AARoads Forum

Regional Boards => Mid-South => Topic started by: Grzrd on August 20, 2010, 01:10:18 PM

Title: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on August 20, 2010, 01:10:18 PM
http://www.thecitywire.com/index.php?q=node/11245

Feds signed over $10 million in TIGER grants to Arkansas (I assume Missouri is allowing Arkansas to use its $5 million that it never requested in the first place) and Arkansas has committed an additional $43 million for a total of $53 million to begin construction on the Bella Vista Bypass (approximately 20% of $250 million estimated to complete Arkansas portion).

Does anyone know if AHTD has indicated which section it would want to build first?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on August 20, 2010, 03:27:25 PM
http://www.thecitywire.com/index.php?q=node/11245

Feds signed over $10 million in TIGER grants to Arkansas (I assume Missouri is allowing Arkansas to use its $5 million that it never requested in the first place) and Arkansas has committed an additional $43 million for a total of $53 million to begin construction on the Bella Vista Bypass (approximately 20% of $250 million estimated to complete Arkansas portion).

Does anyone know if AHTD has indicated which section it would want to build first?

No idea. I would guess south to north, but that's a guess. So far, AHTD is ignoring my questions on this.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: ShawnP on August 20, 2010, 03:48:15 PM
MODOT said Arkansas told them they are building it as a super two.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on August 20, 2010, 09:49:08 PM
MODOT said Arkansas told them they are building it as a super two.

I heard 2-Lane, but never heard specifically it would be a "Super 2". Do you have a link to the article?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: ShawnP on August 20, 2010, 10:02:48 PM
Try MODOT Southwest's Facebook page........
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on August 20, 2010, 10:09:39 PM
Try MODOT Southwest's Facebook page........

Arkansas only has enough funding to move forward with a two-lane bypass over the next six years.

I see no reference to a Super 2.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: ShawnP on August 21, 2010, 08:55:15 PM
A none super two would be a death trap IMHO.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on August 21, 2010, 09:08:26 PM
I see no reference to a Super 2.

I saw on KFSM that the road was to be built as a 2 lane with room to expand to 4 lanes in the future.  This implies it will be a super 2.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on August 21, 2010, 10:15:28 PM
A none super two would be a death trap IMHO.

No arguement, there. Let me check again w/ AHTD. Maybe I'll get a different zombie to reply ;)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on August 22, 2010, 01:17:41 PM
Here is a little more info from  Gridlock Guru  (http://www.allbusiness.com/construction/heavy-civil-construction-energy-utility-water/14979532-1.html/)

Looks like the first section will be built around Hiwasse (middle of nowhere, of course) .
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: ShawnP on August 22, 2010, 02:21:57 PM
Well that would be a dead end road for some time....Arkansas has itself in quiet a pickle.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on August 22, 2010, 04:09:48 PM
Well that would be a dead end road for some time....Arkansas has itself in quiet a pickle.

It would be a complete waste of time to build it first. But maybe there's less ROW acquisition.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: ShawnP on August 22, 2010, 10:00:20 PM
Trying not to get political here but there are considerations that might be pushing Arkansas to move faster. The TIGER grant they gor for 10 million said the project must be completed or going by certain date. Maybe they are pushing to get under that timeline. I know Missouri gave them 5 million of the TIGER grant to help.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on August 22, 2010, 10:16:10 PM
Trying not to get political here but there are considerations that might be pushing Arkansas to move faster. The TIGER grant they got for 10 million said the project must be completed or going by certain date. Maybe they are pushing to get under that timeline. I know Missouri gave them 5 million of the TIGER grant to help.

True. If they are "on a clock", then as I suggested earlier, Hiwasse may be the easiest section to start on (fewer hassles with ROW acquisition, relatively flat terrain, few major roads to hassle with), thus faster to finish.

I wonder if the "bypass" will be part of AR 279 (albeit temporarily)?

*UPDATE*

The Bella Vista Bypass WILL be a Super 2... or at least the first project will. The limits of the project will likely be from AR 72 to AR 72 (per AHTD's e-mail). The second project may be grading & structures to the MO Line, but has yet to be determined.

I don't see how it can be Hwy 72 to Hwy 72 unless it's an E-W alignment. It would be somewhat ironic though, to have "new" 71 built on top of "old" 71 (1920's-30's alignment)  :-D

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on August 23, 2010, 12:43:06 PM
I just received an email from AHTD as well:

Quote
The first section of the bypass will be built on the southern end, in the area of Hiwasse, AR.
Yes, TIGER does have deadlines for beginning a project.
The first project is scheduled for a February 23rd, 2011, letting.
Right of Way has been acquired for four lanes.  The two lanes being built next year will be two of those future four lanes.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on August 23, 2010, 01:07:05 PM
I just received an email from AHTD as well:

The first section of the bypass will be built on the southern end, in the area of Hiwasse, AR.

Yes, TIGER does have deadlines for beginning a project.

The first project is scheduled for a February 23rd, 2011, letting.

Right of Way has been acquired for four lanes.  The two lanes being built next year will be two of those future four lanes.

I wonder what the temporary designation of the road will be before it's completed.  AR 540?  AR 49?  AR x49? 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on August 24, 2010, 01:44:02 PM
^I asked your question re temporary designation.

Answer:

Quote
We have not decided on a designation yet, but it will be a similar situation as the section south of Texarkana.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on August 24, 2010, 02:55:44 PM
I asked your question re temporary designation.

Answer: "We have not decided on a designation yet, but it will be a similar situation as the section south of Texarkana."


Shall we start a betting pool?  149 (NO), 349? 749? 949?  :)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on August 24, 2010, 03:34:21 PM
Don't rule out recycling of 549.  Doddridge to LA state line might be finished before Hiwasse section of Bypass needs to be designated.  TIGER just says you have to start project by a certain time; it doesn't say you have to finish it in a timely manner.  :biggrin:
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on August 24, 2010, 03:44:14 PM
Don't rule out recycling of 549.  Doddridge to LA state line might be finished before Hiwasse section of Bypass needs to be designated.  TIGER just says you have to start project by a certain time; it doesn't say you have to finish it in a timely manner.  :biggrin:

I would think 549 would remain until it's all done, unless you redesignate it US 71 (in which case, would 471 return from the dead? ) :hmmm:

On second thought:
Considering how often Arkansas duplicates numbers (37, 43, 45, 74, 103) it could be another section of 549  :-D
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on August 24, 2010, 03:51:45 PM
You're right. Scratch 549.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on August 24, 2010, 03:52:05 PM
I asked your question re temporary designation.

Answer: "We have not decided on a designation yet, but it will be a similar situation as the section south of Texarkana."


Shall we start a betting pool?  149 (NO), 349? 749? 949?  :)

AR 540?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on August 24, 2010, 03:53:39 PM
I would think 549 would remain until it's all done, unless you redesignate it US 71 (in which case, would 471 return from the dead? ) :hmmm:

Originally, US 71 was going to be rerouted onto what is now AR 549/Future I-49.  Current/old US 71 was going to be AR 471.  But some locals bitched and moaned, and the current setup was approved.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on August 24, 2010, 05:06:07 PM

Originally, US 71 was going to be rerouted onto what is now AR 549/Future I-49.  Current/old US 71 was going to be AR 471.  But some locals bitched and moaned, and the current setup was approved.

I don't know about Texarkana, but it was mostly true in NW Arkansas.  "Old" 71 was going to be AR 471, but got changed to 71B after local businesses complained that no one would know 471 was old 71.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on August 25, 2010, 12:23:04 PM
I just received an AHTD email update re work in Fort Smith/ Fort Chaffee area:

Quote
Regarding the Fort Smith/Fort Chaffee area, a project is underway that will construct 2.7 miles of roadway embankment, two overpass bridges and four box culverts for I-49.  The work is located between County Road 8 and Custer Boulevard.   Work should be completed in the fall of 2011.  A project is also underway that is constructing a new interchange at Highway 22.  This job should be completed in a few months.  The next step is a project extending from Massard Road to Roberts Boulevard, which is north of the current project.  It is scheduled to be let to bids next month.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on August 25, 2010, 01:19:47 PM
I was through there yesterday. The crossbeams are up on the overpasses over AR 22, but the bridge walls are still under construction.

Here's a (somewhat dated) overview of the area:
http://maps.google.com/maps?client=opera&q=barling,+AR&oe=utf-8&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Barling,+Sebastian,+Arkansas&gl=us&ei=2k91TJzxIIGB8gbtr6G-Bw&ved=0CBoQ8gEwAA&ll=35.32064,-94.293487&spn=0.010505,0.016458&t=h&z=16


Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on August 28, 2010, 10:28:02 AM
AASHTO (along with other organizations) will present a report Aug. 30 in Little Rock re interstate funding.  I-49 mentioned "briefly".  A little far for me to go, but is anyone planning to attend? [everything I know about the meeting is contained in this article]

http://www.thecitywire.com/?q=node/11489

Quote
New report to make case for rural interstate funding
Submitted by The City Wire staff on Fri, 08/27/2010 - 2:43pm.

A study to be released Monday (Aug. 30) is meant to remind federal officials to not forget about rural America when allocating federal highway dollars, said Glenn Bolick, a spokesman with the Arkansas Highway & Transportation Department.
Bolick said the report includes a “brief”  mention of Interstate 49.
“Connecting Rural and Urban America”  is the title of the third in a series of reports from the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). Officials from AASHTO and the AHTD will present the report at 1:15 p.m., Aug. 30 in the Arkansas Ballroom of the Little Rock Peabody Hotel.
The “Transportation Reboot”  series by AASHTO seeks to “identify the need to increase capacity in our transportation system to unlock gridlock, generate jobs, deliver freight, and connect rural and urban America.”
John Horsley, AASHTO executive director, AHTD Director Dan Flowers, Mississippi Department of Transportation Director and AASHTO President Butch Brown, and The Poultry Federation of Arkansas-Missouri-Oklahoma President Marvin Childers will be involved in the report discussion.
“Arkansas is typical Rural America,”  Horsley noted in the AHTD statement. “Every American is important to the national economy, whether they raise poultry or cattle, harvest wheat, deliver wind turbines or manufacture goods.”
The report advises that reauthorization of federal transportation legislation should:
- Continue to fund rural portions of the Interstate Highway System and other federal-aid highways that connect America;
- Double federal investment in rural transit systems to meet rising demand; and,
- Expand the existing capacity of the Interstate system, upgrade rural routes to Interstate standards and connect newly urbanized areas to the Interstate system.
“This report reveals the challenges that rural states like Arkansas face,”  Flowers said in the statement. “We have many more highway needs than funds to meet those needs. We have over 16,000 highway miles in our system – 12th largest in the nation.
Bolick said the report may be considered another piece of evidence to use in lobbying for more federal dollars for I-49 when Congress gets around to considering the next highway bill.
“It’s not just Arkansas highway officials and the officials on I-49 asking for that (funding). ... It’s a national organization saying, ”˜Hey, don’t forget about projects here (rural America),”  Bolick explained.
The I-49 route stretches from Texarkana, up through Dequeen, Mena and Waldron, into Fort Smith and on through Northwest Arkansas. All that stands in the way of this interstate reality is several small segments (Bella Vista bypass) at the Arkansas-Louisiana and Arkansas Missouri borders and a large 185-mile segment between Texarkana and Fort Smith that posts a price tag of around $3 billion.
Of the $352 million Arkansas recently received as part of the federal stimulus package, $71.6 million was dedicated to portions of I-49.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on August 30, 2010, 09:58:10 AM
I just noticed that AHTD now has a page devoted to the Bella Vista Bypass (with links):

http://www.arkansashighways.com/BVB/bellavista.aspx
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on August 30, 2010, 10:07:41 AM
I just noticed that AHTD now has a page devoted to the Bella Vista Bypass (with links):

http://www.arkansashighways.com/BVB/bellavista.aspx

DARN IT! How did you find that before me?  :spin:
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on August 30, 2010, 10:16:20 AM
Serendipity.  I was looking to see if AHTD had awarded the "I-69 Innovative Financing Study" project yet (submissions were due July 30).  Just stumbled upon it.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: ShawnP on August 30, 2010, 03:27:35 PM
Ahhhh road geeks!!!!!!!

Yes a favorable term I fully use for myself.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on August 30, 2010, 03:30:23 PM
Ahhhh road geeks!!!!!!!

Yes a favorable term I fully use for myself.

I prefer Road Scholar  ;-)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: ShawnP on August 30, 2010, 03:42:09 PM
Checked that Arkansas site on BVB and nothing really new that we didn't already know. Still leaving us guessing on what building will or won't occur.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on August 30, 2010, 03:47:33 PM
Ahhhh road geeks!!!!!!!

Yes a favorable term I fully use for myself.

I prefer Road Scholar  ;-)

Checked that Arkansas site on BVB and nothing really new that we didn't already know. Still leaving us guessing on what building will or won't occur.

Sounds like a need for a scholarly roadgeek email campaign to AHTD with suggestions for improvement to the BVB page.  :sombrero:
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on August 30, 2010, 05:18:12 PM
AASHTO (along with other organizations) will present a report Aug. 30 in Little Rock re interstate funding.  I-49 mentioned "briefly"...

Here is part of AASHTO report talking about I-540 (described as part of Future I-49):

http://expandingcapacity.transportation.org/states/AR_Unlocking_Gridlock_0410.pdf

No mention of I-49 from I-40 to Texarkana.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on August 30, 2010, 07:33:01 PM
Checked that Arkansas site on BVB and nothing really new that we didn't already know. Still leaving us guessing on what building will or won't occur.

According to the District Engineer, the "Hiwasse Bypass" will be first (basically starting & ending at AR 72), built as a Super 2. Next will (maybe) be from Hiwasse to the MO State Line, either grading & structures or just grading.
--
As far as I-40 to Texarkana, there is already work underway near Ft Chaffee in Barling. The biggest hang-up seems to be crossing the Arkansas River: there's no money for it.

South of the Ft Smith area, I've heard nothing about plans for I-49.


Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: ShawnP on August 30, 2010, 09:59:42 PM
How much would a crossing roughly cost? If the crossing is built I can see the pressure for I-49 going further south increasing by alot. While we all want it quicker but we have to patient and I always tell myself in 20 years it will probably be almost complete.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on August 30, 2010, 10:17:36 PM
How much would a crossing roughly cost?

As of December 2009, it was estimated at $1 Million
http://www.allbusiness.com/government/government-bodies-offices-regional-local/13536201-1.html



I've also found some routing plans for I-49 from the Arkansas River to near Waldron (courtesy of Greenwood High School's website)
http://ghsweb.k12.ar.us/Proposed/I49maps.htm
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: froggie on August 31, 2010, 07:23:32 AM
Quote
I've also found some routing plans for I-49 from the Arkansas River to near Waldron (courtesy of Greenwood High School's website)
http://ghsweb.k12.ar.us/Proposed/I49maps.htm

Note their "proposed exits on I-49", and where it came from...

I have some of the earlier documents/maps for I-49 between Texarkana and Fort Smith...a few of the items I insisted on salvaging from Katrina.  Might have to scan those maps in sometime...
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on August 31, 2010, 07:28:58 AM
Quote
I've also found some routing plans for I-49 from the Arkansas River to near Waldron (courtesy of Greenwood High School's website)
http://ghsweb.k12.ar.us/Proposed/I49maps.htm

Note their "proposed exits on I-49", and where it came from...


Yeah, I saw that ;)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on August 31, 2010, 07:57:14 AM
I've also found some routing plans for I-49 from the Arkansas River to near Waldron (courtesy of Greenwood High School's website)
http://ghsweb.k12.ar.us/Proposed/I49maps.htm

Great find.  To paraphrase the old Smith Barney commercial: "'Road Scholar' finds a nugget the old-fashioned way, he eaarrrrrrns it"

For younger members of the forum, below link helps explain paraphrased quote:

http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=smith+barney+commercial&aq=0
[just click the "Bump-out + Smith Barney" video]
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on August 31, 2010, 09:29:44 AM
Quote
I've also found some routing plans for I-49 from the Arkansas River to near Waldron (courtesy of Greenwood High School's website)
http://ghsweb.k12.ar.us/Proposed/I49maps.htm

Note their "proposed exits on I-49", and where it came from...
Professor emeritus, thank you for the lesson!  :sombrero:
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on August 31, 2010, 09:57:59 AM

Great find.  To paraphrase the old Smith Barney commercial: "'Road Scholar' finds a nugget the old-fashioned way, he eaarrrrrrns it"

For younger members of the forum, below link helps explain paraphrased quote:

http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=smith+barney+commercial&aq=0
[just click the "Bump-out + Smith Barney" video]

John Houseman, "Professor Kingsfield" on The Paper Chase
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on August 31, 2010, 10:16:14 AM
Professor emeritus, thank you for the lesson!  :sombrero:

John Houseman, "Professor Kingsfield" on The Paper Chase

Ever seen Froggie and Kingsfield in the same room?  :hmmm:  :hmmm:  :hmmm:

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on August 31, 2010, 10:17:46 AM

Ever seen Froggie and Kingsfield in the same room?  :hmmm:  :hmmm:  :hmmm:


Kingsfield is dead, but I think Froggie is still with us. :-D
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on August 31, 2010, 03:07:39 PM
No mention of I-49 from I-40 to Texarkana.

Upon further inspection:

http://www.todaysthv.com/news/business/story.aspx?storyid=115424&catid=119

Quote
... It's an example that could improve under two proposed changes in this report. One targets a four lane expansion of Highway 167 from El Dorado to Little Rock at Interstate 530.
The second idea targets the western part of Arkansas between Texarkana and Fort Smith. It would be part of an extended Interstate 49 traveling from Shreveport to Kansas City. It would overlap Highway 71 and I-540 in the Arkansas part...

Looks like either an updated report exists or there was supposed to have been an "Unlocking Freight" button for Arkansas on the AASHTO map [I have already noticed that Georgia "Unlocking Gridlock" button sends you to South Carolina "Unlocking Gridlock" page].  AASHTO map: http://expandingcapacity.transportation.org/state_examples.html
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on August 31, 2010, 03:26:00 PM
I ran across this while looking at I-10 in Mobile:

http://www.bts.gov/publications/transportation_statistics_annual_report/2000/chapter7/movement_of_military_forces_and_materiel_map.html

Looks like STRAHNET follows I-49 corridor in Arkansas on up to Kansas City.  Is there a supplementary pot of money for STRAHNET corridors that could assist in funding I-49 from Fort Smith to Texarkana?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on August 31, 2010, 05:06:09 PM
Snail's pace: another 0.269 miles to be let Sept. 29:

http://www.arkansashighways.com/ProgCon/General/JOBS_include.aspx

Quote
Currently Advertised Projects & Announcements

Notices for September 29, 2010 Letting
 090
 040479
 040479-A 040479-B
 MASSARD RD.-ROBERTS BLVD. (STRS.) (F)
 SEBASTIAN
 71
 10:30 a.m.
http://www.arkansashighways.com/ProgCon/notices/040479%20NOTICE%20TO%20CONTRACTORS.doc
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: froggie on August 31, 2010, 06:40:51 PM
Quote
Looks like STRAHNET follows I-49 corridor in Arkansas on up to Kansas City.  Is there a supplementary pot of money for STRAHNET corridors that could assist in funding I-49 from Fort Smith to Texarkana?

Not since the STRAHNET corridors got rolled into NHS.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on August 31, 2010, 08:22:34 PM
Not since the STRAHNET corridors got rolled into NHS.

With ALDOT looking for money for I-10 in Mobile area, any monetarily relevant reason why would they mention STRAHNET here?:

http://expandingcapacity.transportation.org/unlocking_freight/states/AL_Unlocking_Freight_0610.pdf

Or, is it simply to be "critical to defense", thus higher priority in general competition for $$$?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on September 06, 2010, 11:00:40 AM
How much would a crossing roughly cost?

As of December 2009, it was estimated at $1 Million
http://www.allbusiness.com/government/government-bodies-offices-regional-local/13536201-1.html

Times Record Online is starting a series this week on Fort Smith's future.  Brief mention today of cost of Arkansas River bridge:

Quote
There remains, of course, that small matter of a new bridge to cross the Arkansas River - at a cost of upwards of $300 million - to keep the ultimate completion of I-49 in the hazy distance.
(http://www.swtimes.com/opinion/we/article_e0908754-b904-11df-acf5-001cc4c03286.html)

A related article focuses on the bridge itself:

Quote
“It’s the elephant no one wants to talk about,”  said Ken O’Donnell, a former transportation planner with the Western Arkansas Planning and Development District.
His “elephant”  is a proposed $100 million bridge that would be north of Arkansas 22, span the Arkansas River then connect to I-540 north of Interstate 40.
Until the bridge is finished, I-40 and proposed I-49 cannot cross to form what could one day be the most economically important intersection in the region – one that brings together one major highway that spans the United States from east to west and another that reaches from Winnipeg, Canada, to New Orleans.
What makes the bridge a forbidding subject may be its cost.
Van Buren Mayor Bob Freeman said he’s heard a $150 million estimate of the cost of the bridge structure alone and another $200 million for the ramps and approaches leading up to it.
(http://www.swtimes.com/special_reports/article_83924506-b78d-11df-ab48-001cc4c03286.html)

Also from above-linked article:

Quote
By 2014, the state highway department will schedule paving work on the section of I-49 between U.S. 71 and Arkansas 22, Flowers said. That should complete the segment through Chaffee Crossing.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on September 06, 2010, 02:44:42 PM
Times Record Online is starting a series this week on Fort Smith's future.  Brief mention today of cost of Arkansas River bridge:
"There remains, of course, that small matter of a new bridge to cross the Arkansas River - at a cost of upwards of $300 million - to keep the ultimate completion of I-49 in the hazy distance."
(http://www.swtimes.com/opinion/we/article_e0908754-b904-11df-acf5-001cc4c03286.html)

Build it as a toll bridge.  Just as long as it gets built.  There also needs to be a western extension of I-540 across the Arkansas River to meet I-40 near Muldrow.  And a connector (I-x49?) between I-49 and I-540 on the south end of Ft Smith to provide a freeway connection from Ft Smith to I-49 south without having to travel on US 71, which is a slow 55 MPH four lane divided highway with traffic lights.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on September 07, 2010, 10:21:00 PM
Build it as a toll bridge.  Just as long as it gets built.

RITA official hopes (in a Sept. 5, 2010 article), at the very least, funding sources will be identified for the Arkansas Bridge by 2020:

Quote
2020
Through his job as intermodal manager at the Western Arkansas Planning and Development District, Mat Pitsch does much of the administrative work for RITA.
When RITA celebrates it’s 11th birthday, he hopes it has reached some milestones.
“I would hope our long-term projects have legs,”  he said. “... By 2020, we would have I-49 completed through the region. (The I-49 Bella Vista bypass) would be done, and we’d be next on the list. If the (I-49 Arkansas River) bridge isn’t built, then (funding) sources will be identified.”
(http://www.swtimes.com/special_reports/article_f81e30ca-b791-11df-aa49-001cc4c03286.html)

Wonder if they are considering the toll option?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on September 08, 2010, 09:50:55 PM
Build it as a toll bridge.  Just as long as it gets built.
RITA official hopes (in a Sept. 5, 2010 article), at the very least, funding sources will be identified for the Arkansas Bridge by 2020

Possibly sooner than 2020 if Obama infrastructure plan implemented:

Quote
CONNECTING I-49
Fort Smith City Administrator Dennis Kelly said he sent a letter to Federal Highway Administration officials Tuesday (Sept. 7) reminding them of the regional needs. The primary need has a minimum $330 million price tag and would cover the construction of I-49 from the Alma-Interstate 40 interchange, across the Arkansas River and connect with I-49 sections now under construction through Chaffee Crossing. Kelly said recent trips to Washington and working with Washington D.C.-based Watts Partners – the city’s lobbying group – have served to reinforce the $330 million section.
“With that letter, I wanted to get the word to them (FHA) right away to let them know we are aware of it (funding potential from proposed Obama plan),”  Kelly said."
...
[HOWEVER]
...
"WAIT-AND-SEE
The Arkansas Highway and Transportation Department is also reserving judgment, with spokesman Glenn Bolick saying they are “taking a wait-and-see approach”  to the plan.
“We would welcome any additional funding and will look forward to seeing what projects we have in Arkansas that might fit the criteria. We don't know any program specifics at this time, but with over $23 billion in anticipated needs projected over the next 10 years and only about $4 billion in expected funds to meet that demand we would certainly expect to have projects that meet any criteria,”  Bolick said in an e-mail statement.
(Sept. 8, 2010 The City Wire: http://www.thecitywire.com/index.php?q=node/11713).
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on September 08, 2010, 10:23:46 PM
RITA official hopes (in a Sept. 5, 2010 article), at the very least, funding sources will be identified for the Arkansas Bridge by 2020

Possibly sooner than 2020 if Obama infrastructure plan implemented:

I'll believe it when I see it.
(And that's all I have to say so I don't start a flame war) :jumping:

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on September 09, 2010, 07:25:16 AM
I'll believe it when I see it.
Same here.  BUT, I can envision a more likely scenario.
 
First, it looks like the Fort Smith official did the simple math: $50 billion/50 states=$1 billion.  $1 billion/ equally among road, rail & airports is roughly $330 million figure he touted in his letter.

Here's the scenario:
1. RITA (Fort Smith/ NWA "mega-region") and AHTD both appear to have Bella Vista Bypass as a much higher priority.  Also, Feds demonstrated firm interest in BVB with a $10 million TIGER grant.  IIRC, it was recently estimated that it would take $250 million to build BVB as a full, four-lane interstate.  Arkansas has already committed $50 million to the project, leaving a $200 million shortfall.  If $200 million committed to BVB, then $130 million is left for other Arkansas road projects.

2. Missouri had been waiting on Arkansas for BVB, but decided to finish I-49 from I-435 to I-44 first by reallocating $65 million of $72 million that had been set aside for Missouri portion of BVB.  So, Missouri could allocate $65 million of its $330 million "piece of pie" to BVB.

3. Arkansas is "shovel-ready" and can immediately put people to work since first letting for BVB Super-2 is scheduled for February, 2011.  Missouri presumably could ramp up pretty quickly since they had been waiting on Arkansas.

4. Multi-state cooperative project is appealing to Feds; they have already divvied up TIGER grants between Missouri & Arkansas for BVB.

5. No design work has been done on the Arkansas River Bridge:

Quote
Dan Flowers, Arkansas State Highway and Transportation Department director, said the $100 million estimate is based on the cost of similar four-lane bridges recently built elsewhere. It includes only the bridge itself.
No design work has been done, so no exact estimate is possible right now.
(http://www.swtimes.com/special_reports/article_83924506-b78d-11df-ab48-001cc4c03286.html)

Maybe some of $130 million could be allocated for design work on the bridge.

6. To sum it up, re Arkansas River bridge, the best hope scenario is to get design work going and simultaneously have an accelerated construction schedule for a full four-lane BVB that will allow the Arkansas River bridge to "bubble up" both RITA's and AHTD's respective priority chains.

7. If REALLY lucky, also get some $$$ for preliminary work on Alma I-40 interchange.

ADDITIONAL THOUGHT:

From a Sept. 8, 2010 City Wire article:

Quote
the $787 billion stimulus contained $28 billion, or just 3.55%, for infrastructure projects nationwide.
(http://www.thecitywire.com/index.php?q=node/11713)

I won't comment as a member of either political party, but as a simple member of Roadgeek Nation [sorry, it's those football cross-currents again]: WHAT A MISSED OPPORTUNITY!

Sadly, I just don't think the $50 billion is now there for above-outlined scenario.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: rte66man on September 09, 2010, 10:44:58 AM
Re: the southern Fort Smith interstate. Back in 1998 when OK was looking at the GARVEE bonds, one of the state reps had me look at the cost of building a four-lane interstate from I40 just west of Muldrow south and east to join with the current I540 near the state line. It would have to cross both the Arkansas and the Poteau River as well as a large floodplain. At that time, ODOT made a ballpark guess of $300 million (wish I had that in writing).  The rep dropped it as his share of the pork... errr bonds wasn't nearly that much.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on September 09, 2010, 11:54:47 AM
I was through there yesterday. The crossbeams are up on the overpasses over AR 22, but the bridge walls are still under construction.
Is this a photo of the ongoing AR 22 overpass work?: http://www.kfsm.com/news/rivervalley/kfsm-news-i49funding-obama-infrastructure-plan,0,7266894.story
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on September 09, 2010, 12:02:56 PM
I was through there yesterday. The crossbeams are up on the overpasses over AR 22, but the bridge walls are still under construction.
Is this a photo of the ongoing AR 22 overpass work?: http://www.kfsm.com/news/rivervalley/kfsm-news-i49funding-obama-infrastructure-plan,0,7266894.story

From maybe a year ago ;)

(http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2586/3921404861_cf9f133e42_z_d.jpg)
August 2009 (looking south from AR 22)

I need to update my photos... thanks for the reminder :)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on September 09, 2010, 02:47:56 PM
Back in 1998 when OK was looking at the GARVEE bonds, one of the state reps had me look at the cost of building a four-lane interstate from I40 just west of Muldrow south and east to join with the current I540 near the state line. It would have to cross both the Arkansas and the Poteau River as well as a large floodplain. At that time, ODOT made a ballpark guess of $300 million

Discussion about flood plain and Arkansas River Bridge in Sept. 9 Times Record Online (http://www.swtimes.com/news/article_6553403c-bc23-11df-8998-001cc4c002e0.html):

Quote
... Mark Yardley, Alma public works director, says he believes the opportunity for growth the new highway would bring is “significant”  – attracting industrial prospects as well as freight haulers and distribution centers – current funding conditions make talk about completing the highway just “pie in the sky.”
Alma Mayor John Ballentine believes the Alma portion is likely to be the last leg of the still-unfunded highway completed because of the costly bridge that must span the Arkansas River.
Ballentine reckons the structure will cost $400 million, but that number is a shape-shifter, changing based on who is speaking and what the cost includes.
Ken O’Donnell, until recently the director of the Bi-State Metropolitan Planning Organization, said the stated cost is a bit lower – $280 million to $320 million. That’s starting with the $100 million for the bridge span itself, then adding approaches, ramps and the other things needed to make it accessible.
Because the route approaching the bridge travels through the Kibler bottoms, a flood plain, it might require building a berm or putting the roadway on supports as it extends to the bridge.
O’Donnell said costs for the highway on-grade are computed on a linear foot basis. If the roadway is elevated, the cost must be computed on a square-foot basis. The cost of a multilane interstate bridge spanning the Arkansas River “jumps off the page at you,”  he said.
Last on Alma’s list of concerns is the missing interchange.
Yardley said Arkansas Highway and Transportation Department officials have not included in their plans an interchange routing I-49 to U.S. 64, a key element of getting the highway traffic into central Alma.
Yardley said AHTD planners blamed the proximity of U.S. 64 to I-40 and conflicts with the Union Pacific Railroad corridor, which parallels U.S. 64 and I-40.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on September 09, 2010, 05:15:09 PM

"Alma Mayor John Ballentine believes the Alma portion is likely to be the last leg of the still-unfunded highway completed because of the costly bridge that must span the Arkansas River.


He's also griping because Alma may not get its own exit off I-49 at US 64 (too close to I-40, Right of Way concerns at the railroad).

Apo'strophe
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: ShawnP on September 09, 2010, 10:25:41 PM
Yeah update them or you will lose 50 road geek points :)

I was through there yesterday. The crossbeams are up on the overpasses over AR 22, but the bridge walls are still under construction.
Is this a photo of the ongoing AR 22 overpass work?: http://www.kfsm.com/news/rivervalley/kfsm-news-i49funding-obama-infrastructure-plan,0,7266894.story

From maybe a year ago ;)

(http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2586/3921404861_cf9f133e42_z_d.jpg)
August 2009 (looking south from AR 22)

I need to update my photos... thanks for the reminder :)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on September 11, 2010, 09:55:09 PM
Here's an interesting article (Sept. 11 Times Record Online) about the fight between Barling and Fort Smith for acreage along the I-49 corridor when Fort Chaffee was downsized:

Quote
BARLING - Although bruised feelings and mistrust linger in some quarters, for the most part Barling, Fort Smith and the Fort Chaffee Redevelopment Authority have settled their disputes over the land now referred to as Chaffee Crossing.
The land - 7,000 acres released by the U.S. Army from Fort Chaffee as part of a Base Closing and Realignment downsizing - was at the heart of a feud between the two northern Sebastian County cities.
Barling, working just ahead of the BRAC Commission, had annexed the land of Fort Chaffee, thinking that if the land were decommissioned it would then become part of Barling.
Fort Smith argued that the land was being released to spur economic development, something the much bigger city thought it could manage better than adjacent Barling.
Ultimately, before the feud could come to fisticuffs or courtrooms, the cities reached an agreement about municipal boundaries on the excess land, an agreement that ceded the lion's share of the land to Fort Smith, but left Barling with desirable acreage along the corridor eventually that will become Interstate 49 and that highway's intersection with Arkansas 22 and Arkansas 59.
The agreement required Barling to show progress on developing the land, and it did.
"With the agreement, we were required to develop the property that we received from the FCRA within an eight-year period," Barling City Administrator Ray Caruthers said recently.
The Redevelopment Authority passed a resolution earlier this year showing Barling has met that requirement.
(http://www.swtimes.com/week-in-review/news/article_e6090c86-bd89-11df-9aa4-001cc4c002e0.html)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on September 11, 2010, 10:06:00 PM
Greenwood almost took some of that land for a new High School, but it was voted down.

Everyone is going to want a piece of the pie once I-49 is completed.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on September 12, 2010, 03:46:00 PM
There also needs to be a western extension of I-540 across the Arkansas River to meet I-40 near Muldrow.  And a connector (I-x49?) between I-49 and I-540 on the south end of Ft Smith to provide a freeway connection from Ft Smith to I-49 south...
Re: the southern Fort Smith interstate. Back in 1998 when OK was looking at the GARVEE bonds, one of the state reps had me look at the cost of building a four-lane interstate from I40 just west of Muldrow south and east to join with the current I540 near the state line. It would have to cross both the Arkansas and the Poteau River as well as a large floodplain. At that time, ODOT made a ballpark guess of $300 million

Sept. 12 Times Record Online reports that current economic conditions are pushing the southern Fort Smith bypass interstate further into the future:

http://www.swtimes.com/week-in-review/news/article_d0197290-bd88-11df-93ff-001cc4c002e0.html

Quote
Bruce ... Tabor, a longtime Sequoyah County commissioner, is a member of the Bi-State Metropolitan Planning Organization Board...
When completed, I-49 will run north to south from the Canadian border near Winnipeg to New Orleans.
Tabor said the group considered trying to get a bypass developed - maybe from the Muldrow area to the south side of Fort Smith - for easier access, but he thinks the economy has pushed that far into the future.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on September 16, 2010, 10:35:28 AM
I had not checked i-49.org's website in a long time.  They now have a page devoted exclusively to Chaffee Crossing projects (with photos): http://interstate49.org/clients/25/media/documents/CHAF3592%20I49%20PROGRESS%20REPORT.pdf

BTW - I must admit that I have not signed the petition.

EDIT

Even more photos on 1-49 Coalition's Facebook page: http://www.facebook.com/pages/Interstate-49-BUILD-THE-ROAD/360183234483?ref=ts
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on September 16, 2010, 06:47:32 PM
Even more photos on 1-49 Coalition's Facebook page: http://www.facebook.com/pages/Interstate-49-BUILD-THE-ROAD/360183234483?ref=ts

Interesting how he got a couple topside photos. Must have gone up on the weekend.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on October 01, 2010, 11:29:03 PM
Relatively small Chaffee Crossing bid awarded today with Massard Road-Roberts Blvd. project awarded to Forsgren, Inc. for $14,625,422.88:

http://www.arkansashighways.com/ProgCon/letting/Sep%20'10%20Award%20List.pdf

Also, some fed money released (approximately $3.4 million) to widen entrance and exit ramps on I-540 (Future I-49) between Fayetteville and Bentonville: http://firstarkansasnews.net/2010/09/grant-round-up-for-august-2/

Quote
$3.4 million to work on I-540
A grant totaling $3,435,000 in U.S. Department of Transportation funds have now been released to continue construction on Interstate 540 between Fayetteville and Bentonville. The Arkansas State Highway and Transportation Department will use the funding to widen entrance and exit ramps at several interchanges along I-540 between Fayetteville and Bentonville. It will also create additional lanes that will help reduce traffic congestion and support the future Interstate 49, which will run from Kansas City, Mo., to Shreveport, La.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on October 02, 2010, 11:48:40 AM
Relatively small Chaffee Crossing bid awarded today with Massard Road-Roberts Blvd. project awarded to Forsgren, Inc. for $14,625,422.88:

http://www.arkansashighways.com/ProgCon/letting/Sep%20'10%20Award%20List.pdf

Also, some fed money released (approximately $3.4 million) to widen entrance and exit ramps on I-540 (Future I-49) between Fayetteville and Bentonville: http://firstarkansasnews.net/2010/09/grant-round-up-for-august-2/


They are already playing in the dirt along Massard, but little else. I'll swing by in a week or so to see what's going on.
--

The I-540 Ramp Project had been cussed & discussed for a few years, but only so much AHTD can do without totally rebuilding them (though I wouldn't complain if they had to take out the Red Roof Inn at 6th St, er, MLK Blvd. ;)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Scott5114 on October 07, 2010, 07:11:27 PM
I always wonder why they don't round up the 88¢ or whatever on these multi-million-dollar projects to the nearest dollar. The extra 12¢ isn't going to kill them, is it?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Sykotyk on October 13, 2010, 12:07:29 AM
Hell, round to the nearest $100. Doesn't make a bit of difference as the effective savings/cost is trivial when the burden is spread out amongst thousands or millions of people.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on October 30, 2010, 12:10:44 PM
A lobbyist for Fort Smith (with Watts Partners in D.C.) recently advised Fort Smith civic leaders that "signals" indicate that both Obama Administration and Congress realize that recent stimulus efforts have not created hoped-for number of jobs; as a result, he opines that infrastructure project funding requests will receive favorable treatment from the feds: http://www.thecitywire.com/?q=node/12457

Quote
Steve Pruitt ... a lobbyist with Washington D.C.-based Watts Partners, talked about the federal budget and appropriations timetables in coming months, and stressed to the directors the need to be more focused and precise with Congressional funding requests. Watts Partners is the lobbying firm retained by the city of Fort Smith.
Three primary points were made by Pruitt during his update on political realities – as dynamic as those realities are – in Washington:
- The funding process is out of whack because Congress has yet to approve a 2011 budget resolution;
- The funding/earmark process will become more rigorous; and,
- The Obama Administration and Congress may be more focused on funding infrastructure projects that have a better chance of producing jobs.
Pruitt said “signals”  in funding priorities suggest a “heightened focus”  on special funding and earmark programs going to true infrastructure projects. Just $29 billion of the about $900 billion stimulus plan went for roads and other infrastructure projects, and that didn’t ultimately create enough jobs, Pruitt explained.
“It produced far less than the 1 million jobs they projected,”  Pruitt said.
To that end, Pruitt strongly encouraged the city to “determine”  and “communicate”  a more precise list of funding priorities – preferably with an infrastructure component. He also said the budget timetable dates “are critical”  for the city to meet in order to improve chances for funding. Key dates in the timetable include: Sept. 30, federal agencies submit first funding requests to the Office of Management & Budget; Dec. 15, agencies submit revised requests to OMB; Jan. 30, agencies submit final budget requests to OMB.
The city board is expected to formally approve the city’s top 10 funding requests at their Nov. 2 regular meeting. The proposed priority list is as follows.
1. Interstate 49 between Interstate 40 and U.S. 71 South (project would include a bridge across the Arkansas River) ...
On the funding requests, Pruitt advised the city to become “more aggressive”  in asking for the full amount of a project, and prioritize with projects that “can be up and running in a quick fashion.” ...

I have a difficult time understanding this viewpoint in light of how infrastructure projects received minimal support during TIGER I and TIGER II rounds.  For example, BVB is a shovel-ready project that should be able to immediately create jobs.  Nevertheless, BVB received only $10 million in TIGER I and no money in TIGER II.  Meanwhile a hiking and biking trail in northwest Arkansas received $15 million in TIGER II less than a month ago: http://www.nwaonline.com/news/2010/oct/29/how-we-see-it-now-s-stimulating-20101029/?nwa-opinion

I agree that investing in infrastructure makes a lot of sense, but I just don't see the "signals" that infrastructure projects are now back in favor.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on January 25, 2011, 08:57:45 PM
3.03 mile two-lane section (Hwy. 72 South to Hwy. 72 North) of Bella Vista Bypass is now advertised to be let on February 23.  Work scheduled to be completed by April 2014:

http://www.arkansashighways.com/ProgCon/General/JOBS_include.aspx

Quote
ARKANSAS STATE HIGHWAY AND TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT
JOB 090292
HWY. 72 SOUTH-HWY. 72 NORTH (BELLA VISTA BYPASS) (F)
FEDERAL AID PROJECT NCIIP-HPP2-STDP-STPD-9036(13)

THE PURPOSE OF THIS PROJECT IS TO CONSTRUCT 2 LANES FOR 3.030 MILES OF HWY. 71, CONSTRUCT THE INTERCHANGES AT HWY. 72N AND HWY. 72S WITH RAMPS, RECONSTRUCT HWY. 279, AND CONSTRUCT FRONTAGE ROADS AND COUNTY ROAD CONNECTORS IN BENTON COUNTY.  THIS PROJECT CONSISTS OF GRADING, MINOR DRAINAGE STRUCTURES, CEMENT STABILIZED CRUSHED STONE BASE COURSE, AGGREGATE BASE COURSE, ACHM BASE, BINDER AND SURFACE COURSES, PORTLAND CEMENT CONCRETE PAVEMENT, TWO CONTINUOUS COMPOSITE PLATE GIRDER BRIDGES (TOTAL LENGTHS 234.41' & 282.24'), TWO CONTINUOUS COMPOSITE W-BEAM BRIDGES (TOTAL LENGTHS 206.26' & 207.14'), MAINTENANCE OF TRAFFIC, EROSION CONTROL ITEMS AND MISC. ITEMS ... THE SUCCESSFUL BIDDER WILL BE REQUIRED TO COMPLETE THIS CONTRACT ON OR BEFORE 04/11/14.

Any guesses as to what percentage of fifteen miles of BVB in Arkansas will be finished ten years from now?  Also, since Missouri is scheduled to finish Pineville to I-435 upgrade to I-49 by late 2012/ early 2013, will they have started work on their 5-mile section of BVB ten years from now?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: ShawnP on January 25, 2011, 09:32:03 PM
50% on Arkansas portion and nothing on Missouri. It would be cheaper for Missouri to go now with reduced building costs but MODOT is more broke than the state of Illinois now.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on January 25, 2011, 10:05:20 PM
50% on Arkansas portion and nothing on Missouri. It would be cheaper for Missouri to go now with reduced building costs but MODOT is more broke than the state of Illinois now.

The section being bid on is approx 1/3 of the Bentonville-Bella Vista segment. Once it is complete, AHTD plans to bid on Hiwasse to Missouri. Generally, though, just doing this small segment is a joke.

Here's a map of the area:
http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&client=opera&q=hiwasse,+ar&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Hiwasse,+Benton,+Arkansas&ll=36.421144,-94.325695&spn=0.041163,0.066175&z=14
Missouri spent all their money upgrading 71 north of Carthage because Arkansas wasn't ready.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: J N Winkler on January 25, 2011, 11:01:20 PM
The plans set is kind of small too.  I think it might be just a grading contract, despite the 2014 completion date.  This is such a small letting that I expect to have all the PDF plan sets downloaded and TIFFed by the time I go to bed two hours from now.

Edit:  Now finished (one sheet of sign designs extracted, TIFF plansheets filed), after one hour and five minutes.  The Bella Vista Bypass project in this letting is really thin gruel--just half the ramps at two diamond interchanges and the short length of mainline roadway in between, with no signing whatsoever (which tends to imply a long-term closure after completion, until adjacent sections open).
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on February 24, 2011, 08:21:50 PM
The Bella Vista Bypass project in this letting is really thin gruel ...

The apparent low bid for the project was just a shade under $20 million (at least the gruel will apparently come in at under $7 million per mile):

http://www.thecitywire.com/index.php?q=node/14703

Quote
... The apparent low bidder in Wednesday’s bid opening was APAC Central in Fayetteville, which bid the project $19.854 million. The bid covers dirt work and driving surface and will connect segments of Arkansas 72 in the Hiwasse area of Northwest Arkansas. The first phase of the work is a two-lane road built to interstate standards.
Mat Pitsch, director of the Regional Intermodal Transportation Authority (RITA) in Crawford and Sebastian counties, said the work is a “strategic link”  in completing I-49 ... Arkansas has already spent about $20 million on engineering, utility relocation and other preparatory work on the bypass. It is estimated that Arkansas’ share of the project could be as much as $250 million.
The I-49 route stretches from Texarkana, up through Dequeen, Mena and Waldron, into Fort Smith and on through Northwest Arkansas. All that stands in the way of this interstate reality is several small segments at the Arkansas-Louisiana and Arkansas Missouri borders, an Arkansas River bridge east of Barling that could cost up to $350 million, and a large 185-mile segment between Texarkana and Fort Smith that posts a price tag between $3 billion and $3.5 billion.
“That’s what we’ve got to do next,”  Pitsch said, referring to the funding and construction of the bridge. “That’s a big elephant to bite. To me, it’s easier to make the case for that when you have interstates on both sides of the river.”
There will soon be interstate on both sides.
Work is progressing on the segment of I-49 through Chaffee Crossing, with the northern terminus at Arkansas 22 in Barling and the southern portion planned to Howard Hill Road. Ivy Owen, executive director of the Fort Chaffee Redevelopment Authority, is lobbying state officials to fund the short segment of I-49 from Howard Hill Road to U.S. 71 north of Greenwood.
Costs of the I-49 work underway and planned through Chaffee Crossing are in the estimated range of $67 million to $100 million.

EDIT

Here is AHTD's list of Contracts Awarded from Feb. 23 letting, including the Bella Vista Bypass project:

http://www.arkansashighways.com/ProgCon/letting/Feb%20'11%20Award%20List.pdf
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on March 23, 2011, 08:54:39 AM
A bill for a 10-year half-cent sales tax increase in Arkansas took another step forward yesterday, and may possibly go before Arkansas voters for a vote in 2012.  The sales tax increase is anticipated to fund up to $1.8 billion for highway construction.  The current form of the bill provides that 70% of those funds would be used to build out a four-lane grid system across Arkansas.  Dan Flowers, the head of AHTD, was quoted as noting that US Highway 71 between Texarkana and Fort Smith is part of that grid system, and that US 71's path is part of I-49's future path.  I interpret that statement to mean that some of those funds could be applied to I-49 construction.

Link to the article:

http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D9M4A0RG2.htm

Quote
A House committee made short work Monday of the five proposed constitutional amendments on its agenda, voting in a batch to advance all of them to the joint committee that will make referrals for the 2012 ballot.
The only measure that drew any discussion was a proposed 10-year, half-cent sales tax that would fund up to $1.8 billion for highway construction ...
Rep. Jonathan Barnett, R-Siloam Springs, a former Arkansas Highway Commission member, is the lead sponsor of the proposal, which would devote 70 percent of the temporary sales tax raised to building out a four-lane grid system across the state. The other 30 percent would go to cities and counties for their own road projects ...
Barnett and Arkansas Highway and Transportation Department Director Dan Flowers were on hand at the House committee to describe the proposal. The temporary sales tax would raise $160 million annually for state highways and $34 million each for cities and counties.
Overall, the proposal would make as much as $1.8 billion available for construction over the 10 years. The state would issue bonds, which would be paid down with the sales tax revenue, Barnett said.
The proposal has broad support, including that of the Arkansas Trucking Association, which is also backing a bill by House Speaker Robert Moore that would raise the sales tax on diesel fuel by 5 cents a gallon. Moore, a Democrat, has been having trouble lining up the votes he needs in the majority-Republican Senate Transportation Committee.
Barnett noted that the sales tax would not apply to food purchases, thus it won't run counter to Gov. Mike Beebe's bill to lower the state sales tax on groceries by half a cent, which is expected to pass.
Rep. Johnnie Roebuck, D-Arkadelphia, asked whether Arkansas 7 -- a north-south route in the middle of the state -- would be widened under the amendment. Flowers said it wouldn't because it wasn't part of the grid system.
"However, the utilization of this new revenue for building out those four-lane sections would certainly take the pressure off of our other funding, our normal federal aid and study funding that would be available for such routes as Highway 7 and others," Flowers said.
Flowers noted that U.S. Highway 71, a major connector between Texarkana and Fort Smith is part of the grid system. The highway's path is part of the plan to extend Interstate 49 north-south along the state's western border ...

EDIT

I don't know if the four-lane grid system is defined in the proposed bill or if there is a pre-existing "high priority" grid that is referenced in the bill.  Does anyone know if there is currently a defined four-lane grid that exists?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: NE2 on March 23, 2011, 10:26:36 AM
Page 16 of http://agrtc.com/magazine/4th%20Quarter%2008%5B1%5D.pdf shows the grid.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on March 24, 2011, 11:28:48 AM
Page 16 of http://agrtc.com/magazine/4th%20Quarter%2008%5B1%5D.pdf shows the grid.
Thanks for the very useful map of the grid  ;-).  It lead me to wonder about AHTD's prioritization of the projects, which in turn lead me to AHTD's 2006 Needs Study & Highway Improvement Plan that contains a map showing planned work on various Arkansas corridors (http://www.arkansashighways.com/stip/2006_Needs_Study_Highway_Improvement_Plan.pdf)[the map is on page 53 of the document and page 59/73 of the pdf].  This map is color-coded for anticipated work from 2008-2017, 2018-2027, and beyond 2027.  The only thing that jumped off the page at me was that I-69 from McGehee/US 65 to the Mississippi River is slated to be worked on by 2017. [this study was probably hashed out by the "long-timers" on MTR a while back, but it is first time I have taken a look at it].

I wonder how much, if at all, passage of the proposed sales tax increase would accelerate the timetable for I-49 (as well as other projects)?

EDIT
Here is a link to a February TV report on Barling to Greenwood construction (report begins with brief discussion of LA's I-49 North, and then focuses on Sebastian County's work):

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xh6fut_i49-work-update_news
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on April 03, 2011, 02:14:09 PM
Here's a link to a news report (with a video) regarding Bella Vista Bypass.  Ground should be broken in approximately a month.  The report also has a brief mention of proposed diesel and sales tax increases:

http://www.5newsonline.com/news/kfsm-bella-vista-bypass-set-to-break-ground-20110321,0,6315691.story

In the report, Arkansas Highway Commissioner Dick Trammel indicates that Arkansas voters will have a specific list of projects that would benefit from the tax increases before they go the polls next year.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on April 03, 2011, 02:25:19 PM
Here's a link to a news report (with a video) regarding Bella Vista Bypass.  Ground should be broken in approximately a month.  The report also has a brief mention of proposed diesel and sales tax increases:

http://www.5newsonline.com/news/kfsm-bella-vista-bypass-set-to-break-ground-20110321,0,6315691.story

In the report, Arkansas Highway Commissioner Dick Trammel indicates that Arkansas voters will have a specific list of projects that would benefit from the tax increases before they go the polls next year.

I doubt the sales tax would fly: the grocery tax is about to drop half a cent and Governor Beebe is against any tax increases.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on May 11, 2011, 01:50:08 PM
I-49 International Coalition is meeting in Mena next week (non-members invited).  In case anyone will be in the neighborhood ... :

http://www.swtimes.com/business/article_59eae6a2-7bcf-11e0-bd0f-001cc4c002e0.html

Quote
The I-49 International Coalition will meet with members and nonmembers to discuss current status and future requirements for completing Interstate 49 in Arkansas, according to a news release.
The meeting is 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. May 18 in the library at Rich Mountain Community College in Mena. Lunch is included.
Reservations are due Thursday and can be made by emailing or calling Bill Beam at b.beam@sbcglobal.net or (479) 243-3804.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on May 16, 2011, 07:46:09 PM
An AHTD spokesman was quoted last Friday as saying the contractor is already on site: http://www.nwaonline.com/news/2011/may/16/bella-vista-work-bypass-starts/
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on May 17, 2011, 10:48:23 AM
An AHTD spokesman was quoted last Friday as saying the contractor is already on site: http://www.nwaonline.com/news/2011/may/16/bella-vista-work-bypass-starts/
An illustration (dated Aug. 2010) on the first page of the linked article indicates that the current project includes grading and earthwork from Hiwasse to the AR-MO state line.  I emailed AHTD and asked them if the current project includes the grading & earthwork to the state line.  The response:

Quote
The next phase of work for the Bella Vista Bypass is scheduled to be let in July 2011. That project is for the grading and structures of 4.8 miles from Highway 72 north to the state line. Currently that is the only other project with a scheduled date for letting.

Having the project include structures is more than I had expected.  Slow progress, but at least there may be two projects up and running by Fall.

EDIT

Useless trivia department:  When this project begins in late 2011, Arkansas will have ongoing construction projects at three of the four state lines it shares with other states along the route of I-49.  At the risk of straying off-topic, a roadgeek challenge: When was the last time in the history of the interstate system, if ever, that one state had simultaneous construction projects at three or more state lines of a single interstate?  (I do not have an answer).
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on May 17, 2011, 02:19:46 PM

Useless trivia department:  When this project begins in late 2011, Arkansas will have ongoing construction projects at three of the four state lines it shares with other states along the route of I-49.  At the risk of straying off-topic, a roadgeek challenge: When was the last time in the history of the interstate system, if ever, that one state had simultaneous construction projects at three or more state lines of a single interstate?  (I do not have an answer).


3 of 4? Louisiana, Texas, Missouri...who's #4?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on May 17, 2011, 02:45:25 PM
3 of 4? Louisiana, Texas, Missouri...who's #4?
Three states (LA, MO, TX), but four state line crossings.  There are two proposed state line crossings with Texas; (1) current construction just north of Texarkana and (2) distant-future crossing of Red River at north end of Texas section (yeah, one state line, but two separate crossings of that line; sorry for confusion  :pan:).

EDIT

In any event, one state having ongoing simultaneous construction up to the respective state lines of three other states along the route of one interstate must be a rare event.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on July 08, 2011, 06:50:45 PM
http://www.4029tv.com/mostpopular/28482307/detail.html

Work on the Bella Vista Bypass was scheduled to begin today.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on September 01, 2011, 12:06:07 PM
I just received an email update from AHTD.  Bids for a grading contract for Bella Vista Bypass from Hiwasse to MO state line are expected to be open this October.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on September 16, 2011, 08:56:03 AM
A quick update:

Dirt work appears to be finished (or mostly finished) on the Massard Rd bridge over Future I-49 in Fort Smith. I couldn't get too close since the road is closed, but may try to sneak down this weekend.


Addendum:

Dirt work is finished on the Rye Hill Road bridge over future I-49 and construction has just begun on the bridge sidewalls.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on November 04, 2011, 09:19:33 AM
And in light of the I-69 designations in TX and KY, I've just e-mailed LA, AR, and MO about signing stretches of I-49 that are complete and attached to an existing route (Westbank Expressway, AR 549, I-540, and US 71).  We'll see what they say if they reply.
Above quote from "Louisiana" thread on Southeast page.

Since AASHTO recently gave its conditional approval for Missouri's conversion from US 71 to I-49 signage in December, 2012 (without that section connecting to the current I-49 in Louisiana), and The Texarkana Gazette reported on October 31 that the 8 miles of new terrain I-49 around Texarkana (that connects to I-30) should be open to traffic by this time next year, it seems like December, 2012 would be a great time for AHTD to coordinate with MoDOT and resign US 71 in Missouri, I-540 (from I-40 northward to BVB proposed route), the Texarkana new terrain I-49, and AR 549 and then AR 245 from Doddridge to the new terrain I-49 near Arkansas Blvd. in one ceremonious fell swoop (I-540 will have to be re-signed at some time anyway).  That would be a very powerful statement in fight for federal $$$$$ to complete I-49.

That would be a pretty nice Christmas present for roadgeeks!  :sombrero:
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Anthony_JK on November 04, 2011, 12:15:44 PM
Nope...better to wait until 2015 when I-49 is completed in Louisiana from I-220 north.

Or even better, wait until the segment between Texarkana and Fort Smith is at least under construction, and the Inner City Connector in Shreveport is fully committed to..and then sign the whole shebang as I-49 in one fell swoop.


Anthony
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: rte66man on November 06, 2011, 04:57:27 PM
Nope...better to wait until 2015 when I-49 is completed in Louisiana from I-220 north.

Or even better, wait until the segment between Texarkana and Fort Smith is at least under construction, and the Inner City Connector in Shreveport is fully committed to..and then sign the whole shebang as I-49 in one fell swoop.


Anthony

Why wait?  Do it now. IMO, its a mistake to wait as who knows when the stretch from Ft Smith to DeQueen will be finished.

rte66man
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on November 06, 2011, 05:43:33 PM

Why wait?  Do it now. IMO, its a mistake to wait as who knows when the stretch from Ft Smith to DeQueen will be finished.

rte66man

POINT!  :)

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: lamsalfl on November 09, 2011, 12:46:22 AM
Signing the finished sections early (which I support) keeps the whole project in focus and I think helps to fasttrack funding for the incomplete sections.  government:  "Gee, what's the deal with this gap?"
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on November 09, 2011, 07:12:42 AM
Signing the finished sections early (which I support) keeps the whole project in focus and I think helps to fasttrack funding for the incomplete sections.  government:  "Gee, what's the deal with this gap?"

There is some precedent for that: I (vaguely) remember sections of I-44 in Missouri being incomplete in the 1960's.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: codyg1985 on November 09, 2011, 08:01:49 AM
I just received an email update from AHTD.  Bids for a grading contract for Bella Vista Bypass from Hiwasse to MO state line are expected to be open this October.

I looked on the AHTD website and no such contract was awarded for the October 19th letting.

There is a letting coming up on December 14th, and the plans will be available on November 15th: http://www.arkansashighways.com/ProgCon/General/JOBS_include.aspx
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on November 17, 2011, 11:53:05 AM
I just received an email reply from AHTD (my questions and then AHTD answers):

Quote
Q "I noticed in today's listing of December 14 projects to be let that the second Bella Vista Bypass grading and structures contract was not included.  Has that project run into a long term delay?"

A "The next job has changed scope a couple of times, but it is now a turnkey project schedules for May for the section from Highway 72 north to County Road 34."

Q "... in light of Missouri getting AASHTO OK to resign US 71 as I-49, is AHTD considering resigning I-540 as I-49 (with the idea being to demonstrate to members of Congress from non-I-49 states that a lot of work (MO & AR) has been done on I-49, which in turn generates more momentum in getting federal funds to complete I-49)?"

A "We went through the process and applied to the Feds not too long ago about that, but we were turned down and told more construction needed to be completed before reapplying.

It seems to me that the AASHTO approval for transition from US 71 to I-49 signage in Missouri would warrant a similar I-540 to I-49 transition in Arkansas.  It will be interesting to see how soon Arkansas reapplies.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on November 20, 2011, 02:31:12 AM
Arkansas has a lot on its hands... but they need to focus on I-49/I-540... And not the southern section of I-49.  What is with the section south of Texarkana?  Why exactly was that constructed?  There's no traffic!  I'm sick of seeing NW Arkansas being tossed aside in terms of funding.  They need to basically re-do I-540 from Exit 62 (Martin Luther King Jr/US 62 west) to Exit 88 (Central Avenue/AR 72) in Bentonville... All from poor planning.   I drive it everyday, and it's ridiculous.  Accidents are literally daily, and just further tie up traffic.  Traffic during peak times can crawl at 30 MPH.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on November 20, 2011, 04:20:25 AM
Arkansas has a lot on its hands... but they need to focus on I-49/I-540... And not the southern section of I-49.  What is with the section south of Texarkana?  Why exactly was that constructed?  There's no traffic!  I'm sick of seeing NW Arkansas being tossed aside in terms of funding.  They need to basically re-do I-540 from Exit 62 (Martin Luther King Jr/US 62 west) to Exit 88 (Central Avenue/AR 72) in Bentonville... All from poor planning.   I drive it everyday, and it's ridiculous.  Accidents are literally daily, and just further tie up traffic.  Traffic during peak times can crawl at 30 MPH.


I think part of the difference is terrain. SW Arkansas is a lot flatter than NW Arkansas, which means lower construction costs. Don't forget there was a lot of debate for years about how 49 would connect to Missouri. Ideally, it would have been up US 71 through Bella Vista, but that area over-commercialized very quickly.  So AHTD had to look for alternatives.

PLUS, since Congressman Hammerschmidt retired, there really hasn't been anyone else pushing for 49 in NWA. As for 549, Texarkana probably had a well connected congressman.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Anthony_JK on November 20, 2011, 09:10:39 AM
Arkansas has a lot on its hands... but they need to focus on I-49/I-540... And not the southern section of I-49.  What is with the section south of Texarkana?  Why exactly was that constructed?  There's no traffic!  I'm sick of seeing NW Arkansas being tossed aside in terms of funding.  They need to basically re-do I-540 from Exit 62 (Martin Luther King Jr/US 62 west) to Exit 88 (Central Avenue/AR 72) in Bentonville... All from poor planning.   I drive it everyday, and it's ridiculous.  Accidents are literally daily, and just further tie up traffic.  Traffic during peak times can crawl at 30 MPH.


Just wait until Louisiana opens its segment of I-49 North from I-220 in Shreveport northward in 2015, and you'll see why it was built.

Last time I checked, there was a plan to widen and upgrade I-540 through NW AK...just awaiting funding.


Anthony
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on November 28, 2011, 12:19:11 PM
Arkansas has a lot on its hands... but they need to focus on I-49/I-540... And not the southern section of I-49 ... I'm sick of seeing NW Arkansas being tossed aside in terms of funding.  They need to basically re-do I-540 from Exit 62 (Martin Luther King Jr/US 62 west) to Exit 88 (Central Avenue/AR 72) in Bentonville...
Last time I checked, there was a plan to widen and upgrade I-540 through NW AK...just awaiting funding.

Eight I-540 interchanges are planned to be upgraded using the bond money that Arkansas voters recently approved:
http://www.4029tv.com/r/29706053/detail.html

Quote
Interstate 540 is a highly traveled stretch of road, and if voters approve the bonds those who take advantage of Arkansas interstates will reap the benefits.
"We're going to redo eight interchanges to make it easier to get on and get off," Arkansas Highway Commissioner Dick Trammel said. "It lets us do highways now instead of piecing it out over the next 12 or 15 years. We'll add our bonds. It creates a billion dollars -- $575 million in the bonds plus federal." ...
It could also lead to even bigger improvements such as taking four lanes of I-540 and turning it into six lanes.
"Interchange improvements are the first step toward the eventual widening of 540. We need voters to approve this on Tuesday, and if they upgrade our interchanges, then widening is in our future ...

However, the future increase from four lanes to six lanes will not be funded by the bonds:
http://www.arkansashighways.com/news/2011/2011_Bond_Program.pdf

Quote
... no additional lanes can be added using these funds.
[page 3 of document, page 4/7 of pdf].

EDIT

The above AHTD link indicates plans to rehabilitate and improve the following I-540 interchanges in Washington and Benton counties: Hwys. 62/180, Hwys. 16/112S, Great House Springs Road, Elm Springs Road, Wagon Wheel Road, Hwy. 264, Hwy. 71B, Hwys. 62/102, and Hwy. 72.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: codyg1985 on November 28, 2011, 01:24:51 PM
I wonder if the mainline bridges can be widened inside the interchanges but stripped for the same amount of lanes?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on November 28, 2011, 06:10:16 PM

The above AHTD link indicates plans to rehabilitate and improve the following I-540 interchanges in Washington and Benton counties: Hwys. 62/180, Hwys. 16/112S, Great House Springs Road, Elm Springs Road, Wagon Wheel Road, Hwy. 264, Hwy. 71B, Hwys. 62/102, and Hwy. 72.

US 62 West is being improved now, 16 West was recently "improved", as was Porter Road.  I'm not sure what else AHTD can do besides rebuild the bridges & widen 540
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on December 13, 2011, 03:26:23 PM
Two more projects in the area of Roberts Road to Massard Road, and between US 71 and Howard Hill, should be let by next summer:
http://swtimes.com/site/bios/business/article_f9f4b068-2595-11e1-92b4-001871e3ce6c.html

Quote
Members of the Frontier Metropolitan Planning Organization’s policy board heard an overview of area highway construction projects during a meeting Monday.
Joe Shipman, area district engineer for the Arkansas Highway and Transportation Department, said work continues on the six-mile stretch of highway destined to be part of Interstate 49 that will link Rogers Avenue (Arkansas 22) to U.S. 71 south of Fort Smith at Howard Hill Road.
Shipman said two contracts on the project are in the works and bids will be awarded on another two, in the area of Roberts Road to Massard Road, and between U.S. 71 and Howard Hill, by next summer. Once those are completed, the only remaining work will be the paving, Shipman said ...

EDIT

Here is a link to some similar update info as above:
http://www.swtimes.com/business/article_5c808044-4b22-11e0-9dee-001cc4c03286.html

Quote
... Ivy Owen, executive director of the Fort Chaffee Redevelopment Authority and member of the Western Arkansas Regional Intermodal Transportation Authority, told authority board members Wednesday construction of the interstate crossing at Chaffee Crossing is progressing rapidly. He said earth work and bridge and support work on a portion of the road between Arkansas 22 and Howard Hill is on schedule for completion within a year and a contracts are due to be awarded soon on a portion of the road from Howard Hill to U.S. 71.
Owen said the status of the project has progressed at a rate that his predictions on the highway have changed from "it won't be completed in my lifetime" to "before I retire, I will be driving on I-49 ....
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on December 16, 2011, 11:49:24 AM
This article indicates that the Chaffee Crossing section of I-49 will be open to traffic in 2014:
http://www.swtimes.com/business/article_0c084836-2731-11e1-ac2f-0019bb2963f4.html

Quote
... Progress on several fronts has occurred at Chaffee Crossing, Fort Chaffee Redevelopment Authority staff member Larry Evans told the board. He said construction of the local portion of the Interstate 49 project at Chaffee Crossing continues, with another two contracts remaining to be let on the seven-mile stretch between Arkansas 22 and U.S. 71 before the road is paved.
Evans said highway officials have indicated local motorists may be traveling on the Chaffee Crossing portion of the highway sometime in 2014 ...

EDIT

This article has basically same info as above, but it speaks in terms of the status of the four interchanges near Fort Smith:
http://www.arkansasonline.com/news/2011/dec/17/fort-smiths-4th-interchange-i-49-get-star-20111217/?f=news-arkansas

Quote
The state Highway and Transportation Department plans to award a contract next year to build a fourth interchange in the Fort Smith area for the long-planned Interstate 49.
The interchange would be at U.S. 71 south of the city, according to Joe Shipman, District 4 engineer for the Highway Department ...
Three other Fort Smith-area interchanges for the new northsouth interstate are nearly finished, according to Shipman.
Highway engineers hope traffic will flow on the 6-mile strip within three to five years. It would be one of the first new stretches of future I-49 to be completed in the state since 2005.Arkansas is spending $57.65 million on I-49 interchanges, roadway and other structuresso far in Fort Smith. Complete or nearly complete are interchanges at Arkansas 22 (Rogers Avenue), Roberts Boulevard and Massard Road.
When the fourth interchange on U.S. 71 is under contract and construction is well under way, the state expects to go forward with the last step, Shipman said. That would be paving the highway and opening it to traffic, perhaps by 2014. That schedule depends on available funding.
The projects in Arkansas don’t yet have an official Interstate 49 designation. The state Highway Department refers to the Fort Smith section as “Highway 71 Relocation (I-49).”  ...
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on December 17, 2011, 02:09:51 AM

US 62 West is being improved now, 16 West was recently "improved", as was Porter Road.  I'm not sure what else AHTD can do besides rebuild the bridges & widen 540


They need to improve a lot of the interchanges.  At peak times, NWA traffic is hell.  Exit 86 (off of where I live) is horrible.  The traffic on 14th Street (in Bentonville) and Hudson Road (in Rogers) backs up for an insane length.  This was noted in the study I found of I-540.  The Walton/Walnut exit to the south is another.  Traffic on US 71 approaching Bella Vista, from the south, backs up...  I can't even speak for the Springdale/Fayetteville interchanges.  AHTD is too cheap, and they need to gut the majority of the NWA interchanges and do it right.

The thing with traffic in NWA is that it occurs during certain times.  Most other times, it's heavy.  :)

I drove from Exit 85 on I-540 to the Missouri state line today, and it took me 45 minutes.

It just angers me that such crappy planning was in place, on all levels... Growth or not, plan it out.

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on December 17, 2011, 08:47:19 AM

It just angers me that such crappy planning was in place, on all levels... Growth or not, plan it out.


Well, that's Arkansas for you: they never seem to plan very well. They never anticipated the growth thanks to Wal-Mart/Tyson/JB Hunt. Are they still "talking" about the Springdale Bypass and the special toll road to the airport (which is something else they need to do: fix 264 to the airport).

If AHTD had planned better, they wouldn't need the Bella Vista Bypass and could go straight up 71...but it got too commercialized, too quickly.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on December 19, 2011, 01:24:50 AM
Well, that's Arkansas for you: they never seem to plan very well. They never anticipated the growth thanks to Wal-Mart/Tyson/JB Hunt. Are they still "talking" about the Springdale Bypass and the special toll road to the airport (which is something else they need to do: fix 264 to the airport).

If AHTD had planned better, they wouldn't need the Bella Vista Bypass and could go straight up 71...but it got too commercialized, too quickly.

The Springdale Bypass (which is really needed) is still on the books, and has been listed on the latest STIP I found, I believe.  But I'm sure it'll be another 40 years (and that's being generous) until it is actually fully built.  Although, I think fixing I-540 (widening/interchanges) and the Bella Vista Bypass need to be fixed before the Springdale/US 412 Bypass. I also agree on the airport link... I wasn't aware of a toll road to the airport... Interesting.  I'm still scratching my head as to why they put the main airport here in the middle of nowhere.  :)

On a side note, on I-540/future I-49, they are looking at constructing an interchange in Springdale for Don Tyson Parkway, an interchange for Joyce Boulevard in Fayetteville, and an interchange for SE 8th Street in Bentonville.  They were also looking at an interchange for NE J Street in Bentonville, but I think they scrapped that idea... The city of Bentonville said it would be too costly.

Here's a link for the 8th Street project:  http://www.bentonvillear.com/8th_street_project.html

Here's a few links for the Don Tyson Parkway interchange project:  http://www.springdalear.gov/news/newsdetail94.asp
http://www.5newsonline.com/news/kfsm-i540-interchange-at-don-tyson-parkway-closer-to-construction-20110411,0,6240393.story

Both projects will help with traffic woes in NWA.  The Don Tyson Parkway interchange will take a bit of traffic away from Sunset Avenue.  The 8th Street interchange will take away traffic from 14th Street in Bentonville... It's mainly for Walmart employees.

I couldn't find any links for the Joyce Boulevard interchange with I-540... I think it's in the very early stages.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on December 19, 2011, 01:46:52 AM

The Springdale Bypass (which is really needed) is still on the books, and has been listed on the latest STIP I found, I believe.  But I'm sure it'll be another 40 years (and that's being generous) until it is actually fully built.  Although, I think fixing I-540 (widening/interchanges) and the Bella Vista Bypass need to be fixed before the Springdale/US 412 Bypass. I also agree on the airport link... I wasn't aware of a toll road to the airport... Interesting.  I'm still scratching my head as to why they put the main airport here in the middle of nowhere.  :)


#1 The land was cheap
#2 It was close to Wal-Mart HQ (relatively speaking).

Long story short: Wal-Mart/Tyson/JB Hunt built it and forced everyone to use it.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on December 19, 2011, 12:35:18 PM

I couldn't find any links for the Joyce Boulevard interchange with I-540... I think it's in the very early stages.

Joyce Blvd will be a pain to build if they go through with it: very steep terrain in the vicinity of 540.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on December 20, 2011, 12:52:38 AM
#1 The land was cheap
#2 It was close to Wal-Mart HQ (relatively speaking).

Long story short: Wal-Mart/Tyson/JB Hunt built it and forced everyone to use it.
Joyce Blvd will be a pain to build if they go through with it: very steep terrain in the vicinity of 540.

True... I believe Walmart doesn't utilize XNA as much as the airport in Rogers... Apparently, that's where the corporate hotshots fly in and out of... That's where all of the Walmart corporate jets are... But XNA does have a lot of traffic too.  At least this is what my friend is telling me who has lived here for 21 years... :)

The Joyce Blvd interchange could and should be done.  Not a high priority... but it's on the table.

Joyce Blvd & College (US 71B) is the most congested intersection in Fayetteville.  They are planning a flyover for US 71B (College Ave) to westbound US 71B... since there is no connection...  I'm still confused on the US 71 designations in Fayetteville and NWA.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on December 20, 2011, 10:56:54 AM

True... I believe Walmart doesn't utilize XNA as much as the airport in Rogers... Apparently, that's where the corporate hotshots fly in and out of... That's where all of the Walmart corporate jets are... But XNA does have a lot of traffic too.  At least this is what my friend is telling me who has lived here for 21 years... :)

But almost all the vendors fly to XNA because that's where the commercial flights land.

Quote
Joyce Blvd & College (US 71B) is the most congested intersection in Fayetteville.  They are planning a flyover for US 71B (College Ave) to westbound US 71B... since there is no connection...  I'm still confused on the US 71 designations in Fayetteville and NWA.

They don't know what they want for College & Joyce. I used to live near there and there is always a different proposal. There isn't a lot they can do since the whole area is commercialized. They should have done something when the old Ramada Inn was torn down instead of making anoither strip mall.

The "flyover" would be from College Ave (71B) to the Fulbright Expressway (technically 71 Spur or 471 Spur, but never referred to that way. I say call it a Business Spur, since AHTD is bull of BS). They've been discussing that for almost 10 years. Originally, you were supposed to use the Jughandle at Stearns St (now Joyce Blvd) and turn around, but that is no longer feasible.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on December 22, 2011, 12:10:24 AM
Interesting... I'm not extremely familiar with Fayetteville traffic, but I do know the Jughandle is used by right-turners from College to Joyce.  Nice idea, but it's not working as it should :).  My friend's sister actually got in a bad accident there, because she thought the jughandle was a shortcut to College, from Joyce.  It was her own stupidity, but it goes to show that driver familiarity is an important thing to consider, and signage be more than adequate.  You can't stick something that isn't familiar, and expect drivers to figure it out, without adequate signage... and the signage for the jughandle is not adequate.

This mess at College & Joyce sounds like one that they are working on in Sioux Falls, SD.  Here's a link for the planning:  http://www.sddot.com/PE/projdev/planning_ss_I29Exit77.asp

The 41st & Louise there is comparable to the College & Joyce intersection...  The center turn overpass is interesting... and could fix College & Joyce... Sounds pretty expensive though.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on December 22, 2011, 12:35:49 AM
Interesting... I'm not extremely familiar with Fayetteville traffic, but I do know the Jughandle is used by right-turners from College to Joyce.  Nice idea, but it's not working as it should :).  My friend's sister actually got in a bad accident there, because she thought the jughandle was a shortcut to College, from Joyce.  It was her own stupidity, but it goes to show that driver familiarity is an important thing to consider, and signage be more than adequate.  You can't stick something that isn't familiar, and expect drivers to figure it out, without adequate signage... and the signage for the jughandle is not adequate.


When the original 71 Bypass was built circa 1971, everything around the mall was undeveloped, except along the west service road. Joyce went 2 blocks east and ended behind what's now Lindsey Real Estate. The jughandle was useful then, but is all but useless now for making U Turns. I think the signage for the jughandle still show it as a turn around for 71/62/540.  I think I still have some maps from that time somewhere in my collection. Wal-Mart was rumored for several years before it was finally built south of the mall, but AHTD & Fayetteille Street Dept didn't plan ahead. That was also an era of "growth at any price" in city government. After the oldest living trees in town were cut down to build Target, THEN people started to notice.  That's one reason I finally moved away: Fayetteville lost its charm to the explosive growth.

To fix College and Joyce will cost lots of money...and probably several businesses.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on December 27, 2011, 04:58:00 PM
After getting Arkansas voters to approve the bond referendum for interstate maintenance in November, AHTD and the Arkansas legislature will come back in November 2012 and ask Arkansas voters to approve a one-half percent increase in the sales tax for construction of and improvements to four-lane highways (including additional lanes).  Completion of two lanes of the Bella Vista Bypass is one of the projects that would be funded by the increase:
http://thecabin.net/news/2011-12-24/highway-improvement-advocates-gearing-sales-tax-hike-campaign

Quote
Advocates for renewing a $575 million highway bond program breezed to victory in a November special election with a simple but effective message to voters: Raise new highway maintenance funds without raising taxes.  
Now they’re gearing up for a very “different campaign”  next year to pay for a broader highway construction by adding taxes on top of taxes.
The Legislature this year referred to the 2012 general election ballot a proposed constitutional amendment that would raise the state’s 6 percent sales tax to 6 1/2 percent to fund a $1.8 billion program that would connect all corners of the state with four-lane highways ...
“There is no question it will be a tough sell,”  even with the prospects for job creation and economic development, said Randy Zook, president and CEO of the Arkansas State Chamber of Commerce-Associated Industries of Arkansas ...
Under the proposed constitutional amendment, a half-cent sales tax increase would be in effect for 10 years. Highway construction under the plan would focus primarily on a creating a statewide four-lane grid and adding capacity to existing four-lane highways.
The state would receive 70 percent of the proceeds, an estimated $1.1 billion, with cities and counties sharing the remaining 30 percent, about $700 million ...
Scott Bennett, director of the Arkansas Highway and Transportation Department ... has said approval of the half-cent sales tax increase would fund a number of large, expensive projects across Arkansas, including replacement of the Interstate 30 bridge over the Arkansas River between Little Rock and North Little Rock, widening I-40 between Little Rock and Conway, and widening U.S. 67-167 between Jacksonville and Cabot.
Two lanes of the proposed Bella Vista bypass also would be completed in northwestern Arkansas, and in the south, U.S. 82 between Magnolia and El Dorado would be widened, as would a number of other heavily traveled highways across the state, Bennett said ...
Crucial to the highway tax increase effort, supporters say, would be the support of Gov. Mike Beebe. The governor was featured in television commercials for the road bond renewal drive but has remained steadfastly noncommittal to the highway tax increase proposal.  
About all Beebe has said about the plan is that in the current economy voters would be hard-pressed to support a tax increase ...
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on December 27, 2011, 07:58:30 PM
Crucial to the highway tax increase effort, supporters say, would be the support of Gov. Mike Beebe. The governor was featured in television commercials for the road bond renewal drive but has remained steadfastly noncommittal to the highway tax increase proposal. 
About all Beebe has said about the plan is that in the current economy voters would be hard-pressed to support a tax increase ..."

If he DID support it publicly, it would be the kiss of death to his being Governor. He has cut the grocery tax twice, much to the protest of his opponents. To suddenly support a tax increase for any reason would likely be fatal to his political career. Could we use it? Sure! But I don't think he'll go on the record as supporting it.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on December 28, 2011, 11:30:51 PM
They need to do something... The highway funding formula for this state is seriously flawed, by the sounds of it. 

For me, the Bella Vista Bypass should be at the top of the list.  Missouri is ready to designate US 71 from I-44 to KC as I-49 by the end of 2012.  If AR would fast-track the bypass, we could have I-49 from KC to I-40 near Fort Smith.

Other states can do it right, why can't Arkansas?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on December 28, 2011, 11:50:03 PM
They need to do something... The highway funding formula for this state is seriously flawed, by the sounds of it. 

For me, the Bella Vista Bypass should be at the top of the list.  Missouri is ready to designate US 71 from I-44 to KC as I-49 by the end of 2012.  If AR would fast-track the bypass, we could have I-49 from KC to I-40 near Fort Smith.

Other states can do it right, why can't Arkansas?

Arkansas has always been backwards. We're also a poor state, so we don't have a lot of money. Then they wait too long and have to start again. It took 30+ years to plan/build 540 north of Alma.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: kphoger on December 29, 2011, 11:51:29 AM
Is there still a 4-lane Bella Vista bypass option on the table?  How can the entire corridor be labeled an I-xx without full multilane freeway?  Maybe I'm getting my posts mixed up....
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: codyg1985 on December 29, 2011, 11:52:36 AM
^ I think the other two lanes will be built later as funding becomes available. I think it will be graded so that there will be room for the other carriageway.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on December 29, 2011, 03:57:28 PM
^ I think the other two lanes will be built later as funding becomes available. I think it will be graded so that there will be room for the other carriageway.

Yes. For now, it will be a "Super 2" with Right of Way to expand once money becomes available. Work is currently underway around Hiwasse on grading and structures.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on December 30, 2011, 12:27:45 AM
Arkansas has always been backwards. We're also a poor state, so we don't have a lot of money. Then they wait too long and have to start again. It took 30+ years to plan/build 540 north of Alma.

It looks like AHTD has a new director...

Also, I wouldn't call AR a backwards state (although I'd really like to).  I see a lot of the southern states with progress when it comes to roads/highways.  Alabama and Mississippi come to mind with I-22.  Something is seriously flawed in AR with the highway funding, and it needs to be fixed.  And the fact that Little Rock has the highest amount of Interstate mileage per capita... I can't find the facts to back this up right now, but I believe it.

I see US 67 with a limited access roadway constructed to Cash, AR... Why?  Why, oh why?  I've looked at Google StreetView...  And I see US 63 from I-55 to Jonesboro.  I know the growth in NWA was quick, but why can't we get this type of attention.  And AHTD is very, very flawed, because the AR 102 (14th Street) reconstruction in Bentonville took, literally, years to complete.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on December 30, 2011, 12:48:26 AM


It looks like AHTD has a new director...

Also, I wouldn't call AR a backwards state (although I'd really like to).  I see a lot of the southern states with progress when it comes to roads/highways.  Alabama and Mississippi come to mind with I-22.  Something is seriously flawed in AR with the highway funding, and it needs to be fixed.  And the fact that Little Rock has the highest amount of Interstate mileage per capita... I can't find the facts to back this up right now, but I believe it.

I see US 67 with a limited access roadway constructed to Cash, AR... Why?  Why, oh why?  I've looked at Google StreetView...  And I see US 63 from I-55 to Jonesboro.  I know the growth in NWA was quick, but why can't we get this type of attention.  And AHTD is very, very flawed, because the AR 102 (14th Street) reconstruction in Bentonville took, literally, years to complete.

Don't forget the last part of the 440 Loop is unfunded, too. I'd say misplaced priorities at the least. I have a 1970's Crawford County map that shows I-540 as proposed. Why did it take another 25-30 years? And it was going to be a continuation of the VB/FSM segment, instead of jumping around like it does now.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: ShawnP on December 30, 2011, 06:32:28 AM
Reason why Arkansas doesn't have I-22 like progress is Bama has Richard Shelby. Shelby has been one stubborn SOB in pushing I-22. Stories of him holding up Congressional vacations for more funding are legendary.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on December 30, 2011, 09:26:20 AM
Reason why Arkansas doesn't have I-22 like progress is Bama has Richard Shelby. Shelby has been one stubborn SOB in pushing I-22. Stories of him holding up Congressional vacations for more funding are legendary.

Arkansas had John Paul Hammerschmidt who got Arkansas the money to build I-540 north of Alma, but he retired a few years ago. 

The people who have held his seat in the House since then talk about completing I-49, but haven't allocated any funds. John Boozman talks the talk about securing more funding, but so far it seems to be all talk.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on January 02, 2012, 05:39:05 AM
It's surprising this area doesn't have a big voice for this... In terms of lawmakers...  Anyone driving I-540 between Bentonville and Fayetteville, during peak hours, have a lot of venting. 

This is a bit off topic, but the 14th Street (AR 102) reconstruction through Bentonville (from US 71 Business to Greenhouse Road) took, literally, years to complete.  A simple reconstruction, from a rural 2-lane, to an urban 4-lane.  And they didn't even include medians (very do-able... embrace the median!) and roadway lighting.  Sigh....
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on January 02, 2012, 09:56:51 AM
It's surprising this area doesn't have a big voice for this... In terms of lawmakers...  Anyone driving I-540 between Bentonville and Fayetteville, during peak hours, have a lot of venting. 

This is a bit off topic, but the 14th Street (AR 102) reconstruction through Bentonville (from US 71 Business to Greenhouse Road) took, literally, years to complete.  A simple reconstruction, from a rural 2-lane, to an urban 4-lane.  And they didn't even include medians (very do-able... embrace the median!) and roadway lighting.  Sigh....

14th Street was a contractor default. He went bankrupt and it took time for the bonding company to find a replacement.

Lots of people asking/demanding for I-49, but nothing seems to happen. Boozman says he's trying to get money, but I don't see how he can when he keeps saying we need to slash the federal budget  :confused:
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: ShawnP on January 02, 2012, 10:00:49 AM
Is there enough support to get a transportation district of all the counties together. That way they could create funding mechanism's to kick up by themselves. Sadly as important as a corridor as it is to America. I don't see much feds money coming Arkansas's way. Arkansas doesn't have the Uncle Sugar Daddies with power in Congress anymore.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on January 02, 2012, 10:17:47 AM
Is there enough support to get a transportation district of all the counties together. That way they could create funding mechanism's to kick up by themselves. Sadly as important as a corridor as it is to America. I don't see much feds money coming Arkansas's way. Arkansas doesn't have the Uncle Sugar Daddies with power in Congress anymore.

They talk a lot....that's about it.

There is a proposal for a half cent sales tax to pay for roads, but I am doubtful it was pass in the current anti-tax climate:
http://thecabin.net/news/2011-12-24/highway-improvement-advocates-gearing-sales-tax-hike-campaign#.TwHJF_nNnfU

Yet, at the same time, Arkansas just cut taxes on the sales of used cars.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on January 02, 2012, 11:02:13 AM
I just noticed that AHTD now has a page devoted to the Bella Vista Bypass (with links):
http://www.arkansashighways.com/BVB/bellavista.aspx
DARN IT! How did you find that before me?  :spin:
An AHTD spokesman was quoted last Friday as saying the contractor is already on site: http://www.nwaonline.com/news/2011/may/16/bella-vista-work-bypass-starts/
An illustration (dated Aug. 2010) on the first page of the linked article indicates that the current project includes grading and earthwork from Hiwasse to the AR-MO state line.  I emailed AHTD and asked them if the current project includes the grading & earthwork to the state line.  The response:
"The next phase of work for the Bella Vista Bypass is scheduled to be let in July 2011.
I just received an email update from AHTD.  Bids for a grading contract for Bella Vista Bypass from Hiwasse to MO state line are expected to be open this October.
I just received an email reply from AHTD (my questions and then AHTD answers):
Q "I noticed in today's listing of December 14 projects to be let that the second Bella Vista Bypass grading and structures contract was not included.  Has that project run into a long term delay?"
A "The next job has changed scope a couple of times, but it is now a turnkey project schedules for May for the section from Highway 72 north to County Road 34."
Aside from making improvements to I-540, I have to question AHTD's commitment to prioritizing the Bella Vista Bypass ("BVB") and getting it completed.  First, the BVB link in the top quote above has been removed from the home page and is now inactive.  A small thing, but another project now has a prominent link on the home page: the 430/630 interchange located in, of all places, Little Rock.  Not a good signal...
Also, the other quotes above show that the "second" BVB project has been delayed and decreased in scope.  Money is tight for sure, but it looks like people other than NWA representatives have AHTD's ear.

EDIT

Also, petitioning AASHTO for redesignation of I-540 as I-49 should be a no-brainer and should be done immediately.  Given what AASHTO has allowed Texas and Kentucky to do with I-69 signage, and Missouri with I-49 signage, AASHTO should approve the change.  I don't understand AHTD's apparent reluctance to petition for approval of the change.  It would only help get more $$$ over time.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on January 02, 2012, 11:49:37 AM

Also, petitioning AASHTO for redesignation of I-540 as I-49 should be a no-brainer and should be done immediately.  Given what AASHTO has allowed Texas and Kentucky to do with I-69 signage, and Missouri with I-49 signage, AASHTO should approve the change.  I don't understand AHTD's apparent reluctance to petition for approval of the change.  It would only help get more $$$ over time.

Missouri and Arkansas tried in 2007 to get the I-49 designation approved, but AASHTO said NO. So maybe they are waiting until they get more done?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on January 02, 2012, 12:18:08 PM
Missouri and Arkansas tried in 2007 to get the I-49 designation approved, but AASHTO said NO. So maybe they are waiting until they get more done?
I just get the sense that, in the current economy, AASHTO is being more receptive to back-channel arguments that immediate signage will aid economic development along corridors (why else allow a seven-mile stretch of I-69 to be signed in the middle of Texas's corridor in 2011?).  I think 2007 was right before the crash.

I'm just curious as to why Missouri went back to AASHTO alone in 2011.  Huge gap between Pineville, MO and Shreveport, LA but MoDOT received qualified approval.  Seems like AHTD would get similar approval for I-540 if they went back to AASHTO.  Other than BVB, would make gap between Alma and Shreveport.  It can't hurt to ask again; it worked for Missouri.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on January 02, 2012, 12:42:51 PM
Missouri and Arkansas tried in 2007 to get the I-49 designation approved, but AASHTO said NO. So maybe they are waiting until they get more done?
I just get the sense that, in the current economy, AASHTO is being more receptive to back-door arguments that immediate signage will aid economic development along corridors (why else allow a seven-mile stretch of I-69 to be signed in the middle of Texas's corridor in 2011?).  I think 2007 was right before the crash.

I'm just curious as to why Missouri went back to AASHTO alone in 2011.  Huge gap between Pineville, MO and Shreveport, LA but MoDOT received qualified approval.  Seems like AHTD would get similar approval for I-540 if they went back to AASHTO.  Other than BVB, would make gap between Alma and Shreveport.  It can't hurt to ask again; it worked for Missouri.

Missouri showed significant progress. From Pineville to Kansas City, it's already at least partially controlled access. Arkansas has almost nothing south of Ft Smith. So maybe Missouri thought they'd have a better chance alone this time rather than going in with Arkansas.

Missouri may be done by the end of 2012, while Arkansas will be sitting around wishing for money.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on January 02, 2012, 02:02:45 PM
Missouri showed significant progress. From Pineville to Kansas City, it's already at least partially controlled access. Arkansas has almost nothing south of Ft Smith.
Here's a link to a pdf of the 2007 AASHTO's disapprovals of Missouri's I-49 application and the Arkansas I-49 North application:
http://route.transportation.org/Documents/AM2007_USRN_ReporttoSCOH.pdf
At that time, Missouri only applied for a designation from the state line to I-44 and Arkansas applied from I-40 to the state line.  Both applications were denied because "road is not yet under construction".  I interpret that to mean that complete lack of construction on BVB killed both applications.

Since then, Missouri has made great progress with the interchanges from Joplin to KC (all will be completed by Dec. 2012), but still has not made any progress on BVB.  In its 2011 application, Missouri asked for and received conditional approval from the state line to I-435:
http://route.transportation.org/Documents/USRNReporttoSCOHOct152011.pdf
In Arkansas, I-540 from I-40 to BVB is already an interstate, and at least a small part of BVB around Hiwasse is under construction.  In both regards, I think an Arkansas I-49 North re-application would compare favorably with Missouri's re-application. I don't think the minimal amount of progress between I-40 and I-30 would be a factor in AASHTO's decision.  I think AHTD should go for it. 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: ShawnP on January 02, 2012, 03:42:07 PM
Missouri has their portion coming due 2014-16 as their long range budget has actual construction money budgeted. I would build it now as Construction Rates are as low as they might be in decades. I know it would  be a ghost road and the know nothings would complain about it but it would actually save money over the long term.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on January 02, 2012, 06:11:19 PM
Missouri has their portion coming due 2014-16 as their long range budget has actual construction money budgeted. I would build it now as Construction Rates are as low as they might be in decades. I know it would  be a ghost road and the know nothings would complain about it but it would actually save money over the long term.

My guess is Missouri will wait until everything north of Carthage has been completed, then worry about Pineville. Arkansas seems to be in no hurry, so there is little or no incentive for Missouri to do anything.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on January 03, 2012, 01:14:22 AM
I can see the hesitation on getting the I-49 designation in AR... It doesn't make sense without the Bella Vista Bypass... That really is the missing link.  The southern portion of I-49 (south of Fort Smith) will be a huge task.  The topography/terrain will be a challenge... then again, there's lower population and traffic down there.  The I-49 designation between KC and I-44 makes total sense, and Missouri will have that by the end of 2012 (according to MoDOT).  The Bella Vista Bypass is very underrated, and needs to be completed ASAP.  I drive US 71 often between Bentonville/Rogers and the MO state line... I feel really bad for the truckers... There is so much truck traffic, that have to deal with the traffic signals in Bella Vista, not to mention the regular traffic, both local and regional.  While the BVB should take priority, I-540 (& the interchanges) need huge help too.  I'm just glad I work a shift that avoids the major traffic congestion!  I really hope AR can get it's act together and get that dang bypass built right.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on January 03, 2012, 01:48:23 AM
What will be the temporary numbers for the Bella Vista bypass and the Fort Smith section of I-49 that is currently under construction?  Will they be segments of AR 549?  Will the Bella Vista bypass be AR 540?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: codyg1985 on January 03, 2012, 07:19:55 AM
I think AHTD should reapply for designation of I-540 from Alma to Bentonville as I-49 as Grzrd points out. It wouldn't hurt, and if I-69 in Mississippi can be approved then I don't see why I-49 in Arkansas can't be, either.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on January 03, 2012, 11:22:11 AM
Arkansas had John Paul Hammerschmidt who got Arkansas the money to build I-540 north of Alma, but he retired a few years ago.  
The people who have held his seat in the House since then talk about completing I-49, but haven't allocated any funds. John Boozman talks the talk about securing more funding, but so far it seems to be all talk.
Arkansas doesn't have the Uncle Sugar Daddies with power in Congress anymore.
The Bella Vista Bypass is very underrated, and needs to be completed ASAP.  I drive US 71 often between Bentonville/Rogers and the MO state line... I feel really bad for the truckers... There is so much truck traffic, that have to deal with the traffic signals in Bella Vista, not to mention the regular traffic, both local and regional.
Is either one of the senators from Arkansas powerful enough to push construction of the BVB through the halls of the Senate and its various committees?  Harry Reid, the very powerful Senator from Nevada, has apparently successfully included funding for Interstate 11 in the current draft of the Senate's version of the highway reauthorization bill (and I suspect he will fight hard to keep it in the bill):
http://www.examiner.com/las-vegas-in-national/interstate-from-las-vegas-to-phoenix-plans-move-along-us-senate

It seems like there is a very real need for the BVB, and that a strong argument can be made for it in terms of national significance.  Does Arkansas really have very little senatorial clout?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on January 03, 2012, 07:51:53 PM

It seems like there is a very real need for the BVB, and that a strong argument can be made for it in terms of national significance.  Does Arkansas really have very little senatorial clout?

Boozman is new as is Womack. Both are pretty much lockstep with the rest of the conservatives. Both talk about Arkansas' needs, but don't do a lot. Mark Pryor sort of goes whichever way the wind is blowing.



Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: ShawnP on January 04, 2012, 07:53:37 PM
I-49 should have 6 core Senators in MO, AR and LA delegations. One of those Senators is Roy Blount who got alot of money for work on US-71. I-49 should get support from TX, OK, KS, NB, IA, SD, ND Senators also . All states would have more commerce flowing into them from I-49/I-29 connections.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on January 04, 2012, 09:53:40 PM
I-49 should have 6 core Senators in MO, AR and LA delegations. One of those Senators is Roy Blount who got alot of money for work on US-71. I-49 should get support from TX, OK, KS, NB, IA, SD, ND Senators also . All states would have more commerce flowing into them from I-49/I-29 connections.

In theory, yes. But each Senator has their own agenda...often political. 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on January 05, 2012, 01:40:55 AM
I drove out to Hiawasse to see the progress on the segment they are currently constructing.  It's promising.  They are working on the BVB, a loop around the small town of Hiawasse (which was plastered with signs saying "No annexation" and "Leave Hiawasse Alone".  I'm wondering if Bella Vista or even Centerton is trying to annex them?)  Weird.

Anyway, the eastern part of the portion they are building looks good.  They have a lot of dirt work done, and it looks like they were starting on bridges.  The western portion was just them removing trees, and doing minor dirt work.  I wasn't sure what to expect driving out there... but it is progress.  The sad thing is I was out there around 3-4 PM and saw no movement at all on the two separate sites off of AR 72.  I like to see actively moving, getting stuff done.

I can't remember if I asked this before, but does AHTD do an incentive if the contractors finish early, and a penalty if they finish late? 

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: ShawnP on January 05, 2012, 09:26:16 AM
Sometimes you have to quantify data to those out of the core area. In other words show them the numbers of more commerce flowing and new business's that would want access to quicker markets employed by a Canada to New Orleans I-29/I-49 corridor. Trying to be positive as most areas once they get Interstate connections don't complain about them (yes that includes you Bloomington).

I-49 should have 6 core Senators in MO, AR and LA delegations. One of those Senators is Roy Blount who got alot of money for work on US-71. I-49 should get support from TX, OK, KS, NB, IA, SD, ND Senators also . All states would have more commerce flowing into them from I-49/I-29 connections.

In theory, yes. But each Senator has their own agenda...often political. 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on January 05, 2012, 10:37:11 AM
I drove out to Hiawasse to see the progress on the segment they are currently constructing.  It's promising.  They are working on the BVB, a loop around the small town of Hiawasse (which was plastered with signs saying "No annexation" and "Leave Hiawasse Alone".  I'm wondering if Bella Vista or even Centerton is trying to annex them?)  Weird.

They fought against being incorporated back in 2008, I believe. Information is sparse, but it looks as if they may be trying to incorporate themselves, as Bella Vista recently did. 

Quote

Anyway, the eastern part of the portion they are building looks good.  They have a lot of dirt work done, and it looks like they were starting on bridges.  The western portion was just them removing trees, and doing minor dirt work.  I wasn't sure what to expect driving out there... but it is progress.  The sad thing is I was out there around 3-4 PM and saw no movement at all on the two separate sites off of AR 72.  I like to see actively moving, getting stuff done.

I can't remember if I asked this before, but does AHTD do an incentive if the contractors finish early, and a penalty if they finish late? 


There is also work being done to the south on 279.  I was up that way 2-3 months ago, but didn't have time to stop for photos.

I don't remember if there was an incentive clause or not: AHTD doesn't always do them. I think they did for the 102 project in Bentonville, and we saw how that turned out ;)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: kphoger on January 05, 2012, 11:44:05 AM
I-49 should have 6 core Senators in MO, AR and LA delegations. One of those Senators is Roy Blount who got alot of money for work on US-71. I-49 should get support from TX, OK, KS, NB, IA, SD, ND Senators also . All states would have more commerce flowing into them from I-49/I-29 connections.

I remain unconvinced that saving twenty minutes of a truck driver's transit time magically improves the economy by stimulating business.  If this were 1940, then you could convince me, but today's highway infrastructure is so extensive that I think the connection between highway upgrades and the economy is far overstated.  I-49 may improve the economy of the cities it travels through or near, but I highly doubt the other states would see any change at all in their economies.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: rte66man on January 05, 2012, 08:35:58 PM
I-49 should have 6 core Senators in MO, AR and LA delegations. One of those Senators is Roy Blount who got alot of money for work on US-71. I-49 should get support from TX, OK, KS, NB, IA, SD, ND Senators also . All states would have more commerce flowing into them from I-49/I-29 connections.

Why should OK support funding for a road that doesn't touch their border?  Canadian traffic already comes down I35. Mexican traffic up 35 as well. "more commerce"? I don't see it at all. OK has way more road/bridge needs than does AR.  What little we can chisel from DC needs to stay home.

rte66man
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on January 06, 2012, 12:12:25 AM
I-49 should have 6 core Senators in MO, AR and LA delegations. One of those Senators is Roy Blount who got alot of money for work on US-71. I-49 should get support from TX, OK, KS, NB, IA, SD, ND Senators also . All states would have more commerce flowing into them from I-49/I-29 connections.

Why should OK support funding for a road that doesn't touch their border?  Canadian traffic already comes down I35. Mexican traffic up 35 as well. "more commerce"? I don't see it at all. OK has way more road/bridge needs than does AR.  What little we can chisel from DC needs to stay home.

OK is building a 4 lane US 59 from Poteau to I-40.  It could easily be extended to I-49, if traffic counts ever warrant.  Most truck traffic on 59/270 south of Hodgen turns south onto US 259 and vice versa.  When I-49 is completed, will trucks continue to use US 259 as a cutoff or will they take 270 to I-49?|
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on January 10, 2012, 02:52:50 PM
I just noticed that AHTD now has a page devoted to the Bella Vista Bypass (with links):
http://www.arkansashighways.com/BVB/bellavista.aspx
I just received an email reply from AHTD (my questions and then AHTD answers):
Q "I noticed in today's listing of December 14 projects to be let that the second Bella Vista Bypass grading and structures contract was not included.  Has that project run into a long term delay?"
A "The next job has changed scope a couple of times, but it is now a turnkey project schedules for May for the section from Highway 72 north to County Road 34."
the BVB link in the top quote above has been removed from the home page and is now inactive.  A small thing ...  Not a good signal...

I had a recent email Q & A with AHTD regarding the removal of the BVB link from the AHTD homepage and was reassured that they are still proceeding with BVB:

Quote
Q: I recently noticed that the Bella Vista Bypass link that used to be on the AHTD home page has been removed and deactivated.  Does this mean that completion of BVB has dropped in the scheme of AHTD priorities?

A: I’ll check on that link, but it doesn’t mean anything. We are undergoing changes to our web page. The BV Bypass job continues and the next scheduled job is for the 5 miles from Hwy 72 north to County Road 34.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on January 11, 2012, 01:13:35 PM
Lots of people asking/demanding for I-49, but nothing seems to happen. Boozman says he's trying to get money, but I don't see how he can when he keeps saying we need to slash the federal budget  :confused:
Boozman is new as is Womack. Both are pretty much lockstep with the rest of the conservatives. Both talk about Arkansas' needs, but don't do a lot.
Harry Reid, the very powerful Senator from Nevada, has apparently successfully included funding for Interstate 11 in the current draft of the Senate's version of the highway reauthorization bill (and I suspect he will fight hard to keep it in the bill):
http://www.examiner.com/las-vegas-in-national/interstate-from-las-vegas-to-phoenix-plans-move-along-us-senate

Boozman is doing more talking; claims he is working on the reauthorization bill and that he is going to "fire up" the I-49 Coalition:
http://www.swtimes.com/news/article_bd9fa5bc-3c67-11e1-9405-001871e3ce6c.html

Quote
...Boozman said he and Rep. Mike Ross, D-Prescott, are working on a highway reauthorization bill and plan to fire up the I-49 Coalition, which has congressional representatives from New Orleans to the Canadian border."

Maybe he and Ross can at least match Reid dollar for dollar in I-49 funding vs. I-11 funding.  However, I suspect otherwise ...
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on January 11, 2012, 11:26:25 PM
Boozman is doing more talking; claims he is working on the reauthorization bill and that he is going to "fire up" the I-49 Coalition:
http://www.swtimes.com/news/article_bd9fa5bc-3c67-11e1-9405-001871e3ce6c.html

"...Boozman said he and Rep. Mike Ross, D-Prescott, are working on a highway reauthorization bill and plan to fire up the I-49 Coalition, which has congressional representatives from New Orleans to the Canadian border."

Maybe he and Ross can at least match Reid dollar for dollar in I-49 funding vs. I-11 funding.  However, I suspect otherwise ...

Doubtful
Lots of people asking/demanding for I-49, but nothing seems to happen. Boozman says he's trying to get money, but I don't see how he can when he keeps saying we need to slash the federal budget  :confused:
Boozman is new as is Womack. Both are pretty much lockstep with the rest of the conservatives. Both talk about Arkansas' needs, but don't do a lot.
Harry Reid, the very powerful Senator from Nevada, has apparently successfully included funding for Interstate 11 in the current draft of the Senate's version of the highway reauthorization bill (and I suspect he will fight hard to keep it in the bill):
http://www.examiner.com/las-vegas-in-national/interstate-from-las-vegas-to-phoenix-plans-move-along-us-senate
Boozman is doing more talking; claims he is working on the reauthorization bill and that he is going to "fire up" the I-49 Coalition:
http://www.swtimes.com/news/article_bd9fa5bc-3c67-11e1-9405-001871e3ce6c.html

"...Boozman said he and Rep. Mike Ross, D-Prescott, are working on a highway reauthorization bill and plan to fire up the I-49 Coalition, which has congressional representatives from New Orleans to the Canadian border."

Maybe he and Ross can at least match Reid dollar for dollar in I-49 funding vs. I-11 funding.  However, I suspect otherwise ...
.

Ross is a lame duck: he's not running for re-election. 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on January 16, 2012, 11:58:13 PM
I just noticed that AHTD now has a page devoted to the Bella Vista Bypass (with links):
http://www.arkansashighways.com/BVB/bellavista.aspx
I had a recent email Q & A with AHTD regarding the removal of the BVB link from the AHTD homepage and was reassured that they are still proceeding with BVB:

Q: I recently noticed that the Bella Vista Bypass link that used to be on the AHTD home page has been removed and deactivated.  Does this mean that completion of BVB has dropped in the scheme of AHTD priorities?

A: I’ll check on that link, but it doesn’t mean anything. We are undergoing changes to our web page. The BV Bypass job continues and the next scheduled job is for the 5 miles from Hwy 72 north to County Road 34.

Thank you for inquiring about that.  The AHTD website is crappy, and needs a upgrade (Hint:  Look at MoDOT's webpage!).  I still think NWA Arkansas is neglected, and priority is given to the Little Rock area.  Yes, I haven't lived here too long, but I've heard that from many people here.  But... in my opinion, but the BVB should be at the top of the priority list (#1, in my opinion) for AHTD.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: ShawnP on January 17, 2012, 08:31:05 AM
Lived in NW Arkansas in the late 70's and it has always been a step child to Little Rock. Yet NW Arky is almost if not past Little Rock in Economic impact with 3 huge national corporations in the area. Yet NW Arkansas is still a cul de sac on the Interstate highway system (better than nothing but should be better).
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on January 19, 2012, 12:41:21 AM
Lived in NW Arkansas in the late 70's and it has always been a step child to Little Rock. Yet NW Arky is almost if not past Little Rock in Economic impact with 3 huge national corporations in the area. Yet NW Arkansas is still a cul de sac on the Interstate highway system (better than nothing but should be better).

The growth here has been very rapid (I've only lived here for a year).  There definitely should be more focus here.  It's sad that the majority of the interchanges along I-540, in NWA, need reconstruction. 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on January 19, 2012, 10:57:35 AM

The growth here has been very rapid (I've only lived here for a year).  There definitely should be more focus here.  It's sad that the majority of the interchanges along I-540, in NWA, need reconstruction. 

I think it's a combination of multiple factors: No one ever anticipated the growth in NWA: no one ever thought any of the "Big 3" would amount to anything and the U of A was more of a wannabe party school until 10-15 years ago.  Plus Fayetteville is so far removed from the rest of the state (geographically & politically) that they're often forgotten.  Even though the I-540 extension had been proposed since the 1970's, it took until the 1990's to get serious about it.
Now that AHTD is getting serious, there's not enough money to do anything.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on January 23, 2012, 07:05:26 PM
 Has anybody had time to read the article in the Arkansas Democrat Gazette about the Highway department and the money going where the cars are? Also the 1/2 cent sales tax vote this fall being critical to pass for expanding 4 lane roads in Arkansas. It starts on the front page.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on January 23, 2012, 08:06:06 PM
Has anybody had time to read the article in the Arkansas Democrat Gazette about the Highway department and the money going where the cars are? Also the 1/2 cent sales tax vote this fall being critical to pass for expanding 4 lane roads in Arkansas. It starts on the front page.

It's behind a Paywall online.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on January 23, 2012, 09:37:44 PM
Sorry,That paper and the Texarkana Gazette are in my lunch room at work so I don't have access to it online;.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on January 23, 2012, 10:11:49 PM
Well, a little bit of construction on I-540: AHTD is spending $5 million to install 24 miles of cable barriers on I-540: (http://www.4029tv.com/r/30281071/detail.html)

Quote
AHTD officials said they're getting the cables installed along a busy stretch of I-540 ...
The project started last month, and officials said it is expected to be completed by the summer.
"This is a really big project for us. It's a $5 million project, (constructing) 24 miles of cable barriers. It's significantly bigger than most of the cable barrier jobs we've had," Bolick said.
According to AHTD, the cable barrier will be installed in the median from Bentonville all the way to Fayetteville, securing a large part of the interstate, which is well-known for crossover accidents.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on January 23, 2012, 11:27:25 PM
Here's a thought:

If Mississippi was allowed to post 20-something miles of I-69 when it's no where close to complete, why can't AHTD or MoDOT post I-49?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on January 24, 2012, 11:35:49 AM
I drove out to Hiawasse to see the progress on the segment they are currently constructing.  It's promising.  They are working on the BVB, a loop around the small town of Hiawasse (which was plastered with signs saying "No annexation" and "Leave Hiawasse Alone".  I'm wondering if Bella Vista or even Centerton is trying to annex them?)  Weird.

Looks like Bella Vista is taking over Hiwasse by force, though Hiwasse would rather be part of Gravette.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Stephane Dumas on January 24, 2012, 01:22:19 PM
Google maps updated their satellite imagery at Texarkana, here the upcoming interchange of I-30 with I-49 http://maps.google.com/?ll=33.479563,-93.966923&spn=0.055482,0.077162&t=k&z=14&vpsrc=6

Edit: Looks like I arrived too late at the finish line. :sleep:
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3321.msg129064#msg129064
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on January 24, 2012, 02:32:12 PM
Google maps updated their satellite imagery at Texarkana, here the upcoming interchange of I-30 with I-49 http://maps.google.com/?ll=33.479563,-93.966923&spn=0.055482,0.077162&t=k&z=14&vpsrc=6
Edit: Looks like I arrived too late at the finish line. :sleep:
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3321.msg129064#msg129064
Actually, I believe it is an update over the link I posted.  I don't remember the southern "prong" at N Stateline Ave being paved.

http://www.arkansasonline.com/news/2011/dec/17/fort-smiths-4th-interchange-i-49-get-star-20111217/?f=news-arkansas
The state Highway and Transportation Department plans to award a contract next year to build a fourth interchange in the Fort Smith area for the long-planned Interstate 49.
The interchange would be at U.S. 71 south of the city, according to Joe Shipman, District 4 engineer for the Highway Department ...
Three other Fort Smith-area interchanges for the new northsouth interstate are nearly finished, according to Shipman ...
Complete or nearly complete are interchanges at Arkansas 22 (Rogers Avenue), Roberts Boulevard and Massard Road.
When the fourth interchange on U.S. 71 is under contract and construction is well under way, the state expects to go forward with the last step, Shipman said. That would be paving the highway and opening it to traffic, perhaps by 2014.
Anyway,  Stephane's post motivated me to check Bing's aerial view of the I-49 work at Chaffee Crossing. (http://www.bing.com/maps/?v=2&cp=35.29965984320673~-94.32473373413086&lvl=13&dir=0&sty=h&where1=Fort%20Smith%2C%20AR&form=LMLTCC)  Pretty good progress.  I checked Google and Bing for initial signs of construction at Hiwasse, but did not see anything.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on January 24, 2012, 09:02:07 PM

Anyway,  Stephane's post motivated me to check Bing's aerial view of the I-49 work at Chaffee Crossing. (http://www.bing.com/maps/?v=2&cp=35.29965984320673~-94.32473373413086&lvl=13&dir=0&sty=h&where1=Fort%20Smith%2C%20AR&form=LMLTCC)  Pretty good progress.  I checked Google and Bing for initial signs of construction at Hiwasse, but did not see anything.

The bridge at AR 22 is done, Frontier Rd/Ft Smith Blvd is done. Rye Hill Rd finished last month.  Massard Rd is still a work in progress.

C'mon up some time and I'll show you around ;)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on January 24, 2012, 10:08:25 PM
The bridge at AR 22 is done, Frontier Rd/Ft Smith Blvd is done. Rye Hill Rd finished last month.  Massard Rd is still a work in progress.
C'mon up some time and I'll show you around ;)
Thanks for the offer.  My roadgeek budget is tight; my wife and kids don't quite "get it".  That said, I am thinking of both 2012 AR I-49 trip and 2013 AR I-49 trip.

It looks like driving on the paved segments of I-49 North is an option if a Texarkana meet comes together.  Today, I spoke with Susan Stafford, a LaDOTD Public Information Officer.  She gave a tentative OK to the notion of meet attendees driving on the paved I-49 North, but there would be some bureaucratic prerequisites ... Even if I cannot make the meet, I might do a "stealth" drive myself before it opens to the general public.  :sombrero:
(above from "2012 meets?" thread on General Highway Talk)
For 2012, I want to drive paved segments of I-49 North before they open to general public and check out new terrain I-49 around Texarkana (I also hold out a quixotic/idiotic hope that, if a meet or personal "stealth" trip were late enough in Summer or early Fall, AHTD would be as accomodating as LaDOTD).  What a great I-49 doubleheader THAT would be!

You should drive the new road and film it.  Nobody would probably even notice and if you did get caught you wouldn't get in that much trouble.
(above from "Texarkana; (Future I-49; I-69 Spur)" thread)

If AHTD is not accomodating, other options may exist ...  :D

Could we make it from Fayetteville to Texarkana and back in a day?
(above from "2012 meets?" thread)

For 2013, I'm thinking of scaling back bugo's idea, making it a Fort Smith-Fayetteville trip, and checking out Chaffee Crossing and BVB construction.  By that time, Howard Hill to US 71S work  and second BVB project work should be well under way.  US 412 work will be cranking, too.  I hope a meet happens; if not, I may need the Road Scholar's guidance through the area.  ;-)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on January 28, 2012, 11:33:58 AM
Is there still another Bridge left to build between Roberts Road and Massard Road in the Fort Smith project. Shipman says there are 2 jobs left before paving. Job # 40479 was for overpass bridges for Massard Rd. and Custer Blvd., then 2 main lane bridges over Roberts Blvd. Job #40478 is for Grading and structures from Rye Hill to U.S. 71. I don't see another one on the AHTD that he is talking about. http://www.swtimes.com/business/article_f9f4b068-2595-11e1-92b4-001871e3ce6c.html
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on January 28, 2012, 12:06:18 PM
What will this highway be signed?  Will AASHTO get off their high horse and let AHTD sign it as I-49?  Or will it be another section of AR 549?  It will connect AR 22 to US 71 and probably won't get much traffic until it is extended to I-540 in Alma.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on January 28, 2012, 01:37:42 PM
Is there still another Bridge left to build between Roberts Road and Massard Road in the Fort Smith project. Shipman says there are 2 jobs left before paving. Job # 40479 was for overpass bridges for Massard Rd. and Custer Blvd., then 2 main lane bridges over Roberts Blvd. Job #40478 is for Grading and structures from Rye Hill to U.S. 71. I don't see another one on the AHTD that he is talking about. http://www.swtimes.com/business/article_f9f4b068-2595-11e1-92b4-001871e3ce6c.html

Looks like maybe Coyote Trail near Roberts Rd.  http://binged.it/wbHJZE

I've heard nothing regarding its designation. But the only interchange in this area is AR 22 so will 49 be paved and "abandoned" or will it have a temporary at-grade terminus? I've heard nothing either way.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on January 28, 2012, 02:01:20 PM
What will this highway be signed?  Will AASHTO get off their high horse and let AHTD sign it as I-49?  Or will it be another section of AR 549?  It will connect AR 22 to US 71 and probably won't get much traffic until it is extended to I-540 in Alma.
I believe the current FHWA guidance is that a freeway built to interstate standards cannot receive an interstate designation until at least one end of the freeway segment connects to a currently existing part of the interstate system (I believe this is the reason I-22 cannot be signed until the I-65/I-22 interchange is completed in 2014).  It will probably be a long wait for I-49 designation because Arkansas River bridge will have to be built to connect AR 22 to I-540 at Alma, which would then provide the necessary connection.

Above said, it looks like I-49 North in Louisiana will have I-49 signage for 2013 opening, even though it will have neither an I-30 connection nor an I-220 connection (although Texarkana work should be completed, and AR/LA state line to Doddridge will be under construction; maybe that's enough to establish the I-30 "connection"):

This is typical of the signing plans for I-49 North:

(http://www.sabre-roads.org.uk/wiki/images/b/bd/Sheet_0110.png)

Note I-49 trailblazer assembly.
(above quote from "I49 in LA" thread)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on January 28, 2012, 08:00:00 PM
What do you Guys think about some sections between Barling and I 40 that could could be built so you wouldn't have 300 million plus to have at one time. AHTD couldn't come up with 220 million for Bella Vista Bypass at one time. Could they extend I 540 south closer to Arkansas river and mabe extend from Barling towards the river so it could be broken down and not so much money at one time?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on January 28, 2012, 08:17:45 PM
What do you Guys think about some sections between Barling and I 40 that could could be built so you wouldn't have 300 million plus to have at one time. AHTD couldn't come up with 220 million for Bella Vista Bypass at one time. Could they extend I 540 south closer to Arkansas river and mabe extend from Barling towards the river so it could be broken down and not so much money at one time?

In theory, yes, you could extend the road north from Barling, but it would be a road to nowhere.  It would likely just sit there doing nothing until the bridge was built, unless locals could use it to access some of the Corp of Engineer parks.

I'm sure the bridge would be a separate project from the I-40/49 interchange, but they would be so close to each other, I think doing one without the other would be a waste of time.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on January 28, 2012, 09:09:16 PM
What do you Guys think about some sections between Barling and I 40 that could could be built so you wouldn't have 300 million plus to have at one time. AHTD couldn't come up with 220 million for Bella Vista Bypass at one time. Could they extend I 540 south closer to Arkansas river and mabe extend from Barling towards the river so it could be broken down and not so much money at one time?

In theory, yes, you could extend the road north from Barling, but it would be a road to nowhere.  It would likely just sit there doing nothing until the bridge was built, unless locals could use it to access some of the Corp of Engineer parks.

I'm sure the bridge would be a separate project from the I-40/49 interchange, but they would be so close to each other, I think doing one without the other would be a waste of time.

I don't like new taxes but I see we to pass the 1/2 cent sale tax in Arkansas to build these roads. And the other day in the paper it said don't look for a new highway bill this year because of election year. So worthless congress is not going to help. It is sad that we spend billions of dollars in america and cannot build new roads to help the economy.


Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Henry on January 29, 2012, 06:52:09 PM
Reason why Arkansas doesn't have I-22 like progress is Bama has Richard Shelby. Shelby has been one stubborn SOB in pushing I-22. Stories of him holding up Congressional vacations for more funding are legendary.
Wasn't NC the same way? Seeing that I-73 and I-74 signs have sprung up at a frantic pace (and virtually none elsewhere), there must've been some stubborn SOBs running things in Raleigh too.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on January 29, 2012, 10:59:23 PM
If I were in charge of AASHTO, I would ban North Carolina from making any changes to their system for 10 years.  Every time the AASHTO changes are released, half of them are from NC.  The moving of US 117 to a freeway then back to the 2 lane road is the most ridiculous example, with the reroutings of I-40 being nearly as bad. 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on February 08, 2012, 09:59:19 PM
This article (http://www.thecitywire.com/node/20299) reports that the second and third largest cities in Arkansas have joined forces to obtain more funding for the completion of I-49 in Arkansas:

Quote
Fayetteville Mayor Lioneld Jordan and Fort Smith Mayor Sandy Sanders held joint press conferences Wednesday [Feb. 8] in their respective cities to discuss the new partnership.
“Our initial focus will be on transportation issues, and other areas of mutual interest will be identified in the future. First: The completion of I-49 is a natural topic for joint emphasis,”  Sanders said in a statement. “I-49 will have tremendous economic benefit for our two cities. The benefit to Fort Smith is obvious. It would place us at the center of an east/west and north/south interstate intersection in the center of the United States.  We will see a transportation and logistic enterprise confluence. Job growth will be substantial. There are tremendous benefits to Fayetteville as well.”
Sanders said the “combined efforts”  of the two cities in lobbying Congress for I-49 funding “will be significant.”
The I-49 route stretches from Texarkana, up through Dequeen, Mena and Waldron, into Fort Smith and on through Northwest Arkansas. All that stands in the way of this interstate reality is several small segments at the Arkansas-Louisiana and Arkansas Missouri borders, an Arkansas River bridge east of Barling that could cost up to $350 million, and a large 185-mile segment between Texarkana and Fort Smith that posts a price tag between $3 billion and $3.5 billion.
Work has begun on the Bella Vista Bypass, which will connect Arkansas and Missouri with an interstate highway that will eventually be part of I-49. The proposed bypass is about 20 miles, extending from U.S. 71 just south of Bella Vista to U.S. 71 near Pineville, Mo. Arkansas’ portion is approximately 15 miles in length, while the Missouri section will be about 5 miles.
Arkansas has already spent about $20 million on engineering, utility relocation and other preparatory work on the bypass. It is estimated that Arkansas’ share of the project could be as much as $250 million ...
Fort Smith and Fayetteville are the second and third largest cities in Arkansas. We each have strengths that can benefit and support the other. A closer working relationship has the potential to be the catalyst for creating more vibrant growth and development ....

EDIT

A good place to start would be for the two cities to push AHTD to make the redesignation of I-540 as I-49 happen as soon as possible.  :clap:
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Henry on February 09, 2012, 11:23:00 AM
This article (http://www.thecitywire.com/node/20299) reports that the second and third largest cities in Arkansas have joined forces to obtain more funding for the completion of I-49 in Arkansas:

Quote
Fayetteville Mayor Lioneld Jordan and Fort Smith Mayor Sandy Sanders held joint press conferences Wednesday [Feb. 8] in their respective cities to discuss the new partnership.
“Our initial focus will be on transportation issues, and other areas of mutual interest will be identified in the future. First: The completion of I-49 is a natural topic for joint emphasis,”  Sanders said in a statement. “I-49 will have tremendous economic benefit for our two cities. The benefit to Fort Smith is obvious. It would place us at the center of an east/west and north/south interstate intersection in the center of the United States.  We will see a transportation and logistic enterprise confluence. Job growth will be substantial. There are tremendous benefits to Fayetteville as well.”
Sanders said the “combined efforts”  of the two cities in lobbying Congress for I-49 funding “will be significant.”
The I-49 route stretches from Texarkana, up through Dequeen, Mena and Waldron, into Fort Smith and on through Northwest Arkansas. All that stands in the way of this interstate reality is several small segments at the Arkansas-Louisiana and Arkansas Missouri borders, an Arkansas River bridge east of Barling that could cost up to $350 million, and a large 185-mile segment between Texarkana and Fort Smith that posts a price tag between $3 billion and $3.5 billion.
Work has begun on the Bella Vista Bypass, which will connect Arkansas and Missouri with an interstate highway that will eventually be part of I-49. The proposed bypass is about 20 miles, extending from U.S. 71 just south of Bella Vista to U.S. 71 near Pineville, Mo. Arkansas’ portion is approximately 15 miles in length, while the Missouri section will be about 5 miles.
Arkansas has already spent about $20 million on engineering, utility relocation and other preparatory work on the bypass. It is estimated that Arkansas’ share of the project could be as much as $250 million ...
Fort Smith and Fayetteville are the second and third largest cities in Arkansas. We each have strengths that can benefit and support the other. A closer working relationship has the potential to be the catalyst for creating more vibrant growth and development ....

EDIT

A good place to start would be for the two cities to push AHTD to make the redesignation of I-540 as I-49 happen as soon as possible.  :clap:
Hopefully, once the Missouri portion is completed, then I-49 shields will go up along I-540, at least to the part north of I-40. South of I-40, I see it being signed as Future I-49, until AHTD can figure out a way to connect Fort Smith and Texarkana.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on February 14, 2012, 08:04:44 PM
In yesterday's Arkansas Gazette there was an article about Bridges in Arkansas. Scott Bennett mentioned I 49 Bridge between Alma and Fort Chaffee being in the development stage. He said the environmental was done and I think he was talking about it being in the design stage. Hopefully they will know what the actual bridge and cost will be soon.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on February 14, 2012, 08:47:01 PM
In yesterday's Arkansas Gazette there was an article about Bridges in Arkansas. Scott Bennett mentioned I 49 Bridge between Alma and Fort Chaffee being in the development stage. He said the environmental was done and I think he was talking about it being in the design stage. Hopefully they will know what the actual bridge and cost will be soon.

Gordon, thanks for the heads up on the article. The entire article, Some imagine Chester Street for new bridge (http://beta.arkansasonline.com/news/2012/feb/13/some-imagine-chester-street-new-bridge-20120213/), is behind a pay wall (curiosity led me to pay 99 cents for a one-day subscription).  The good news is that a FEIS has been approved for the entire Texarkana-Fort Smith corridor, but no design work has been done on the bridge:

Quote
Bennett .... cited ... other new bridges in development:
The Interstate 49 bridge over the Arkansas River that would connect Interstate 540 at Alma with a U.S. 71 project under construction on a new location in the area of Fort Chaffee. The environmental impact statement has been approved for the entire I-49 corridor between Texarkana and Fort Smith, but no design work has been done on the bridge.

Maybe Bennett describing it as "in development" means the design work on it is at least on the radar screen.  In contrast, although Bennett mentioned two other major bridge projects as being "in development" (I-69 Mississippi River bridge and Southern Gateway bridge in metro Memphis),  he did NOT mention the I-49 Red River bridge at the Texas state line; the Red River bridge must not be on the radar screen.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on February 16, 2012, 11:52:57 AM
In case anyone wants some light historical reading, AHTD recently emailed me the Executive Summary of the US 71 Relocation from DeQueen to I-40 FEIS (http://www.aaroads.com/forum_images/southeast/001747_FEIS_Executive_Summary.pdf) (and Alex is kind enough to host it on the AARoads server).  Enjoy!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: lamsalfl on February 16, 2012, 06:10:53 PM
Wow, I didn't know they selected an alignment already.  I'm kinda surprised at the lack of interchanges for all those towns between Grannis and Mena.  Also, the SA goes through the Ouchita National Forest.  I know it's good for long distance travelers, but if the route isn't going to go closer to those towns, then at least throw them a bone with a couple more interchanges.  At the end of the day, it looks like the route will be about 5 miles to the east of the towns.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on February 17, 2012, 01:38:15 AM
Wow, I didn't know they selected an alignment already.  I'm kinda surprised at the lack of interchanges for all those towns between Grannis and Mena.  Also, the SA goes through the Ouchita National Forest.  I know it's good for long distance travelers, but if the route isn't going to go closer to those towns, then at least throw them a bone with a couple more interchanges.  At the end of the day, it looks like the route will be about 5 miles to the east of the towns.

I expect AR 246 will be extended from Hatfield to the new I-49 and AR 4 will be extended from Cove.  There might be some more short connector state highways commissioned as well.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on February 24, 2012, 09:20:50 AM
I just received an email reply from AHTD (my questions and then AHTD answers):
Quote
Q "I noticed in today's listing of December 14 projects to be let that the second Bella Vista Bypass grading and structures contract was not included.  Has that project run into a long term delay?"
A "The next job has changed scope a couple of times, but it is now a turnkey project schedules for May for the section from Highway 72 north to County Road 34."

This article (http://www.joplinglobe.com/local/x843242992/Interstate-49-signs-going-up-on-U-S-71) indicates that the first Bella Vista Bypass project is about 25% complete and that the next project, five miles and two lanes, is still on track to be let in May:

Quote
Work to convert U.S. 71 in Arkansas is continuing. Glenn Bolick, spokesman for the Arkansas State Highway and Transportation Department, said work is under way on a two-lane route around Bella Vista that eventually will become a four-lane bypass.
“We’ve completed 25 percent of the first contract, which is almost $20 million, for a three-mile stretch near Highway 72 South at Hiwasse,”  he said. “When that stretch of the highway is completed, we will use that piece. It’s a section of what we call independent utility.”
The department will seek bids for a five-mile, two-lane stretch north of Hiwasse in May.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on February 24, 2012, 09:51:46 AM

“We’ve completed 25 percent of the first contract, which is almost $20 million, for a three-mile stretch near Highway 72 South at Hiwasse,”  he said. “When that stretch of the highway is completed, we will use that piece. It’s a section of what we call independent utility.”

It's a Hiwassee Bypass  :rofl:
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on February 24, 2012, 08:31:41 PM
Is it still going to be a toll road?  If so, I predict a lot of shunpiking will occur as the toll road will be 2 lanes and the surface road will be 4 lanes divided.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on March 20, 2012, 06:37:57 PM
AHTD has asked fpr a grant to help finish the Fort Chaffee Crossing. Hope they get in the 2012 Tiger. grant.http://www.arkansashighways.com/tiger/T4/71.aspx
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on March 21, 2012, 12:15:15 PM
AHTD has asked fpr a grant to help finish the Fort Chaffee Crossing. Hope they get in the 2012 Tiger. grant.http://www.arkansashighways.com/tiger/T4/71.aspx

It seems like they could have made a more persuasive case by providing more up-to-date information on the Status of I-49 Corridor map (http://www.arkansashighways.com/tiger/T4/71/AR_71_FIG2.pdf), particularly in regard to Louisiana's I-49 North.  It also could have included the Dec. 2012 projected signage date for I-49 in Missouri.  Doing so might have helped them hammer home the point that completion of the section in question is a critical first step for the I-30 to I-40 section of the corridor because the corridor is already essentially complete from I-435 to I-40 (with exception of Bella Vista Bypass) and I-10 to I-30 (with exception of a bit more work around Shreveport).
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on March 25, 2012, 04:00:12 AM
Good ol' Arkansas... I'm still hoping for a complete Bella Vista Bypass (with I-49 designation from Kansas City to I-40) within my lifetime... and I'm 25.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on March 25, 2012, 08:41:21 AM
Good ol' Arkansas... I'm still hoping for a complete Bella Vista Bypass (with I-49 designation from Kansas City to I-40) within my lifetime... and I'm 25.

What is needed is another John Paul Hammerschmidt to bring home the pork ;)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on March 28, 2012, 01:11:39 AM
Good ol' Arkansas... I'm still hoping for a complete Bella Vista Bypass (with I-49 designation from Kansas City to I-40) within my lifetime... and I'm 25.

What is needed is another John Paul Hammerschmidt to bring home the pork ;)

We need something.  With the recent vote passed for bonds, I'm curious to see what will be done in NWA.  I know it won't be widening, but solely on interchange improvements.  Considering how a few them need to be totally gutted and reconstructed, I really wonder about what will be done this summer.  I've tried to find anything on the AHTD website and Google... and I have found nothing.  It's sad.  I'm used to the State DOT's websites to provide a ton of information about projects/plans... and Arkansas is just not with it.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on March 28, 2012, 09:23:54 PM
Good ol' Arkansas... I'm still hoping for a complete Bella Vista Bypass (with I-49 designation from Kansas City to I-40) within my lifetime... and I'm 25.

What is needed is another John Paul Hammerschmidt to bring home the pork ;)

We need something.  With the recent vote passed for bonds, I'm curious to see what will be done in NWA.  I know it won't be widening, but solely on interchange improvements.  Considering how a few them need to be totally gutted and reconstructed, I really wonder about what will be done this summer.  I've tried to find anything on the AHTD website and Google... and I have found nothing.  It's sad.  I'm used to the State DOT's websites to provide a ton of information about projects/plans... and Arkansas is just not with it.

All the interstates (except maybe "north" 540) are in desperate need of repaving. There is a major reconstruction project along I-40 in the vicinity of the Cache River with 2-3 bridges being replaced.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: ShawnP on March 29, 2012, 08:47:58 AM
I wouldn't list any project in any states on I-49 as "Pork". This Interstate is badly needed for commerce and hurricane evacuation routing. The Commerce stream is already there and we all know the danger that is southern LA for hurricanes.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: NE2 on March 29, 2012, 09:14:43 AM
I wouldn't list any project in any states on I-49 as "Pork". This Interstate is badly needed for commerce and hurricane evacuation routing. The Commerce stream is already there and we all know the danger that is southern LA for hurricanes.
Adding overpasses at minor rural roads in southwestern Missouri is certainly pork.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on March 29, 2012, 09:18:59 AM
I wouldn't list any project in any states on I-49 as "Pork". This Interstate is badly needed for commerce and hurricane evacuation routing. The Commerce stream is already there and we all know the danger that is southern LA for hurricanes.

At the risk of turning this political, one man's Pork is another man's Earmark (I-99, anyone? ;) )

But yes, it's needed... we just have to convince Congress it's more important than tax breaks for millionaires.   :fight:
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on March 30, 2012, 01:24:37 AM
I very much disagree with you.  US 71 between Kansas City and the northern terminus of I-540 in Arkansas have very high traffic counts.  

Missouri has it's act together, like always.  Arkansas can't even get a 2 lane bypass built within a reasonable amount of time (Bella Vista Bypass).

Trust me, it's not pork... Have you traveled it?  It is a rural corridor, so to speak, but look at the traffic counts.  There you go.

I invite you to come down to NW Arkansas... and SW Missouri.  Experience the nightmare here in NWA... I have never seen such inadequacies.  Keep in mind, this is not a major urban area, so to speak.

And there is accident after accident (on I-540/Future I-49 in NWA)... It's a a common occurrence... And the cable median barrier they are constructing will only provide a "band-aid"... It's rather sad.

I commend Missouri for seeing the potential of I-49... Good for them!

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on March 30, 2012, 02:56:52 PM
Missouri has almost always been ahead of the curve when it comes to US 71. Most of it has been 4 lanes north of I-44 for at least 30 years.

Arkansas has always been behind the times. Not just on 71, but everywhere.  One of the last major improvements on 71 was 4-Laning it south of Greenwood. I don't know if it's money or misplaced priorities, but Arkansas is more RE active than PRO active.

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on March 30, 2012, 04:25:57 PM
Missouri has almost always been ahead of the curve when it comes to US 71. Most of it has been 4 lanes north of I-44 for at least 30 years.

It was 2 lanes from Jasper to Carthage when I was a kid.  This would have been the early to mid '80s.  I also remember that traffic would be forced onto what is now the frontage road where the 4 lanes were open.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: ShawnP on March 30, 2012, 09:40:25 PM
NW Arkansas if I am right has 3 top 500 companies in Tyson, Hunt and a little retailer called Wal-Mart. All generate tons of traffic and yes I-49 is badly needed in the area.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on March 31, 2012, 07:26:17 AM
Missouri has almost always been ahead of the curve when it comes to US 71. Most of it has been 4 lanes north of I-44 for at least 30 years.

It was 2 lanes from Jasper to Carthage when I was a kid.  This would have been the early to mid '80s.  I also remember that traffic would be forced onto what is now the frontage road where the 4 lanes were open.

I remember the narrow Center Creek bridges being used for SB traffic for many years. 4 Lane was Hit n Miss to near Jasper. I remember a couple odd switchbacks in that area, too.
 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: txstateends on March 31, 2012, 04:09:14 PM
With all the corporate influences in NW Arkansas, especially WM, wouldn't it help them to, ummm, help the Bypass' cause a little bit?  It's sure not going to help them and other firms with trucks to be waiting around on a slowly-thrown-together not-so-super-2. 

I think I need a few of these now... :cheers:
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on March 31, 2012, 09:55:56 PM
With all the corporate influences in NW Arkansas, especially WM, wouldn't it help them to, ummm, help the Bypass' cause a little bit?  It's sure not going to help them and other firms with trucks to be waiting around on a slowly-thrown-together not-so-super-2. 

I think I need a few of these now... :cheers:

Honest answer: I don't know.

Snarky answer available via private message  :whip:
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on April 01, 2012, 03:11:33 AM
I remember the narrow Center Creek bridges being used for SB traffic for many years. 4 Lane was Hit n Miss to near Jasper. I remember a couple odd switchbacks in that area, too.

Switchbacks?  Do you mean crossovers where the lanes shifted onto the new roadway? 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on April 01, 2012, 10:05:47 AM
I remember the narrow Center Creek bridges being used for SB traffic for many years. 4 Lane was Hit n Miss to near Jasper. I remember a couple odd switchbacks in that area, too.

Switchbacks?  Do you mean crossovers where the lanes shifted onto the new roadway? 

Yes.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on April 02, 2012, 02:19:16 AM
With all the corporate influences in NW Arkansas, especially WM, wouldn't it help them to, ummm, help the Bypass' cause a little bit?  It's sure not going to help them and other firms with trucks to be waiting around on a slowly-thrown-together not-so-super-2. 

I think I need a few of these now... :cheers:

You would think so... As massive as Walmart is, I'm surprised that they haven't done more... Traffic congestion here can get crazy.  That being said, Walmart is pushing for an interchange on I-540 at SE 8th Street in Bentonville...  It would greatly help the SE 14th Street/Hudson Road interchange... That gets backed up at peak times like crazy.  A big part of it is the Walmart home office people trying to get on 540 to go south to Springdale/Fayetteville.

That, and the Waltons (so I've heard) hired an outside source to push the wet/dry county issue in Benton County to a vote... Sorely needed (Time to move to the 21st Century!).
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on April 02, 2012, 08:55:24 AM
With all the corporate influences in NW Arkansas, especially WM, wouldn't it help them to, ummm, help the Bypass' cause a little bit?  It's sure not going to help them and other firms with trucks to be waiting around on a slowly-thrown-together not-so-super-2. 

I think I need a few of these now... :cheers:

You would think so... As massive as Walmart is, I'm surprised that they haven't done more... Traffic congestion here can get crazy.  That being said, Walmart is pushing for an interchange on I-540 at SE 8th Street in Bentonville...  It would greatly help the SE 14th Street/Hudson Road interchange... That gets backed up at peak times like crazy.  A big part of it is the Walmart home office people trying to get on 540 to go south to Springdale/Fayetteville.

That, and the Waltons (so I've heard) hired an outside source to push the wet/dry county issue in Benton County to a vote... Sorely needed (Time to move to the 21st Century!).

I know there's a big Wet/Dry push in Benton County: doesn't surprise me that the Waltons may be behind it. I know Wal-Mart helped build the regional airport and Alice Walton recently built a museum. Why they don't throw their weight behind I-49 is beyond me. Maybe not sufficiently in their "best interest" ?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on April 03, 2012, 04:34:37 PM
It's a Hiwassee Bypass  :rofl:

The Highway 72 to Co. Rd. 34 section of the Hiwasse Bypass (http://www.arkansashighways.com/ProgCon/LETTING%20PLANS/090293.pdf) is scheduled to be let on May 2 (http://www.arkansashighways.com/ProgCon/General/JOBS_include.aspx).  EDIT - Here is AHTD's description of the project:

Quote
THE PURPOSE OF THIS PROJECT IS TO CONSTRUCT 2.377 MILES OF TWO LANE ROADWAY FOR HWY. 71 AND THE COUNTY ROAD 34 INTERCHANGE IN BENTON COUNTY. THIS PROJECT CONSISTS OF EARTHWORK, AGGREGATE BASE COURSE, ACHM BASE, BINDER AND SURFACE COURSES, PCC PAVEMENT, MINOR DRAINAGE STRUCTURES, A CONT. COMP. PLATE GIRDER OVERPASS BRIDGE (TOTAL SPAN LENGTH 192.12'), EROSION CONTROL ITEMS, WIRE FENCE, MAINTENANCE OF TRAFFIC AND MISC. ITEMS.

http://www.arkansasonline.com/news/2011/dec/17/fort-smiths-4th-interchange-i-49-get-star-20111217/?f=news-arkansas
Quote
The state Highway and Transportation Department plans to award a contract next year to build a fourth interchange in the Fort Smith area for the long-planned Interstate 49.
The interchange would be at U.S. 71 south of the city, according to Joe Shipman, District 4 engineer for the Highway Department ...
Three other Fort Smith-area interchanges for the new northsouth interstate are nearly finished, according to Shipman.

Also in the May 2 letting, I believe this is the "fourth interchange" project (http://www.arkansashighways.com/ProgCon/LETTING%20PLANS/040478.pdf) referenced in the above-linked article. Here is AHTD's description of the project:

Quote
THE PURPOSE OF THIS PROJECT IS TO CONSTRUCT 0.635 MILE OF THE HWY. 71 RELOCATED EMBANKMENT, THE EMBANKMENTS FOR THE RAMPS ALONG WITH THE OVERPASS BRIDGE AND APPROACHES AT THE INTERCHANGE OF HWY. 71 AND COUNTY ROAD 8 IN SEBASTIAN COUNTY NEAR THE FORT CHAFFEE MILITARY RESERVATION.  THIS PROJECT CONSISTS OF EARTHWORK, AGGREGATE BASE COURSE, ACHM BINDER AND SURFACE COURSES, MINOR DRAINAGE STRUCTURES, GUARDRAIL, EROSION CONTROL ITEMS, A CONT. COMP. PLATE GIRDER UNIT OVERPASS BRIDGE (329.16 FT.), WIRE FENCE, MAINTENANCE OF TRAFFIC AND MISC. ITEMS.

County Road 8 is also known as Howard Hill Road (http://www.bing.com/maps/?v=2&cp=35.26129840120871~-94.35301494598388&lvl=15&dir=0&sty=h&where1=Fort%20Smith%2C%20AR&form=LMLTCC).

AHTD must be stretching itself to have both a Bella Vista Bypass project and a Chaffee Crossing project in the same letting ...  :wow:
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: intelati49 on April 04, 2012, 06:03:01 PM
It's a Hiwassee Bypass  :rofl:

The Highway 72 to Co. Rd. 34 section of the Hiwasse Bypass (http://www.arkansashighways.com/ProgCon/LETTING%20PLANS/090293.pdf) is scheduled to be let on May 2 (http://www.arkansashighways.com/ProgCon/General/JOBS_include.aspx).  EDIT - Here is AHTD's description of the project:

Quote
THE PURPOSE OF THIS PROJECT IS TO CONSTRUCT 2.377 MILES OF TWO LANE ROADWAY FOR HWY. 71 AND THE COUNTY ROAD 34 INTERCHANGE IN BENTON COUNTY. THIS PROJECT CONSISTS OF EARTHWORK, AGGREGATE BASE COURSE, ACHM BASE, BINDER AND SURFACE COURSES, PCC PAVEMENT, MINOR DRAINAGE STRUCTURES, A CONT. COMP. PLATE GIRDER OVERPASS BRIDGE (TOTAL SPAN LENGTH 192.12'), EROSION CONTROL ITEMS, WIRE FENCE, MAINTENANCE OF TRAFFIC AND MISC. ITEMS.

It's about damn time... :banghead: :pan: :pan: :pan:
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on April 04, 2012, 11:14:15 PM

County Road 8 is also known as Howard Hill Road (http://www.bing.com/maps/?v=2&cp=35.26129840120871~-94.35301494598388&lvl=15&dir=0&sty=h&where1=Fort%20Smith%2C%20AR&form=LMLTCC).


I know the area fairly well: It's less than 10 miles from me. There are a couple old sections of 71 nearby which are in rough shape.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on April 07, 2012, 07:12:10 AM
I know there's a big Wet/Dry push in Benton County: doesn't surprise me that the Waltons may be behind it. I know Wal-Mart helped build the regional airport and Alice Walton recently built a museum. Why they don't throw their weight behind I-49 is beyond me. Maybe not sufficiently in their "best interest" ?

In my opinion, Walmart Home Office is careful about what it does, which, infrastructure wise, is nothing.  They haven't and won't give money to infrastructural improvements... If they did, the traffic issues in Bentonville would be somewhat resolved.. They are advocating them somewhat with the 8th Street interchange.  Walmart definitely wants the 8th Street interchange, and the City of Bentonville has plans for it on their website.

It makes me sad that I find zero information on the state website.  What purpose does AHTD serve if I can't info on it?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on April 07, 2012, 02:08:24 PM
I know there's a big Wet/Dry push in Benton County: doesn't surprise me that the Waltons may be behind it. I know Wal-Mart helped build the regional airport and Alice Walton recently built a museum. Why they don't throw their weight behind I-49 is beyond me. Maybe not sufficiently in their "best interest" ?

In my opinion, Walmart Home Office is careful about what it does, which, infrastructure wise, is nothing.  They haven't and won't give money to infrastructural improvements... If they did, the traffic issues in Bentonville would be somewhat resolved.. They are advocating them somewhat with the 8th Street interchange.  Walmart definitely wants the 8th Street interchange, and the City of Bentonville has plans for it on their website.

It makes me sad that I find zero information on the state website.  What purpose does AHTD serve if I can't info on it?


I think AHTD has little to do with it. It's mainly the city that's doing the work:
http://www.bentonvillear.com/8th_street_project.html

Wal-Mart was a strong proponent of the regional cargo passenger airport, as were JB Hunt and Tyson,  which was paid for with bonds issued by Llama Company (Alice Walton) .

Not surprising they don't contribute much to infrastructure improvements: they don't like employee benefits, either.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on April 09, 2012, 09:17:23 PM
Has anyone taken some pictures of the Hiwasse bypass? I saw where the AHTD said it was about 25% complete. I liked us 71 description of the road.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on April 10, 2012, 05:08:36 PM
Has anyone taken some pictures of the Hiwasse bypass? I saw where the AHTD said it was about 25% complete. I liked us 71 description of the road.

I've not had time, but maybe sometime this Spring.  I can tell you 49 will go under 72 on the east end and over 279 south of town. BTW: Hiwasse may soon cease to exist, as they have approved a plan to merge with Gravette.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on April 11, 2012, 12:14:57 AM
Has anyone taken some pictures of the Hiwasse bypass? I saw where the AHTD said it was about 25% complete. I liked us 71 description of the road.

I've not had time, but maybe sometime this Spring.  I can tell you 49 will go under 72 on the east end and over 279 south of town. BTW: Hiwasse may soon cease to exist, as they have approved a plan to merge with Gravette.


That's interesting...

Also, why would the Bentonville 8th Street interchange be a city project?  I'm confused!  Does AHTD completely step out of it?  Weird!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on April 11, 2012, 01:13:20 AM
Has anyone taken some pictures of the Hiwasse bypass? I saw where the AHTD said it was about 25% complete. I liked us 71 description of the road.

I've not had time, but maybe sometime this Spring.  I can tell you 49 will go under 72 on the east end and over 279 south of town. BTW: Hiwasse may soon cease to exist, as they have approved a plan to merge with Gravette.


That's interesting...

Also, why would the Bentonville 8th Street interchange be a city project?  I'm confused!  Does AHTD completely step out of it?  Weird!

AHTD may be responsible for the actual interchange,  but 8th Street itself isn't a state maintained roadway. 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: codyg1985 on April 11, 2012, 07:05:22 AM
Has anyone taken some pictures of the Hiwasse bypass? I saw where the AHTD said it was about 25% complete. I liked us 71 description of the road.

I've not had time, but maybe sometime this Spring.  I can tell you 49 will go under 72 on the east end and over 279 south of town. BTW: Hiwasse may soon cease to exist, as they have approved a plan to merge with Gravette.


That's interesting...

Also, why would the Bentonville 8th Street interchange be a city project?  I'm confused!  Does AHTD completely step out of it?  Weird!

I don't know if something similar has happened in Arkansas, but here in Huntsville, AL the city of Huntsville fully paid for the widening of US 431 through part of the city, so it had little to no involvement from ALDOT.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on April 11, 2012, 11:20:13 AM

I don't know if something similar has happened in Arkansas, but here in Huntsville, AL the city of Huntsville fully paid for the widening of US 431 through part of the city, so it had little to no involvement from ALDOT.

Not to my knowledge, though AHTD has been known to assume maintenance for a road, improve it, then turn it back to the city.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on April 13, 2012, 01:26:02 AM
AHTD may be responsible for the actual interchange,  but 8th Street itself isn't a state maintained roadway. 

I'm just used to the state recognizing what needs to be done, and doing the main work (with little city coordination) when it came to projects like that.

In Sioux Falls SD, they reconstructed most of I-29 through the city.  The SDDOT also reconstructed the interchanges (putting in SPUIs and a Parclo), along with the streets involved (usually it was 1/4 mile to a 1 mile on each side of the interchange, depending).  I loved traveling I-29 in SF with 3 lanes and an auxiliary lane... Compared to I-540 here in NWA.

Maybe it's because SD is a low population state (I've heard both sides), but dang, they got it right up there when it comes to funding.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on April 17, 2012, 11:36:38 AM
After getting Arkansas voters to approve the bond referendum for interstate maintenance in November, AHTD and the Arkansas legislature will come back in November 2012 and ask Arkansas voters to approve a one-half percent increase in the sales tax for construction of and improvements to four-lane highways (including additional lanes).  Completion of two lanes of the Bella Vista Bypass is one of the projects that would be funded by the increase:
http://thecabin.net/news/2011-12-24/highway-improvement-advocates-gearing-sales-tax-hike-campaign
Quote
The Legislature this year referred to the 2012 general election ballot a proposed constitutional amendment that would raise the state’s 6 percent sales tax to 6 1/2 percent to fund a $1.8 billion program that would connect all corners of the state with four-lane highways ...
Scott Bennett, director of the Arkansas Highway and Transportation Department ... has said approval of the half-cent sales tax increase would fund a number of large, expensive projects across Arkansas, including ... [t]wo lanes of the proposed Bella Vista bypass ...

In this article (http://www.thecitywire.com/node/21425), Scott Bennett reiterates that completion of two lanes of the Bella Vista Bypass would be funded by the bonds.  He also mentions that the Fayetteville-Bentonville corridor (I assume I-540) would be widened from four to six lanes:

Quote
Director of the Arkansas State Highway and Transportation Commission Scott Bennett oversees the improvements of 16,000 miles of highway, the 12th largest in the country.
He outlined the programs that would begin construction if a half-cent sales tax increase passes in November. The tax would be in effect for 10 years and finance a $1.8 billion bond program for a four-lane highway system linking every part of the state.
In Northwest Arkansas, it would widen the Fayetteville-Bentonville corridor to six lanes and complete the Bella Vista bypass to two lanes. It would also build a bypass from North Springdale, west toward XNA connecting somewhere in the Tonitown vacinity.
“The bond gives you the money up front…under construction in five years and finished in seven and paid in ten years. If you raise the money ... it would take 20 years or more to widen I-540 in Northwest Arkansas,”  said Bennett.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on April 22, 2012, 01:38:41 AM
Quote
Director of the Arkansas State Highway and Transportation Commission Scott Bennett oversees the improvements of 16,000 miles of highway, the 12th largest in the country.
He outlined the programs that would begin construction if a half-cent sales tax increase passes in November. The tax would be in effect for 10 years and finance a $1.8 billion bond program for a four-lane highway system linking every part of the state.
In Northwest Arkansas, it would widen the Fayetteville-Bentonville corridor to six lanes and complete the Bella Vista bypass to two lanes. It would also build a bypass from North Springdale, west toward XNA connecting somewhere in the Tonitown vacinity.
“The bond gives you the money up front…under construction in five years and finished in seven and paid in ten years. If you raise the money ... it would take 20 years or more to widen I-540 in Northwest Arkansas,”  said Bennett.
Sigh... well... He realizes the issues, but he needs to decommission a ton of state highways, and fix the funding formula for transportation funding (Not something he can do).  That might help.  I do admire his drive.  540 between Fayetteville and Bentonville/Rogers is a death trap... It's sad the amount of accidents I see, and it backs up traffic for miles upon miles.  The Bella Vista bypass is very needed... And not with a ridiculous 2 laner.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: mcdonaat on April 22, 2012, 05:59:35 AM
Quote
Director of the Arkansas State Highway and Transportation Commission Scott Bennett oversees the improvements of 16,000 miles of highway, the 12th largest in the country.
He outlined the programs that would begin construction if a half-cent sales tax increase passes in November. The tax would be in effect for 10 years and finance a $1.8 billion bond program for a four-lane highway system linking every part of the state.
In Northwest Arkansas, it would widen the Fayetteville-Bentonville corridor to six lanes and complete the Bella Vista bypass to two lanes. It would also build a bypass from North Springdale, west toward XNA connecting somewhere in the Tonitown vacinity.
“The bond gives you the money up front…under construction in five years and finished in seven and paid in ten years. If you raise the money ... it would take 20 years or more to widen I-540 in Northwest Arkansas,”  said Bennett.
Sigh... well... He realizes the issues, but he needs to decommission a ton of state highways, and fix the funding formula for transportation funding (Not something he can do).  That might help.  I do admire his drive.  540 between Fayetteville and Bentonville/Rogers is a death trap... It's sad the amount of accidents I see, and it backs up traffic for miles upon miles.  The Bella Vista bypass is very needed... And not with a ridiculous 2 laner.
Head south to Louisiana, and you'll see a state that needs to shed some miles. TONS of highways here end at the state line with Arkansas, changing from a LA hwy to an AR county road. Gravel road on one side, asphalt with striping and shields on the other. It's crazy, really.
Any word on if the interstate will change to I-49 completely, or stay dual signed?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on April 23, 2012, 11:40:52 PM
Head south to Louisiana, and you'll see a state that needs to shed some miles. TONS of highways here end at the state line with Arkansas, changing from a LA hwy to an AR county road. Gravel road on one side, asphalt with striping and shields on the other. It's crazy, really.
Any word on if the interstate will change to I-49 completely, or stay dual signed?

Knowing Arkansas, 49 and 71 will run concurrent, but 71 will be "invisible" .
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on April 24, 2012, 12:19:15 AM
Head south to Louisiana, and you'll see a state that needs to shed some miles. TONS of highways here end at the state line with Arkansas, changing from a LA hwy to an AR county road. Gravel road on one side, asphalt with striping and shields on the other. It's crazy, really.
Any word on if the interstate will change to I-49 completely, or stay dual signed?

Knowing Arkansas, 49 and 71 will run concurrent, but 71 will be "invisible" .

I assume that 71 will remain on its current alignment except for a few places (Foran Gap, the causeway near Milwood Lake, etc.)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on May 01, 2012, 11:00:45 AM
In this article (http://www.thecitywire.com/node/21425), Scott Bennett reiterates that completion of two lanes of the Bella Vista Bypass would be funded by the bonds.  He also mentions that the Fayetteville-Bentonville corridor (I assume I-540) would be widened from four to six lanes
540 between Fayetteville and Bentonville/Rogers is a death trap... It's sad the amount of accidents I see, and it backs up traffic for miles upon miles.  The Bella Vista bypass is very needed... And not with a ridiculous 2 laner.

AHTD official Dick Trammel was in Bentonville yesterday lobbying for the sales tax increase:

Quote
Transportation experts spent Monday morning talking traffic in Bentonville, Arkansas.
State Highway Commissioner Dick Trammel joined Alex Herrgott, the US Chamber of Commerce's Director of Transportation and Infrastructure, and US Senator John Boozeman on a panel to discuss the issues facing northwest Arkansas and the country.
"540 is full," Trammel says. "Every morning you see the congestion."
Herrgott says now is the time to address infrastructure issues, because traffic will increase as the economy continues to recover.
"If you think things are bad now, you should see two years from now," he says. "Failure to adequately address capacity on that road in the next five or ten years will increase congestion, choke out goods and services, and will have substantial negative impacts on the economy."
He says we need to expand highways and interstates across the country.
"It's not just about people getting to and from work," Herrgott says. "It's about competing in the global marketplace."
In November the Arkansas Department of Highway and Transportation plans to ask voters in to approve a half-cent sales tax to pay for the expansion of I-540 to six lanes. Trammel says the tax would last for ten years, and would also pay for the completion of the Bella Vista Bypass and part of a bypass for Springdale.
"We don't have the funding now to do these expensive and highly congested areas," Trammel says."It takes three to five years to finish those projects so I'm just hoping the people give us the opportunity now."
The panel was part of the Rogers-Lowell Chamber of Commerce's "Focus on the Economy" series.

Trammel paints a pretty bleak picture if the sales tax increase is not approved by the voters.  Vote aside, I don't understand why the I-540 widening is not already a higher priority at AHTD.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on May 01, 2012, 12:14:28 PM

Trammel paints a pretty bleak picture if the sales tax increase is not approved by the voters.  Vote aside, I don't understand why the I-540 widening is not already a higher priority at AHTD.

Purely conjecture on my part, but I wonder if has to do with how remote NW Arkansas is from Little Rock? Surely 540 would be a bigger priority than the 430/630 rebuild? Of course, no one walks about the 440 extension, BUT I-530 is in the process of a major renovation. Sounds to me like mismanaged priorities.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on May 04, 2012, 11:10:29 PM
Low Bid for Hwy. 72 North to CO. RD. 34 on the Bella Vista Bypass was Kolb Grading, LLC of Mo. of 13,647,413.56. This is for 2.37 miles of two lane roadway and the Interchange at Co. Rd. 34. Also a low bid of 17,173,759.98 was for the interchange at 71 Hwy. and Fort Chaffee crossing. Includes a bridge for Co. Rd. 8 over future I 49 and the Base surface that includes .635 miles.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on May 11, 2012, 08:14:56 AM
This article (http://www.todaysthv.com/news/article/210471/119/THV-Extra-Ark-transportation-projects) has the latest cost estimate to complete I-49 through Arkansas: $3 billion (with no targeted completion date):

Quote
But that's only one highway project underway in Arkansas. Highway 549 is underway as well, which some day will be named I-49 along the western corridor .... It's an international project passing through Arkansas in bits and pieces, but no timeframe .... "Even though we've spent well in excess of a billion dollars to date, it's going to take us about $3 billion more to complete I-49 in Arkansas," Ort says.

AHTD does not seem to be a team player in terms of keeping Louisiana's I-49 South in the conversation:

Quote
"What we're primarily focused on is the connection between Kansas City, Missouri and Shreveport, Louisiana," says Ort.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: ShawnP on May 11, 2012, 09:13:23 AM
Not from Arkansas but I thought Arky had permission to toll the BVB to complete? What's the hold up? Construction rates will never be cheaper than now. Plus if they toll when would they come off?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on May 11, 2012, 11:20:13 AM
Not from Arkansas but I thought Arky had permission to toll the BVB to complete? What's the hold up? Construction rates will never be cheaper than now. Plus if they toll when would they come off?

I'm not sure if the AR Legislature has amended the state constitution yet: if not, it's against the constitution (or maybe the highway charter) to build toll roads. So far, all the work is being done under ARRA.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: codyg1985 on May 15, 2012, 07:26:26 AM
This article (http://www.todaysthv.com/news/article/210471/119/THV-Extra-Ark-transportation-projects) has the latest cost estimate to complete I-49 through Arkansas: $3 billion (with no targeted completion date):

Quote
But that's only one highway project underway in Arkansas. Highway 549 is underway as well, which some day will be named I-49 along the western corridor .... It's an international project passing through Arkansas in bits and pieces, but no timeframe .... "Even though we've spent well in excess of a billion dollars to date, it's going to take us about $3 billion more to complete I-49 in Arkansas," Ort says.

AHTD does not seem to be a team player in terms of keeping Louisiana's I-49 South in the conversation:

Quote
"What we're primarily focused on is the connection between Kansas City, Missouri and Shreveport, Louisiana," says Ort.

Someone didn't proofread their article apparently:

Quote
We will have some lane closures probably in the next eight to 12 weeks. Motorists are going to see tremendous benefits of this.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on May 15, 2012, 08:19:12 AM

Someone didn't proofread their article apparently:


Or maybe Mr Ort actually said that. ;)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on May 17, 2012, 10:57:57 PM
It's a Hiwassee Bypass  :rofl:

Google Maps imagery now shows construction of the Hiwasse Bypass (http://maps.google.com/maps?q=Hiwasse,+AR&hl=en&ll=36.430813,-94.345093&spn=0.049859,0.077162&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=49.844639,79.013672&oq=hiwasse+&t=h&hnear=Hiwasse,+10,+Benton,+Arkansas&z=14); it must be true. :hyper:
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on May 21, 2012, 01:38:22 AM
It's a Hiwassee Bypass  :rofl:

Google Maps imagery now shows construction of the Hiwasse Bypass (http://maps.google.com/maps?q=Hiwasse,+AR&hl=en&ll=36.430813,-94.345093&spn=0.049859,0.077162&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=49.844639,79.013672&oq=hiwasse+&t=h&hnear=Hiwasse,+10,+Benton,+Arkansas&z=14); it must be true. :hyper:

It's shocking, isn't it?  There is serious issues with the transportation funding in Arkansas.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on May 21, 2012, 09:26:16 AM
It's a Hiwassee Bypass  :rofl:

Google Maps imagery now shows construction of the Hiwasse Bypass (http://maps.google.com/maps?q=Hiwasse,+AR&hl=en&ll=36.430813,-94.345093&spn=0.049859,0.077162&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=49.844639,79.013672&oq=hiwasse+&t=h&hnear=Hiwasse,+10,+Benton,+Arkansas&z=14); it must be true. :hyper:

It's shocking, isn't it?  There is serious issues with the transportation funding in Arkansas.

A combination of limited funds and misplaced priorities. I-530 is getting reconstructed while I-40 is rotting.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sr641 on May 21, 2012, 05:48:31 PM
Arkansas is too busy building US 67 to Walnut Ridge.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on May 21, 2012, 06:52:32 PM
Arkansas is too busy building US 67 to Walnut Ridge.

A combination of limited funds and misplaced priorities.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on May 21, 2012, 09:49:08 PM
It's a Hiwassee Bypass  :rofl:

Google Maps imagery now shows construction of the Hiwasse Bypass (http://maps.google.com/maps?q=Hiwasse,+AR&hl=en&ll=36.430813,-94.345093&spn=0.049859,0.077162&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=49.844639,79.013672&oq=hiwasse+&t=h&hnear=Hiwasse,+10,+Benton,+Arkansas&z=14); it must be true. :hyper:

It's shocking, isn't it?  There is serious issues with the transportation funding in Arkansas.

A combination of limited funds and misplaced priorities. I-530 is getting reconstructed while I-40 is rotting.

40 is horrible through Russellville.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on May 21, 2012, 10:04:00 PM

40 is horrible through Russellville.

It was never improved when Gov. Huckabee got the bond issue passed: "no money".

Around Ozark, I-40 is cracked and pitted very badly, as well.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on May 22, 2012, 07:33:24 AM
A combination of limited funds and misplaced priorities.
A combination of limited funds and misplaced priorities.

Although this article is primarily about a controversy surrounding the possible tolling of I-49 South in Louisiana (http://theadvocate.com/news/2890492-123/regional-split-arises-over-i-49), comments allegedly made by Arkansas legislators to a visitor from Louisiana may reflect a lack of commitment to I-49 by at least some Arkansan legislators:

Quote
But state Rep. Sam Jones, D-Franklin, noted that I-49 between Shreveport and the Arkansas border was financed without any tolls.
“We have built ourselves to the cornfields or cotton fields or whatever,”  Jones said.
He said that, when the road was being built, there was a “song and dance”  about the need to finish the road because Arkansas planned an I-49 link to Fort Smith, Kansas City, Mo. and eventually Canada.
But Jones said when he visited the Arkansas Legislature earlier this year lawmakers there laughed about that notion, which they said would not happen for several lifetimes.
The road plan has been discussed since the 1990s.
(bold emphasis supplied by me)

To be fair, their alleged laughter may have simply been a reflection of the lack of money.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: ShawnP on May 22, 2012, 09:52:55 AM
Arkansas built most of future I-49 with earmarks from DC.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on May 22, 2012, 11:25:27 AM
Arkansas built most of future I-49 with earmarks from DC.

So was I-540 north of Alma ;)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on May 24, 2012, 07:27:38 PM
I asked the AHTD bridge department when do they plan to design the I 49 Arkansas River Bridge In the Fort Smith area. So I guess it will be a long time before we could drive on it.       

Our bridge program through 2016 does not include that structure.
 
Carl J. Fuselier, P.E.
Division Head - Bridge
Arkansas Highway and Transportation Department
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: ShawnP on May 31, 2012, 04:44:01 PM
Arkansas built most of future I-49 with earmarks from DC.

So was I-540 north of Alma ;)

I have no problems with earmarks like I-540/I-49 that benefit a majority of the people. Now those earmarks that study the mating habits of flying turd squirrels of Eastern Kentucky get me going.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on June 21, 2012, 02:02:25 PM
AHTD has asked fpr a grant to help finish the Fort Chaffee Crossing. Hope they get in the 2012 Tiger. grant.http://www.arkansashighways.com/tiger/T4/71.aspx

West Memphis was recently awarded an $11 million TIGER IV grant (http://www.bizjournals.com/memphis/blog/memphis-in-motion/2012/06/west-memphis-wins-11-million-grant.html).  I have not seen the final list from USDOT, but I suspect AHTD's silence means that the above I-49 project did not get a grant.  However, the project is listed for a 2013 letting in the Preliminary 2013-16 STIP (http://www.arkansashighways.com/stip/2013-2016/2013-2016_Prelim_STIP.pdf):

Quote
JOB /ITEM NUMBER-040376
COUNTY-Sebastian
RTE-071
TERMINI-Hwy. 71-Hwy. 22 (Base & Surf.) (S)
TYPE WORK-New Location
LENGTH-6.04
YEAR-2013

Quote
Alma Mayor John Ballentine believes the Alma portion is likely to be the last leg of the still-unfunded highway completed because of the costly bridge that must span the Arkansas River.
Ballentine reckons the structure will cost $400 million, but that number is a shape-shifter, changing based on who is speaking and what the cost includes.
Ken O’Donnell, until recently the director of the Bi-State Metropolitan Planning Organization, said the stated cost is ... $280 million to $320 million. That’s starting with the $100 million for the bridge span itself, then adding approaches, ramps and the other things needed to make it accessible.
Because the route approaching the bridge travels through the Kibler bottoms, a flood plain, it might require building a berm or putting the roadway on supports as it extends to the bridge.
O’Donnell said costs for the highway on-grade are computed on a linear foot basis. If the roadway is elevated, the cost must be computed on a square-foot basis
The entire article, Some imagine Chester Street for new bridge (http://beta.arkansasonline.com/news/2012/feb/13/some-imagine-chester-street-new-bridge-20120213/), is behind a pay wall (curiosity led me to pay 99 cents for a one-day subscription).  The good news is that a FEIS has been approved for the entire Texarkana-Fort Smith corridor, but no design work has been done on the bridge:
Quote
Bennett .... cited ... other new bridges in development:
The Interstate 49 bridge over the Arkansas River that would connect Interstate 540 at Alma with a U.S. 71 project under construction on a new location in the area of Fort Chaffee. The environmental impact statement has been approved for the entire I-49 corridor between Texarkana and Fort Smith, but no design work has been done on the bridge.
Maybe Bennett describing it as "in development" means the design work on it is at least on the radar screen.
I asked the AHTD bridge department when do they plan to design the I 49 Arkansas River Bridge In the Fort Smith area       
Quote
Our bridge program through 2016 does not include that structure.
Carl J. Fuselier, P.E.
Division Head - Bridge
Arkansas Highway and Transportation Department

In looking at the Preliminary STIP, I'm mildly disappointed that a relatively small amount of money was not set aside for the design work on the Arkansas River Bridge.  Maybe AHTD is waiting to see if the half-cent sales tax passes, which would provide for widening of I-540 and two-lane Bella Vista Bypass, before it even thinks about initiating the design work for the bridge.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on June 22, 2012, 04:29:27 AM
Quote
In looking at the Preliminary STIP, I'm mildly disappointed that a relatively small amount of money was not set aside for the design work on the Arkansas River Bridge.  Maybe AHTD is waiting to see if the half-cent sales tax passes, which would provide for widening of I-540 and two-lane Bella Vista Bypass, before it even thinks about initiating the design work for the bridge.
AHTD is the most ridiculous government (and non gov for that matter) department that I have ever come across.   

What a mess.  And no funding... Unless it's in Little Rock...

Fail, fail, fail... And so sick of it.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on June 29, 2012, 08:33:31 PM
I had a chance today to check out the "Hiwasse Bypass" (tm):

On the east end, bridge columns are being built for where AR 72 will pass over I-49. The embankment is mostly finished as is prefabricated concrete panels with a faux brickwork design.

On the west end, it is still mostly dirt work. The level of I-49 has still not been completely lowered.

AR 279 South of Hiwasse has been detoured along what appears to be a future frontage road. Bridge columns are going up where I-49 will cross over AR 279. This appears to be a grade separation only with no access to or from I-49.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on June 29, 2012, 09:02:25 PM
So 2 interchanges in a row on I-49 will be for AR 72?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on June 29, 2012, 09:04:45 PM
So 2 interchanges in a row on I-49 will be for AR 72?

It appears that way, but I've not verified the plans.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on June 29, 2012, 09:12:45 PM
That will be as silly as all the AR 282 interchanges from I-540.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on June 29, 2012, 09:18:00 PM
That will be as silly as all the AR 282 interchanges from I-540.

At least each of the 282's go someplace different  (sort of).
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: intelati49 on June 29, 2012, 11:04:29 PM
That will be as silly as all the AR 282 interchanges from I-540.

At least each of the 282's go someplace different  (sort of).

Kind of like the MO 100 interchanges on I-44
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on June 30, 2012, 10:08:41 AM
What is the next section of the Bella Vista Bypass that AHTD plans to let for construction? I don't see any on the STIP for 2013-2016.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on June 30, 2012, 11:24:21 PM
A couple photos I took yesterday around Hiwasse:
(http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8157/7475848488_7b24aeca81_c_d.jpg)
West embankment and center column of future bridge over I-49 at AR 72 southeast of Hiwasse.

(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7278/7475848032_c18d9d1736_c_d.jpg)
AR 279 at I-49 just south of Hiwasse. 279 is temporarily detoured along what will eventually be one of 49's frontage roads
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on July 01, 2012, 05:34:37 AM
Nice to see some progress... As much as I hate AHTD.

I just hope they don't f*&^ it up like they did with I-540 in NWA... Meh, too late.

US71, do you feel these will be frontage roads?  I don't see that.




Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on July 01, 2012, 08:51:32 AM
Nice to see some progress... As much as I hate AHTD.

I just hope they don't f*&^ it up like they did with I-540 in NWA... Meh, too late.

US71, do you feel these will be frontage roads?  I don't see that.


It's an educated guess. The Detour on 279 hugs I-49...it's the E-W road near the center
http://goo.gl/maps/z8TM
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on July 02, 2012, 07:21:50 PM
There were 2 articles in the Arkansas Gazette today about promoting the state wide 1/2 cent sales tax. They have 3 projects in Northwest Arkansas area that will be on the list to get money. 1- 125 million to widening stretches of I 540 in Washington and Benton counties to 6 lanes. 2- 100 million for completion of the Bella Vista Bypass of 2 lanes. 3- 150 million to help build a 4 lane section of U.S. 412 Bypass north of Springdale. Maybe Little Rock want get all of the money if voted in. Although it said Little Rock would 300 million for a new bridge at the Arkansas river on I 30.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on July 02, 2012, 07:51:50 PM
There were 2 articles in the Arkansas Gazette today about promoting the state wide 1/2 cent sales tax. They have 3 projects in Northwest Arkansas area that will be on the list to get money. 1- 125 million to widening stretches of I 540 in Washington and Benton counties to 6 lanes. 2- 100 million for completion of the Bella Vista Bypass of 2 lanes. 3- 150 million to help build a 4 lane section of U.S. 412 Bypass north of Springdale. Maybe Little Rock want get all of the money if voted in. Although it said Little Rock would 300 million for a new bridge at the Arkansas river on I 30.

I-30? I figured they would go for the new Broadway Bridge. I think finishing I-440 should be a priority in the Little Rock area.

As others have pointed out, AHTD doesn't prioritize very well.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: codyg1985 on July 03, 2012, 09:05:14 AM
There were 2 articles in the Arkansas Gazette today about promoting the state wide 1/2 cent sales tax. They have 3 projects in Northwest Arkansas area that will be on the list to get money. 1- 125 million to widening stretches of I 540 in Washington and Benton counties to 6 lanes. 2- 100 million for completion of the Bella Vista Bypass of 2 lanes. 3- 150 million to help build a 4 lane section of U.S. 412 Bypass north of Springdale. Maybe Little Rock want get all of the money if voted in. Although it said Little Rock would 300 million for a new bridge at the Arkansas river on I 30.

I-30? I figured they would go for the new Broadway Bridge. I think finishing I-440 should be a priority in the Little Rock area.

As others have pointed out, AHTD doesn't prioritize very well.

Is the existing bridge not wide enough to handle the traffic? Or is the existing bridge falling apart?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on July 03, 2012, 09:43:14 AM

Is the existing bridge not wide enough to handle the traffic? Or is the existing bridge falling apart?

The I-30 bridge is considered substandard and is starting to age and need repairs. I think AHTD wants wider shoulders and the Corps of Engineers says the piers are too closely spaced for barge traffic.

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: rte66man on July 03, 2012, 10:19:17 AM

Is the existing bridge not wide enough to handle the traffic? Or is the existing bridge falling apart?

The I-30 bridge is considered substandard and is starting to age and need repairs. I think AHTD wants wider shoulders and the Corps of Engineers says the piers are too closely spaced for barge traffic.


Was that bridge built before the river was "upgraded" to the McClellan-Kerr Navigation System?

rte66man
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on July 06, 2012, 10:22:53 AM
This is probably the only Arkansas I-49 shield, and likely the first one ever made:

(http://i167.photobucket.com/albums/u126/bugo348/sinez/routemarkerI-49.jpg)
(above quote from I-49 Coming to Missouri (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3239.msg155386#msg155386) thread)

I wish you would take your I-49 shield to AHTD in Little Rock, offer to let them make copies, and then get one of them to do to the Arkansas delegation what a Texas Transportation Commissioner recently did to the Texas delegation with I-69 shields (http://www.i69texasalliance.com/NewsUpdates/update%20Congress%207.1.12.html). Give them a constant reminder.  :sombrero:
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on July 06, 2012, 11:28:59 PM

Is the existing bridge not wide enough to handle the traffic? Or is the existing bridge falling apart?

The I-30 bridge is considered substandard and is starting to age and need repairs. I think AHTD wants wider shoulders and the Corps of Engineers says the piers are too closely spaced for barge traffic.


Was that bridge built before the river was "upgraded" to the McClellan-Kerr Navigation System?

rte66man

I believe it was. The I-30 bridge was built circa 1960 and the Little Rock section of McClellan-Kerr project was finished around 1968.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on July 07, 2012, 02:21:43 AM

Is the existing bridge not wide enough to handle the traffic? Or is the existing bridge falling apart?

The I-30 bridge is considered substandard and is starting to age and need repairs. I think AHTD wants wider shoulders and the Corps of Engineers says the piers are too closely spaced for barge traffic.


Was that bridge built before the river was "upgraded" to the McClellan-Kerr Navigation System?

rte66man

I believe it was. The I-30 bridge was built circa 1960 and the Little Rock section of McClellan-Kerr project was finished around 1968.

It still had to be built with navigation in mind since the plan to deepen the channel was in the works. There are two other traffic bridges and two railroad bridges between downtown LR and NLR that didn't have to be replaced (the Main Street Bridge was built in the 1970s after the navigation project was finished and I believe both railroad bridges have lifting center spans).

The I-30 bridge is perfectly good other than the fact that it's barely wide enough for six lanes. Functionally obsolete.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on July 07, 2012, 05:11:49 AM
There were 2 articles in the Arkansas Gazette today about promoting the state wide 1/2 cent sales tax. They have 3 projects in Northwest Arkansas area that will be on the list to get money. 1- 125 million to widening stretches of I 540 in Washington and Benton counties to 6 lanes. 2- 100 million for completion of the Bella Vista Bypass of 2 lanes. 3- 150 million to help build a 4 lane section of U.S. 412 Bypass north of Springdale. Maybe Little Rock want get all of the money if voted in. Although it said Little Rock would 300 million for a new bridge at the Arkansas river on I 30.

My 2 cents on AR Trans funding:  It's ridiculous, and I probably sound like a broken record.  I complain way too much on this forum.  And I apologize for my bi*&^ing again.

We see them constructing future I-49 in SW AR, and constructing more of US 67 (Interstate standards I believe) to the northeast of Newport, AR... aka low traffic counts.

Common sense would tell you to have projects in areas with high traffic counts and high accident count areas?  Right?  Or am I crazy?

Ummm... Yeah.  I thought, for sure, my interchange on I-540 in NWA would see something, some sort of reconstruction, this summer... Some sort of improvement... No change... Zero.  Backed up, as always.

My hate for AHTD has increased, and I didn't think that was possible.

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on July 07, 2012, 08:59:51 PM
Future I 49 in SW AR was earmarked I think for a 100 million by State rep. in This area. Congress has designated Future I 49 as a high priority corridor. But US 67 is a AHTD Priority and Randy Ort said in the Arkansas Gazette about a month ago that was his and some others dream to extend it to Interstate standards to ST Louis. Even though Missouri dropped there side of it. One thing you can count on is AHTD has there retirement meeting every 3 months. That is what they concentrate on.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on July 21, 2012, 11:29:02 AM
The second half of this July 15 KTBS-Shreveport TV video report (http://www.ktbs.com/news/I-49-Louisiana-and-Arkansas-Projects/-/144844/15565946/-/sollgtz/-/index.html) focuses on the I-49 funding challenges for the Fort Smith to Texarkana section.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on August 07, 2012, 04:26:30 PM
This is probably the only Arkansas I-49 shield, and likely the first one ever made
(above quote from I-49 Coming to Missouri (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3239.msg155386#msg155386) thread)
(http://i.imgur.com/f9uLy.jpg)

Although the latter assertion may continue to be true, the former looks like it will soon no longer be true. I emailed AHTD and asked if MAP-21 might encourage them to reapply to AASHTO for I-49 designations. The response:

Quote
We are completing an application to have I-540 (I-40 to Missouri State Line ) redesignated as I-49 and plan to submit to AASHTO for consideration at the fall meeting.

The Special Committee on Route Numbering meets on November 15.  AHTD still has a chance to get I-49 shields facing the highway before MoDOT.  Game on?

edit - Or, will AHTD coordinate with MoDOT this December, and then coordinate with LaDOTD in Summer 2013 for SW Arkansas and I-49 North segments?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on August 27, 2012, 07:21:21 PM
Last Friday, I drove to Booneville, AR. Along the way, I spotted another section of Future 49 under construction (yellow line)

http://goo.gl/maps/GHDV5

This is roughly halfway between I-540 at Ft Smith and Jct 10 Spur near Greenwood.

Very hilly, rugged terrain. I expect there will be some road cuts in this area
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: NE2 on August 27, 2012, 07:56:16 PM
Last Friday, I drove to Booneville, AR. Along the way, I spotted another section of Future 49 under construction (yellow line)

http://goo.gl/maps/GHDV5
That's the "Chaffee Crossing" segment; it's been under construction for several years. The Arkansas River crossing to the north is on hold.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on August 27, 2012, 08:11:46 PM
Last Friday, I drove to Booneville, AR. Along the way, I spotted another section of Future 49 under construction (yellow line)

http://goo.gl/maps/GHDV5
That's the "Chaffee Crossing" segment; it's been under construction for several years. The Arkansas River crossing to the north is on hold.

The section in yellow is a new segment (less than 6 months old).  If nothing else, it could be a "bypass" between 71 and AR 22 at Barling. ;)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on August 27, 2012, 09:37:42 PM
http://www.arkansasonline.com/news/2011/dec/17/fort-smiths-4th-interchange-i-49-get-star-20111217/?f=news-arkansas
Quote
The state Highway and Transportation Department plans to award a contract next year to build a fourth interchange in the Fort Smith area for the long-planned Interstate 49.
The interchange would be at U.S. 71 south of the city, according to Joe Shipman, District 4 engineer for the Highway Department ...
Three other Fort Smith-area interchanges for the new northsouth interstate are nearly finished, according to Shipman.
.... in the May 2 letting, I believe this is the "fourth interchange" project ... Here is AHTD's description of the project:
Quote
THE PURPOSE OF THIS PROJECT IS TO CONSTRUCT 0.635 MILE OF THE HWY. 71 RELOCATED EMBANKMENT, THE EMBANKMENTS FOR THE RAMPS ALONG WITH THE OVERPASS BRIDGE AND APPROACHES AT THE INTERCHANGE OF HWY. 71 AND COUNTY ROAD 8 IN SEBASTIAN COUNTY NEAR THE FORT CHAFFEE MILITARY RESERVATION.  THIS PROJECT CONSISTS OF EARTHWORK, AGGREGATE BASE COURSE, ACHM BINDER AND SURFACE COURSES, MINOR DRAINAGE STRUCTURES, GUARDRAIL, EROSION CONTROL ITEMS, A CONT. COMP. PLATE GIRDER UNIT OVERPASS BRIDGE (329.16 FT.), WIRE FENCE, MAINTENANCE OF TRAFFIC AND MISC. ITEMS.
Last Friday ... I spotted another section of Future 49 under construction (yellow line)
http://goo.gl/maps/GHDV5
The section in yellow is a new segment (less than 6 months old).

Given the time frame and the length of the yellow line, it looks like the "fourth interchange" project.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on August 27, 2012, 09:59:51 PM
In today's Arkansas Democrat Gazette was an Article about the Bella Vista Bypass. The first segment is about 50% complete and the 2nd segment started in June. Both are scheduled to be complete in 2014. There is no money earmarked to do another section unless the sale tax amendment is passed in November. If it does pass they will finish 2 lanes of the Bypass and also widen some I 540 from Fayetteville to Bentonville. Also one section of the Springdale Bypass will be built. Otherwise there is no section for construction to be built until 2016. There is no named opposition so far for the amendment as of now.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on August 27, 2012, 10:00:07 PM
http://www.arkansasonline.com/news/2011/dec/17/fort-smiths-4th-interchange-i-49-get-star-20111217/?f=news-arkansas
Quote
The state Highway and Transportation Department plans to award a contract next year to build a fourth interchange in the Fort Smith area for the long-planned Interstate 49.
The interchange would be at U.S. 71 south of the city, according to Joe Shipman, District 4 engineer for the Highway Department ...
Three other Fort Smith-area interchanges for the new northsouth interstate are nearly finished, according to Shipman.
.... in the May 2 letting, I believe this is the "fourth interchange" project ... Here is AHTD's description of the project:
Quote
THE PURPOSE OF THIS PROJECT IS TO CONSTRUCT 0.635 MILE OF THE HWY. 71 RELOCATED EMBANKMENT, THE EMBANKMENTS FOR THE RAMPS ALONG WITH THE OVERPASS BRIDGE AND APPROACHES AT THE INTERCHANGE OF HWY. 71 AND COUNTY ROAD 8 IN SEBASTIAN COUNTY NEAR THE FORT CHAFFEE MILITARY RESERVATION.  THIS PROJECT CONSISTS OF EARTHWORK, AGGREGATE BASE COURSE, ACHM BINDER AND SURFACE COURSES, MINOR DRAINAGE STRUCTURES, GUARDRAIL, EROSION CONTROL ITEMS, A CONT. COMP. PLATE GIRDER UNIT OVERPASS BRIDGE (329.16 FT.), WIRE FENCE, MAINTENANCE OF TRAFFIC AND MISC. ITEMS.
(above quote from I-49 in AR (Bella Vista, Fort Smith) (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3324.msg141534#msg141534) thread)
Last Friday ... I spotted another section of Future 49 under construction (yellow line)
http://goo.gl/maps/GHDV5
The section in yellow is a new segment (less than 6 months old).

Given the time frame and the length of the yellow line, it looks like the "fourth interchange" project.

Yes, quite likely. CR 8 is Howard Hill Rd, which is just SW of where the last project ended (Rye Hill Rd). Judging from the grading, I would say the dirt work will probably end just before 71. Lots of traffic in the area, so there really isn't a good place to stop for actual photos.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: dariusb on August 28, 2012, 12:12:05 AM
The second half of this July 15 KTBS-Shreveport TV video report (http://www.ktbs.com/news/I-49-Louisiana-and-Arkansas-Projects/-/144844/15565946/-/sollgtz/-/index.html) focuses on the I-49 funding challenges for the Fort Smith to Texarkana section.

I enjoyed watching that video as well as the I-49 Road To The Future segments.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on September 06, 2012, 09:57:52 AM
First six-lane section of the Interstate in NWA expected to open by year's end. (pay) (http://www.nwaonline.com/news/2012/sep/06/i-540-6-lane-section-opening-set-20120906/)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on September 06, 2012, 10:14:54 AM
First six-lane section of the Interstate in NWA expected to open by year's end. (pay) (http://www.nwaonline.com/news/2012/sep/06/i-540-6-lane-section-opening-set-20120906/)

I've been watching that. There will be a Jersey Barrier between the NB and SB lanes of I-540. I'll be up that way again in a few days so I'll get a better look.

Update:
See my comments here: https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=5278.msg172752#msg172752
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on September 25, 2012, 08:54:44 PM
Quote
The state Highway and Transportation Department plans to award a contract next year to build a fourth interchange in the Fort Smith area for the long-planned Interstate 49.
The interchange would be at U.S. 71 south of the city, according to Joe Shipman, District 4 engineer for the Highway Department ...
Three other Fort Smith-area interchanges for the new northsouth interstate are nearly finished, according to Shipman ... Complete or nearly complete are interchanges at Arkansas 22 (Rogers Avenue), Roberts Boulevard and Massard Road.
When the fourth interchange on U.S. 71 is under contract and construction is well under way, the state expects to go forward with the last step, Shipman said. That would be paving the highway and opening it to traffic, perhaps by 2014 ...
Given the time frame and the length of the yellow line, it looks like the "fourth interchange" project.
Yes, quite likely. CR 8 is Howard Hill Rd, which is just SW of where the last project ended (Rye Hill Rd). Judging from the grading, I would say the dirt work will probably end just before 71. Lots of traffic in the area, so there really isn't a good place to stop for actual photos.

It looks like it won't be too long before there will be some paving to go on top of the dirt.  AHTD is advertising a 5.495 mile paving project in Chaffee Crossing for its October 24 letting (http://www.arkansashighways.com/ProgCon/notices/040376%20notice.pdf):

(http://i.imgur.com/sQIDF.jpg)

The Plans (http://www.arkansashighways.com/ProgCon/LETTING%20PLANS/040376.pdf) indicate that the paving will begin just north of the Future I-49/ US 71 interchange:

(http://i.imgur.com/r2MXW.jpg)

It looks like they have a good chance of meeting that 2014 opening target.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on September 25, 2012, 10:33:09 PM
The Rye Hill-Barling stretch of I-49 will be pretty much worthless when it is first opened.  It will be useful for Barling residents going south on 71, but I doubt it gets 2000 cars a day until it is extended.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on September 25, 2012, 10:42:04 PM
The Rye Hill-Barling stretch of I-49 will be pretty much worthless when it is first opened.  It will be useful for Barling residents going south on 71, but I doubt it gets 2000 cars a day until it is extended.

Or a truck bypass. Should we start kicking around numbers (like Spur 71) ?  ;)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: NE2 on September 25, 2012, 10:46:17 PM
Probably a second Highway 549.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on September 25, 2012, 10:57:22 PM
Probably a second Highway 549.

I'd have to disagree, though another x49 is possible.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: rte66man on September 26, 2012, 05:59:59 PM
Take a closer look at the schematic posted above. US71B????? I thought it was AR255.

rte66man
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on September 26, 2012, 06:29:38 PM
Take a closer look at the schematic posted above. US71B????? I thought it was AR255.

rte66man

Looks like it's co-signed as 71B/255.... an apparent mistake.  I hope AHTD isn't dumb enough to do a re-route on 71B.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: NE2 on September 26, 2012, 07:26:31 PM
59 would make a lot of sense as a temporary number.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on September 26, 2012, 11:20:57 PM
49 is the only number that makes sense.  Call it AR 49, I don't care.  Just don't give it a number that is planned to become obsolete in a few years.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on September 26, 2012, 11:29:39 PM
49 is the only number that makes sense.  Call it AR 49, I don't care.  Just don't give it a number that is planned to become obsolete in a few years.

Like 471? ;)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on September 26, 2012, 11:38:23 PM
471 was meant to be permanent.  It was the idiot business owners along the road that caused it to be changed back.  To be honest, 71B is the better number for the road.  But it should revert to 71 and the spur between 71 and 540 in south Fayetteville could become 471.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on September 27, 2012, 01:00:10 AM
471 was meant to be permanent.  It was the idiot business owners along the road that caused it to be changed back.  To be honest, 71B is the better number for the road.  But it should revert to 71 and the spur between 71 and 540 in south Fayetteville could become 471.

About 20 years ago, I think AHTD still called it 471S, but it's now invisible 71S.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on September 27, 2012, 01:20:19 AM
71S?  It's mainline US 71.  Once there was a 71S sign on 540 south but it was an error and was replaced.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on September 27, 2012, 08:46:33 AM
71S?  It's mainline US 71.  Once there was a 71S sign on 540 south but it was an error and was replaced.

I though I saw on a map the section of the old 71 Bypass from 540 to College Ave was 71S (though not posted)?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on September 27, 2012, 01:00:18 PM
Probably a second Highway 549.

Arkansas has a history of this. It'll either be SH 549 or 449.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on September 27, 2012, 06:47:59 PM
Not trying to veer into a state that I'm not supposed to, I'll make it germain:

- Visited the UnderCliff bar and grill in Tipton Ford, Missouri (just south of Joplin, where you can hear the traffic on the near-future I-49 bridge (http://www.undercliff.net) from the restaurant's front deck as well as watch Kansas City Southern trains on that railroad's original Kansas City to Lake Charles/Beaumont-Port Arthur mainline.  What's interesting is that the restaurant is on old U.S. 71.  WOW.  It's only a paved country road with no shoulders.  What a difference a few decades make.  Other businessmen/bikers were at the UnderCliff, bound for BBB in Fayetteville.

- Hadn't driven on I-44 southwest from Joplin to the Oklahoma line in a while.  WOW #2 (though I've seen the east side development).  The trucking companies and the big truck stops in nice buildings popping up at this future I-44/I-49 junction makes me wonder what's going to happen when I-49 is finally linked between Pineville, MO and NWA (and then on to Fort Smith) and someday (when I'm dead) to Texarkana when Fort Smith genuinely becomes a two-interstate junction city and Shreveport (and possibly Texarkana) becomes a three-junction city.

Back to Arkansas now.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on October 26, 2012, 05:43:19 PM
The Low bid for HWY. 71 , HWY.  22 (base and surface) at Fort Chaffee crossing was 22,649,692.08 from APAC- Tennessee, Inc.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on October 26, 2012, 07:26:10 PM
The Low bid for HWY. 71 , HWY.  22 (base and surface) at Fort Chaffee crossing was 22,649,692.08 from APAC- Tennessee, Inc.

I saw that.  Maybe we'll have a Ft Smith bip-pass in a couple years ;)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on October 29, 2012, 12:26:30 PM
The Low bid for HWY. 71 , HWY.  22 (base and surface) at Fort Chaffee crossing was 22,649,692.08 from APAC- Tennessee, Inc.

On October 28, AHTD awarded the contract to APAC-Tennessee, Inc. (http://www.arkansashighways.com/ProgCon/letting/Oct%20'12%20Award%20List.pdf) Also, this Oct. 25 TV video report (http://5newsonline.com/2012/10/25/officials-hope-new-highway-improves-area/) has some footage of Future I-49 construction through Chaffee Crossing and projects that construction should be completed in about two years:

Quote
Plans are in the works to build a major interstate right through the heart of the River Valley. The state Highway Commission chose bids this week for a portion of road that is expected to become part of Interstate 49.
A portion of I-49 will run right through Chaffee Crossing. The state expects construction to begin in a couple of months ....
The new seven mile stretch will run through Chaffee Crossing .... new portion of highway that will connect Highway 71 with Highway 22 near Central City ....
“We are extremely excited,”  said Stephanie Malone, Marketing Director for Chaffee Crossing. “It’s gonna relieve some traffic and send some traffic our way, close to 43,000 trips a day.”  ....
Construction should take about two years.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on October 29, 2012, 12:43:47 PM
43,000 cars a day before it connects to I-540/Future 49 north at Alma?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on October 29, 2012, 12:53:09 PM
The Low bid for HWY. 71 , HWY.  22 (base and surface) at Fort Chaffee crossing was 22,649,692.08 from APAC- Tennessee, Inc.

On October 28, AHTD awarded the contract to APAC-Tennessee, Inc. (http://www.arkansashighways.com/ProgCon/letting/Oct%20'12%20Award%20List.pdf) Also, this Oct. 25 TV video report (http://5newsonline.com/2012/10/25/officials-hope-new-highway-improves-area/) has some footage of Future I-49 construction through Chaffee Crossing and projects that construction should be completed in about two years:

Quote
Plans are in the works to build a major interstate right through the heart of the River Valley. The state Highway Commission chose bids this week for a portion of road that is expected to become part of Interstate 49.
A portion of I-49 will run right through Chaffee Crossing. The state expects construction to begin in a couple of months ....
The new seven mile stretch will run through Chaffee Crossing .... new portion of highway that will connect Highway 71 with Highway 22 near Central City ....
“We are extremely excited,”  said Stephanie Malone, Marketing Director for Chaffee Crossing. “It’s gonna relieve some traffic and send some traffic our way, close to 43,000 trips a day.”  ....
Construction should take about two years.

All the grading and structures are complete from AR 22 at Barling to just past Rye Hill. Rye Hill to US 71, crossing Howard Hill Rd, just started a couple months ago and is projected to finish around 2014. I wonder if AHTD & APAC will wait until that's done before starting paving.

KFSM makes it sound like construction has just begun even though it's been on-going for 3+ years. Also, 49 won't run to Canada, only to Kansas City.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on November 12, 2012, 07:12:22 PM
Move Arkansas Forward has a Proposed Constitutional Fact Sheet #1 (http://www.movearkansasforward.com/pdf/TurnbackBooklet.pdf) that lists by region the four-lane highway projects that would be supported by the half-cent sales tax to be voted on in November (pages 6-7/88 of pdf; pages 4-5 of document):
Quote
Four-Lane Projects of Regional Significance
Northwest Arkansas
• Completion of the initial two lanes of the ultimate four lanes of the Bella Vista bypass
This article (http://ozarksfirst.com/fulltext?nxd_id=725282) reports that Issue No.1 was approved by the voters
(quote from Arkansas (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=6952.msg183504#msg183504) thread)

This Nov. 12 Joplin Globe article (http://www.joplinglobe.com/topstories/x2082769768/Bella-Vista-bypass-going-forward-following-passage-of-half-cent-sales-tax-in-Arkansas) has three Nov. 7 photos of construction on the Bella Vista Bypass and reports that the BVB will be one of the early projects funded by the recently approved sales tax increase:

Quote
... the outcome of a vote last week in Arkansas, when residents imposed a half-cent sales tax to raise money for transportation projects around the state.
Among those projects that will be funded with the new tax revenue are the first two lanes of the Bella Vista bypass. Missouri officials have committed to matching what Arkansas does, meaning the long-awaited project is on the road to becoming a reality.
“The good news is that the Bella Vista bypass will be one of the earliest projects in this program,”  Randy Ort, spokesperson for the Arkansas State Highway and Transportation Department.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on November 14, 2012, 03:37:31 PM
(http://kurtjwayne.com/images/pineville49.jpg)

The current southernmost Missouri (as of 12/12/12) exit to I-49 at Pineville, waiting for the bag to come off...the blue signs are all up the current U.S. 71 now from this point at the turnoffs.  Pineville is the last zip code in Missouri prior to crossing the Arkansas line at Bella Vista.  1/2 mile south of this is the four-lane extended signage structure, northbound lane rock cut and (currently blocked-off) southbound exit ramp to the future BV bypass, all of which were in place around 2005/2006 and ready to be built had the Arkansas legislature been ready to fund their side then.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: agentsteel53 on November 14, 2012, 04:29:24 PM
is it just me or does that shield lack the state name?  Missouri is usually quite fastidious about this.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: yakra on November 15, 2012, 09:27:44 PM
It's not just you. Scott noticed the same in the I-49 Coming to MO thread.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on November 19, 2012, 05:21:41 PM
Last night driving south through Anderson past McDonald County High School, the blue covering had been removed off one of the signs and it said "Interstate" in the red area.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on November 20, 2012, 07:41:33 PM
Last night driving south through Anderson past McDonald County High School, the blue covering had been removed off one of the signs and it said "Interstate" in the red area.

They ALL do. The state name is usually in the blue area above the number (Interstate State XX).
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on November 20, 2012, 08:30:19 PM
Last night driving south through Anderson past McDonald County High School, the blue covering had been removed off one of the signs and it said "Interstate" in the red area.

They ALL do. The state name is usually in the blue area above the number (Interstate State XX).

Heh, sorry.  You can tell who doesn't watch the signs as much.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: intelati49 on November 28, 2012, 04:05:39 PM
is it just me or does that shield lack the state name?  Missouri is usually quite fastidious about this.

This is correct. :pan:
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on November 28, 2012, 04:09:27 PM
is it just me or does that shield lack the state name?  Missouri is usually quite fastidious about this.

Usually they are, yes.

I am hoping to attend the ceremony (got my new shirt ready), so maybe I can investigate further.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on November 28, 2012, 04:42:31 PM
Maybe Missouri has done away with state named shields.  The signs on the new part of I-44 in Tulsa has neutered signs, so it wouldn't be the only state doing it.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Alps on November 28, 2012, 09:11:22 PM
In NJ, state names have been left to individual projects/design consultants and contractors. More often than not, they're included, but there's no pattern to it.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on December 03, 2012, 05:34:28 PM
I thought there was to be a decision made for Arkansas regarding redesignating Interstate 540 north from I-40 as I-49. Did not see that covered in the notes document.
Was it postponed for a future meeting?
I received an early August email from AHTD (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3324.msg166650#msg166650) to that effect.  I was surprised that it was not included in the notes document. I will follow up with AHTD.
(above quote from AASHTO Committee on Route Numbering (Nov. 2012) Actions (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=8157.msg187410#msg187410) thread)

I recently received a response from AHTD and, surprisingly, the reason lies with the presence of US 49:

Quote
The short answer is that we can’t apply for I-49 designation unless we can get some kind of exceptions.  Here are the reasons.
1.       AASHTO’s US Route Numbering Policies state that there will be no Interstate Route bearing the same number designation as a US Numbered Route in any State (see Attachment, Item 3 on Page 8 of 11 and a similar discussion  on Page 4, Item 4).
2.       US Highway 49 exists in Arkansas and Mississippi.  It begins in Piggott, Arkansas and travels through the State to Helena/West Helena and then crosses the Mississippi River to Gulfport, MS.
3.       Both Missouri and Louisiana have portions of I-49.  Missouri’s portion travels between Kansas City and the Arkansas State Line.  The portion in Louisiana is not yet complete to the Arkansas State Line.
4.       For Arkansas to be able to rename I-540 to I-49 (and Arkansas Highway 549 to I‑49), US 49 will have to be either renumbered or changed from a US Highway to a State Highway. 
5.       AASHTO designation guidelines allow for a US Highway contained within a single State, but the highway must be at least 300 miles long (see Attachment, Page 5 of 11).  US 49 is only 235.6 miles long in Mississippi meaning that it could not be a stand-alone segment of US Highway based on the guidelines.
.. we continue to work on a resolution for this.

Very interesting that US 49 in Mississippi is a large part of the problem.

edit

As previously posted in the Improving I-540 at Fort Smith thread (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=8430.msg196166#msg196166), AHTD apparently intends to dually designate I-49 with I-540 instead of redesignating I-540 as I-49.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: codyg1985 on December 03, 2012, 05:46:17 PM
^ I-41 and I-74 in NC are precedents against that reasoning...
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: NE2 on December 03, 2012, 05:53:56 PM
Actually I-24/US 24 in Illinois is a better example. Tell them that Illinois has no problems with it.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on December 03, 2012, 06:05:24 PM
Actually I-24/US 24 in Illinois is a better example. Tell them that Illinois has no problems with it.
Missouri renumbered MO 57 as 171 after I-57 was built, yet now they have TWO 64's (MO 64 and I-64) and TWO 72's (MO 72 and I-72).
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Alex on December 03, 2012, 06:06:12 PM

I recently received a response from AHTD and, surprisingly, the reason lies with the presence of US 49:

Quote
The short answer is that we can’t apply for I-49 designation unless we can get some kind of exceptions.  Here are the reasons.
1.       AASHTO’s US Route Numbering Policies state that there will be no Interstate Route bearing the same number designation as a US Numbered Route in any State (see Attachment, Item 3 on Page 8 of 11 and a similar discussion  on Page 4, Item 4).
2.       US Highway 49 exists in Arkansas and Mississippi.  It begins in Piggott, Arkansas and travels through the State to Helena/West Helena and then crosses the Mississippi River to Gulfport, MS.
3.       Both Missouri and Louisiana have portions of I-49.  Missouri’s portion travels between Kansas City and the Arkansas State Line.  The portion in Louisiana is not yet complete to the Arkansas State Line.
4.       For Arkansas to be able to rename I-540 to I-49 (and Arkansas Highway 549 to I‑49), US 49 will have to be either renumbered or changed from a US Highway to a State Highway. 
5.       AASHTO designation guidelines allow for a US Highway contained within a single State, but the highway must be at least 300 miles long (see Attachment, Page 5 of 11).  US 49 is only 235.6 miles long in Mississippi meaning that it could not be a stand-alone segment of US Highway based on the guidelines.
.. we continue to work on a resolution for this.

Very interesting that US 49 in Mississippi is a large part of the problem.

Thank you Grzrd for looking into this!

The people at AASHTO really need to have better communications across their committee. Seriously, this is the rational given to prevent I-49 in AR? The precedent of Interstate/U.S. number duplication within a state has been broken on a number of occasions now. Why should it matter in this instance, especially when the two routes in question are across the state from one another and never come close to meeting. Do the people that approve things for NC or WI never talk to the people in charge of the Arkansas applications? Even next door in Texas you have IH 69 and US 69 signed in the same state, and they will eventually also intersect...
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: triplemultiplex on December 04, 2012, 10:40:32 AM
I can't imagine that AASHTO wouldn't grant an exception for this supposed 'conflict' given all the precedent, both old and new.  But the idea that they bring it up all is still pretty stupid.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: ShawnP on December 04, 2012, 11:45:09 PM
Some good pics........

http://www.joplinglobe.com/local/x2082769768/Bella-Vista-bypass-going-forward-following-passage-of-half-cent-sales-tax-in-Arkansas
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on December 05, 2012, 12:04:56 AM
Some good pics........

http://www.joplinglobe.com/local/x2082769768/Bella-Vista-bypass-going-forward-following-passage-of-half-cent-sales-tax-in-Arkansas
If you can get the pictures to open correctly :(
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on December 11, 2012, 07:50:13 PM
This article (http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/US-71-in-Mo-south-of-Kansas-City-turned-into-I-49-4108657.php) sets forth some sobering numbers for the completion of I-49 in Arkansas - $2.8 billion to complete I-49, with only $4 billion currently available for overall needs in Arkansas over the next ten years:

Quote
I-49 is mainly new construction in Arkansas, with the cost to complete a stretch between Interstates 30 and 40 through the Ouachita mountains estimated at $2 billion, said Randy Ort, spokesman for the Arkansas Department of Transportation. Even with the state's new highway sales tax, he said Arkansas doesn't have much to put toward the I-49 projects because of other transportation needs.
"There's about $2.8 billion needed to complete I-49 in Arkansas," Ort said. "Basically we've identified $23 billion in needs over the next 10 years, but only $4 billion to address those needs. So money is a big issue."
Ort said Arkansas has the nation's 12th-largest highway system but ranks 43rd in revenue to pay for it.
"It's a priority and we want to get it done," Ort said. "We understand there are advantages, not just for Arkansas but for the whole region."

It's going to be a looooooong wait ...
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on December 12, 2012, 10:01:10 AM

Congratulations on the name change!  ;-)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on December 12, 2012, 11:50:32 PM
This article (http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/US-71-in-Mo-south-of-Kansas-City-turned-into-I-49-4108657.php) sets forth some sobering numbers for the completion of I-49 in Arkansas - $2.8 billion to complete I-49, with only $4 billion currently available for overall needs in Arkansas over the next ten years

This TV video report (http://www.ky3.com/news/ky3-interstate-49-i49-missouri-joplin-unveiling-ceremony-economic-opportunity-20121212,0,5111997.story) is primarily about the I-49 unveiling in Missouri, but it includes Federal Highway Administrator Victor Mendez making the following comment:

Quote
Many say I-49 will connect Missouri to the rest of the country and the world.
"If you look at the stretch of I-49 from Louisiana up to Canada, it's an amazing opportunity here that, as a nation, we cannot miss," said Mendez.

If Mendez truly means what he says, and federal funding could be at play, then MAP-21 (http://www.rules.house.gov/Media/file/PDF_112_2/LegislativeText/CRPT-112hrpt-HR4348.pdf) might provide a 95% federal funding opportunity for significant sections of I-49 in Arkansas (page 70/599 of pdf; page 70 of document):

Quote
SEC. 1116. PRIORITIZATION OF PROJECTS TO IMPROVE FREIGHT MOVEMENT.
(a) IN GENERAL.–Notwithstanding section 120 of title 23, United States Code, the Secretary may increase the Federal share payable for any project to 95 percent for projects on the Interstate System and 90 percent for any other project if the Secretary certifies that the project meets the requirements of this section.
(b) INCREASED FUNDING.–To be eligible for the increased Federal funding share under this section, a project shall–
(1) demonstrate the improvement made by the project to the efficient movement of freight, including making progress towards meeting performance targets for freight movement established under section 150(d) of title 23, United States Code; and (2) be identified in a State freight plan developed pursuant to section 1118.
(c) ELIGIBLE PROJECTS.–Eligible projects to improve the movement of freight under this section may include, but are not limited to–
(1) construction, reconstruction, rehabilitation, and operational improvements directly relating to improving freight
movement
...

IF AHTD were to be aggressive in pursuing this funding, then they might have a receptive ear in Mendez to navigate the technical requirements of eligibility for the funding.  Even a 90% share as "any other project" would be significant.

I admittedly have not read all of the technical requirements for the funding, so maybe I am simply engaging in wishful thinking ... At the very least, AHTD should investigate the possibility.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on January 22, 2013, 10:55:48 AM
Just random, but I drove to Gravette today from Bella Vista through what used to be "Hiwasse".  The infrastructure for the future bridge between Hiwasse and Gravette (about 1-2 miles west of downtown Hiwasse) is being set, and construction is proceeding north from there toward the state line...cuts are being put in place for the south exit ramps also there.  Forgive me but, did that article say when Missouri is actually going to start digging on their side?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on January 22, 2013, 12:12:14 PM
did that article say when Missouri is actually going to start digging on their side?

Information contained in this post (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3239.msg183602#msg183602) indicates that MoDOT has the BVB in its STIP, but that Missouri wants Arkansas to have a firm timetable for construction to the state line before they begin.  Arkansas will not begin collecting the sales tax until July 1, 2013; however, this post (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3324.msg184388#msg184388) includes a quote from an AHTD spokesperson that the BVB will be one of the early projects in the sales tax program.

I'll throw out an optimistic guess that Missouri will start turning dirt on the BVB in Spring 2015; that's just my guess.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Anthony_JK on January 22, 2013, 12:50:27 PM
I assume that that is contingent upon AR commiting to a full 4-lane BVB, and not just a temporary Super-2 as is presently proposed??
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on January 22, 2013, 01:01:07 PM
Information contained in this post (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3239.msg183602#msg183602)
I assume that that is contingent upon AR commiting to a full 4-lane BVB, and not just a temporary Super-2 as is presently proposed??

I asked that question in my phone conversation and he said that the commitment to two lanes will be sufficient:

I spoke with a MoDOT individual today and he confirmed that the above 2015 project in the Draft STIP is for the Bella Vista Bypass. However, it is contingent on whether Arkansas will have construction under way to the state line by that time. As he put it, there is no need to build it to a dead-end and have it sit for a long time. MoDOT already has the money set aside and will build the entire four lanes even if Arkansas has to stay at two lanes for a while.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on January 22, 2013, 07:55:50 PM
Thanks, gang.

I can assure you, that stretch north of the highway I saw they're building will go to NOWHERE if it doesn't go to the state line...it may head straight to the Bella Vista western city limits.  Don't know.  BTW, I'll be curious if they build an exit for BV at that point, for either Glasgow and/or Highlands (I forget the east/west street there which loops northward and turns into Glasgow heading back east.)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on January 23, 2013, 10:29:44 AM
Thanks, gang.

I can assure you, that stretch north of the highway I saw they're building will go to NOWHERE if it doesn't go to the state line...it may head straight to the Bella Vista western city limits.  Don't know.  BTW, I'll be curious if they build an exit for BV at that point, for either Glasgow and/or Highlands (I forget the east/west street there which loops northward and turns into Glasgow heading back east.)

Based on what I have read, the next segment to be built after the "Hiwasse Bypass" is supposed to be to the MO state Line.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on January 26, 2013, 07:32:35 AM
This TV video report (http://5newsonline.com/2013/01/24/i-49-corridor-to-be-finished-in-2014/) has footage of construction in the Chaffee Crossing area:

Quote
Crews expect all work along 71 to be wrapped up by the end of 2014 or early in 2015 ....
“We have three projects that are complete on the northern portion,”  Joe Shipman, District Engineer for the Arkansas State Highway and Transportation Department, said. “We have one project that will be complete basically in the next few weeks. We have a project at the interchange at Highway 71 in the Jenny Lind community that is well underway. It’s expected to wrap up by the end of the year.”
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on January 26, 2013, 08:31:47 AM
This TV video report (http://5newsonline.com/2013/01/24/i-49-corridor-to-be-finished-in-2014/) has footage of construction in the Chaffee Crossing area:

Quote
Crews expect all work along 71 to be wrapped up by the end of 2014 or early in 2015 ....
“We have three projects that are complete on the northern portion,”  Joe Shipman, District Engineer for the Arkansas State Highway and Transportation Department, said. “We have one project that will be complete basically in the next few weeks. We have a project at the interchange at Highway 71 in the Jenny Lind community that is well underway. It’s expected to wrap up by the end of the year.”

In the vicinity of Howard Hill Rd, they appear to be working quickly, but done by the end of the year, I have my doubts though I suppose it's possible. 

I spoke with Mr Shipman a few days ago about what designation the Ft Smith-Barling segment might have (the media keeps calling it Highway 71), but he said no decision has been made at this time.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: cjk374 on January 26, 2013, 01:50:33 PM
I thought there was to be a decision made for Arkansas regarding redesignating Interstate 540 north from I-40 as I-49. Did not see that covered in the notes document.
Was it postponed for a future meeting?
I received an early August email from AHTD (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3324.msg166650#msg166650) to that effect.  I was surprised that it was not included in the notes document. I will follow up with AHTD.
(above quote from AASHTO Committee on Route Numbering (Nov. 2012) Actions (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=8157.msg187410#msg187410) thread)

I recently received a response from AHTD and, surprisingly, the reason lies with the presence of US 49:

Quote
The short answer is that we can’t apply for I-49 designation unless we can get some kind of exceptions.  Here are the reasons.
1.       AASHTO’s US Route Numbering Policies state that there will be no Interstate Route bearing the same number designation as a US Numbered Route in any State (see Attachment, Item 3 on Page 8 of 11 and a similar discussion  on Page 4, Item 4).
2.       US Highway 49 exists in Arkansas and Mississippi.  It begins in Piggott, Arkansas and travels through the State to Helena/West Helena and then crosses the Mississippi River to Gulfport, MS.
3.       Both Missouri and Louisiana have portions of I-49.  Missouri’s portion travels between Kansas City and the Arkansas State Line.  The portion in Louisiana is not yet complete to the Arkansas State Line.
4.       For Arkansas to be able to rename I-540 to I-49 (and Arkansas Highway 549 to I‑49), US 49 will have to be either renumbered or changed from a US Highway to a State Highway. 
5.       AASHTO designation guidelines allow for a US Highway contained within a single State, but the highway must be at least 300 miles long (see Attachment, Page 5 of 11).  US 49 is only 235.6 miles long in Mississippi meaning that it could not be a stand-alone segment of US Highway based on the guidelines.
.. we continue to work on a resolution for this.

Very interesting that US 49 in Mississippi is a large part of the problem.

edit

As previously posted in the Improving I-540 at Fort Smith thread (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=8430.msg196166#msg196166), AHTD apparently intends to dually designate I-49 with I-540 instead of redesignating I-540 as I-49.
^ I-41 and I-74 in NC are precedents against that reasoning...
Actually I-24/US 24 in Illinois is a better example. Tell them that Illinois has no problems with it.
Missouri renumbered MO 57 as 171 after I-57 was built, yet now they have TWO 64's (MO 64 and I-64) and TWO 72's (MO 72 and I-72).
The colors aren't great on this one, but this was one shot I had...

(http://www.formulanone.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/Int10LA-US61-US61signs.jpg)
Apparently it didn't matter to Louisiana either.  They also have LA 59 VERY close to I-59, which should have been a no-no according to AASHTO.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on February 07, 2013, 09:55:39 PM
Through acquisitions the KCS got the Louisiana and Arkansas and a railroad which runs pretty much parallel to I-49 (current, plus I-10 and future) all the way to New Orleans, and now with their still developing Mexico line they're running parallel to a future Kansas City/Mexico corridor via I-49 and I-69 .... Shows me just how critical this emerging dual I-69 and I-49 corridor is as well.
(above quote from I-69 in TX (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3624.msg167179#msg167179) thread)
This TV video report (http://www.ky3.com/news/ky3-interstate-49-i49-missouri-joplin-unveiling-ceremony-economic-opportunity-20121212,0,5111997.story) is primarily about the I-49 unveiling in Missouri, but it includes Federal Highway Administrator Victor Mendez making the following comment:
Quote
Many say I-49 will connect Missouri to the rest of the country and the world.
"If you look at the stretch of I-49 from Louisiana up to Canada, it's an amazing opportunity here that, as a nation, we cannot miss," said Mendez.
At approximately the 1:00 mark of this TV video report (http://www.ktbs.com/news/Officials-Meet-in-Austin-for-I-69-Update/-/144844/18435332/-/1142dc0z/-/index.html), the following map caught my eye:
(http://i.imgur.com/JHFlRzp.jpg)
(bottom quote from I-69 in LA (and LA 3132/Shreveport Inner Loop Extension) (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=4510.msg202233#msg202233) thread)

The above map provides a great visual of how the Alma-to-Texarkana I-49 corridor in western Arkansas is crucial to connecting I-49 in Missouri and NWA (I-540), I-29, I-35, the I-369/I-69 corridor through Texas, and I-49 through southwest Arkansas and Louisiana.  I wonder if Arkansas officals will be able to persuasively make the case for I-49 funding?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on March 20, 2013, 12:11:50 AM
Yesterday there was a long front page article about highway and road projects underway in Northwest Arkansas.  They mentioned the BV bypass and that there will be no stopping it now (they expect to possibly "let" bids for all the remaining sections to the Missouri State line soon).  Wish I could link it but it's behind a paywall.

They were also talking about other areas in NWA that have road construction, a lot of them.  It will be interesting when the Springdale bypass is complete and, from that, the new road to the XNA airport.  I doubt there are that many airports in the U.S. that serve metro areas of near 500,000 people that only have two-lane roads serving them.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: codyg1985 on March 20, 2013, 07:46:01 AM

I recently received a response from AHTD and, surprisingly, the reason lies with the presence of US 49:

Quote
The short answer is that we can’t apply for I-49 designation unless we can get some kind of exceptions.  Here are the reasons.
1.       AASHTO’s US Route Numbering Policies state that there will be no Interstate Route bearing the same number designation as a US Numbered Route in any State (see Attachment, Item 3 on Page 8 of 11 and a similar discussion  on Page 4, Item 4).
2.       US Highway 49 exists in Arkansas and Mississippi.  It begins in Piggott, Arkansas and travels through the State to Helena/West Helena and then crosses the Mississippi River to Gulfport, MS.
3.       Both Missouri and Louisiana have portions of I-49.  Missouri’s portion travels between Kansas City and the Arkansas State Line.  The portion in Louisiana is not yet complete to the Arkansas State Line.
4.       For Arkansas to be able to rename I-540 to I-49 (and Arkansas Highway 549 to I‑49), US 49 will have to be either renumbered or changed from a US Highway to a State Highway. 
5.       AASHTO designation guidelines allow for a US Highway contained within a single State, but the highway must be at least 300 miles long (see Attachment, Page 5 of 11).  US 49 is only 235.6 miles long in Mississippi meaning that it could not be a stand-alone segment of US Highway based on the guidelines.
.. we continue to work on a resolution for this.

Very interesting that US 49 in Mississippi is a large part of the problem.

Thank you Grzrd for looking into this!

The people at AASHTO really need to have better communications across their committee. Seriously, this is the rational given to prevent I-49 in AR? The precedent of Interstate/U.S. number duplication within a state has been broken on a number of occasions now. Why should it matter in this instance, especially when the two routes in question are across the state from one another and never come close to meeting. Do the people that approve things for NC or WI never talk to the people in charge of the Arkansas applications? Even next door in Texas you have IH 69 and US 69 signed in the same state, and they will eventually also intersect...

I just thought of a reason why this has come up, and it isn't an AASHTO problem, but an Arkansas problem. I think internally Arkansas only refers to the route number and makes no distinction between whether it is a Interstate, US, or State Route. With that said, I don't see why they can't just put up I-49 signs but still refer to it internally as 549 until they can come up with a different system internally for referring to state routes.

Someone correct me if I am wrong, but I don't think there are any state and US routes in Arkansas that have the same number.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: NE2 on March 20, 2013, 07:56:53 AM
I just thought of a reason why this has come up, and it isn't an AASHTO problem, but an Arkansas problem. I think internally Arkansas only refers to the route number and makes no distinction between whether it is a Interstate, US, or State Route. With that said, I don't see why they can't just put up I-49 signs but still refer to it internally as 549 until they can come up with a different system internally for referring to state routes.
Oh please. If http://www.openstreetmap.org/?relation=1714635 can have a single number (159), so can US 49 and I-49.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: J N Winkler on March 20, 2013, 01:04:29 PM
In regard to Arkansas I-49, in this month's advertisements (for the April 17 letting) AHTD has a contract (030313) for bridges and surfacing on what it calls US 71 Section 1--Louisiana state line north to Doddridge.  This is a full freeway and is the continuation of I-49 North into Arkansas.  It is, however, fairly short, and neither the plans nor the bid items include any signing.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on March 20, 2013, 06:16:08 PM
In regard to Arkansas I-49, in this month's advertisements (for the April 17 letting) AHTD has a contract (030313) for bridges and surfacing on what it calls US 71 Section 1--Louisiana state line north to Doddridge.  This is a full freeway and is the continuation of I-49 North into Arkansas.  It is, however, fairly short, and neither the plans nor the bid items include any signing.

I was through there yesterday: bridge girders are finally up at Doddridge, though approach work is still under construction. Signage is going up in the Texarkana area. Along I-30, signs appear complete. Along AR 549/Future I-49, there is still work to be done. AR 245 will be Exit 35, I-30 appears to be Exit 37A-B.

As far as the numbering: Arkansas already has US 59 and AR 59, so I don't see why US 49 and I-49 would be a problem.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: J N Winkler on March 20, 2013, 06:43:05 PM
As far as the numbering: Arkansas already has US 59 and AR 59, so I don't see why US 49 and I-49 would be a problem.

If I understand the email Grzrd quotes correctly, the obstacle is AASHTO, which gets involved in both legs of a US and Interstate number duplication rather than just one leg as in the case of a state and US number duplication.  But the email implies that Arkansas has not yet applied, so the real problem could be that the AHTD personnel responsible for overseeing a route numbering application are reading just the AASHTO policy without being aware of exceptions that have been made elsewhere, including in a neighboring state.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: codyg1985 on March 20, 2013, 09:33:31 PM
I was through there yesterday: bridge girders are finally up at Doddridge, though approach work is still under construction. Signage is going up in the Texarkana area. Along I-30, signs appear complete. Along AR 549/Future I-49, there is still work to be done. AR 245 will be Exit 35, I-30 appears to be Exit 37A-B.

Have any signs been replaced along the AR 245 freeway yet changing it to AR 549 or AR 151?

As far as the numbering: Arkansas already has US 59 and AR 59, so I don't see why US 49 and I-49 would be a problem.

True, but they may get around that because US 59 is multiplexed with another US route (US 71 or US 270) through all of its length in Arkansas, so internally the route is probably referred to as 71 or 270 and not 59. I still don't see why they can't just apply for it anyway.

One interesting thing is that future I-69 corridor signs have been posted in Arkansas even though there is an AR 69, but there are no Future I-49 signs anywhere that I know of in Arkansas, even though it is MUCH closer to being signed than I-69 is.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on March 20, 2013, 11:34:27 PM
I was through there yesterday: bridge girders are finally up at Doddridge, though approach work is still under construction. Signage is going up in the Texarkana area. Along I-30, signs appear complete. Along AR 549/Future I-49, there is still work to be done. AR 245 will be Exit 35, I-30 appears to be Exit 37A-B.

Have any signs been replaced along the AR 245 freeway yet changing it to AR 549 or AR 151?

I've seen nothing for AR 151, but there is one AR 549 (and a Detour 245) at the Arkansas Ave Exit (where 245 gets rerouted).

Independent markers up at 549 and 71 north of Texarkana, but they are covered. Overhead signage is still being worked on along the new section.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: rte66man on March 26, 2013, 09:28:35 PM
Just got back from a trip from OKC to Indianapolis.  Had some extra time, so I took the scenic route from Tulsa to Springfield via Hiwassee.  The piers and end walls are in at the western junction of AR72 and I49.  The beams are sitting to the side awaiting placement.  It looked as if the ramps and roadbed was cleared north of the overpass, but there was too much mud for me to investigate further.

The overpass at AR279 is nearly complete (just lacked the guardrails).  There is a parallel road just to the south of 49 that runs over to the eastern junction with AR72.  It gave me an opportunity to get a good look at the roadbed.  It's ready for paving.

The AR72 overpass south of Hiwassee is complete.  It was made for 4 lanes, but only two were paved on either side (the approaches of course).
(http://www.flickr.com/photos/rte66man/8593255467)

I have some pics that I will try to post later this week.

rte66man
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on March 26, 2013, 09:43:57 PM

The AR72 overpass south of Hiwassee is complete.  It was made for 4 lanes, but only two were paved on either side.


If memory serves correct, AHTD acquired Right of Way for 4 Lanes, but only has the money to build 2 at this time.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: NE2 on March 26, 2013, 10:06:59 PM
Two on either side makes 4 total, doesn't it?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: kphoger on March 26, 2013, 10:20:21 PM
Two on either side makes 4 total, doesn't it?

That's what I was thinking!  :biggrin:
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: rte66man on March 26, 2013, 10:28:41 PM
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rte66man/

Go to the "March 2013 Road Trip" set.

rte66man
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on March 27, 2013, 01:09:11 PM
If I understand the email Grzrd quotes correctly, the obstacle is AASHTO, which gets involved in both legs of a US and Interstate number duplication rather than just one leg as in the case of a state and US number duplication.  But the email implies that Arkansas has not yet applied, so the real problem could be that the AHTD personnel responsible for overseeing a route numbering application are reading just the AASHTO policy without being aware of exceptions that have been made elsewhere, including in a neighboring state.

I really believe that the problem does lie with AHTD personnel.  In past emails, I have provided several examples to AHTD of I-XX and US XX in the same state.  In my most recent email, I asked if the problem had been resolved and if AHTD was submitting I-49 application(s) in time for the AASHTO Spring meeting.  AHTD's response:

Quote
We are unaware of any resolution to the issue related to the I-49 signage.

 :banghead:



The Low bid for HWY. 71 , HWY.  22 (base and surface) at Fort Chaffee crossing was 22,649,692.08 from APAC- Tennessee, Inc.
On October 28, AHTD awarded the contract to APAC-Tennessee, Inc. (http://www.arkansashighways.com/ProgCon/letting/Oct%20'12%20Award%20List.pdf) Also, this Oct. 25 TV video report (http://5newsonline.com/2012/10/25/officials-hope-new-highway-improves-area/) has some footage of Future I-49 construction through Chaffee Crossing and projects that construction should be completed in about two years

This March 21 article (http://www.4029tv.com/news/arkansas/river-valley/Paving-begins-on-Chaffee-Crossing-stretch-of-I-49/-/14498626/19407564/-/format/rsss_2.0/-/9p6ulp/-/index.html) reports that the paving project has begun and includes a photo of a crew pouring concrete.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: codyg1985 on March 28, 2013, 08:15:43 AM
^ Try asking them about how they refer to everything as simply "Highway" in their bid lettings, for example, and if that has anything to do with why I-49 can't be signed.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: kphoger on March 28, 2013, 10:00:01 AM
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rte66man/

Go to the "March 2013 Road Trip" set.

rte66man

Or just go to the direct link (http://www.flickr.com/photos/rte66man/sets/72157633097063219/).
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on March 28, 2013, 10:56:23 AM
Here's a link to a pdf of the 2007 AASHTO's disapprovals of Missouri's I-49 application and the Arkansas I-49 North application:
http://route.transportation.org/Documents/AM2007_USRN_ReporttoSCOH.pdf
Try asking them about how they refer to everything as simply "Highway" in their bid lettings, for example, and if that has anything to do with why I-49 can't be signed.

The use of "Highway" did not prevent AHTD from applying in 2007, and the presence of US 49 did not appear to be a factor in AASHTO's disapproval of the application.  That said, I have sent an email to AASHTO with an I-49 "hypothetical", and asked if they have granted waivers in the past.  Depending on AASHTO's response, I may ask AHTD about their internal policies.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on April 14, 2013, 10:23:53 PM
This April 9 article (http://www.thecitywire.com/node/27235) reports that, although there is still no official timeline, Bella Vista Bypass construction is ready to begin once the money starts coming in from the tax:

Quote
The half-cent sales tax that was approved by voters in November 2012 starts being collected July 1 and will last for 10 years. The projects that will be funded with the largest portion of that money have already been decided, planned and are ready to move forward when the money starts to roll in.
“Revenue will start to pour in around August because there is about a two-month delay between the time Arkansas Department of Finance and Administration collects the money and allocates the money,”  said Danny Straessle, assistant public information office for the Arkansas Highway and Transportation Department (AHTD). ....
Anyone who travels to Bella Vista knows that traffic on U.S. 71 can be snarly at best. This project’s purpose is to make traffic safer and more efficient by moving traffic from the Missouri state line to I-540 south of Bella Vista.
Although no official timeline has been established, this project is essentially ready to go, Straessle said. The design work is already complete.
“Initially we are only constructing the two northbound lanes of what will ultimately become a four-lane, access-controlled (Interstate-type) facility,”
he said. “No funding has been identified for the southbound lanes. When the northbound lanes are open, we will run traffic in both directions- similar to a two-lane highway.”



I had a chance today to check out the "Hiwasse Bypass" (tm)

You may have a case of trademark infringement.  The above-linked article, reporting on current BVB construction projects, discusses "a bypass around Hiwasse":

Quote
There are also two related construction projects underway in conjunction with this project that are funded with STIP money. Those projects include a bypass around Hiwasse and construction will complete interchanges with Highway 72 as well as the two northbound lanes between the north and south interchanges.
Another project picks up where the other ends and extends the bypass to Benton County Road 34.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on April 25, 2013, 01:24:42 PM
MAP-21 (http://www.rules.house.gov/Media/file/PDF_112_2/LegislativeText/CRPT-112hrpt-HR4348.pdf) might provide a 95% federal funding opportunity for significant sections of I-49 in Arkansas (page 70/599 of pdf; page 70 of document):
Quote
SEC. 1116. PRIORITIZATION OF PROJECTS TO IMPROVE FREIGHT MOVEMENT.
At the very least, AHTD should investigate the possibility.

Atkins North America recently completed its I-69 Innovative Financing Study Final Findings (http://www.arkansashighways.com/planning_research/statewide_planning/Studies/AHTD%20I-69%20Innovative%20Financing%20Study_Final%20Findings%20Report_02192013.pdf) and the Executive Summary (http://www.arkansashighways.com/planning_research/statewide_planning/Studies/AHTD%20I-69%20Innovative%20Financing%20Study_Executive%20Summary_01092013.pdf), and the Final Findings provide a discussion of Section 1116 that is also relevant to I-49 and the Arkansas River bridge (page 18/122 of pdf; page 13 of document):

Quote
Section 1116 of MAP‐21 includes provisions for development of a freight plan .... the Secretary may increase the Federal share payable for any project to 95 percent for projects on the Interstate System and 90 percent for any other project if the Secretary certifies that the project meets the requirements of this section .... The potential for increased Federal participation could be beneficial for all I‐69 segments, but particularly bridge segments that are high cost and for which funding for the entire segment must be available before any construction can be initiated ... the states should coordinate with FHWA to ensure that I‐69 is included in the Freight Plan to better position themselves for a reduced State match under MAP‐21 and future funding programs.

Including the I-49 Arkansas River bridge in an Arkansas freight plan appears to be a no-brainer ...



Quote
Projects of National and Regional Significance [1120]
MAP-21 authorizes $500 million from the General Fund (subject to appropriation) in FY 2013 only
(above quote from I-69 Ohio River Bridge (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3245.msg198385#msg198385) thread)
This Jan. 23 Texarkana Gazette article (behind paywall) (http://www.texarkanagazette.com/news/2013/01/23/miller-county-quorum-court-approves-meas-573189.php) reports that the Miller County Quorum Court will ask for support from the National Association of Counties and the Arkansas congressional delegation to support I-49 funding for rural Arkansas .... Since the Doddridge-to-Louisiana state line paving project is already funded and slated to be let in 2013 (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3321.msg155771#msg155771), and will complete the final Miller County I-49 segment, I wonder if this an initial step of a multi-state (and possibly national) coordinated effort to get I-49 throughout rural Arkansas designated as a Project of National and Regional Significance and become eligible for related funding in future years?
(above quote from Texarkana (Future I-49, I-69 Spur)  (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3321.msg199304#msg199304) thread)

The Final Findings also provide a discussion of Projects of National and Regional Significance ("PNRS")and how individual state DOTs should coordinate with FHWA (pp. 17-18/122 of pdf; pp. 12-13 of document):

Quote
Section 1120 of MAP‐21 states the following:
Not later than 2 years after the date of enactment of the MAP‐21, the Secretary shall submit a report to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Environment and Public Works of the Senate regarding projects of national and regional significance.”
The report must include a comprehensive list of each project of national and regional significance that has been compiled through a survey of State DOTs .... to improve the opportunity for Federal funding of I‐69 segments under both the current and future versions of this program, each state represented in this study should contact FHWA to ensure that they are involved in the process and provide the documentation necessary to support FHWA’s determination that I‐69 warrants a position on the list based on the requirements identified above.

Several months ago I asked AHTD if they had applied for FY 2013 PNRS funding, and I was informed that MAP-21 had killed the PNRS program ...  :banghead:
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on April 25, 2013, 04:48:51 PM
Couple of mini-updates on this at Hiwasse:

1.  They've built one of those "cement mills" (or whatever you call those structures meant to generate a lot of concrete at a specific location) at the new bridge at Hwy 72(? - the highway between Bentonville and Gravette).

2.  Absolutely NOTHING being done east of that bridge (the segment between 72 and where I-540 ends at the Bentonville/Bella Vista line) yet that I can tell.  It will be fascinating to see how they pull that off given there's more development in that area though not heavily so.

3.  Funny thing...there are three bridges under construction in Hiwasse..that one, just south of the main part of town, and the western crossing of Hwy 72.  Right before that west bridge was a subdivision that was started around the "boom" years of the mid-2000s but abandoned after just one house was built.  Now small houses appear to be being not built, but MOVED there.  Not sure why (cheap land?) but there are two moved houses on blocks plus a third which looks like it may have been moved.  Not something one sees every day around here, especially not near an interstate under construction.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: ShawnP on April 30, 2013, 08:11:49 PM
Missouri has funding for the BVB in the out years. Have a feeling with Arkansas kicking into gear this summer on BVB that Missouri will slide construction up.

http://contribute.modot.mo.gov/plansandprojects/construction_program/STIP2013-2017/districtconstruct/documents/1_Projects_014.pdf
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on April 30, 2013, 10:19:23 PM
Back in Jan. 31 the Highway commissioners voted to accept  the staff's members to enter into negotiations with Garver LLC in North Little Rock to serve as the program manager for the 1/2 cent sales tax program. Also to use Stephen's Inc. in Little Rock to serve as the Financial advisor and bond Company for this project. Today I noticed that the Jobs # for the !/2 cent sale tax have changed to have CA in front of the Jobs. For instance now for the Bella Vista Bypass they are now CA 0903,CAo904,CA0905 to complete the 2 lanes of the project. The other 2 lanes still the standard AHTD job #'s. I saw an article in the Arkansas Democrat Gazzette what CA would stand for but can't remember. Looks like there will be a new Tab on the web site for the jobs that are going to be done.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on May 05, 2013, 10:29:28 PM
I see where M0DOT has moved up there STIP for the Bella Vista Bypass to Start in the Fall of 2014. Job # 7PO601 has construction money to start there part. So Arkansas has made them feel they will work on the 2 lanes early in the 1/2 cent sales tax construction.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on May 06, 2013, 10:56:40 AM
I'll be passing through Pineville, MO next weekend, so I'll look to see if MoDOT is doing anything on 49.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on May 14, 2013, 12:01:30 AM
As if we didn't have enough reasons for the I-49 Bella Vista bypass to be built, Crowder College of Neosho is building a significant second campus in Jane, MO, right off U.S. 71 (posts near bottom of the page). (http://www.urbanplanet.org/forums/index.php/topic/24917-mcdonald-county-tidbit/page-5)  Northwest Arkansas Community College in Bentonville creates enough traffic...if the new Crowder campus even has 1/4 of the traffic this will further add to bottlenecks at the stop light intersection of Larry Neff Road and U.S. 71.

(Tick tock, tick tock, tick tock...and the clock keeps going on the BVB construction.)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on May 22, 2013, 09:35:50 AM
Paving has started on both the east and west Hiwasse exits of future I-49.  Asphalt. *sigh*  :-/ X-(
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on May 22, 2013, 09:21:49 PM
Paving has started on both the east and west Hiwasse exits of future I-49.  Asphalt. *sigh*  :-/ X-(

They might be just laying down the base and then will be putting the rebar and concrete on top of that afterward.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on May 23, 2013, 05:00:52 PM
Move Arkansas Forward has a Proposed Constitutional Fact Sheet #1 (http://www.movearkansasforward.com/pdf/TurnbackBooklet.pdf) that lists by region the four-lane highway projects that would be supported by the half-cent sales tax to be voted on in November (pages 6-7/88 of pdf; pages 4-5 of document):
Quote
Four-Lane Projects of Regional Significance
Northwest Arkansas
- Completion of the initial two lanes of the ultimate four lanes of the Bella Vista bypass
This article (http://ozarksfirst.com/fulltext?nxd_id=725282) reports that Issue No.1 was approved by the voters
(quote from Arkansas (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=6952.msg183504#msg183504) thread)

This article (http://www.thv11.com/news/article/266323/2/Arkansas-highway-officials-considering-tolls-on-I-40), primarily about the possibility of tolling I-40 (and previously discussed in the 6 Laning I-40  (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=6548.msg223076#msg223076) thread), reports that, even though Arkansas voters approved the one-half cent sales tax to fund the initial two lanes of the BVB, AHTD is currently investigating the tolling potential of the BVB:

Quote
Are you only looking at this section of Interstate 40?  No, the Department is currently investigating tolling potential in two other corridors (Northbelt Freeway, in conjunction with Metroplan, and the Bella Vista Bypass).

Tolls on top of a sales tax increase; interesting.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on May 23, 2013, 05:40:05 PM

Tolls on top of a sales tax increase; interesting.

I don't remember the original source, but I had heard that Bella Vista Bypass could NOT be tolled since it used Federal Money (ARRA funds).
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on May 25, 2013, 05:01:27 AM
As far as I know, tolls in Arkansas have never existed except for a couple of long-discontinued ferries. Don't know of any newly-built roads in the state that can support a toll. Maybe the North Belt as long as that area grows.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on May 26, 2013, 02:35:43 PM
As far as I know, tolls in Arkansas have never existed except for a couple of long-discontinued ferries. Don't know of any newly-built roads in the state that can support a toll. Maybe the North Belt as long as that area grows.

There have been toll bridges in Arkansas.

Adding tolls to I-40 east of North Little Rock would only make a miserable drive that much worse.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on May 31, 2013, 11:42:15 AM
Very, very bad news out of Scott County, Arkansas just south of Fort Smith and Greenwood.

U.S. 71 at Y City (near the junction of the highway that goes to Hot Springs) and Parks was completely flooded by yesterday's storms with homes washed away.  The Scott County sheriff was apparently killed alongside possibly others.

https://www.facebook.com/4029news?fref=ts

This is a minor point compared to it, but an interstate cannot get to this area fast enough if said road will have bridges and safeguards against this.  (Fortunately U.S. 59 is an alternate, but it's ASTOUNDING how much beautiful no-man's-land is there for miles without a gas station. EDIT: Highway 59 at Page (paralleling Rich Mountain near the AR/OK line) is down to one lane. (http://www.4029tv.com/news/arkansas/river-valley/floods-lead-to-multiple-road-closures-in-leflore-county/-/14498626/20372042/-/v0oicgz/-/index.html))
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on May 31, 2013, 11:57:49 AM
Very, very bad news out of Scott County, Arkansas just south of Fort Smith and Greenwood.

U.S. 71 at Y City (near the junction of the highway that goes to Hot Springs) and Parks was completely flooded by yesterday's storms with homes washed away.  The Scott County sheriff was apparently killed alongside possibly others.

That would be US 270 East. 

I never considered that area flood prone, except around the Ouachita River at Acorn.  Most of that area is National Forest, so there's not a lot of commercial build-up.  There's a Shell/EZ Mart just to the north, but no other other active stations until Mena, approx 20 miles south.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on June 01, 2013, 03:15:26 AM
A little-known fact is the Ouachita Mountains catch all the moisture flowing north from the Gulf, so they get more rain than anywhere else in the contiguous U.S. west of the Mississippi (with the exception of coastal Louisiana). Some places average more than 60 inches a year.

The Appalachians in Georgia/Tennessee/North Carolina suffer the same deal. They're higher, so they get dumped on more.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: NE2 on June 01, 2013, 05:25:10 AM
heh heh Ouachita
(http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/pictures%5C9545%5COUCH%201159-Eldorado,%20KS-12-27-2002.jpg)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on June 01, 2013, 09:27:21 AM
This article says the there was a 24 foot flash flood that hit the Fourche la Favre river on Thursday and "temporarily swamped" the Highway 71 bridge. (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/A/AP_US_SEVERE_WEATHER?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2013-05-31-21-22-15)  I guess that's one thing the engineers of future I-49 will have to, er, seriously consider.

Wow.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on June 01, 2013, 09:48:28 AM
This article says the there was a 24 foot flash flood that hit the Fourche la Favre river on Thursday and "temporarily swamped" the Highway 71 bridge. (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/A/AP_US_SEVERE_WEATHER?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2013-05-31-21-22-15)  I guess that's one thing the engineers of future I-49 will have to, er, seriously consider.

Wow.

One would think that is obvious, but given Arkansas it might not be.

Fortunately, the bridge appears to be undamaged.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: codyg1985 on June 03, 2013, 08:51:40 AM
This article says the there was a 24 foot flash flood that hit the Fourche la Favre river on Thursday and "temporarily swamped" the Highway 71 bridge. (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/A/AP_US_SEVERE_WEATHER?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2013-05-31-21-22-15)  I guess that's one thing the engineers of future I-49 will have to, er, seriously consider.

Wow.

One would think that is obvious, but given Arkansas it might not be.

Fortunately, the bridge appears to be undamaged.

I hope they are putting the elevations of these bridges to withstand a 100-year flood event. I thinkhope that is standard practice.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on June 07, 2013, 02:35:23 PM
I thought there was to be a decision made for Arkansas regarding redesignating Interstate 540 north from I-40 as I-49. Did not see that covered in the notes document.
Was it postponed for a future meeting?
I received an early August email from AHTD (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3324.msg166650#msg166650) to that effect.  I was surprised that it was not included in the notes document. I will follow up with AHTD.
(above quote from AASHTO Committee on Route Numbering (Nov. 2012) Actions (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=8157.msg187410#msg187410) thread)
I recently received a response from AHTD and, surprisingly, the reason lies with the presence of US 49

I recently indirectly asked FHWA about the I-49/US 49 situation, and (I have asked for clarification about where "I-49" was written into law) I was surprised to find out that FHWA's position appears to be that Congressional action mandates the use of "I-49" in the I-49 corridor.

First, my question:

Quote
I was just looking at the Interstates FAQ page and read the answer to the question of why there is no Interstate 50.  I can think of several exceptions to this rule, including an I-74/US 74 overlap in North Carolina and a future interchange between I-69 and US 69 in Texas.  What factors does FHWA consider in granting an exception to the rule?  In particular, I am thinking about the possibility of I-49 and US 49 in Arkansas.  It seems like an exception to the rule would make a lot of sense in the Arkansas scenario.

The FHWA answer (with my emphasis):

Quote
Thank you for your inquiry on FHWA’s Interstate numbering policies.  FHWA generally bases our review of proposed Interstate numbering requests on the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials’ (AASHTO) numbering policies in their Transportation Policy Book.  Most Interstate numbering requests are consistent with these policies, but these policies are neither law nor regulation.  We are not required to adhere to them in exercising our authority over Interstate numbering. 
You mentioned several exceptions to the policy, “that a State should not have an Interstate route and US route with the same number” .  In each case, Congress chose the number ( I-74, I-69 and I-49 ) and wrote it into law. These statutory numbering designations supersede the authority of FHWA, which is required to implement Federal law, and also AASHTO, a voluntary association with no enforcement authority.  If a State requests a designation using the congressionally set number, FHWA is required by law to approve that request even if it is inconsistent with AASHTO’s numbering policies used for the remainder of the System.  In fact, if a State requested a number that differs from the number in the statute, FHWA would turn it down.
Because the Interstate and U.S. numbering plans are mirror images of each other, the central States could be faced with requesting an Interstate number that coincides with a US route designation.  In those rare cases, FHWA and AASHTO have been committed to working with the requesting States to ensure the numbering adequately meets their needs and the integrity of the Interstate System.  Through this process, both organizations are able to work with States on developing an Interstate System that is representative of the States’ and country’s needs.
One additional point is that few motorists are aware of AASHTO’s Interstate numbering plan or that the numbers follow a pattern.  In general, motorists are not confused when numbering inconsistencies occur as they navigate around the country not by the numbering plan but by maps, directions, GPS, the guide signs on the highways, or other means.  Thank you for your inquiry and continued interest in the Interstate System.

The first question in my mind (assuming no error in FHWA's answer) is where is the "I-49" designation written into law? At first glance, in looking at the FHWA Statutory Listing of Corridor Descriptions (http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/national_highway_system/high_priority_corridors/hpcor.cfm) page, High Priority Corridor 72 is described as follows:

Quote
72.The North-South corridor, along Interstate Route 49 North, from Kansas City, Missouri, to Shreveport, Louisiana.

If this is indeed a Congressional mandate, then FHWA (and AASHTO) would be powerless to deny an AHTD I-49 numbering request (FHWA approval would still be needed as to whether a certain section meets current interstate-grade standards).



I just thought of a reason why this has come up, and it isn't an AASHTO problem, but an Arkansas problem. I think internally Arkansas only refers to the route number and makes no distinction between whether it is a Interstate, US, or State Route. With that said, I don't see why they can't just put up I-49 signs but still refer to it internally as 549 until they can come up with a different system internally for referring to state routes.
Someone correct me if I am wrong, but I don't think there are any state and US routes in Arkansas that have the same number.

I suspect Cody may be right and that this is purely an internal AHTD thing.

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: agentsteel53 on June 07, 2013, 02:44:40 PM
in this case, 49 is not a bad number - especially since US-49 is on the other side of the state, and thus the potential for confusion is fairly minimal.  (see also: I-24/US-24 in Illinois.  I believe AASHO hand-waved that one as "far enough apart; it's fine".)

that said: there goes Congress meddling in things it does not understand.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on June 07, 2013, 05:31:56 PM
... at the FHWA Statutory Listing of Corridor Descriptions (http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/national_highway_system/high_priority_corridors/hpcor.cfm) page, High Priority Corridor 72 is described as follows:
Quote
72.The North-South corridor, along Interstate Route 49 North, from Kansas City, Missouri, to Shreveport, Louisiana.
in this case, 49 is not a bad number

Do you not have a lurking fear that Congress has designated "I-49N" shields for Arkansas?  :bigass:



that said: there goes Congress meddling in things it does not understand.

Agreed.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on June 11, 2013, 11:14:14 AM
I emailed AHTD and asked if MAP-21 might encourage them to reapply to AASHTO for I-49 designations. The response:
Quote
We are completing an application to have I-540 (I-40 to Missouri State Line ) redesignated as I-49 and plan to submit to AASHTO for consideration at the fall meeting.
I thought there was to be a decision made for Arkansas regarding redesignating Interstate 540 north from I-40 as I-49. Did not see that covered in the notes document.
Was it postponed for a future meeting?
I received an early August email from AHTD (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3324.msg166650#msg166650) to that effect.  I was surprised that it was not included in the notes document. I will follow up with AHTD.
(above quote from AASHTO Committee on Route Numbering (Nov. 2012) Actions (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=8157.msg187410#msg187410) thread)
I recently received a response from AHTD and, surprisingly, the reason lies with the presence of US 49
I recently indirectly asked FHWA about the I-49/US 49 situation, and (I have asked for clarification about where "I-49" was written into law) I was surprised to find out that FHWA's position appears to be that Congressional action mandates the use of "I-49" in the I-49 corridor .... If this is indeed a Congressional mandate, then FHWA (and AASHTO) would be powerless to deny an AHTD I-49 numbering request (FHWA approval would still be needed as to whether a certain section meets current interstate-grade standards).

After having I-49 North (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3324.msg128594#msg128594) and I-49 South (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3321.msg128609#msg128609) designation applications denied in 2007, and the 2012 decision to not submit designation applications because of the apparent US 49 problem, it now appears that AHTD will try again at the October, 2013 AASHTO meeting. I emailed AHTD and asked them if they had considered that the language designating High Priority Corridor 72 would make FHWA and AASHTO powerless to deny an I-49 numbering request (assuming respective segments are interstate-grade). The reply:

Quote
Our planning division tells me that they are submitting again this fall and that they are using the same justification that you mention.

I do not know if they will try for both I-540 north of Alma and AR 549 in SW Arkansas; I will wait to be surprised.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Henry on June 11, 2013, 11:39:05 AM
I emailed AHTD and asked if MAP-21 might encourage them to reapply to AASHTO for I-49 designations. The response:
Quote
We are completing an application to have I-540 (I-40 to Missouri State Line ) redesignated as I-49 and plan to submit to AASHTO for consideration at the fall meeting.
I thought there was to be a decision made for Arkansas regarding redesignating Interstate 540 north from I-40 as I-49. Did not see that covered in the notes document.
Was it postponed for a future meeting?
I received an early August email from AHTD (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3324.msg166650#msg166650) to that effect.  I was surprised that it was not included in the notes document. I will follow up with AHTD.
(above quote from AASHTO Committee on Route Numbering (Nov. 2012) Actions (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=8157.msg187410#msg187410) thread)
I recently received a response from AHTD and, surprisingly, the reason lies with the presence of US 49
I recently indirectly asked FHWA about the I-49/US 49 situation, and (I have asked for clarification about where "I-49" was written into law) I was surprised to find out that FHWA's position appears to be that Congressional action mandates the use of "I-49" in the I-49 corridor .... If this is indeed a Congressional mandate, then FHWA (and AASHTO) would be powerless to deny an AHTD I-49 numbering request (FHWA approval would still be needed as to whether a certain section meets current interstate-grade standards).

After having I-49 North (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3324.msg128594#msg128594) and I-49 South (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3321.msg128609#msg128609) designation applications denied in 2007, and the 2012 decision to not submit designation applications because of the apparent US 49 problem, it now appears that AHTD will try again at the October, 2013 AASHTO meeting. I emailed AHTD and asked them if they had considered that the language designating High Priority Corridor 72 would make FHWA and AASHTO powerless to deny an I-49 numbering request (assuming respective segments are interstate-grade). The reply:

Quote
Our planning division tells me that they are submitting again this fall and that they are using the same justification that you mention.

I do not know if they will try for both I-540 north of Alma and AR 549 in SW Arkansas; I will wait to be surprised.
There's still the chance that they will be denied again, as the part in the middle still needs to be constructed; hopefully we'll see at least AR 549 converted into I-49 once the Shreveport link is completed.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: codyg1985 on June 11, 2013, 11:42:03 AM
With I-49 in MO being signed, I don't see now why I-540 couldn't be signed as I-49 now. It connects to I-40, and, even if it didn't, with the new rules on designating new interstates (like with I-69 in the Brownsville area), I don't see a problem with it being designated as I-49 anyway.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on June 11, 2013, 02:06:13 PM
I emailed AHTD and asked if MAP-21 might encourage them to reapply to AASHTO for I-49 designations. The response:
Quote
We are completing an application to have I-540 (I-40 to Missouri State Line ) redesignated as I-49 and plan to submit to AASHTO for consideration at the fall meeting.
I thought there was to be a decision made for Arkansas regarding redesignating Interstate 540 north from I-40 as I-49. Did not see that covered in the notes document.
Was it postponed for a future meeting?
I received an early August email from AHTD (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3324.msg166650#msg166650) to that effect.  I was surprised that it was not included in the notes document. I will follow up with AHTD.
(above quote from AASHTO Committee on Route Numbering (Nov. 2012) Actions (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=8157.msg187410#msg187410) thread)
I recently received a response from AHTD and, surprisingly, the reason lies with the presence of US 49
I recently indirectly asked FHWA about the I-49/US 49 situation, and (I have asked for clarification about where "I-49" was written into law) I was surprised to find out that FHWA's position appears to be that Congressional action mandates the use of "I-49" in the I-49 corridor .... If this is indeed a Congressional mandate, then FHWA (and AASHTO) would be powerless to deny an AHTD I-49 numbering request (FHWA approval would still be needed as to whether a certain section meets current interstate-grade standards).

After having I-49 North (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3324.msg128594#msg128594) and I-49 South (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3321.msg128609#msg128609) designation applications denied in 2007, and the 2012 decision to not submit designation applications because of the apparent US 49 problem, it now appears that AHTD will try again at the October, 2013 AASHTO meeting. I emailed AHTD and asked them if they had considered that the language designating High Priority Corridor 72 would make FHWA and AASHTO powerless to deny an I-49 numbering request (assuming respective segments are interstate-grade). The reply:

Quote
Our planning division tells me that they are submitting again this fall and that they are using the same justification that you mention.

I do not know if they will try for both I-540 north of Alma and AR 549 in SW Arkansas; I will wait to be surprised.
There's still the chance that they will be denied again, as the part in the middle still needs to be constructed; hopefully we'll see at least AR 549 converted into I-49 once the Shreveport link is completed.

Henry, with that logic (not bad logic at that) I-540 has just as much of a shot given that A) I-49 now is actually as far south as the official Northwest Arkansas metropolitan statistical area (south of Pineville, MO in McDonald County) and; B) like with Texarkana, there are only a few more miles left to be built to link the "orphan" section with the current I-49 and those connecting miles are in the process of being built out, albeit with not as much ground plowed yet on the north side.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Henry on June 12, 2013, 11:12:40 AM
I emailed AHTD and asked if MAP-21 might encourage them to reapply to AASHTO for I-49 designations. The response:
Quote
We are completing an application to have I-540 (I-40 to Missouri State Line ) redesignated as I-49 and plan to submit to AASHTO for consideration at the fall meeting.
I thought there was to be a decision made for Arkansas regarding redesignating Interstate 540 north from I-40 as I-49. Did not see that covered in the notes document.
Was it postponed for a future meeting?
I received an early August email from AHTD (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3324.msg166650#msg166650) to that effect.  I was surprised that it was not included in the notes document. I will follow up with AHTD.
(above quote from AASHTO Committee on Route Numbering (Nov. 2012) Actions (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=8157.msg187410#msg187410) thread)
I recently received a response from AHTD and, surprisingly, the reason lies with the presence of US 49
I recently indirectly asked FHWA about the I-49/US 49 situation, and (I have asked for clarification about where "I-49" was written into law) I was surprised to find out that FHWA's position appears to be that Congressional action mandates the use of "I-49" in the I-49 corridor .... If this is indeed a Congressional mandate, then FHWA (and AASHTO) would be powerless to deny an AHTD I-49 numbering request (FHWA approval would still be needed as to whether a certain section meets current interstate-grade standards).

After having I-49 North (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3324.msg128594#msg128594) and I-49 South (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3321.msg128609#msg128609) designation applications denied in 2007, and the 2012 decision to not submit designation applications because of the apparent US 49 problem, it now appears that AHTD will try again at the October, 2013 AASHTO meeting. I emailed AHTD and asked them if they had considered that the language designating High Priority Corridor 72 would make FHWA and AASHTO powerless to deny an I-49 numbering request (assuming respective segments are interstate-grade). The reply:

Quote
Our planning division tells me that they are submitting again this fall and that they are using the same justification that you mention.

I do not know if they will try for both I-540 north of Alma and AR 549 in SW Arkansas; I will wait to be surprised.
There's still the chance that they will be denied again, as the part in the middle still needs to be constructed; hopefully we'll see at least AR 549 converted into I-49 once the Shreveport link is completed.

Henry, with that logic (not bad logic at that) I-540 has just as much of a shot given that A) I-49 now is actually as far south as the official Northwest Arkansas metropolitan statistical area (south of Pineville, MO in McDonald County) and; B) like with Texarkana, there are only a few more miles left to be built to link the "orphan" section with the current I-49 and those connecting miles are in the process of being built out, albeit with not as much ground plowed yet on the north side.
Which is precisely why I would expect I-540 to be dually signed with Future I-49 shields until the Bella Vista gap is fully closed.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on June 18, 2013, 08:42:59 PM
As previously posted in the Improving I-540 at Fort Smith thread (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=8430.msg196166#msg196166), AHTD apparently intends to dually designate I-49 with I-540 instead of redesignating I-540 as I-49.
I recently indirectly asked FHWA about the I-49/US 49 situation, and (I have asked for clarification about where "I-49" was written into law) I was surprised to find out that FHWA's position appears to be that Congressional action mandates the use of "I-49" in the I-49 corridor.

I received a clarification from FHWA today and it looks like FHWA will not resist an AHTD I-49 numbering request and that FHWA is further ordering AASHTO to stand down because of HPC 72:

Quote
Thank you for your follow-up questions and correspondence.  Please note, I am also copying Marty Vitale with AASHTO, for their records and information.  As far as the designation of the Arkansas segments of the North-South Corridor as I-49, FHWA is required by law to approve future Intestate route designation request once: the segment meets Interstate Standard;  connects or plans to connect to the existing System, by October 1, 2037.  Once those two requirements are met the designation request must be initiated by the State.
High Priority Corridor (HPC) #1 is identified as a future Intestate route in Section 1105 of ISTEA, as amended. HPC #1 is described as the North-South Corridor from Kansas City, Mo to Shreveport, LA.  HPC # 72 also described as the North-South Corridor between Kansas City, MO and Shreveport, LA.  HPC #72 reads, “The North-South corridor, along Interstate 49 North, from Kansas City, Missouri, to Shreveport, Louisiana” .  HPC # 72 was added to Section 1105 of ISTEA, as amended by Section 1304 of SAFETEA-LU.  This amendment, establishes the numbering for the North-South Corridor between Kansas City and Shreveport.

All AHTD has to do now is ask ..............
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on June 20, 2013, 03:01:58 PM
I see where M0DOT has moved up there STIP for the Bella Vista Bypass to Start in the Fall of 2014. Job # 7PO601 has construction money to start there part. So Arkansas has made them feel they will work on the 2 lanes early in the 1/2 cent sales tax construction.
AHTD has released the 2013 Arkansas Highway map (http://www.arkansashighways.com/planning_research/mapping_graphics/2013%20AR%20State%20Highway%20Map%20-%20State%20Side.pdf) and the 2013 map does not have the projected route through Texas
(above quote from Texarkana (Future I-49, I-69 Spur) (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3321.msg228335#msg228335) thread)

Although the projected route of Future I-49 through Texas has disappeared on the 2013 map, the projected route of Missouri's section of the Bella Vista Bypass has appeared on the 2013 map (the 2012 map (http://www.arkansashighways.com/planning_research/mapping_graphics/State_Highway_Map_State_Side_2012.PDF) only has the projected route of the Arkansas section of the Bella Vista Bypass):

(http://i.imgur.com/Tb8MeVq.png)

Maybe this is another hint that the Bella Vista Bypass will be an early project in the sales tax program.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on June 20, 2013, 10:35:01 PM
FWIW, by that map above the first layer of pavement has been laid (though probably not in all lanes) from the east 72 bridge over this new highway to the west 72 bridge over future I-49, a distance of around 2-3 miles.  They're grading on the north side of the west 72 crossing, but also building a bridge over it and won't be able to link the two segments until the bridge is complete and they can reroute traffic from the old section of the highway over it.

Weird thing's already happened.  Right before that west crossing, a new subdivision has popped up, largely made up of homes that were moved from other locations.  The subdivision was started in the mid-2000s but was abandoned with only one house built.  Now with one-two other new builds plus the "move-ins", there are at least six.  Gonna be interesting to see what happens with the town formerly known as "Hiwasse", where the aforementioned (total of three) crossings are.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on June 20, 2013, 10:47:40 PM
FWIW, by that map above the first layer of pavement has been laid (though probably not in all lanes) from the east 72 bridge over this new highway to the west 72 bridge over future I-49, a distance of around 2-3 miles.  They're grading on the north side of the west 72 crossing, but also building a bridge over it and won't be able to link the two segments until the bridge is complete and they can reroute traffic from the old section of the highway over it.

Weird thing's already happened.  Right before that west crossing, a new subdivision has popped up, largely made up of homes that were moved from other locations.  The subdivision was started in the mid-2000s but was abandoned with only one house built.  Now with one-two other new builds plus the "move-ins", there are at least six.  Gonna be interesting to see what happens with the town formerly known as "Hiwasse", where the aforementioned (total of three) crossings are.

I think there are only 2 interchanges: 72East and 72West. IIRC, AR 279 is only a grade separation.  I need to get back up there and investigate it further.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on June 20, 2013, 11:38:12 PM
Grzrd,

I can't get onto the arkansashighways.com site...what does the Fort Smith map look like?  (Gotta be frank, I'm astounded how much FSM people and/or investors are betting on I-49 there with all the construction in the Barling area.  There is building going on EVERYWHERE west of the future I-49 right-of-way.)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on June 20, 2013, 11:54:19 PM
Grzrd,

I can't get onto the arkansashighways.com site...what does the Fort Smith map look like?  (Gotta be frank, I'm astounded how much FSM people and/or investors are betting on I-49 there with all the construction in the Barling area.  There is building going on EVERYWHERE west of the future I-49 right-of-way.)

Future 49 doesn't show on the Ft Smith inset at all.

The land is relatively cheap in Barling considering it's mostly Ft Chaffee property. There's a new fire station going up on Massard Rd near I-49, plus a museum going up next to the nature center. AHTD just moved their shop out that way and there is talk of a third High School for Ft Smith in the area, as well.  There's also a Mitsubishi wind turbine plant built with major tax incentives that never opened. There are several other businesses promising to build, but I don't remember who they are, off-hand.

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Henry on June 21, 2013, 10:32:20 AM
Grzrd,

I can't get onto the arkansashighways.com site...what does the Fort Smith map look like?  (Gotta be frank, I'm astounded how much FSM people and/or investors are betting on I-49 there with all the construction in the Barling area.  There is building going on EVERYWHERE west of the future I-49 right-of-way.)

Future 49 doesn't show on the Ft Smith inset at all.

The land is relatively cheap in Barling considering it's mostly Ft Chaffee property. There's a new fire station going up on Massard Rd near I-49, plus a museum going up next to the nature center. AHTD just moved their shop out that way and there is talk of a third High School for Ft Smith in the area, as well.  There's also a Mitsubishi wind turbine plant built with major tax incentives that never opened. There are several other businesses promising to build, but I don't remember who they are, off-hand.


In other words, I-540 south of I-40 will remain just that, as I-49 is being built further east.

It's no surprise that the old Fort Chaffee is being redeveloped into a mixed-use area, especially in anticipation of the new highway coming through it.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on June 21, 2013, 10:50:09 AM
Grzrd,

I can't get onto the arkansashighways.com site...what does the Fort Smith map look like?  (Gotta be frank, I'm astounded how much FSM people and/or investors are betting on I-49 there with all the construction in the Barling area.  There is building going on EVERYWHERE west of the future I-49 right-of-way.)

Future 49 doesn't show on the Ft Smith inset at all.

The land is relatively cheap in Barling considering it's mostly Ft Chaffee property. There's a new fire station going up on Massard Rd near I-49, plus a museum going up next to the nature center. AHTD just moved their shop out that way and there is talk of a third High School for Ft Smith in the area, as well.  There's also a Mitsubishi wind turbine plant built with major tax incentives that never opened. There are several other businesses promising to build, but I don't remember who they are, off-hand.


In other words, I-540 south of I-40 will remain just that, as I-49 is being built further east.


Yes, though there is a proposed spur off 540 (in the vicinity of Greenwood Rd/AR 45) that will eventually connect to I-49
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: RoadSigma on June 21, 2013, 01:22:47 PM
I will be so glad when Arkansas builds thier part of I-49...so much faster access to eastern texas and especially New Orleans from up here in Kansas City.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on June 21, 2013, 02:08:25 PM
I see where M0DOT has moved up there STIP for the Bella Vista Bypass to Start in the Fall of 2014. Job # 7PO601 has construction money to start there part. So Arkansas has made them feel they will work on the 2 lanes early in the 1/2 cent sales tax construction.
This article (http://www.theconstructionindex.co.uk/news/view/atkins-wins-us-transport-contracts) reports that, instead of Garver, Atkins, in partnership with Brown & Gay Engineers and Fugro Consultants, has been selected to provide on-call construction services for AHTD:
Quote
The contract specifically calls for Atkins to support a new programme that will use a temporary sales tax to fund a US$1.8bn, ten-year project to build and improve four-lane highways throughout the state.
Now the wait begins to see which project will be first .....
(bottom quote from Arkansas (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=6952.msg228305#msg228305) thread)

It's still unofficial, but I just received an AHTD email indicating that the Bella Vista Bypass project is first in line and that there may be a kickoff event for it in late 2013/early 2014:

Quote
The schedule has not been finalized, but unofficially it looks like that the Bella Vista job would be the first one and it could happened before the end of the year even though 2014 is more likely. We have some tentative plans to host a kickoff event and that one seems to be the most likely one.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on June 21, 2013, 10:37:40 PM
the Future I-49 corridor is east of this section of I-540. A map on page 23/36 of the Executive Summary of the US 71 Relocation From Dequeen to I-40 Final Environmental Impact Statement pdf (http://www.aaroads.com/forum_images/southeast/001747_FEIS_Executive_Summary.pdf) shows the location of this section of I-540 relative to the proposed route of Future I-49.  If I interpret the map correctly, it looks like the long-range plan is to build a "spur" from the southern section of I-540 to connect with Future I-49 just south of the current US 71 (which, along with I-40, would create a possible I-x49 loop)
(above quote from Improving I-540 at Fort Smith (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=8430.msg195657#msg195657) thread)
there is a proposed spur off 540 (in the vicinity of Greenwood Rd/AR 45) that will eventually connect to I-49

Here's the map of the proposed I-540 "southern spur" referenced above that would connect to I-49:

(http://i.imgur.com/6I42K0a.jpg)

edit

Gotta be frank, I'm astounded how much FSM people and/or investors are betting on I-49 there with all the construction in the Barling area.  There is building going on EVERYWHERE west of the future I-49 right-of-way.

Given that the FEIS is now approximately 16 years old, has there been enough development along the proposed I-540 "southern spur" corridor to now make it prohibitively expensive?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: rte66man on June 22, 2013, 09:59:21 AM
FWIW, by that map above the first layer of pavement has been laid (though probably not in all lanes) from the east 72 bridge over this new highway to the west 72 bridge over future I-49, a distance of around 2-3 miles.  They're grading on the north side of the west 72 crossing, but also building a bridge over it and won't be able to link the two segments until the bridge is complete and they can reroute traffic from the old section of the highway over it.

Weird thing's already happened.  Right before that west crossing, a new subdivision has popped up, largely made up of homes that were moved from other locations.  The subdivision was started in the mid-2000s but was abandoned with only one house built.  Now with one-two other new builds plus the "move-ins", there are at least six.  Gonna be interesting to see what happens with the town formerly known as "Hiwasse", where the aforementioned (total of three) crossings are.

I think there are only 2 interchanges: 72East and 72West. IIRC, AR 279 is only a grade separation.  I need to get back up there and investigate it further.

You are correct, there aren't any on/off ramps at AR279.  I was there in March:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rte66man/8593255773/

rte66man
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on June 27, 2013, 01:48:14 PM
It's still unofficial, but I just received an AHTD email indicating that the Bella Vista Bypass project is first in line and that there may be a kickoff event for it in late 2013/early 2014

This article (http://www.thecitywire.com/node/28415#.Ucx4mr7D-M8) reports that "shortly after July 4" the order of projects should be known and that "it's assumed" that the Bella Vista Bypass will be the first project:

Quote
Shortly after July 4, the Arkansas Highway and Transportation Department should know the order of projects that will be completed with the half-cent sales tax that will start being collected July 1 with money to start flowing in August, said Danny Straessle, assistant public information officer with ASHTD. While not confirmed for a few more weeks, it’s assumed that the Bella Vista Bypass will probably be the first project.
“The purpose of this project is safe and efficient movement of traffic from the Missouri state line to I-540 south of Bella Vista,”  he said. “Volume has necessitated this work as the current route on U.S. Highway 71 is loaded with traffic and is not conducive to free-flow movement like an Interstate-type facility would be.”
Another major Northwest Arkansas development will be later in July, he said. The July 24 bid letting with the Arkansas Highway Commission will award a contract to widen Interstate 540 from Highway 16 to Porter Road to three lanes at an estimated cost of $9 million.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on June 27, 2013, 06:30:38 PM
Another major Northwest Arkansas development will be later in July, he said. The July 24 bid letting with the Arkansas Highway Commission will award a contract to widen Interstate 540 from Highway 16 to Porter Road to three lanes at an estimated cost of $9 million.

That's approx 1 more mile. I'm sure they will tear out the new cable barriers and put in a Jersey Barrier like they did between Hwy 16 and US 62.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on June 30, 2013, 01:10:52 AM
One last question, since I'm a "non-highway" person.

Can someone tell me if (as I believe I saw today) "Rocky Dell Hollow" is going to be a future ramp off future I-49?  I saw grading work done to this road with what appeared to be an exit ramp grade.  That's going to be fascinating...that road goes, like the neck of a tuning fork, straight into a curve from where the two main roads of west Bella Vista (Glasgow Road to the north, Highlands Road to the south) split.  Heretofore, U.S. 71 has bisected Bella Vista, and west BV has been essentially closed off, accessible only by dirt roads from the west.  Now, this is going to open up that side of town.

Gonna be fascinating to see what they do there at that exit, if indeed it is one.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: NE2 on June 30, 2013, 01:30:03 AM
Looks like there will be an interchange at or near Rocky Dell Hollow: http://bellavistaarkansas.org/bella-vista-bypass.html
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on June 30, 2013, 09:45:41 AM
Can someone tell me if (as I believe I saw today) "Rocky Dell Hollow" is going to be a future ramp off future I-49?  I saw grading work done to this road with what appeared to be an exit ramp grade.  That's going to be fascinating...that road goes, like the neck of a tuning fork, straight into a curve from where the two main roads of west Bella Vista (Glasgow Road to the north, Highlands Road to the south) split.

Looking at the June 2007 Design Reassessment (http://www.arkansashighways.com/BVB/Reassessment_june07.pdf), it's possible that you are looking at grading for a frontage road that will maintain property access for a relocated farm (page 10/91 of pdf):

(http://i.imgur.com/DLkC5bG.jpg)

The changes to this interchange are summarized on page 12/91 of the pdf:

Quote
The County Road 34 (Ferrell Road) interchange was enlarged to meet current design standards, County Road 34 was realigned west of the interchange to reconnect the local road network, and a frontage road was added to maintain property access.



I think there are only 2 interchanges: 72East and 72West. IIRC, AR 279 is only a grade separation.

A map on page 8/91 of the above Design Reassessment pdf confirms that there is no interchange at AR 279, but it is interesting to note that the 1998 plans had included an interchange at AR 279:

(http://i.imgur.com/H6OejTR.jpg)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on June 30, 2013, 12:46:39 PM
Can someone tell me if (as I believe I saw today) "Rocky Dell Hollow" is going to be a future ramp off future I-49?  I saw grading work done to this road with what appeared to be an exit ramp grade.  That's going to be fascinating...that road goes, like the neck of a tuning fork, straight into a curve from where the two main roads of west Bella Vista (Glasgow Road to the north, Highlands Road to the south) split.

Looking at the June 2007 Design Reassessment (http://www.arkansashighways.com/BVB/Reassessment_june07.pdf), it's possible that you are looking at grading for a frontage road that will maintain property access for a relocated farm (page 10/91 of pdf):

(http://i.imgur.com/DLkC5bG.jpg)

The changes to this interchange are summarized on page 12/91 of the pdf:

Quote
The County Road 34 (Ferrell Road) interchange was enlarged to meet current design standards, County Road 34 was realigned west of the interchange to reconnect the local road network, and a frontage road was added to maintain property access.



I think there are only 2 interchanges: 72East and 72West. IIRC, AR 279 is only a grade separation.

A map on page 8/91 of the above Design Reassessment pdf confirms that there is no interchange at AR 279, but it is interesting to note that the 1998 plans had included an interchange at AR 279:

(http://i.imgur.com/H6OejTR.jpg)

Grzrd, from your top photo that's exactly what this appears to be.  The proposed toll booths are very near where I saw the road off the main (future) interstate.  I was at (maybe the only remaining Northwest Arkansas supermarket not named "Walmart" or "Harps") Bella Vista's Allen Foods today, where they have a huge map of BV on the wall of the store entry way.  Right through where this future interstate runs is a huge, far and away the largest undeveloped BV-owned bloc of land on the west side of town which says "reserved for future development".  Boy, is it going to.  Bella Vista is the ONLY one of Northwest Arkansas' big six cities (BV, Bentonville, Rogers, Springdale, Fayetteville, Siloam Springs) that has absolutely no non-dirt-road access on one side of town.

That's going to change, drastically.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Desert Man on June 30, 2013, 01:35:01 PM
As previously posted in the Improving I-540 at Fort Smith thread (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=8430.msg196166#msg196166), AHTD apparently intends to dually designate I-49 with I-540 instead of redesignating I-540 as I-49.
I recently indirectly asked FHWA about the I-49/US 49 situation, and (I have asked for clarification about where "I-49" was written into law) I was surprised to find out that FHWA's position appears to be that Congressional action mandates the use of "I-49" in the I-49 corridor.

I received a clarification from FHWA today and it looks like FHWA will not resist an AHTD I-49 numbering request and that FHWA is further ordering AASHTO to stand down because of HPC 72:

Quote
Thank you for your follow-up questions and correspondence.  Please note, I am also copying Marty Vitale with AASHTO, for their records and information.  As far as the designation of the Arkansas segments of the North-South Corridor as I-49, FHWA is required by law to approve future Intestate route designation request once: the segment meets Interstate Standard;  connects or plans to connect to the existing System, by October 1, 2037.  Once those two requirements are met the designation request must be initiated by the State.
High Priority Corridor (HPC) #1 is identified as a future Intestate route in Section 1105 of ISTEA, as amended. HPC #1 is described as the North-South Corridor from Kansas City, Mo to Shreveport, LA.  HPC # 72 also described as the North-South Corridor between Kansas City, MO and Shreveport, LA.  HPC #72 reads, "The North-South corridor, along Interstate 49 North, from Kansas City, Missouri, to Shreveport, Louisiana”.  HPC # 72 was added to Section 1105 of ISTEA, as amended by Section 1304 of SAFETEA-LU.  This amendment, establishes the numbering for the North-South Corridor between Kansas City and Shreveport.

All AHTD has to do now is ask ..............

Redesignation of I-540 to "49" makes more sense, less confusing to the drivers using the route and transportation officials in charge of the project. The I-540 is an extension of the 49 - same route - however to change the number will confuse long-time residents at first used to the "540". Actually, I-49 ends in Kansas City, MO where another north-south freeway: the I-29 also ends. 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on June 30, 2013, 03:54:03 PM
I think there are only 2 interchanges: 72East and 72West. IIRC, AR 279 is only a grade separation.
the June 2007 Design Reassessment (http://www.arkansashighways.com/BVB/Reassessment_june07.pdf) .... A map on page 8/91 of the above Design Reassessment pdf confirms that there is no interchange at AR 279, but it is interesting to note that the 1998 plans had included an interchange at AR 279:
(http://i.imgur.com/H6OejTR.jpg)

The November 2007 Design Reassessment (http://www.arkansashighways.com/BVB/Reassessment_nov07.pdf), not to be confused with the earlier June 2007 Design Reassessment, discusses the proposed AR 279 interchange and the solution that has been developed (page 2/16 of pdf):

(http://i.imgur.com/X9vUQUg.jpg)

Figure 2 (page 4/16 of pdf):

(http://i.imgur.com/e0XUPIJ.jpg)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on June 30, 2013, 04:22:09 PM

Redesignation of I-540 to "49" makes more sense, less confusing to the drivers using the route and transportation officials in charge of the project. The I-540 is an extension of the 49 - same route - however to change the number will confuse long-time residents at first used to the "540". Actually, I-49 ends in Kansas City, MO where another north-south freeway: the I-29 also ends. 

Maybe the road can be dually designated with "north" 540 eventually phased out (ala AR 471/US 71B).
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on June 30, 2013, 05:30:30 PM
There is a beautiful Arkansas Welcome Center on I-35 east of Texarkana.

Wouldn't be surprised to see one either at the future interchange on the map Grzrd posted above (of the interchange at west Bella Vista, AR) or to the north of it in the current woody hills at the state line.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: txstateends on June 30, 2013, 05:45:31 PM
There is a beautiful Arkansas Welcome Center on I-35 east of Texarkana.


I'm guessing you mean I-30.  Otherwise, that's one part of I-35 I've *never* been on :D
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: roadman65 on June 30, 2013, 06:37:59 PM
There is a beautiful Arkansas Welcome Center on I-35 east of Texarkana.

Wouldn't be surprised to see one either at the future interchange on the map Grzrd posted above (of the interchange at west Bella Vista, AR) or to the north of it in the current woody hills at the state line.
When I traveled US 71 from Northern Missouri to Shreveport in 01, there was a Welcome Center just south of the MO/ AR line.  I would imagine there would have to be one on the new interstate as well, unless Arkansas closed the one I visited as it has been know for states  to have been closing State Line Welcome Centers such as NJ for US 22 prior to I-78 being completed or PennDOT closing the I-95 SB one near Scudder's Falls Bridge.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on June 30, 2013, 08:32:21 PM
There is a beautiful Arkansas Welcome Center on I-35 east of Texarkana.


I'm guessing you mean I-30.  Otherwise, that's one part of I-35 I've *never* been on :D

It's less than 5 years old. Replaced an older one between Exits 1 and 2.  The one in Bella Vista is a bit older, but it replaced one at the state line.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on June 30, 2013, 09:50:56 PM
There is a beautiful Arkansas Welcome Center on I-35 east of Texarkana.


I'm guessing you mean I-30.  Otherwise, that's one part of I-35 I've *never* been on :D

It's less than 5 years old. Replaced an older one between Exits 1 and 2.  The one in Bella Vista is a bit older, but it replaced one at the state line.

I think the current one in Bella Vista is a LOT older.  And given all that's happening in northwest Arkansas (in less than a year, USA Today has run an article (two days ago, actually) called 'Mayberry' goes Manhattan (http://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/destinations/2013/06/27/bentonville-broadens-its-palette/2466567/) about Bentonville; the "Amazeum" plans have been announced (http://amazeum.org/), Bentonville and its dining scene made the Washington Post's "In/out list" (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/artsandliving/features/2012/year-in-review/the-list.html) (dumping the dining scene of Charleston, SC) and Southern Living asked if Bentonville is "the south's next cultural 'Mecca'?" (http://thedailysouth.southernliving.com/2012/10/06/is-bentonville-the-souths-next-cultural-mecca/)).

Off I-30 (thanks for the correction on my goof :-P ) near Texarkana Arkansas is wanting to put its best foot forward for Texas and Texas-bound visitors.  Gut feeling is that near that west Bella Vista interchange Grzrd put the map for above Arkansas will want to put its best foot forward also for northwest Arkansas and Fort Smith (got some things happening there as well even without considering Chaffee Crossing) (http://www.usmarshalsmuseum.com/).  They need to replace the (excuse me) dump that's on the west side of U.S. 71 in Bella Vista right now.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on June 30, 2013, 10:53:34 PM


I think the current one in Bella Vista is a LOT older.  And given all that's happening in northwest Arkansas (in less than a year, USA Today has run an article (two days ago, actually) called 'Mayberry' goes Manhattan (http://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/destinations/2013/06/27/bentonville-broadens-its-palette/2466567/) about Bentonville; the "Amazeum" plans have been announced (http://amazeum.org/), Bentonville and its dining scene made the Washington Post's "In/out list" (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/artsandliving/features/2012/year-in-review/the-list.html) (dumping the dining scene of Charleston, SC) and Southern Living asked if Bentonville is "the south's next cultural 'Mecca'?" (http://thedailysouth.southernliving.com/2012/10/06/is-bentonville-the-souths-next-cultural-mecca/)).

Off I-30 (thanks for the correction on my goof :-P ) near Texarkana Arkansas is wanting to put its best foot forward for Texas and Texas-bound visitors.  Gut feeling is that near that west Bella Vista interchange Grzrd put the map for above Arkansas will want to put its best foot forward also for northwest Arkansas and Fort Smith (got some things happening there as well even without considering Chaffee Crossing) (http://www.usmarshalsmuseum.com/).  They need to replace the (excuse me) dump that's on the west side of U.S. 71 in Bella Vista right now.

You should have seen the Hellhole it replaced  :thumbdown:.  I'm not in Bentonville enough to really tell how bit it's becomng (and I will never go to Alice's museum), but I know it's growing a lot to the west, esp along the road to XNA (about the only direction they can go).  It will be interesting to see what happens when the Arkansas Music Pavilion and Walton Arts Center move up that way.

The Marshall's Museum could be a big draw for Ft Smith: I know they're hoping with all the money they are spending on it. We now have signs at the city limits about being the easternmost town of the old west. I have mixed feelings about the museum, but am taking a wait and see attitude.


Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on July 01, 2013, 12:46:40 AM
Why two interchanges at AR 72 but none at AR 279? 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on July 01, 2013, 09:10:18 AM
Looks like there will be an interchange at or near Rocky Dell Hollow: http://bellavistaarkansas.org/bella-vista-bypass.html
The November 2007 Design Reassessment (http://www.arkansashighways.com/BVB/Reassessment_nov07.pdf) ... (page 4/16 of pdf) ....
(http://i.imgur.com/e0XUPIJ.jpg)
Why two interchanges at AR 72 but none at AR 279?

The map that NE2 linked shows the relationship of the three locations. In the 1998 concept design, each of the three locations had an interchange.  By the time 2006 rolled around, the 0.75 mile length from AR 279 to AR 72 East was deemed too close for two interchanges and the decision was made to choose either AR 279 or AR 72 East as an interchange location.  The primary argument for the AR 279 location was that it provided the most direct access to the Northwest Arkansas Regional Airport and that there were plans to upgrade it to four lanes.  The primary argument for the AR 72 East location was that AR 72 East had higher current and projected traffic volumes than AR 279.  The AR 72 East location was chosen because of the higher traffic volumes.

However, the frontage road was incuded in the design to shorten the travel time between AR 279 and AR 72 East.  Also, in anticipation of possible great increases in traffic volumes, the AR 72 East interchange and the frontage road have been designed so that an AR 279/ AR 72 East "split" interchange, with the frontage road being incorporated into a system of collector/ distributor roads, can be built.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on July 01, 2013, 10:59:27 AM

However, the frontage road was incuded in the design to shorten the travel time between AR 279 and AR 72 East.  Also, in anticipation of possible great increases in traffic volumes, the AR 72 East interchange and the frontage road have been designed so that an AR 279/ AR 72 East "split" interchange, with the frontage road being incorporated into a system of collector/ distributor roads, can be built.

Also came in handy as a 279 Detour last Summer ;)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on July 01, 2013, 03:23:39 PM
Is TO AR 279 going to be signed from I-49?  Are there going to be TO I-49 signs on the frontage road?  If not, this setup is a failure.  The 72 west interchange is totally unnecessary.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Lyon Wonder on July 11, 2013, 06:22:56 PM
Renumber US-49 in AR and MS to US-47 or even a 3-digit number.  Problem solved!!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on July 11, 2013, 06:37:00 PM
Renumber US-49 in AR and MS to US-47 or even a 3-digit number.  Problem solved!!

If one can get Mississippi to go along with that.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: NE2 on July 11, 2013, 08:12:01 PM
There's no problem except Arkansas's misinterpretation of AASHTO's anality.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: txstateends on July 11, 2013, 08:54:50 PM
There's no problem except Arkansas's misinterpretation of AASHTO's anality.

...but not alanity....
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on July 17, 2013, 12:01:50 PM
Looks like the bridge over Hwy. 72 West between Gravette and Hiwasse is near completion.  What's fascinating about this location is that there's a "berm" that's been built by moving earth for future I-49 north of here, which also blocks the view of construction to the north (toward that future west Bella Vista interchanges Grzrd had the map of earlier).  The berm is right next to the section of the current highway which will have to be demolished to make way for I-49 once the aforementioned bridge is finished.  Once that's done and the old highway/berm are removed drivers will have a clear view right and left of the future interstate.

BTW, Grzrd, I've made an e-mail inquiry into the Arkansas Visitor's Bureau to ask about any available information for plans for a future I-49/Bella Vista-NWA area Welcome Center.  It's inevitable there will be a new one with an Interstate...just "where", "manned/unmanned" and "how big".

Water lines are also being laid east of Gravette (which is west of the previously mentioned bridge) but I'm not sure if that's for expected development along the interchange or just for the nice houses (not as big a developments as near Bentonville, but nice homes nonetheless) being built along Hwy. 72 east of G-town.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on July 17, 2013, 12:11:30 PM
Looks like the bridge over Hwy. 72 West between Gravette and Hiwasse is near completion.  What's fascinating about this location is that there's a "berm" that's been built by moving earth for future I-49 north of here, which also blocks the view of construction to the north (toward that future west Bella Vista interchanges Grzrd had the map of earlier).  The berm is right next to the section of the current highway which will have to be demolished to make way for I-49 once the aforementioned bridge is finished.  Once that's done and the old highway/berm are removed drivers will have a clear view right and left of the future interstate.

BTW, Grzrd, I've made an e-mail inquiry into the Arkansas Visitor's Bureau to ask about any available information for plans for a future I-49/Bella Vista-NWA area Welcome Center.  It's inevitable there will be a new one with an Interstate...just "where", "manned/unmanned" and "how big".

Water lines are also being laid east of Gravette (which is west of the previously mentioned bridge) but I'm not sure if that's for expected development along the interchange or just for the nice houses (not as big a developments as near Bentonville, but nice homes nonetheless) being built along Hwy. 72 east of G-town.

You may wish to contact AHTD. I have a friend with the Dept of Tourism who says AHTD is responsible for the Info Centers.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on July 25, 2013, 09:39:46 AM
http://www.nwaonline.com/news/2013/jul/25/i-540-widening-tap/ (pay, but schedule published)

Quote

TIMELINE
The Projects

Bid schedules for the first six half-cent sales tax projects are:

- Bella Vista Bypass (I-540 interchange): Late 2013

- Bella Vista Bypass (U.S. 71 to Arkansas 72): Late 2013

- Bella Vista Bypass (Benton County 34 to Missouri line): Early 2014

- Springdale Northern Bypass (I-540 to Arkansas 112): Late 2014

- I-540 Widening (Southeast 14th Street to East Central Avenue): Early 2015

- I-540 Widening (Fulbright Expressway to Sunset Avenue): Mid-2015

Source: Arkansas Highway And Transportation Department

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on July 25, 2013, 10:03:30 AM
^ Great find and great news! Here's a free article:

http://www.thecitywire.com/node/28743#.UfEu4b7D-M8

Quote
The first six highway construction projects funded by the “Connecting Arkansas Program”  (CAP) are in Benton and Washington counties ....AHTD Spokesman Randy Ort said the six projects made the top of the list because “they were much further along in the process.”  .... Those projects aren’t the end of the line for Northwest Arkansas work. A bid on work for I-540 (Highway 264 and New Hope Road) should be let in mid 2015. A bid for U.S. 412 work between Highways 67 and 141, and work for I-540 (U.S. 412 and Wagon Wheel Road) is expected to be let in mid 2017.

edit

This PowerPoint presentation from the July 24, 2013 AHTD Commission Business Meeting (http://www.arkansashighways.com/PowerPoints/2013/072413_Commission%20Meeting%20Powerpoint.pdf) contains the entire CAP Schedule and here is a snip of the three Bella Vista Bypass projects (page 47/61 of pdf):

(http://i.imgur.com/lTS5eJL.png)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on July 25, 2013, 07:19:45 PM
Thanks, Grzrd.  If I'm reading this correctly, does this snip graphic you placed above mean they're working to have the BV bypass complete at year 2016's end on the Arkansas side?  (That seems reasonable...granted, Missouri has to have their section complete).
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on July 25, 2013, 09:24:35 PM
does this snip graphic you placed above mean they're working to have the BV bypass complete at year 2016's end on the Arkansas side?  (That seems reasonable...granted, Missouri has to have their section complete).

I don't see the BVB mentioned elsewhere on the Schedule, which leads me to believe that they intend to have grading and paving completed by the end of 2016.  If Missouri stays on schedule and lets their five-mile section in Fall 2014, then they would have two full construction seasons to finish their section by the end of 2016.  I agree that such a schedule seems reasonable.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on August 01, 2013, 10:55:59 PM
right now it's estimated that Northwest Arkansas/Fort Smith has a combined metro population, right now, of 784,000 people (http://www.urbanplanet.org/forums/index.php/topic/45620-population-trends-of-northwest-arkansas/page-4) .... In addition, in 30 years Northwest Arkansas alone is predicted (without Fort Smith) to have 1,000,000 people. (http://www.bizjournals.com/bizjournals/on-numbers/scott-thomas/2013/01/28-metros-have-a-shot-at-joining-the.html)
(above quote from Texarkana (Future I-49, I-69 Spur) (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3321.msg236619#msg236619) thread)
The November 2007 Design Reassessment (http://www.arkansashighways.com/BVB/Reassessment_nov07.pdf) ... (page 4/16 of pdf) ....
(http://i.imgur.com/e0XUPIJ.jpg)
By the time 2006 rolled around, the 0.75 mile length from AR 279 to AR 72 East was deemed too close for two interchanges and the decision was made to choose either AR 279 or AR 72 East as an interchange location ... The AR 72 East location was chosen because of the higher traffic volumes.

However, the frontage road was incuded in the design to shorten the travel time between AR 279 and AR 72 East.  Also, in anticipation of possible great increases in traffic volumes, the AR 72 East interchange and the frontage road have been designed so that an AR 279/ AR 72 East "split" interchange, with the frontage road being incorporated into a system of collector/ distributor roads, can be built.

I wonder whether the explosive growth in the area has exceeded expectations and AHTD may see a need to upgrade to an AR 279/ AR 72 East "split" interchange sooner rather than later, perhaps as part of the project to upgrade the BVB from two lanes to four lanes?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on August 04, 2013, 08:44:33 AM
From yesterday's Joplin (MO) Globe:

Quote

“The design of the highway is complete,”  he said. “The acquisition of property is complete. All we have been waiting on is the funding. It is basically ready to go.’’

Rob Smith, communications and policy specialist for the Northwest Arkansas Council, which supported the Connecting Arkansas Program, said, “The importance of the Bella Vista bypass project and the other two major highway projects in Northwest Arkansas that will occur because voters approved Issue No. 1 cannot be overstated.

“Research commissioned by the NAC and conducted by the Texas A&M Transportation Institute last year showed our two-county area of Northwest Arkansas loses $103 million annually due to traffic congestion,’’ he said in an email statement. “The researchers told us major projects, such as the Bella Vista bypass, will help reduce that figure.”

The council is a private, nonprofit organization that was founded in 1990 to work on issues, such as infrastructure, education, economic development and community vitality. The council has about 100 members.

Said Smith: “For Northwest Arkansas and for Southwest Missouri, there’s no highway project more important than the Bella Vista bypass.’’

http://www.joplinglobe.com/local/x1664877140/Arkansas-to-seek-bids-for-initial-two-lanes-of-Bella-Vista-bypass/?state=taberU


So I guess it's official.  :nod:
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on August 04, 2013, 11:07:14 AM
FY 2013 TIGER Grants
DOT is authorized to award $473.847 million in TIGER Discretionary Grants pursuant to the Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act, 2013 (Pub. L. 113-6, March 26, 2013).  This appropriation is similar, but not identical to the appropriation for the “TIGER”  program authorized and implemented pursuant to the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (the “Recovery Act” ). Because of the similarity in program structure, DOT will continue to refer to the program as ”˜”˜TIGER Discretionary Grants.’’ As with previous rounds of TIGER, funds for the FY 2013 TIGER program are to be awarded on a competitive basis for projects that will have a significant impact on the Nation, a metropolitan area or a region.

It looks to me that the Bella Vista Bypass would qualify for the other 2 lanes from Tiger 2013. I wonder if the AHTD put in an application.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on August 04, 2013, 02:09:04 PM
Good question, Gordon.

I also wonder if, despite it seeming all-but-quixotic and certainly non-considerable right now, the stretch of highway between Fort Smith and Texarkana will in a few years, quicker than we think, itself be called "the most important project in southwest Arkansas".  Or maybe Arkansas proper.

(http://i.imgur.com/JHFlRzp.jpg)

I'm reminded, for anyone who remembers it, of when the Larry Johnson/Stacy Augmon-led undefeated UNLV basketball team (fresh off a national championship season, going undefeated until a loss to Christian Laettner/Bobby Hurley-led Duke in the NCAA semis, with all five UNLV players making "all-American" and being called "the greatest team to never win a national championship") came to Arkansas (which itself only had one loss and had perhaps its most heralded recruiting class to date playing as seniors, who set the table for back-to-back national championship games a few years later, winning one of them).  At the time, UNLV was #1 in the polls, Arkansas #2.

Larry Johnson couldn't get into SMU academically in his hometown of Dallas, but he was smart enough in a pre-Arkansas game interview, when told that someone (Dick Vitale?) had predicted UNLV to lose, to respond: "Hey, he's pretty good.  He's usually right."  In reality, Dick Vitale, in the UNLV/UA pregame, said "The UNLV players are sky-high about this game".  And they were, blowing out Arkansas on the latter's home court.

Promise not to use this Texas DOT map above (reprinted on video recently by KTBS-TV Channel 3/Shreveport) again, but the fact that the Texas DOT did this map, and that key to it is I-49/Arkansas, tells me that secretly, behind the scenes, there are some important people sky-high about a prospect of a completed I-49.  And again, given the fact that the possible chief I-49(/I-69) beneficiary Houston is now America's #1 goods port (http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2013/07/houston_supplants_new_york.html) also tells me that some of these sky-high players may have some very deep pockets.  Don't get me wrong, they won't spend their own money to build an interstate through the Ouachitas.  But they can make a LOT of noise about it.  And sometimes that's all it takes.

This will get interesting in the Natural State.  Many of us expecting otherwise may even live to see it...

(EDIT: hadn't ever looked it up, but Wiki says stats show the ports of South Louisiana and Houston were ranked #1 and 2, with the NYC/NJ port #3.  Beaumont is #4!  Meanwhile, Duluth/Superior (#18 in the US) Port's website says this port is the #1 volume port on the Great lakes, (http://www.duluthport.com/) #2 in dry bulk in the U.S. (though I'm guessing much of that is grain which wouldn't head down the I-49 corridor).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_North_American_ports#United_States

This tells us so much of we need to know about I-49/I-69.)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Brandon on August 05, 2013, 04:03:42 PM
^^ Here's the Wiki listed by US port volume: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ports_in_the_United_States
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on August 05, 2013, 06:32:02 PM
^^ Here's the Wiki listed by US port volume: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ports_in_the_United_States

Thanks, Brandon.

Amazing: The "Winnie-Minnie-New-Hou" corridor is going to link the Central US/Central Canada (and beyond) to 7 of the top 10 ports in America, 8 if you count the access to nearby Mobile for people coming from the north/northwest.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on August 07, 2013, 01:55:53 PM
http://bvwv.nwaonline.com/news/2013/aug/07/interchange-first-list-20130807/

The link above is pay, so I'll type in part of the story, by Cassi Lapp:

Interchange first on list
Bids to be let by end of year for first of three projects

Quote

Construction of the bypass around Hiwasse began March 2011 and connects a portion of Arkansas Highway 72 back on itself, creating a bypass of the Hiwasse area of Gravette.  Two interchanges are being constructed, on the southeast and northwest sides of Hiwasse. The interchanges and roadway connecting the two is epxected to be completed next spring.

The price of that project is $19.8 million, (Danny) Straessle (of the Arkansas Highway and Transportation Department) said.

The second project already in the works is an interchange at Rocky Del (sic) Hollow Road, west of the Highlands in Bella Vista.

Construction on the interchange and the road to connect to the Arkansas 72 interchange began in the summer of 2012.  Straessle said the project should wrap up late in the summer of 2014.  This will create a continuous two-lane state highway from Hiwasse nearing the Missouri state line.


and;

Quote

A third project will also go to bid early next year to complete the highway from Rocky Del (sic) Hollow Road to the state line.

"The Bella Vista Bypass project has been ready to go for some time; we just needed the money.  Overpasses at interchanges are being built to full interchanges, they just won't have southbound lanes," Straessle said.

There is a plan for a future four-land highway to become I-49 running from Louisiana to Canada.  But the money isn't there yet, Straessle said, and the completion date for that is an unknown at this time.

"Ideas are being kicked around.  One is a toll study, but that is in its infancy," he said.  A toll-road study was completed once before, he added, but at the time was not feasible to support the bypass.

"We're taking a look at that again," he said.


Takeaways?

1.  I still say the state of Arkansas runs the risk of looking foolish for not having thought to build I-49 between Greenwood and Texarkana.  Our second largest risk of looking foolish is going to be having the BV bypass two lane, during the time it is two-lane.

2.  According to this article, Mr. Straessle is predicting the aforementioned Rocky Dell Hollow interchange (west Bella Vista) to the east Highway 72 interchange will be fully complete, in two-lane form, next summer, which means,

3.  The Rocky Dell Hollow-to-Missouri line section and (the BIG one, IMO) the east Highway 72 interchange-to-I-540's-current-end section will be the two areas which take from 2014 (or this year, if they're started*) to 2016 per Grzrd's schedule posted earlier.

*On another forum, a resident near the future BV bypass says she's spoken with people who are doing constant fossil / artifact digs near the Lowe's at Bentonville/Bella Vista in advance of future I-49 coming through there in a couple of years.

Sorry for the long post.  :pan:
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on August 07, 2013, 02:08:30 PM
(http://www.century21.com/listhub/photo/420x315/photos.listhub.net/ARMLSAR/647687/0?lm=20120120T190851)

Heh, went looking for "Rocky Dell Hollow Road" to make sure I was spelling it right, and found this, one of many listings for the same property - a weird thing I see happening is that subdivisions are being built along the sides of this future interstate elsewhere in the BV area, not just here:

Quote
Beautiful serene property on the west side of one of the proposed Bella Vista bypass interchanges. Mostly pasture (about 30% wooded). Close to the Bella Vista gun range. Public water at the site. Owner is willing to subdivide.,There is also additional acreage available on the east side of the planned interchange. Cattle on property. Okay to drive by property to see, but do not enter property. Call listing agent to arrange for access to property.

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: ShawnP on August 07, 2013, 08:24:47 PM
Any estimates on how much a upgrade from super two to four lanes would cost?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: codyg1985 on August 07, 2013, 09:33:45 PM
Any estimates on how much a upgrade from super two to four lanes would cost?

I would think maybe a third of thee cost of the project to build the super-2. The bridges over the freeway will already be wide enough so those will be sufficient. New bridges will need to be built for the new carriageway, and grading and pavement will be needed for the new carriageway as well. The drainage structures, I would think, would partly be in place.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on August 08, 2013, 10:37:34 AM
For a citation of this area's population growth (and the now-being-addressed need for a through interstate), to anyone who remembers driving through Bentonville, Arkansas 20-30 years ago (or even 50 years ago when the one stop light was said to be a "blinker") Bentonville High School is set to have 4,200 students this year, 5,000 in 3 years if a new high school isn't built (http://nwahomepage.com/fulltext?nxd_id=451592) according to a story by KNWA-TV yesterday.

And that's not counting six other high schools in neighboring cities (Rogers, Springdale, Fayetteville, Siloam Springs) that have an average of 2,400 students each.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on August 08, 2013, 12:27:52 PM
Major flooding at U.S. 71 in Bella Vista - This is what I-49's BV bypass will (whew) replace in 3 years. (http://www.4029tv.com/weather/Cars-rush-through-flooded-street-in-Bella-Vista/-/8899072/21385262/-/qt8v6t/-/index.html?utm_source=hootsuite&utm_medium=facebook&utm_campaign=4029%2Bnews)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on August 08, 2013, 09:53:31 PM
For a citation of this area's population growth (and the now-being-addressed need for a through interstate), to anyone who remembers driving through Bentonville, Arkansas 20-30 years ago (or even 50 years ago when the one stop light was said to be a "blinker") Bentonville High School is set to have 4,200 students this year, 5,000 in 3 years if a new high school isn't built (http://nwahomepage.com/fulltext?nxd_id=451592) according to a story by KNWA-TV yesterday.

And that's not counting six other high schools in neighboring cities (Rogers, Springdale, Fayetteville, Siloam Springs) that have an average of 2,400 students each.

Link didn't work.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on August 09, 2013, 09:42:26 AM
For a citation of this area's population growth (and the now-being-addressed need for a through interstate), to anyone who remembers driving through Bentonville, Arkansas 20-30 years ago (or even 50 years ago when the one stop light was said to be a "blinker") Bentonville High School is set to have 4,200 students this year, 5,000 in 3 years if a new high school isn't built (http://nwahomepage.com/fulltext?nxd_id=451592) according to a story by KNWA-TV yesterday.

And that's not counting six other high schools in neighboring cities (Rogers, Springdale, Fayetteville, Siloam Springs) that have an average of 2,400 students each.

Link didn't work.

Sorry, Road Hog.  Try this:  http://www.nwahomepage.com/fulltext-news/second-high-school-solution-for-growth/d/fulltext-news/kahwErWO4UComYOqfImn8Q
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on August 10, 2013, 11:42:06 AM
It's worse than I thought, actually. By the time Bentonville builds its second high school, the two separate schools will still be among the 10 biggest in the state. Springdale split several years ago and SHS is still No. 2 in enrollment (Har-Ber is No. 9).

I'm looking at Arkansas Activities Association enrollment numbers, but those only count grades 10-12 and use average numbers from the past 3 years.

I wonder, though, if the desire is still pretty strong to keep Bentonville a one-school town. They're winning state championships by the ton with their numbers advantage and the whole town supports one program. Same dynamic is in play in Texas, in places like Allen and Southlake.

End of sports thread-jack. Back to roads.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on August 11, 2013, 12:04:27 AM
It's worse than I thought, actually. By the time Bentonville builds its second high school, the two separate schools will still be among the 10 biggest in the state. Springdale split several years ago and SHS is still No. 2 in enrollment (Har-Ber is No. 9).

I'm looking at Arkansas Activities Association enrollment numbers, but those only count grades 10-12 and use average numbers from the past 3 years.

I wonder, though, if the desire is still pretty strong to keep Bentonville a one-school town. They're winning state championships by the ton with their numbers advantage and the whole town supports one program. Same dynamic is in play in Texas, in places like Allen and Southlake.

End of sports thread-jack. Back to roads.

Yes, there has been.  And while it is still a one-school town they're playing Euless, TX Trinity next month, with Trinity ranked #17 in the nation, #3 in Texas. (http://www.fearlessfriday.com/yabbse/index.php?topic=128535.0)  This after "Bennie" played teams ranked #1 at one point or another last season in Oklahoma (Tulsa Union, in the big preseason scrimmage), Missouri, Mississippi and Arkansas (http://www.maxpreps.com/high-schools/bentonville-tigers-(bentonville,ar)/football-fall-12/schedule.htm), beating them all before losing in the rematch to Fayetteville in the 2012 state championship game.  South Panola won it all in Mississippi last year, too.  According to Rivals and USA Today, South Panola finished as America's top team in 2010 (Euless Trinity started as America's top team and pretty much held it until losing, surprisingly, in the Texas 5A championship game.)

I've veered off roads too much here, too, so I'll stop from here on out.  Suffice it to say that this isn't our father's northwest Arkansas.  Goodness, it's really not our oldest brother's northwest Arkansas, either.  (A decade ago you'd never have seen a northwest Arkansas team hanging with schools like the aforementioned.  Then Springdale 2005 came along and ever since then the talent seems to have just kept coming, mainly because the kids who were little in the first big move in wave from the early 2000s are coming of high school age.)  There's all sorts of things happening here most people wouldn't have dreamt of 15 or more years ago.  And, IMO, when the interstate is finished, and ESPECIALLY if I-49(/I-69 through Texas) is finished we may not have seen "nuthin'" yet.

Back to highways for good.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: ShawnP on August 13, 2013, 07:48:41 PM
I asked about the cost from a super two to a true Interstate as we can all see the need. Not a resident of Arkansas but do the local residents seem willing to take a higher tax rate to help support four lanes (like NE Missouri did with US-36/I-72)? This tax would be on top of the new statewide tax but would speed I-49 and yes 6 lanes ahead quicker plus the US-420 project.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on August 13, 2013, 08:08:16 PM
I asked about the cost from a super two to a true Interstate as we can all see the need. Not a resident of Arkansas but do the local residents seem willing to take a higher tax rate to help support four lanes (like NE Missouri did with US-36/I-72)? This tax would be on top of the new statewide tax but would speed I-49 and yes 6 lanes ahead quicker plus the US-420 project.

Depends who you ask. NW Arkansas, maybe. Southern Arkansas, not likely.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on August 17, 2013, 12:43:28 PM
A good article on internet of Bella Vista bypass. http://mdcp.nwaonline.com/news/2013/aug/16/new-arkansas-tax-fund-bella-vista-bypass--20130815/
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on August 20, 2013, 07:44:14 PM
In the above news it said Arkansas was looking at tolls again for the south bound lanes of Bella Vista Bypass. I read back in the summer that I 40 and this project would be hard to make a toll road because they cannot toll fees on existing roads that Federal money has been spent on. For instance AHTD said if they add another lane to I 40 from Little Rock to Memphis, they could toll that lane only so if you got over in the far left lane, you have to pay. But if you drove the distance in the 2 inside lanes you would not have to pay. On the Bella Vista Bypass the North bound lanes have had federal money involved so the south bound lanes would not If tolled. Missouri said when they build there part it would be all 4 lanes because of expense and they have the money set aside. Looks like that would be a mess.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on August 20, 2013, 08:28:37 PM
In the above news it said Arkansas was looking at tolls again for the south bound lanes of Bella Vista Bypass. I read back in the summer that I 40 and this project would be hard to make a toll road because they cannot toll fees on existing roads that Federal money has been spent on. For instance AHTD said if they add another lane to I 40 from Little Rock to Memphis, they could toll that lane only so if you got over in the far left lane, you have to pay. But if you drove the distance in the 2 inside lanes you would not have to pay. On the Bella Vista Bypass the North bound lanes have had federal money involved so the south bound lanes would not If tolled. Missouri said when they build there part it would be all 4 lanes because of expense and they have the money set aside. Looks like that would be a mess.

Arkansas would also have to rewrite the highway laws to permit tolling.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on August 20, 2013, 10:29:14 PM
I agree,  Especially sense the 2 lanes north will have also 1/2 cent sales tax money passed by the voters and there was not any mention any of those roads would be possible toll roads in the future.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on August 24, 2013, 08:58:44 PM
Man, this is weird.

Visiting Fort Smith today, and I see that work has indeed resumed on the (currently) "Interstate to nowhere".   Road graders were working the roadbed in the area around future I-49 and Rogers Avenue in a suburb called Barling.  At the sparkling Massard Road bridge (emblazoned with plaques bearing the names of AHTD officials including the omnipresent former Razorback cheerleader Dick Trammell), where there was an interstate of weeds in May the roadbed has been mowed and is in the process of grading.  There was an earthmover and a grader parked under the bridge.  The future northbound lanes are graded for two lanes and shoulders...the future southbound ones are just graded one lanes.  There was a black substance that appears to be on the graded ground...don't know if that's herbicide but there were no weeds growing on the graded bed.

New buildings keep being built.  The Phoenix Metals facility, announced in May, is among those, 1/4 mile west (http://www.arkansasbusiness.com/article/91527/phoenix-metals-announces-new-fort-smith-facility) of the future Interstate.  Though I tend to discount it, a veteran retail clerk at Dillard's in Fort Smith says the hot rumor is that there's going to be an open air mall built in this area much like Pinnacle Hills Promenade in Rogers.  Were I not to know better, this would almost be like some Stephen King novel or Twilight Zone episode where a city is mysteriously being built on the edge of nowhere.  In reality, it shows me how many people are really betting on the future main corridor between Mexico and Canada.  And my gut feeling is Fort Smith will almost be as big a beneficiary as Shreveport, with better river connections though not-as-strong rail ones.

Update: there IS a mall being planned for this place! (http://www.arkansasbusiness.com/article/93860/no-endangered-beetles-at-barling-mall-site)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: codyg1985 on August 25, 2013, 02:10:13 PM
Any updates on the Arkansas River bridge and the connection to I-40/current I-540?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on August 25, 2013, 02:55:18 PM
Any updates on the Arkansas River bridge and the connection to I-40/current I-540?

Codyg, can't speak for those in the know but I've not heard of any.  That's what makes this so "Rod Serling-ish/Stephen King-ish".  These businesses (including the proposed 70 store, 90-100 acre shopping mall which according to the Dillard's employee I spoke with may look very much like the Pinnacle Hills Promenade in Rogers, AR, pictured below, though the newspaper article says it will be more like this (http://ftsmithpavilion.com/) shopping center which appears to be only 1/3 the size of the future Barling/I-49 development) are MILES from I-40 right now, and even a few miles (at least) east of the current Fort Smith Interstate bypass...but the reason the Phoenix Metals people I linked to the story on above (whose structure is going up right now, 3 months after the announcement) said they located there is because of its proximity to I-40.

(EDIT...didn't see it before, but here's the newspaper article on the shopping mall (http://swtimes.com/sections/business/fcra-close-barling-mall-property.html), again, bear in mind there is virtually NOTHING here right now save a convenience store, woods, and a sparkling new bridge-and-interstate-to-nowhere.  Amazingly, this is such an in-plain-sight-huge-secret that there aren't even any comments in the newspaper article on it, pro or con):

(http://media.arkansasonline.com/img/photos/2010/09/11/promenade6COLxFIT__t598.jpg?b7052f07a6139e7088ebc43100469802b2560d37)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on August 27, 2013, 04:41:55 PM
Any updates on the Arkansas River bridge and the connection to I-40/current I-540?

I recently had an email Q & A exchange with AHTD and the short answer is that AHTD does not even have plans to begin the design work for the Arkansas River bridge:

Quote
Q: With the opening of the Chaffee Crossing section of I-49 scheduled for late 2014, does AHTD plan to begin design work on the Future I-49 Arkansas River bridge at any time in the foreseeable future?

A: Not at this time. There isn’t any funding identified for that river crossing.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on August 27, 2013, 04:46:06 PM
Any updates on the Arkansas River bridge and the connection to I-40/current I-540?

I recently had an email Q & A exchange with AHTD and the short answer is that AHTD does not even have plans to begin the design work for the Arkansas River bridge:

Quote
Q: With the opening of the Chaffee Crossing section of I-49 scheduled for late 2014, does AHTD plan to begin design work on the Future I-49 Arkansas River bridge at any time in the foreseeable future?

A: Not at this time. There isn’t any funding identified for that river crossing.

Grzrd, just posted an answer to the "Chaffee Crossing" thread on a concern about this.

It's going to be fascinating to see how both the I-49 Arkansas River Bridge (with its attendant junctions at current I-540 Alma and Rogers Ave/Ark 22) and the I-49 Greenwood/Texarkana sections get resolved if they ever do.  (And, frankly, these dreams are going to be seen less as shaped like "pipes" and more like "bullseyes".  There are a LOT of people who appear to be dearly wanting the rest of this interstate to happen as it closes in, pincer-like, on those final two* areas.

*Not including Lafayette-New Orleans, currently also served through I-10.)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on August 28, 2013, 11:12:03 AM

(EDIT...didn't see it before, but here's the newspaper article on the shopping mall (http://swtimes.com/sections/business/fcra-close-barling-mall-property.html), again, bear in mind there is virtually NOTHING here right now save a convenience store, woods, and a sparkling new bridge-and-interstate-to-nowhere.  Amazingly, this is such an in-plain-sight-huge-secret that there aren't even any comments in the newspaper article on it, pro or con):


There is a new High School that is going to be built at the west end of Chaffee Crossing and there are several factories as well. AHTD just moved their Fort Smith offices out there, there's the Janet Huckabee Nature Center near the south end, a proposed nature museum next to it and a new fire station under construction. :)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on August 28, 2013, 01:41:51 PM
A former Mena mayor wants AHTD to build the section around Mena before the rest of the highway.  He said that AHTD claimed they didn't have the money to build it.  Sounds like an excuse to me.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on August 29, 2013, 01:00:36 AM
A former Mena mayor wants AHTD to build the section around Mena before the rest of the highway.  He said that AHTD claimed they didn't have the money to build it.  Sounds like an excuse to me.

It makes sense to build the segments around towns first as bypasses (Mena, Waldron, etc.) and then connect them as you go.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on August 29, 2013, 08:44:53 AM
A former Mena mayor wants AHTD to build the section around Mena before the rest of the highway.  He said that AHTD claimed they didn't have the money to build it.  Sounds like an excuse to me.

It makes sense to build the segments around towns first as bypasses (Mena, Waldron, etc.) and then connect them as you go.

AHTD is not known for common sense.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: rte66man on August 29, 2013, 01:03:59 PM
A former Mena mayor wants AHTD to build the section around Mena before the rest of the highway.  He said that AHTD claimed they didn't have the money to build it.  Sounds like an excuse to me.

It makes sense to build the segments around towns first as bypasses (Mena, Waldron, etc.) and then connect them as you go.

That is the way Texas does it (see US277, US81, US82, etc).

rte66man
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on August 29, 2013, 09:22:28 PM
This article (http://www.thv11.com/news/article/266323/2/Arkansas-highway-officials-considering-tolls-on-I-40), primarily about the possibility of tolling I-40 (and previously discussed in the 6 Laning I-40  (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=6548.msg223076#msg223076) thread), reports that, even though Arkansas voters approved the one-half cent sales tax to fund the initial two lanes of the BVB, AHTD is currently investigating the tolling potential of the BVB:
Quote
Are you only looking at this section of Interstate 40?  No, the Department is currently investigating tolling potential in two other corridors (Northbelt Freeway, in conjunction with Metroplan, and the Bella Vista Bypass).

This article (http://www.thecitywire.com/node/29319) reports that AHTD is investigating the possibility of tolling not only the Bella Vista Bypass, but also "other sections of the interstate", and that there is a "realistic possibility" that the entire four lanes of the BVB might be completed within the current time frame for two lane construction, even in the absence of tolling:

Quote
AHTD Public Information Officer Randy Ort said while Missouri was struggling to secure the funding necessary to finish its portion of the Bella Vista Bypass, Arkansas had secured enough to install two of the highway's planned four lanes. To complete the other four lanes, AHTD would have to figure out a way to raise an additional $50 million.
One way to possibly pay for the Arkansas portion of not only the Bella Vista Bypass, but other sections of the interstate, would be the creation of Arkansas' first ever toll road, which Ort said was being studied for feasibility.
"It's a candidate to be a toll road, but we need to get the results of this study," he said. "Another reason the results of this study are so important, no only will that show us whether or not it's feasible as a toll road, it will provide us a great amount of data and information as to what it will take to complete the final two lanes to make it the ultimate four lanes that both states want. So by getting the results of the toll study, we think there is a possibility, and a realistic possibility, whether it's a toll road or not a toll road that we will be able to complete this as a four lane facility in the time frame that we committed to only committed to build the two lanes."

Where would AHTD find the money in the absence of tolls?



This TV video report (http://5newsonline.com/2013/08/29/highway-officials-discuss-ways-to-speed-up-i-49-corridor/), in addition to having footage of the paving project in the Chaffee Crossing area, reports an AHTD estimate of twenty years to connect Fort Smith, Texarkana, and Bella Vista via I-49:

Quote
“We still have a pretty sizable gap in Arkansas from Texarkana to Fort Smith,”  Ort said. ” It’s going to be about 180 miles and about a 2.5 billion dollars. That’s very hard to fund a project of that size.”
“That’s a very expensive project,”  explained Dick Trammel,  Now I think in the future, everyone’s going to work towards trying to make that possible. I think the funding is going to be the problem.”
The Highway Department says they’re committed to completing the I49 corridor across the state. However, they estimate it could be 20 years before Texarkana connects to Fort Smith and up through Bella Vista.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on August 29, 2013, 11:14:27 PM
Good work, Grzrd.

Dig the man with the I-49 necktie toward the report's end!

BTW, don't know where they'll get the money, but I-49 as two lanes around Bella Vista could be, I'm afraid, an absolute MESS given the traffic it will see.  Glad they're thinking ahead on this one if they follow through.

EDIT:

Some fascinating things on that City Wire article:

1.  Trouble in the Show Me State?

Quote
"And today, we have the plans done. They've been done for many years. We would have to go in and refresh those plans, but that would be a relatively minor task. We purchased the land but we have one challenge," he said. "Considering all the work we did north of there, we no longer have enough money to complete that. So at this time, we can't commit to a schedule in Missouri to do that."

The shortfall in funding amounts to about $25 million, though he said Missouri transportation officials were working to find a funding source to complete the state's portion of the project.

2.  Then there's this potential "lulu":

Quote
Gard Wayt, the Shreveport, La.-based executive director of the I-49 International Coalition, said having officials like Whitaker and others from the city and county level on up to the federal level participate in today's meeting was designed to get all sides thinking and working together to figure out how to finish I-49 at an accelerated rate, a rate at which the interstate could be done in less than a decade.

"If I were going to be safe, I'd say (the Arkansas portion would be complete in) 10 years," ( :wow: ) Wayt said. "But what we're trying to do is cut that in half." (  :wow:   :wow: )

Which "Arkansas portion" does he mean?  The WHOLE one?!?!  I know if he's the director of the I-49 coalition he'd be an optimist, but wow...  (Then again, Texas' Highway and Transportation Department, per the graphic from KTBS-TV/Shreveport earlier, is like the old singer/guitarist Billy Squier when talking about I-49...."Everybody wants you!" (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XhOZL21g2aE)  Instead of being a pipe dream, this is rapidly becoming something that the focus and the impetus will get narrower and stronger on, IMO.)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on September 02, 2013, 06:07:30 PM
This article (http://www.kansascity.com/2012/09/02/3793979/us-71-south-to-become-i-49.html)  .... MoDOT also makes it clear that they are waiting on Arkansas before they build Missouri's section of the Bella Vista Bypass:
Quote
“We do not want to build a four-lane freeway that dead-ends at the state line,” said Sean Matlock, MoDOT’s manager for the I-49 project.
(above quote from I-49 Coming to Missouri (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3239.msg171905#msg171905) thread)
This article (http://www.thecitywire.com/node/29319) reports that MoDOT is currently approximately $25 million short of having its section of the Bella Vista Bypass fully funded:
Quote
Dan Salisbury, the assistant director of the southwest district of the Missouri Department of Transportation (MoDoT) ... said ... funding to complete the state's I-49 corridor in a section known as the Bella Vista Bypass was not currently in place .... "we no longer have enough money to complete that. So at this time, we can't commit to a schedule in Missouri to do that."
The shortfall in funding amounts to about $25 million.
(above quote from I-49 Coming to Missouri (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3239.msg243628#msg243628) thread)

This August 30 article (behind paywall) (http://www.arkansasonline.com/news/2013/aug/30/missouri-says-no-cash-bella-vista-bypass-20130830/) reports that Missouri's lack of a schedule for the Bella Vista Bypass has resulted in AHTD delaying the letting for the County Road 34 to Missouri state line section of the Arkansas BVB:

Quote
Randy Ort, public information officer for the Arkansas Highway Department, said ....
the original timeline for Arkansas and Missouri to complete the project was 2017. He said officials with the Arkansas Highway Department first learned that Missouri was unable to complete its section in that time frame in recent weeks.
A new schedule for completion of the bypass has been developed, Ort said.
The portion of the bypass from Benton County Road 34 to the Missouri state line was to be bid in January, Ort said. But now, a document from the department listing dates of future projects does not list a time frame for that project.
“We have the money, but it does not make sense to continue that portion,”  Ort said. “Do we want to continue a road if it is not usable?”
The stretch of road will be completed when Missouri is ready
, Ort said.
He said the section of the bypass from U.S. 71 in Bentonville to Arkansas 72 west of Hiwasse will have a bid released in January. The department will delay construction of a full interchange at that location so the road can open sooner, Ort said.
A stretch of the bypass from Arkansas 72 west of Hiwasse to Benton County Road 34 is already underway, Ort said. An estimated completion date for that portion was not provided.

Nothing like communication between neighboring state DOTs that are theoretically coordinating a state-line project; in the past year, AHTD and MoDOT have literally switched positions in regard to one waiting on the other at the state line.



This article (http://www.thecitywire.com/node/29319) reports that ... there is a "realistic possibility" that the entire four lanes of the BVB might be completed within the current time frame for two lane construction, even in the absence of tolling:
Quote
AHTD Public Information Officer Randy Ort said ... "we think there is a possibility, and a realistic possibility, whether it's a toll road or not a toll road that we will be able to complete this as a four lane facility in the time frame that we committed to only committed to build the two lanes."

The article reporting on the delay for the section from County Road 34 to the Missouri state line also discusses the possibility that Arkansas will go ahead and build a four-lane highway, and that Missouri wants the Arkansas section to be four lanes:

Quote
The Arkansas Highway Department is building the Bella Vista bypass as a two lane road but has plans to expand it later to four lanes, said Ort.
He said officials believe it will cost another $50 million to expand the road to four lanes. He said there is a possibility that the road will be expanded to four lanes sooner than previously thought. He said that is very preliminary, and no official information is available regarding it.
Dan Salisbury, Missouri assistant district engineer for the southwest district said ... Missouri Department of Transportation plans to complete the road as four lanes when funding becomes available. He added that officials also want the Arkansas section to be four lanes.
“That is because we save very little by doing two lanes,”  Salisbury said.
It will cost Missouri $40 million to complete its portion of the bypass, Salisbury said. He said at this time “roughly”  $15 million is available for the project.

Well, Missouri needs another $25 million and Arkansas needs another $50 million to finish a four-lane BVB.  Maybe MoDOT is putting behind-the-scenes heat on AHTD to identify a source for the $50 million and go ahead and build the four lanes; it at least appears that AHTD is actively exploring that possibility.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on September 03, 2013, 02:09:17 AM
Is it certain that the Bella Vista Bypass will not be tolled?  I tried to weed through the past replies on this thread.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on September 03, 2013, 08:18:33 AM
Is it certain that the Bella Vista Bypass will not be tolled?

This August 29 post (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3324.msg243633#msg243633) discusses a newspaper article which reports AHTD is currently conducting a feasibility study of tolls on the Bella Vista Bypass:

This article (http://www.thecitywire.com/node/29319) reports that AHTD is investigating the possibility of tolling not only the Bella Vista Bypass, but also "other sections of the interstate":
Quote
One way to possibly pay for the Arkansas portion of not only the Bella Vista Bypass, but other sections of the interstate, would be the creation of Arkansas' first ever toll road, which Ort said was being studied for feasibility



I tried to weed through the past replies on this thread.

Next time, try using the "Search" function on the upper right hand corner of the page while you are in the thread. For example, the following search would have led you to the post I mentioned above:

toll bella vista bypass

[do not put the search phrase in parentheses because "toll" will not necessarily be next to "Bella Vista Bypass"]
Also, compare that search to what happens if you start your search on the "AARoads Forum Index" page. I think in that case the search will give you the most recent post in every thread that contains the search terms, and would not have listed the post I provided above (I presume you would have to next go to the individual threads for more exhaustive searches).
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on September 10, 2013, 08:56:14 AM
Any updates on the Arkansas River bridge and the connection to I-40/current I-540?

This article (http://www.thecitywire.com/node/29466) reports on a consultant making a presentation to the Fort Smith Board of Directors and quotes one of the Directors as saying that the connection to I-40 will be "first" (apparently after the Chaffee Crossing, BVB, and LA state line sections):

Quote
Members of the Fort Smith Board of Directors met for nearly three hours on Monday night (Sept. 9) to discuss and try to narrow the focus of priorities identified during a strategic planning retreat on July 19 and 20 at Mt. Magazine State Park ....
Director Mike Lorenz .... said annexation of land surrounding what will become Interstate 49 would be essential as the city looks not only five or 10 years down the road, but decades or even 100 years into the future.
"That's something Ron said at the end looking 50 or 200 years in the future. While we're talking 20 plus years to get I-49 finished, it won't be that long before it's connected to Interstate 40 … That's going to happen first. That's going to happen before down south happens. But that gives you connection from that intersection to Joplin, basically, and I think that defines the entire area right there. And I think that has to be a major priority."
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on September 10, 2013, 02:33:03 PM
Grzrd, I'm still shaking my head (though I can still admire a genuine optimist) about the I-49 proponent from Shreveport who said that he's working to find ways to make this happen in 10, and maybe FIVE years.

That being said, I agree...with the BV bypass scheduled for completion in 2016, any spot along I-49 south of Joplin is immediately opened up to the entire northern U.S. and Canada by our existing interstate system.  With the man in the Arkansas Business article predicting that Fort Smith will be "unrecognizeable"* in five years (and he has to mean that part of it where I-49 goes) there certainly are people who think at least part of this FSM to Texarkana route is going to happen sooner rather than later.  (BTW, today it was announced that Thermold Industries, a firearms manufacturer, is moving their HQ from North Carolina to Fort Smith.  I think, though, they'll be in "old" Fort Smith along Wheeler Avenue, on the southwest side of town near the Oklahoma border.  At least, for now.  ;-)

*My hometown of Springfield Missouri hasn't changed much in parts of the north side.  On the SOUTH side, where the James River Freeway was built connecting Interstate 44 with U.S. 65 to Branson and U.S. 60 to West Plains, Jonesboro and Memphis, it looks like a different city.  That's what will happen in east Fort Smith.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on September 10, 2013, 02:48:32 PM
Any updates on the Arkansas River bridge and the connection to I-40/current I-540?

This article (http://www.thecitywire.com/node/29466) reports on a consultant making a presentation to the Fort Smith Board of Directors and quotes one of the Directors as saying that the connection to I-40 will be "first" (apparently after the Chaffee Crossing, BVB, and LA state line sections):

Quote
Members of the Fort Smith Board of Directors met for nearly three hours on Monday night (Sept. 9) to discuss and try to narrow the focus of priorities identified during a strategic planning retreat on July 19 and 20 at Mt. Magazine State Park ....
Director Mike Lorenz .... said annexation of land surrounding what will become Interstate 49 would be essential as the city looks not only five or 10 years down the road, but decades or even 100 years into the future.
"That's something Ron said at the end looking 50 or 200 years in the future. While we're talking 20 plus years to get I-49 finished, it won't be that long before it's connected to Interstate 40 … That's going to happen first. That's going to happen before down south happens. But that gives you connection from that intersection to Joplin, basically, and I think that defines the entire area right there. And I think that has to be a major priority."

Wrong.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on September 11, 2013, 03:40:09 PM
Is it certain that the Bella Vista Bypass will not be tolled?

AHTD has posted its presentation for the September 11 Arkansas Highway Commission Meeting (http://www.arkansashighways.com/PowerPoints/2013/091113_Commission%20Meeting%20Powerpoint.pdf). Pages 19-32/39 of the pdf pertain to the Bella Vista Bypass.  One item that caught my eye is AHTD apparently believing that tolling the Bella Vista Bypass would preclude an interstate designation (page 31/39 of pdf):

(http://i.imgur.com/5ZSRNor.png)

I thought MAP-21 allows new interstate sections to be tolled (http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/MAP21/summaryinfo.cfm):

Quote
Other changes include the mainstreaming of tolling new Interstates and added lanes on existing Interstates, which was previously allowed only under the Interstate System Construction Toll Pilot Program and the Express Lanes Demonstration Program

At any rate, on page 32/39, making a decision on “Free”  Road vs. Tolling is listed as one of the "Next Steps".  I am curious as to what constitutes the "free" road option, i.e. where would they find the $50 million needed to complete a four-lane facility?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on September 11, 2013, 07:39:44 PM
Is it certain that the Bella Vista Bypass will not be tolled? 

Based upon what I have read, it will not. Part of the reason being that ARRA money is being used to build part of the highway.  If I-49 was tolled, I believe they would have to refund any monies received by the government.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on September 11, 2013, 09:59:19 PM
This is another reason I think our AHTD is out of control. The people of Arkansas passed the 1/2 cent sales tax for 4 lane roads to be built. It did not have what roads to do, so if they use 100 million on the Bypass for 2 lanes and then toll the road then they better think that will be the last tax hike they will get from the citizens of Arkansas. I think they need to build all 4 lanes of the Bella Vista Bypass and cut back somewhere else.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on September 12, 2013, 05:59:54 PM
There are 2 good articles in the Arkansas Democrat Gazette today about highway funding and the sale of bonds for the 1/2 cent sales tax and the Interstate rehabilitation project. One good thing is about making the Bella Vista Bypass a toll road. The study said it would take 40 yrs. to pay off. Here is a remark by mr. Trammel who also said they were committed to doing the next 2 jobs but will put on hold the last segment until Missouri is ready to meet them. The money coming in for the 1/2 cent sales tax is lower than expected so they will have to scale back some of the projects. The state’s top highway official said Wednesday that it doesn’t “make a lick of sense”  to use tolls to finance widening of the proposed Bella Vista Bypass to four lanes.

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on September 12, 2013, 09:55:15 PM
http://arkansasnews.com/sections/news/highway-commission-postpones-part-bella-vista-bypass-project.html

Highway Commission postpones part of Bella Vista Bypass project

LITTLE ROCK – The Arkansas Highway Commission endorsed a proposal Wednesday to postpone construction of a section of the Bella Vista Bypass in Northwest Arkansas at the Missouri border until that state can find funding for its six-mile portion of the project.

The commission also selected a firm to handle the sale of the first round of bonds – $469 million – that will fund construction of a system of a four-lane highways connecting all parts of the state. Voters last November approved a 10-year half-cent state sales tax increase to pay for the $1.8 billion project.

---
So Arkansas is waiting on Missouri who is waiting on Arkansas.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on September 13, 2013, 01:02:42 AM
Not a Mexican standoff, but a hillbilly standoff.  :sombrero:
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on September 14, 2013, 12:22:45 AM
http://arkansasnews.com/sections/news/highway-commission-postpones-part-bella-vista-bypass-project.html

Highway Commission postpones part of Bella Vista Bypass project

LITTLE ROCK – The Arkansas Highway Commission endorsed a proposal Wednesday to postpone construction of a section of the Bella Vista Bypass in Northwest Arkansas at the Missouri border until that state can find funding for its six-mile portion of the project.

The commission also selected a firm to handle the sale of the first round of bonds – $469 million – that will fund construction of a system of a four-lane highways connecting all parts of the state. Voters last November approved a 10-year half-cent state sales tax increase to pay for the $1.8 billion project.

---
So Arkansas is waiting on Missouri who is waiting on Arkansas.

I hate this state.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on September 14, 2013, 08:37:01 AM
http://arkansasnews.com/sections/news/highway-commission-postpones-part-bella-vista-bypass-project.html

Highway Commission postpones part of Bella Vista Bypass project

LITTLE ROCK – The Arkansas Highway Commission endorsed a proposal Wednesday to postpone construction of a section of the Bella Vista Bypass in Northwest Arkansas at the Missouri border until that state can find funding for its six-mile portion of the project.

The commission also selected a firm to handle the sale of the first round of bonds – $469 million – that will fund construction of a system of a four-lane highways connecting all parts of the state. Voters last November approved a 10-year half-cent state sales tax increase to pay for the $1.8 billion project.

---
So Arkansas is waiting on Missouri who is waiting on Arkansas.

I hate this state.

Better than Texas or Mississippi :/
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on September 15, 2013, 04:22:48 AM
http://arkansasnews.com/sections/news/highway-commission-postpones-part-bella-vista-bypass-project.html

Highway Commission postpones part of Bella Vista Bypass project

LITTLE ROCK – The Arkansas Highway Commission endorsed a proposal Wednesday to postpone construction of a section of the Bella Vista Bypass in Northwest Arkansas at the Missouri border until that state can find funding for its six-mile portion of the project.

The commission also selected a firm to handle the sale of the first round of bonds – $469 million – that will fund construction of a system of a four-lane highways connecting all parts of the state. Voters last November approved a 10-year half-cent state sales tax increase to pay for the $1.8 billion project.

---
So Arkansas is waiting on Missouri who is waiting on Arkansas.

I hate this state.

Better than Texas or Mississippi :/

When it comes to roads, Texas and Mississippi are miles ahead of Arkansas.  Take the roads out of the equation?  Ehhh, it's the south.  Enough said.  :)  Kidding, of course.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on September 26, 2013, 02:07:19 PM
Any updates on the Arkansas River bridge and the connection to I-40/current I-540?

This article (http://www.thecitywire.com/node/29787#.UkR0HL7D-M8), primarily an update about the (non-Future I-49) I-540 construction work in Fort Smith, notes that the I-540 Arkansas River bridge is not being upgraded, primarily because funding for the Future I-49 Arkansas River bridge is a higher priority:

Quote
It has been a little less than nine months since Interstate 540 through Fort Smith and Van Buren was reduced to one lane in both directions, causing traffic nightmares not normally seen in the area.
For commuters looking for a status update on the construction project, Arkansas Highway and Transportation Department District 4 Engineer Chad Adams has good news.
"We're still looking at them being on schedule," he said. "We still have an estimated completion of late spring 2014."
The nearly $79 million project, the largest single-project contract awarded in AHTD history, has seen the demolition of six bridges, with more to come as the months go on ....
While many bridges along the interstate are being replaced, or in some cases raised to allow for higher clearances, one bridge that will not have much if any work done to it is the Arkansas River Bridge.
According to Adams, widening the bridge to conform with current federal highway standards, which is what the contractors are doing with many of the bridges along I-540, is not financially feasible, especially considering that the AHTD is attempting to secure funding for a river bridge along the I-49 route.
He said rehab work on the Arkansas River Bridge on I-540 could total more than $100 million, which would then make it the largest single highway construction contract awarded in state history ....

At least AHTD seems to be giving some serious thought to the I-49 Arkansas River bridge.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on September 26, 2013, 02:25:27 PM

This article (http://www.thecitywire.com/node/29787#.UkR0HL7D-M8), primarily an update about the (non-Future I-49) I-540 construction work in Fort Smith, notes that the I-540 Arkansas River bridge is not being upgraded, primarily because funding for the Future I-49 Arkansas River bridge is a higher priority:

I was beginning to wonder about that. The construction crews have signs all around saying "DO NOT DAMAGE BRIDGE".

Still, it's disappointing the roadway is being rebuilt with asphalt instead of concrete. :(
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Henry on September 26, 2013, 02:42:09 PM

This article (http://www.thecitywire.com/node/29787#.UkR0HL7D-M8), primarily an update about the (non-Future I-49) I-540 construction work in Fort Smith, notes that the I-540 Arkansas River bridge is not being upgraded, primarily because funding for the Future I-49 Arkansas River bridge is a higher priority:

I was beginning to wonder about that. The construction crews have signs all around saying "DO NOT DAMAGE BRIDGE".

Still, it's disappointing the roadway is being rebuilt with asphalt instead of concrete. :(
Really? Is this the first time that such signs have been used? (I've never seen them anywhere in all my 43 years of traveling.)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on September 26, 2013, 02:53:01 PM

This article (http://www.thecitywire.com/node/29787#.UkR0HL7D-M8), primarily an update about the (non-Future I-49) I-540 construction work in Fort Smith, notes that the I-540 Arkansas River bridge is not being upgraded, primarily because funding for the Future I-49 Arkansas River bridge is a higher priority:

I was beginning to wonder about that. The construction crews have signs all around saying "DO NOT DAMAGE BRIDGE".

Still, it's disappointing the roadway is being rebuilt with asphalt instead of concrete. :(
Really? Is this the first time that such signs have been used? (I've never seen them anywhere in all my 43 years of traveling.)

They're not on the highway, per se, but in the construction areas. There's usually too much traffic to try to get a pic.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on September 27, 2013, 11:29:48 AM
I recently received an email update from AHTD regarding the designation of I-49 in Arkansas:

Quote
As you can see from the attached map, we have recently requested route designation changes for several sections of the Highway 71/State Highway 549/I-540 corridor in western Arkansas.

From the attached map (SW Arkansas image posted in Texarkana thread (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3321.msg249676#msg249676)):
(http://i.imgur.com/1mvAXCO.png)

It looks like they have asked for the I-49 designation along I-540 from Alma to Bentonville. October 17 should be a big I-49 day!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on September 27, 2013, 01:29:50 PM
GREAT WORK, GRZRD!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on September 27, 2013, 03:38:19 PM
Forgot to ask (sorry if you posted) why October 17th? Will the results of the petitioning be released then from the Feds?  Forgive my ignorance on this process.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on September 27, 2013, 04:14:16 PM
why October 17th?

http://route.transportation.org/Pages/default.aspx

Quote
Next Meeting of the Special Committee on US Route Number will meet in Denver, CO, October 17, 2013 - Applications due no later than September 9, 2013
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on September 27, 2013, 04:29:01 PM
why October 17th?

http://route.transportation.org/Pages/default.aspx

Quote
Next Meeting of the Special Committee on US Route Number will meet in Denver, CO, October 17, 2013 - Applications due no later than September 9, 2013

Thank you, Grzrd...the wait begins.

What's fascinating is that just this past week voters approved a millage for a new high school for Bentonville, AR (enrollment by 2016, the year the new school would ostensibly be built, is projected to be around 5,400 kids at the existing Bentonville High, amazing for a school that had around 900 kids 20 years ago).  Already on local news there are reports of a new Walmart plus multiple building permits for the city of Centerton, AR (immediately west of Bentonville, south of the Bella Vista bypass) merely because of the new high school being built.  With the developer of Chaffee Crossing promising Fort Smith will be "unrecognizable" in 5 years (at least his corner, the east side of it) plus a third high school possibly being built in Fort Smith at CC (a sign is up for it already) it's going to be fascinating to see how this plays out, and what a future I-49 will bring throughout northwest and west Arkansas.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on October 04, 2013, 09:06:43 PM
It looks like they have asked for the I-49 designation along I-540 from Alma to Bentonville. October 17 should be a big I-49 day!

AHTD has posted its September 30 presentation to the Springdale Rotary Club (http://www.arkansashighways.com/PowerPoints/2013/093013_Trammel_SpringdaleRotary.pdf) and it has numerous slides about costs and timetables for individual segments of the Bella Vista Bypass and I-540 (I-49 in less than two weeks?) improvements under the Connecting Arkansas Program and the Interstate Rehabilitation Program.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on October 05, 2013, 01:36:45 AM
It looks like they have asked for the I-49 designation along I-540 from Alma to Bentonville. October 17 should be a big I-49 day!

AHTD has posted its September 30 presentation to the Springdale Rotary Club (http://www.arkansashighways.com/PowerPoints/2013/093013_Trammel_SpringdaleRotary.pdf) and it has numerous slides about costs and timetables for individual segments of the Bella Vista Bypass and I-540 (I-49 in less than two weeks?) improvements under the Connecting Arkansas Program and the Interstate Rehabilitation Program.

The first few slides paint the picture... Arkansas needs to decommission a bunch of state highways. 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: english si on October 05, 2013, 06:01:53 AM
I thought more "gee, California's network is rather sparse". The other states are all smaller in area than AR.

What you didn't spot was how efficient their admin process is - their admin costs are the 49% lowest, and haven't hockey sticked in the last few years.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on October 05, 2013, 08:06:47 AM
Arkansas would be well-served to go to a two-tiered state system like adjacent states Tennessee, Missouri and Texas. But the problem is the state would still have to maintain the secondary system. Maybe at a slightly lesser priority, but a wholesale turnover to counties would never fly.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on October 05, 2013, 11:40:53 PM
Arkansas would be well-served to go to a two-tiered state system like adjacent states Tennessee, Missouri and Texas. But the problem is the state would still have to maintain the secondary system. Maybe at a slightly lesser priority, but a wholesale turnover to counties would never fly.
The problem is the amount/mileage of state highways in Arkansas.  I drove on one recently, AR 127, between Clifty and AR 12.  I passed 2 cars (the stretch was 8 miles).  They really need to cut the fat, so to speak.

I love Missouri's system... Arkansas isn't intelligent enough to adopt something like that though.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: NE2 on October 05, 2013, 11:59:52 PM
Who says Arkansas doesn't have something like Missouri's system, where minor state highways get less maintenance (despite having numbers rather than letters)?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: english si on October 06, 2013, 04:49:06 AM
They really need to cut the fat, so to speak.
Why? Especially as admin costs per mile are so low.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on October 06, 2013, 07:00:14 PM
They really need to cut the fat, so to speak.
Why? Especially as admin costs per mile are so low.

AHTD likes to take over county roads, like AR 74 (WC 43) east of US 71 near Winslow and AR 400 (Shepherd Springs Rd). They also have lots of short routes (AR 116 south of Booneville)

Conversely, AR 72 has been discontinued between US 71 and Bus 71 in Bentonville, as has AR 16 from I-540 to AR 112. Also AR 245 north of I-30 in Texarkana (south of 30 being replaced by AR 549)

I'm not sure AHTD has a definitive policy.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on October 08, 2013, 02:49:38 AM
Who says Arkansas doesn't have something like Missouri's system, where minor state highways get less maintenance (despite having numbers rather than letters)?
To my knowledge, they don't, and quite frankly, AHTD is miles behind MoDOT.  But that was my point, minor state highways could have letters.  I really like MO's system. 

I thought more "gee, California's network is rather sparse". The other states are all smaller in area than AR.

What you didn't spot was how efficient their admin process is - their admin costs are the 49% lowest, and haven't hockey sticked in the last few years.

Can you provide any sources or links?  AHTD is very poorly run, in my opinion.  They may have low admin costs, but their output is subpar.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: HandsomeRob on October 08, 2013, 11:41:56 AM
AHTD has posted its September 30 presentation to the Springdale Rotary Club (http://www.arkansashighways.com/PowerPoints/2013/093013_Trammel_SpringdaleRotary.pdf) and it has numerous slides about costs and timetables for individual segments of the Bella Vista Bypass and I-540 (I-49 in less than two weeks?) improvements under the Connecting Arkansas Program and the Interstate Rehabilitation Program.
The map on page 17 of that PDF seems to show a proposed eastern bypass of Rogers. Do we know anything about this proposal?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on October 08, 2013, 12:20:49 PM
September 30 presentation to the Springdale Rotary Club (http://www.arkansashighways.com/PowerPoints/2013/093013_Trammel_SpringdaleRotary.pdf)
The map on page 17 of that PDF seems to show a proposed eastern bypass of Rogers. Do we know anything about this proposal?

Environmental Assessment (http://www.arkansashighways.com/public_meetings/2012/090373/090373%20Final%20EA%20with%20Approval%20Signature%20and%20Appendices_new.pdf) and a map (http://www.arkansashighways.com/public_meetings/2012/090373/090373_2012.08.27_APLM_Cou_new.pdf).

One major purpose for the project is to provide some relief for the I-540 (Future I-49) corridor (p. 9/175 of EA pdf; p. 1 of EA document):

Quote
Purpose of the Proposed Project
The purpose of the proposed project is to improve north-south connectivity in the eastern portions of Springdale, Lowell, Bethel Heights and Rogers and to continue the eastern north-south corridor route of Highway 265 from Highway 264 north to Highway 94. The proposed connectivity improvements would provide another avenue for motorists to travel north and south without having to access Highway 71B and Interstate 540 in the Northwest Arkansas metro area.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on October 09, 2013, 03:16:10 AM
September 30 presentation to the Springdale Rotary Club (http://www.arkansashighways.com/PowerPoints/2013/093013_Trammel_SpringdaleRotary.pdf)
The map on page 17 of that PDF seems to show a proposed eastern bypass of Rogers. Do we know anything about this proposal?
Quote
Purpose of the Proposed Project
The purpose of the proposed project is to improve north-south connectivity in the eastern portions of Springdale, Lowell, Bethel Heights and Rogers and to continue the eastern north-south corridor route of Highway 265 from Highway 264 north to Highway 94. The proposed connectivity improvements would provide another avenue for motorists to travel north and south without having to access Highway 71B and Interstate 540 in the Northwest Arkansas metro area.

This won't be a bypass by any means.  It's just a widening project, really... but could be considered a bypass, if they do it right.  I just hope that AHTD will not make it 2 lanes in each direction, with the dreaded center left turn lane.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Henry on October 09, 2013, 09:52:20 AM
September 30 presentation to the Springdale Rotary Club (http://www.arkansashighways.com/PowerPoints/2013/093013_Trammel_SpringdaleRotary.pdf)
The map on page 17 of that PDF seems to show a proposed eastern bypass of Rogers. Do we know anything about this proposal?
Quote
Purpose of the Proposed Project
The purpose of the proposed project is to improve north-south connectivity in the eastern portions of Springdale, Lowell, Bethel Heights and Rogers and to continue the eastern north-south corridor route of Highway 265 from Highway 264 north to Highway 94. The proposed connectivity improvements would provide another avenue for motorists to travel north and south without having to access Highway 71B and Interstate 540 in the Northwest Arkansas metro area.

This won't be a bypass by any means.  It's just a widening project, really... but could be considered a bypass, if they do it right.  I just hope that AHTD will not make it 2 lanes in each direction, with the dreaded center left turn lane.
Don't get your hopes up! This being AR, they most likely will.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: NE2 on October 09, 2013, 02:15:22 PM
So related to the whole issue of conflict with US 49: how the hell did I-41 get approved?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on October 09, 2013, 02:31:32 PM
So related to the whole issue of conflict with US 49: how the hell did I-41 get approved?

Since it is a US 41 to I-41 "Conversion" (http://www.dot.wisconsin.gov/projects/neregion/41/), the same number will remain on the same corridor. The number 41 will be upgraded from US highway to Interstate. My guess is that, if anything, it may have been concluded to be the least confusing interstate number to the public.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: agentsteel53 on October 09, 2013, 02:59:25 PM
So related to the whole issue of conflict with US 49: how the hell did I-41 get approved?

what you should be asking is "how the hell did I-74 get approved in North Carolina".  there, we have a 74/74 junction.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: NE2 on October 09, 2013, 03:12:33 PM
what you should be asking is "how the hell did I-74 get approved in North Carolina".  there, we have a 74/74 junction.
Congress set that number (as they did with I-49 and I-69).
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on October 21, 2013, 11:03:02 AM
why October 17th?

http://route.transportation.org/Pages/default.aspx

Quote
Next Meeting of the Special Committee on US Route Number will meet in Denver, CO, October 17, 2013 - Applications due no later than September 9, 2013

Grzrd, forgive me if I missed this, but any word on Arkansas I-49?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on October 21, 2013, 11:10:55 AM
any word on Arkansas I-49?

The final step of the AASHTO approval process is Board approval of the Committee recommendations.  The Board is pretty much meeting all day today, and should take action on the route applications today.

When will the results be posted? I'm guessing that it could be as early as tomorrow, but past experience indicates that it may be several days past that time.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on October 21, 2013, 01:10:54 PM
any word on Arkansas I-49?

The final step of the AASHTO approval process is Board approval of the Committee recommendations.  The Board is pretty much meeting all day today, and should take action on the route applications today.

When will the results be posted? I'm guessing that it could be as early as tomorrow, but past experience indicates that it may be several days past that time.

Thanks, Grzrd.  I know you'll post it as soon as you hear the word.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on October 22, 2013, 03:42:05 PM
I recently received an email update from AHTD regarding the designation of I-49 in Arkansas:
Quote
As you can see from the attached map, we have recently requested route designation changes for several sections of the Highway 71/State Highway 549/I-540 corridor in western Arkansas.
From the attached map (SW Arkansas image posted in Texarkana thread (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3321.msg249676#msg249676)):
(http://i.imgur.com/1mvAXCO.png)

I just got a verbal confirmation from AHTD that they were "surprised", but they got "everything they asked for" regarding I-49.

No word on when the first shield will go up.  :bigass:

edit

Dig the man with the I-49 necktie toward the report's end!

Maybe it's time for some folks on the Forum to get a new tie!:

(http://i.imgur.com/fXrKFLo.png)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on October 22, 2013, 03:51:03 PM
I assume at some point they will renumber the exits? That will show how serious AHTD is about the middle section (Texarkana to Alma).
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on October 22, 2013, 08:41:10 PM
Well done, Grzrd!  Thank you.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: txstateends on October 24, 2013, 12:23:35 PM
So, there are no Missouri-style upgrades/changes they have to do, or any timeframe (you-can't-do-this-until) issues (except, of course, the future construction/completion of the unbuilt parts) listed in the approval breakdown...are there any, or is it solely an "I-49 as soon as we can make the signs" situation?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on October 24, 2013, 12:48:53 PM
So, there are no Missouri-style upgrades/changes they have to do, or any timeframe (you-can't-do-this-until) issues (except, of course, the future construction/completion of the unbuilt parts) listed in the approval breakdown...are there any, or is it solely an "I-49 as soon as we can make the signs" situation?

I have an email in to AHTD asking about their understanding and their short-term plans.  FWIW I think that, if FHWA has already identified a segment as being interstate-grade construction, then a request to put up the shields is a formality that FHWA cannot refuse because the interstate number has been Congressionally designated. Still, AHTD has to ask ...

The map several posts up suggests that AHTD has short-term plans to put shields up on I-540 and AR 549 neat Texarkana.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on October 24, 2013, 03:14:04 PM
So, there are no Missouri-style upgrades/changes they have to do, or any timeframe (you-can't-do-this-until) issues (except, of course, the future construction/completion of the unbuilt parts) listed in the approval breakdown...are there any, or is it solely an "I-49 as soon as we can make the signs" situation?

I just took a look at what AHTD asked for in their application (page 3/36 of pdf) (http://route.transportation.org/Documents/Arkansas%20AM2013.pdf):

(http://i.imgur.com/idAhBES.png)

* AHTD asked for redesignations of I-540 ("as Interstate 49") and part of US 71 (I assume "as Interstate 49") in NWA.  I had thought that they were going to ask for concurrent designations in order to allow for a transition period.
* Designation of AR 549 from the Louisiana state line to US 71 at the Texas state line as "Interstate 49".  Does this suggest a concurrency?  Although, I suppose that, since it is a state route, they can axe AR 549 on their own and not have to ask AASHTO.

At any rate, I think that they want to put shields up at appropriate places sooner rather than later.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on October 25, 2013, 11:19:28 AM
Grzrd, if I recall correctly, you said it might be several days before the AHTD formally announces this?  (And it's reported by Arkansas media outlets?)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on October 25, 2013, 11:25:33 AM
^ I mentioned that it might take several days for AASHTO to post their decision. As for AHTD, they may wait until they clear up any remaining formalities, if any, with FHWA before they issue a news release. I currently have an email in to AHTD and I will post if the reply provides good information.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on October 25, 2013, 11:26:30 AM
^ I mentioned that it might take several days for AASHTO to post their decision. As for AHTD, they may wait until they clear up any remaining formalities, if any, with FHWA before they issue a news release. I currently have an email in to AHTD and I will post if the reply provides good information.

Thank you, Grzrd.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on October 27, 2013, 09:23:56 AM
it might be several days before the AHTD formally announces this?  (And it's reported by Arkansas media outlets?)

AHTD has gotten word out to the media and this article (behind paywall) (http://www.nwaonline.com/news/2013/oct/27/i-49-designation-clears-roadblock-20131027/) reports that AHTD has already submitted its application to FHWA, FHWA has signaled that approval should be effective by Christmas, and that, after approval, "it will take a while longer before the new signs go up and the old ones come down":

Quote
The Arkansas Highway and Transportation Department has gotten initial approval to designate two sections of highway as Interstate 49 ....
The approved sections include 73 miles of Interstate 540 from Alma north to Bella Vista and 42 miles of Arkansas 549 from Texarkana south to the Louisiana state line, said Randy Ort, a spokesmanfor the Highway Department.
The approval came from the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials at an Oct. 18 meeting in Denver ....
But final approval must come from the Federal Highway Administration, which received the state’s application last month.
“They have the information,”  said Ort. “We’re just waiting to hear back from them. We don’t foresee any problems.”
Scott Bennett, director of the Arkansas Highway Department, said he’d like to have final approval by Christmas, but that may be too optimistic.
Doug Hecox, a spokesman for the Federal Highway Administration, said Christmas is possible.
“I think that sounds like a very reasonable goal,”  he said.

“The proposal from the state is still being reviewed, so we don’t have any way to ballpark how long it’ll take.”
After the I-49 designation is approved on the federal level, it will take a while longer before the new signs go up and the old ones come down, Ort said. The process requires educating the public, making new signs and installing them, he said.
Besides the I-49 signs, the application the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials approved included “future I-49 signs”  for two sections that are still under construction.
Those segments are the 14-mile Bella Vista bypass and a 6-mile section of U.S. 71 on the south side of Fort Smith to Arkansas 22 at Barling.

The section near Fort Smith is scheduled to be completed in June.
A 5-mile section from Doddridge to the Louisiana state line is to be done in May. Ort said it would likely be completed before the Highway Department is ready to put I-49 signs up along the route, so it has been approved for the I-49 signs.
“It just doesn’t make sense to have to keep renumbering things when it’s clear it’s part of the interstate system,”  said Bennett, referring to Arkansas 549 south of Texarkana.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on October 27, 2013, 10:27:44 AM
 :nod:
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on October 27, 2013, 02:23:05 PM
I find it interesting that the US 71 freeway north of US 62/AR 102 is not a part of I-540, but will be a part of I-49 before the BVB is opened.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on October 27, 2013, 03:43:48 PM
BTW, I've been out of state the past three weeks, but another key part of the Bella Vista bypass is now in place - they've opened the new west 102 bridge between Gravette and the community formerly known as "Hiwasse".  The new east bridge east/southeast of "Hiwasse" has been open for months.

This new bridge will allow the two current "under construction" segments of the BV bypass on the Arkansas side to be connected to one another.  A berm had been plowed north of the old highway right next to where this bridge was built.  They're now removing the pavement of the old highway section, and will later push down the berm and start connecting the segment of I-49 that's being plowed north from the bridge to the road (forget its name) just west of Bella Vista near where the B.V. gun range has been.

(EDIT: BTW, the article in the paper that Grzrd cited was very nice.  They also had a map, though on the map they only designated where the "(current)I-49" segments are going to be along (I-540, the route from Texarkana to the Louisiana line).)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: rte66man on October 28, 2013, 08:52:32 AM
BTW, I've been out of state the past three weeks, but another key part of the Bella Vista bypass is now in place - they've opened the new west 102 bridge between Gravette and the community formerly known as "Hiwasse".  The new east bridge east/southeast of "Hiwasse" has been open for months.

This new bridge will allow the two current "under construction" segments of the BV bypass on the Arkansas side to be connected to one another.  A berm had been plowed north of the old highway right next to where this bridge was built.  They're now removing the pavement of the old highway section, and will later push down the berm and start connecting the segment of I-49 that's being plowed north from the bridge to the road (forget its name) just west of Bella Vista near where the B.V. gun range has been.

102?? "formerly Hiwassee"  :confused:  I thought the road to Gravette was AR72. If the name is no longer Hiwassee, then what is it?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on October 28, 2013, 09:39:40 AM
rte66man, Hiwasse agreed to be annexed by Gravette because they didn't want to be annexed by Bella Vista.

Sorry, I meant to say that the east and west new bridges over future I-49 are over Hwy. 72...I get it and 102 mixed up in name sometimes.  Apologies.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on October 28, 2013, 01:24:19 PM
The bridge on Howard Hill Rd south of Fort Smith is now open, as well.  Paving looks to be at least started to just past Rye Hill Rd. Past that, construction crews are still lowering the grade for 49.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on October 29, 2013, 09:45:14 AM
In their quest to be intuitive, google does some odd things.  Today when looking to see what other media outlets are reporting on Grzrd's news, I typed in "Arkansas I-49".  Atop the results was this, which is a map that shows exactly where construction has taken place so far on the Bella Vista bypass.  Where the green arrow is denotes where the new bridge I wrote about has just been opened on west Hwy. 72 toward Gravette.  The area below the bridge is significantly more built than the area above:

(https://www.google.com/maps/vt/data=VLHX1wd2Cgu8wR6jwyh-km8JBWAkEzU4,p8P4pzJTzOp5UvTEgX5yAW1c3nBPwkTRBDteZ4oWzLjOoa-CrQZSra_AcwGRmSsSPlcWL6UQtgUIIcc2Fknt4xaXxZ_60nxzGBIFbXL56gzedBO51Uyj71MXTt4LlOXY7jHxDxJAA2-kZXa9tfwY-KPpm3n2uOBGGsWS9Kro0Wim2ZCPQE3Io1lp7PpcV-D02XZEZVui3PmW4eH-eeBYAK5Y)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: rickmastfan67 on October 29, 2013, 10:42:40 AM
* AHTD asked for redesignations of I-540 ("as Interstate 49") and part of US 71 (I assume "as Interstate 49") in NWA.  I had thought that they were going to ask for concurrent designations in order to allow for a transition period.

They might do it the same way PennDOT did when they changed a segment of I-279 into I-376.  For a few weeks, have both I-279 & I-376 shields posted along the side of the road (not @ the exit on-ramps, just the mainline) and then remove the I-279 shields when they updated the BGS's.

(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v645/rickmastfan67/Interstates/PA/I-376/P1050410s.jpg)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on October 29, 2013, 11:02:35 AM
* AHTD asked for redesignations of I-540 ("as Interstate 49") and part of US 71 (I assume "as Interstate 49") in NWA.  I had thought that they were going to ask for concurrent designations in order to allow for a transition period.

They might do it the same way PennDOT did when they changed a segment of I-279 into I-376.  For a few weeks, have both I-279 & I-376 shields posted along the side of the road (not @ the exit on-ramps, just the mainline) and then remove the I-279 shields when they updated the BGS's.


There is precedence: when AR 68 became US 412, there was a transition period. Also when AR 471 became US 71B.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on October 29, 2013, 07:14:55 PM
* AHTD asked for redesignations of I-540 ("as Interstate 49") and part of US 71 (I assume "as Interstate 49") in NWA.  I had thought that they were going to ask for concurrent designations in order to allow for a transition period.

They might do it the same way PennDOT did when they changed a segment of I-279 into I-376.  For a few weeks, have both I-279 & I-376 shields posted along the side of the road (not @ the exit on-ramps, just the mainline) and then remove the I-279 shields when they updated the BGS's.


There is precedence: when AR 68 became US 412, there was a transition period. Also when AR 471 became US 71B.

Arkansas likes to remove the old highway sign, replace it with a sign with the new number on it, and haphazardly put the old sign underneath the new sign, sometimes with one bolt:

(https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3047/2874003675_987d46fdeb_z.jpg?zz=1)

(https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3257/2874004433_d60aa5e7fe.jpg)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: rte66man on November 05, 2013, 10:05:27 AM
In their quest to be intuitive, google does some odd things.  Today when looking to see what other media outlets are reporting on Grzrd's news, I typed in "Arkansas I-49".  Atop the results was this, which is a map that shows exactly where construction has taken place so far on the Bella Vista bypass.  Where the green arrow is denotes where the new bridge I wrote about has just been opened on west Hwy. 72 toward Gravette.  The area below the bridge is significantly more built than the area above:

(https://www.google.com/maps/vt/data=VLHX1wd2Cgu8wR6jwyh-km8JBWAkEzU4,p8P4pzJTzOp5UvTEgX5yAW1c3nBPwkTRBDteZ4oWzLjOoa-CrQZSra_AcwGRmSsSPlcWL6UQtgUIIcc2Fknt4xaXxZ_60nxzGBIFbXL56gzedBO51Uyj71MXTt4LlOXY7jHxDxJAA2-kZXa9tfwY-KPpm3n2uOBGGsWS9Kro0Wim2ZCPQE3Io1lp7PpcV-D02XZEZVui3PmW4eH-eeBYAK5Y)

This is what it looked like in March. Wonder what took them so long to finish.....
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rte66man/8594356450/in/set-72157633097063219
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on November 25, 2013, 03:31:58 PM
As previously discussed in a post in the Texarkana thread (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3321.msg261159#new), the President of the I-49 International Coalition, Curt Green, recently justified the construction of I-49 through Arkansas as being a logical corridor for goods coming from Louisiana and Texas ports and as being a much safer road than the current US 71.

This article is inked in the other post: http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Head-of-I-49-coalition-says-road-needed-soon-5009881.php

Quote
The head of a coalition that supports the construction of a controlled access highway through western Arkansas says the roadway should be built soon so travelers can be safer and the region can enjoy greater economic development.
Curt Green ....
said that current work on Interstate 69 and U.S. 59 in Texas will turn Texarkana into more of an economic hub and that I-49 is needed to move goods farther north.
"Having 69 ending right here in Texarkana will mean cargo coming in from Harlingen and Corpus Christi," he said. "This will mean that we are going to be dumping a tremendous amount of traffic and cargo to Texarkana."
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on November 29, 2013, 10:39:55 AM
Who says Arkansas doesn't have something like Missouri's system, where minor state highways get less maintenance (despite having numbers rather than letters)?
To my knowledge, they don't, and quite frankly, AHTD is miles behind MoDOT.  But that was my point, minor state highways could have letters.  I really like MO's system. 

I spoke with Scott Bennett, AHTD Director, about this issue directly. He is well aware of the size of the system and says they basically have an informal primary-secondary network internally. Re-signing a ton of state highways with letters when people don't really care just for roadgeek purposes doesn't really sounds like a cost-effective project.

I'm not sure why you say AHTD is miles behind MoDOT, because currently it is MoDOT that is holding up the completion of the Bella Vista Bypass since they lost their funding they promised to Arkansas. Missouri needs to get their house in order, Arkansas is moving forward (despite your comments about Arkansas's "intelligence"...)

Completed as promised!! Not so much, MoDOT...

http://swtimes.com/news/highway-commission-postpones-part-bella-vista-bypass-project
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: NE2 on November 29, 2013, 10:47:40 AM
I spoke with Scott Bennett, AHTD Director, about this issue directly. He is well aware of the size of the system and says they basically have an informal primary-secondary network internally.
Probably a rough continuation of the old federal aid primary/secondary systems.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on November 29, 2013, 11:01:40 AM
I asked him about the size of the network; he knows that much of the system is glorified driveways and roads that connect ghost towns. However, he said that taking people's state highways would be such a bad move politically that they wouldn't be able to get anything else done

He said the secondary roads basically are at minimum maintenance, which is the same they would be if they were officially in a secondary network (Missouri) or administrated by a county organization (Iowa). Low volume rural routes are a problem in almost every state, not just Arkansas.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on November 29, 2013, 11:17:16 AM

I'm not sure why you say AHTD is miles behind MoDOT, because currently it is MoDOT that is holding up the completion of the Bella Vista Bypass since they lost their funding they promised to Arkansas. Missouri needs to get their house in order, Arkansas is moving forward (despite your comments about Arkansas's "intelligence"...)


MoDOT had the money when Arkansas didn't, so moved on to other projects instead of sitting around wanking until Arkansas was ready.

This is just so much finger pointing, though. Just get the furshlugginer road done and quit playing the "blame game".
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: NE2 on November 29, 2013, 11:22:17 AM
What does he think about 159? http://www.openstreetmap.org/?relation=1714635
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on November 29, 2013, 11:25:36 AM
What does he think about 159? http://www.openstreetmap.org/?relation=1714635

Don't forget AR 74 ;)

FWIW, my research seems to indicate these 159's  are mostly (if not all) old alignments of US 65.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: NE2 on November 29, 2013, 11:33:41 AM
Don't forget AR 74 ;)
Eh, that one could be a continuous route if the gaps were filled: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?relation=1715519
Not the case for 159 at McGehee.

FWIW, my research seems to indicate these 159's  are mostly (if not all) old alignments of US 65.
I see 3 likely old alignments (Lake Village, McGehee, Dumas) and 5 that are probably not.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on November 29, 2013, 11:53:00 AM
Don't forget AR 74 ;)
Eh, that one could be a continuous route if the gaps were filled: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?relation=1715519
Not the case for 159 at McGehee.

FWIW, my research seems to indicate these 159's  are mostly (if not all) old alignments of US 65.
I see 3 likely old alignments (Lake Village, McGehee, Dumas) and 5 that are probably not.

They may also be old AR 59 (there was a 59 in southern Arkansas before US 59 was formed).
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: NE2 on November 29, 2013, 12:48:17 PM
They cocked it up in 1973:
Quote
73-226 IN DESHA COUNTY, in accordance with the provisions of Act 9 of 1973, IT IS ORDERED that the county road beginning at the junction of State Highway 4 west of McGehee, thence running south and east to the Missouri Pacific Railroad at Masonville, a length of approximately 3.2 miles, as shown on the attached map, is hereby made a part of the State Highway System, to be designated as State Highway No. 159, Section 5.
73-227 IN DESHA COUNTY, in accordance with the provisions of Act 9 of 1973, IT IS ORDERED that the county road beginning at the junction of State Highway 4 west of McGehee, thence running north through Sections 29 and 20, T12S, R3W, to a county road junction on the north line of Section 20, T12S, R3W, a length of approximately 1.5 miles, as shown on the attached map, is hereby made a part of the State Highway System, to be designated as State Highway No. 159, Section 6.
73-228 IN DESHA COUNTY, in accordance with the provisions of Act 9 of 1973, IT IS ORDERED that the county road beginning at the junction of U. S. 65 north of McGehee, thence westerly across the Missouri Pacific Railroad to old U. S. 65, thence southerly along old U. S. 65 to the north corporate limits of McGehee, a length of approximately 0.8 miles, as shown on the attached map, is hereby made a part of the State Highway System, to be designated as State Highway No.159, Section 7.
73-229 IN DESHA COUNTY, in accordance with the provisions of Act 9 of 1973, IT IS ORDERED that the county road known as the Griff Leek Road beginning at the junction of State Highway 138 in Section 31, T10S, R3W, thence running northerly to the west side of Canal No. 19 in Section 19, T10S, R3W, a length of approximately 2.4 miles, as shown on the attached map, is hereby made a part of the State Highway System, to be designated as State Highway No. 159, Section 8.
73-230 IN DESHA COUNTY, in accordance with the provisions of Act 9 of 1973, IT IS ORDERED that the county road beginning at the junction of U.S. 65 at the northwest corner of Mitchellville, thence running south along the west corporate limits of Mitchellville to old U. S. 65, thence running southeasterly along old U. S. 65 to the north corporate limits of Dumas at East Dante Street, a length of approximately 1.2 miles, as shown on the attached map, is hereby made a part of the State Highway System, to be designated as State Highway No. 159, Section 9.

Only the one south of Eudora is old 59 (and was the first segment of 159, renumbered in 1935). Anyway, looks like the one from McGehee to Halley is also old US 65 (and, along with the one at Lake Village, was around before 1973). That still leaves two segments west of McGehee (226 and 227) and one east of Winchester (229) that are not old anything (except east of Masonville was US 165) - and the ones at McGehee don't form any sort of logical route when combined with the others.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on November 30, 2013, 03:59:58 AM
I'm not sure why you say AHTD is miles behind MoDOT, because currently it is MoDOT that is holding up the completion of the Bella Vista Bypass since they lost their funding they promised to Arkansas. Missouri needs to get their house in order, Arkansas is moving forward (despite your comments about Arkansas's "intelligence"...)

Completed as promised!! Not so much, MoDOT...
Seriously?  MoDOT got tired of Arkansas's ridiculous ignorance to the Bella Vista Bypass, whether it be by funding or AHTDs too much focus on the Little Rock region. 
MoDOT sat on the money for the longest time... I don't blame them one bit for transferring the money to the section of US 71 between Joplin and Kansas City.

And AHTD is many miles behind MoDOT, in many ways... Here's a list:

- MoDOTs website... AHTDs is just sad.  Even smaller, less populated states have better DOT websites.
- MoDOTs variable message signs... AHTD has none on I-540 in NWA.  I love MoDOTs messages on them.  It's simple reminders to stay safe, and they'll use them for other issues as well.
- MoDOT completed I-49 between Joplin and KC
- MoDOT highways have wide shoulders (where it needs to be) and roadway lighting (where it should be, for the most part).  AHTD has been improving on the shoulders; I haven't noticed any improvement on the roadway lighting... I will never understand why AHTD is so against providing roadway lighting.
- AHTD loves to lay down a sea of pavement for a 5 lane roadway (Just look at the "Eastern Parkway" in NWA plans).  MoDOT actually uses raised medians and gives a crap about access points.

Did I miss anything?  I'm not even going to go into the funding stuff.  And Dick Trammel needs to go.

I live in Northwest Arkansas.  I have never lived in Missouri.  Just wanted to get that out of the way.


Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on November 30, 2013, 04:25:39 AM
I spoke with Scott Bennett, AHTD Director, about this issue directly. He is well aware of the size of the system and says they basically have an informal primary-secondary network internally.
Probably a rough continuation of the old federal aid primary/secondary systems.

Probably not.  AR 8 east of Mena was FAP while AR 8 west of town was FAS, for one example.  Some state highways had FAP and FAS segments and some segments that were neither.  Most US highways were FAP except for where they paralleled an interstate.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on November 30, 2013, 04:28:39 AM
They may also be old AR 59 (there was a 59 in southern Arkansas before US 59 was formed).

Where?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on November 30, 2013, 04:31:48 AM
AHTD's website has a LOT of useful material.  From historic bridge listings to historical maps to meeting minutes to old copies of Arkansas Highways magazine, the AHTD website is a great resource.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on November 30, 2013, 04:48:31 AM
AHTD's website has a LOT of useful material.  From historic bridge listings to historical maps to meeting minutes to old copies of Arkansas Highways magazine, the AHTD website is a great resource.
It may be great for a roadgeek interested in historic value... And I am, but it needs more.  I work in IT and AHTDs website needs a huge overhaul, along with ODOTs.  And, now that I look at it, ODOTs website is worse than AHTDs.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: NE2 on November 30, 2013, 04:54:00 AM
I spoke with Scott Bennett, AHTD Director, about this issue directly. He is well aware of the size of the system and says they basically have an informal primary-secondary network internally.
Probably a rough continuation of the old federal aid primary/secondary systems.

Probably not.  AR 8 east of Mena was FAP while AR 8 west of town was FAS, for one example.  Some state highways had FAP and FAS segments and some segments that were neither.  Most US highways were FAP except for where they paralleled an interstate.

What does this have to do with anything? 159 has segments that are relatively major (such as to Louisiana) and chickenshit segments. The former should be maintained to a higher standard than the latter. This may or may not correspond to the FAP/FAS divide (or the FA/non-FA divide).
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on November 30, 2013, 06:59:12 AM
AHTD's website has a LOT of useful material.  From historic bridge listings to historical maps to meeting minutes to old copies of Arkansas Highways magazine, the AHTD website is a great resource.
It may be great for a roadgeek interested in historic value... And I am, but it needs more.  I work in IT and AHTDs website needs a huge overhaul, along with ODOTs.  And, now that I look at it, ODOTs website is worse than AHTDs.

ODOT's site has plenty of good information as well.  OTA's website kinda sucks though.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on November 30, 2013, 07:03:12 AM
I spoke with Scott Bennett, AHTD Director, about this issue directly. He is well aware of the size of the system and says they basically have an informal primary-secondary network internally.
Probably a rough continuation of the old federal aid primary/secondary systems.

Probably not.  AR 8 east of Mena was FAP while AR 8 west of town was FAS, for one example.  Some state highways had FAP and FAS segments and some segments that were neither.  Most US highways were FAP except for where they paralleled an interstate.

What does this have to do with anything? 159 has segments that are relatively major (such as to Louisiana) and chickenshit segments. The former should be maintained to a higher standard than the latter. This may or may not correspond to the FAP/FAS divide (or the FA/non-FA divide).

You said the primary/secondary system coorelated with the old FAP/FAS designation and I said that I didn't think it did.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: NE2 on November 30, 2013, 08:13:16 AM
And then you gave some reasons that don't make sense. 8 west of Mena could be part of the secondary system while east of Mena could be primary. U.S. Highways could be primary except where they parallel an Interstate.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on November 30, 2013, 09:58:32 AM
You implied that the secondary system was made up of individual routes, not parts of routes that are partially on the primary system.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: NE2 on November 30, 2013, 10:41:09 AM
I did no such thing.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on November 30, 2013, 10:48:38 AM
Indeed you did.  I said "implied" not "stated".
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on November 30, 2013, 10:54:18 AM
They may also be old AR 59 (there was a 59 in southern Arkansas before US 59 was formed).

Where?

I'll have to go back and verify, but I believe in the Eudora area
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: NE2 on November 30, 2013, 10:58:09 AM
Indeed you did.  I said "implied" not "stated".
You're putting implications in my poo.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on November 30, 2013, 10:58:54 AM
I will never understand why AHTD is so against providing roadway lighting.


What's their usual excuse? Money!

They waste it on pet projects, then don't have it for important stuff.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: NE2 on November 30, 2013, 11:00:09 AM
They may also be old AR 59 (there was a 59 in southern Arkansas before US 59 was formed).

Where?

I'll have to go back and verify, but I believe in the Eudora area
Eudora to Louisiana was 59, renumbered 159 when the deliberately confusing 59 was created in northwest Arkansas. Thanks, AHTD! (http://www.arkansashighways.com/planning_research/mapping_graphics/archived_tourist_maps/archived_tourist_maps.aspx)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on November 30, 2013, 11:10:54 AM
Indeed you did.  I said "implied" not "stated".
You're putting implications in my poo.

Yes you did, Brad, yes you did.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on November 30, 2013, 11:12:14 AM
Why was AR 99 renumbered as AR 43?  (Possibly to match MO 43.)

Why was AR 13 renumbered as AR 81 (and later US 425)?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on November 30, 2013, 11:18:15 AM
Why was AR 99 renumbered as AR 43?  (Possibly to match MO 43.)

Why was AR 13 renumbered as AR 81 (and later US 425)?

Why was AR 47 renumbered as AR 37?  (Possibly to match MO 37?)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: NE2 on November 30, 2013, 11:40:19 AM
Why was AR 13 renumbered as AR 81 (and later US 425)?
I don't know. That one's fuckin weird, since a new 13 was created north from Carlisle at about the same time (1942-1945).
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on November 30, 2013, 12:06:31 PM
Getting back to Bella Vista Bypass, I think AHTD should fund 4 lanes from Missouri line to County Rd. 34 interchange so Missouri will have a better incentive to get voters to pass a bill to finish their part. Missouri has said they want build all 4 lanes to save money. AHTD probably has not thought of it.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on November 30, 2013, 03:22:56 PM
If you promise to meet at the state line and fail to follow through on the promise, that indicates a lack of planning and awareness of the situation across the border. For a state that loves to pimp its follow through (completed as promised!!), MoDOT sure broke a big promise to Arkansas in this instance. I would be embarrassed if I was responsible for dropping the ball in such a manner.

As for the rest of your comments, I have found everything I have ever wanted on AHTD's website. Sure it isn't the world's most user friendly website, but pretty much all the information is there.

I'm glad you like the little reminders to drive safe, but that is a pretty expensive reminder, and I don't blame AHTD one bit for not putting up a sign that says "Look twice for motorcycles" during 90% of its usage. Especially if they funded real safety projects, like cable median barrier, with the savings.

MoDOT's completion of Interstate 49 is not comparable to Arkansas's inability to fund I-49 between Fort Smith and Texarkana, and everyone knows it. Have you ever driven US 71 through the Ouachitas? Its going to be a little more expensive than MoDOT's lay-two-more-lanes-on-flat-prairie.

Also AHTD is implementing access management in Northwest Arkansas, including on Highway 265 and Highway 112 improvement projects. Highway 12 will also likely contain access management.

And so you know, I don't care for much of AHTD's approach, but the avenues you seem to be attacking just simply aren't true.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bill C on November 30, 2013, 07:05:43 PM


MoDOT's completion of Interstate 49 is not comparable to Arkansas's inability to fund I-49 between Fort Smith and Texarkana, and everyone knows it. Have you ever driven US 71 through the Ouachitas? Its going to be a little more expensive than MoDOT's lay-two-more-lanes-on-flat-prairie.





If I may be bold enough to offer a suggestion to the geographic difficulties of building through western Arkansas, why not simply build I-49 from Texarkana to Fort Smith  through eastern Oklahoma and link the new roadway at the southern current end of I-540?  It seems to me to be a way to save money and to build the road quicker (if Oklahoma is amenable to the prospect of the new interstate in their territory).  Oklahoma's hills are smaller and their terrain easier to surmount.  Go west young man...

I also think I-69 should be taken from Houston to Texarkana.  Scrap the I-369 name and remove plans to put the road across southern Arkansas or into Mississippi.  From Little Rock route I-49 over US 67 to Poplar Bluff, joining I-57 at Sikeston.  Once a road is built connecting Marion to Evansville, I-69 outside of Texas would be complete with far fewer bridges, far sooner, and at a huge savings. We already have routes from Mexico to Canada, we just haven't linked them by name and the gaps in them are much easier to close than what the bureaucrats have handed us.  Ease the burden on the citizens of both Mississippi and Arkansas by making a routing change now to save money and use resources more wisely.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on November 30, 2013, 07:16:52 PM
112 improvements? You mean shifting the road near AR 12? I figured most of that was City of Bentonville.

265? How many years did AHTD talk about extending it to Rogers? At least 20, IIRC.

Now we can sit here and play the "blame game" or we can look at creative solutions, such as Louisiana did with unclaimed property.

Both AHTD and MoDOT share some of the blame. Quit pointing fingers and DO something!

---
FWIW, I find MoDOT's "Nag" signs to be a nuisance. I suppose they are good when there's a major traffic slow down or a detour, but I get weary of "Watch for Motorcycles. MODOT Cares" or "Don't Drink and Drive. MODOT Cares" or "Don't Pick Your A$$ While Driving. MODOT cares". :whip:
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on December 01, 2013, 12:31:10 AM
My post was an Idea to help Missouri get enough votes in 2014 to pass a tax bill to complete their part of the bella Vista Bypass. I have seen 2 articles, that is what they are looking into. Remember the 2009 Stimulus grant from the federal gov. was the give 5 million to each state for that project. Missouri gave up their part so Arkansas could start. I am from Arkansas and believe it should be working together with Missouri to finish the project. If there belief is to save money by building 4 lanes then Arkansas needs to offer to build 4 lanes to the first interchange so we can support their citizens to vote for money to finish their part. The 1/2 cent Arkansas sales tax was passed and it did not state where the money should be spent. I think that should be a priority road to get finished.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on December 01, 2013, 03:29:22 AM
I have found everything I have ever wanted on AHTD's website. Sure it isn't the world's most user friendly website, but pretty much all the information is there.

I'm glad you like the little reminders to drive safe, but that is a pretty expensive reminder, and I don't blame AHTD one bit for not putting up a sign that says "Look twice for motorcycles" during 90% of its usage. Especially if they funded real safety projects, like cable median barrier, with the savings.

MoDOT's completion of Interstate 49 is not comparable to Arkansas's inability to fund I-49 between Fort Smith and Texarkana, and everyone knows it. Have you ever driven US 71 through the Ouachitas? Its going to be a little more expensive than MoDOT's lay-two-more-lanes-on-flat-prairie.

Also AHTD is implementing access management in Northwest Arkansas, including on Highway 265 and Highway 112 improvement projects. Highway 12 will also likely contain access management.

And so you know, I don't care for much of AHTD's approach, but the avenues you seem to be attacking just simply aren't true.

I want to see actual plans on AHTD's website.  For instance, the SPUI that will be constructed at Exit 85 on I-540 in NWA.  I just want to view the documents online.  I had to email a district engineer to view them.  More can be done with AHTD's website, but it's not horrible.  That's the least of the problems.

Those signs that you are referring to will also broadcast Amber Alerts, weather alerts, road closures, and civil emergencies... Every other state has them along Interstates.  If they are not included in the reconstruction of 540 in NWA, then we have a big problem.

I have driven US 71 between Fort Smith and I-30.  And I know that will be a task and a half to complete.  I don't see that link happening in my lifetime... and I'm 27.  I'm not dissing any organization/entity/etc when it comes to that.

AR 112?  If you're referring to SW I Street in Bentonville, then yes, that is a beautiful roadway, and well thought out... It should be a standard... Sidewalks on both sides, a raised center median, and roadway lighting.  Was it Bentonville or AHTD?  I know for sure the roadway lights were not AHTD.  AHTD seems to hate anything to do with roadway lighting.

And if you happen to be affiliated with AHTD, US 62 (Hudson Road) east of I-540 in Rogers, has some raised reflective pavement markers that were installed when they resurfaced it... Sporadically... It's like they gave up after a while.
And if you are affiliated with AHTD, why will you not install roadway lighting on state roads, when it's feasible and needed?







 


Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Scott5114 on December 01, 2013, 05:52:00 AM
If I may be bold enough to offer a suggestion to the geographic difficulties of building through western Arkansas, why not simply build I-49 from Texarkana to Fort Smith  through eastern Oklahoma and link the new roadway at the southern current end of I-540?  It seems to me to be a way to save money and to build the road quicker (if Oklahoma is amenable to the prospect of the new interstate in their territory).  Oklahoma's hills are smaller and their terrain easier to surmount.  Go west young man...

In Oklahoma, you run into money problems (ODOT is concentrating on bridges) and lack of political will to bypass towns on the US-59 corridor. There would also be little benefit to Oklahoma (you would be serving Poteau and Pocola and that's it). If this came to pass, it would have to be an OTA project.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: NE2 on December 01, 2013, 06:49:10 AM
Can someone tell me what major city-to-city corridor I-49 is supposed to serve? Houston-KC traffic is better off going via Dallas and US 75-69, picking up I-49 at Joplin, and New Orleans-KC traffic can save distance and stick to mostly four-lanes by going to Memphis and then up US 63-60-13.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on December 01, 2013, 10:18:27 AM
Can someone tell me what major city-to-city corridor I-49 is supposed to serve? Houston-KC traffic is better off going via Dallas and US 75-69, picking up I-49 at Joplin, and New Orleans-KC traffic can save distance and stick to mostly four-lanes by going to Memphis and then up US 63-60-13.

NAFTA.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: J N Winkler on December 01, 2013, 10:46:50 AM
I want to see actual plans on AHTD's website.  For instance, the SPUI that will be constructed at Exit 85 on I-540 in NWA.  I just want to view the documents online.  I had to email a district engineer to view them.

AHTD does put construction plans on its website--the problem is that they aren't archived online after the letting.  There are some states where the state DOT does quite a good job of making construction plans available online in arrears, but Arkansas just isn't one of them (yet).  This issue is actually one reason I have written scripts to collect and archive the plans automatically.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: NE2 on December 01, 2013, 12:14:38 PM
Can someone tell me what major city-to-city corridor I-49 is supposed to serve? Houston-KC traffic is better off going via Dallas and US 75-69, picking up I-49 at Joplin, and New Orleans-KC traffic can save distance and stick to mostly four-lanes by going to Memphis and then up US 63-60-13.

NAFTA.
How is that an answer? Mexican traffic will go via Houston, and Canadian traffic needs somewhere to go to.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on December 02, 2013, 04:16:26 AM
My previous post was deleted... and it probably should have been.

I'll stand by my "nag" Missouri dynamic message signs... Those signs will display Amber Alerts, Road Closures, Weather Conditions, etc.  I just said that I like MoDOT's extra messages on those signs.  And most every other state that I've visited have implemented those signs, and most don't display those extra messages.  To each their own.

And those signs are an essential part of ITS strategies.


Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: NE2 on December 02, 2013, 09:06:46 AM
I just thought of a reason why this has come up, and it isn't an AASHTO problem, but an Arkansas problem. I think internally Arkansas only refers to the route number and makes no distinction between whether it is a Interstate, US, or State Route. With that said, I don't see why they can't just put up I-49 signs but still refer to it internally as 549 until they can come up with a different system internally for referring to state routes.
Oh please. If http://www.openstreetmap.org/?relation=1714635 can have a single number (159), so can US 49 and I-49.
Worse (from the standpoint that two same-numbered routes at opposite ends of the state are supposedly a problem): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arkansas_Highway_37

And 980 :bigass:
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Anthony_JK on December 02, 2013, 09:08:41 AM
Can someone tell me what major city-to-city corridor I-49 is supposed to serve? Houston-KC traffic is better off going via Dallas and US 75-69, picking up I-49 at Joplin, and New Orleans-KC traffic can save distance and stick to mostly four-lanes by going to Memphis and then up US 63-60-13.

New Orleans is still a major city....and Louisiana has four of the busiest seaports in the nation.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: NE2 on December 02, 2013, 09:46:01 AM
Can someone tell me what major city-to-city corridor I-49 is supposed to serve? Houston-KC traffic is better off going via Dallas and US 75-69, picking up I-49 at Joplin, and New Orleans-KC traffic can save distance and stick to mostly four-lanes by going to Memphis and then up US 63-60-13.

New Orleans is still a major city....and Louisiana has four of the busiest seaports in the nation.

Bold added.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on December 02, 2013, 09:49:43 AM
My previous post was deleted... and it probably should have been.

I'll stand by my "nag" Missouri dynamic message signs... Those signs will display Amber Alerts, Road Closures, Weather Conditions, etc.  I just said that I like MoDOT's extra messages on those signs.  And most every other state that I've visited have implemented those signs, and most don't display those extra messages.  To each their own.

And those signs are an essential part of ITS strategies.



I can understand the signs if there's an accident, I just don't like the "nag" messages .
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: ShawnP on December 02, 2013, 11:16:12 AM
First I believe both Arkansas are to blame for the BVB fiasco. First it was Arkansas going, then Missouri and then both states pointing at each other. Missouri missed a golden opportunity to save some major bucks if they had built their portion in 09 when construction rates were at historic lows. Sure MODOT would have taken some nanny hits from folks over a ghost road but us Road Geeks would know the major bucks they saved and would have saluted them. Knowing had badly BVB is needed by both states I wouldn't have seen the Missouri portion as a ghost road for long.

As far Nanny messages. They drive me utterly crazy to have my tax dollars go to lecture me. I see the Amber Alerts, road warnings for construction and accidents. I do not see the endless seatbelt lecturing messages.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Anthony_JK on December 02, 2013, 11:50:52 AM
Can someone tell me what major city-to-city corridor I-49 is supposed to serve? Houston-KC traffic is better off going via Dallas and US 75-69, picking up I-49 at Joplin, and New Orleans-KC traffic can save distance and stick to mostly four-lanes by going to Memphis and then up US 63-60-13.

New Orleans is still a major city....and Louisiana has four of the busiest seaports in the nation.

Bold added.

Acknowledged...for now. Until I-49 is actually finished. 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: NE2 on December 02, 2013, 01:12:55 PM
I-49 isn't going to magically cut the distance...
New Orleans to Kansas City via Memphis: 844 miles (http://maps.google.com/maps?q=new+orleans+to+kansas+city&saddr=new+orleans&daddr=kansas+city&num=100&t=m&z=6&geocode=FVoEyQEdFJ6h-illghGyVKQghjG00yJe6FsG2w%3BFU6dVAIdedhc-imXmemvXvfAhzGiUapq5iWFVQ)
New Orleans to Kansas City via I-10 to Lafayette and I-49: 883 miles (http://maps.google.com/maps?saddr=new+orleans&daddr=30.3666641,-91.6333879+to:kansas+city&hl=en&sll=34.525592,-92.171112&sspn=14.658597,29.025879&geocode=FVoEyQEdFJ6h-illghGyVKQghjG00yJe6FsG2w%3BFchbzwEdFcmJ-imDQkDmTW4khjFvZVyhlbvvxw%3BFU6dVAIdedhc-imXmemvXvfAhzGiUapq5iWFVQ&mra=dpe&mrsp=1&sz=6&via=1&t=m&z=6)
New Orleans to Kansas City via I-49 all the way: 905 miles (http://maps.google.com/maps?saddr=new+orleans&daddr=29.7006127,-91.1996663+to:kansas+city&hl=en&sll=34.525592,-92.171112&sspn=14.658597,29.025879&geocode=FVoEyQEdFJ6h-illghGyVKQghjG00yJe6FsG2w%3BFQQyxQEdTmeQ-inPePBj8mEhhjHobiudX3yj4A%3BFU6dVAIdedhc-imXmemvXvfAhzGiUapq5iWFVQ&mra=dpe&mrsp=1&sz=6&via=1&t=m&z=6)

And the terrain's flatter via Memphis, another benefit for trucks. The money would be better spent completing the four-laning of US 63, something AHTD probably plans anyway.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on December 02, 2013, 02:51:32 PM

And the terrain's flatter via Memphis, another benefit for trucks. The money would be better spent completing the four-laning of US 63, something AHTD probably plans anyway.

Not to worry: I'm sure AHTD will blow up half the mountainside to have a (reasonably) level roadway. </s>
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: NE2 on December 02, 2013, 05:09:24 PM
Why was AR 13 renumbered as AR 81 (and later US 425)?
I don't know. That one's fuckin weird, since a new 13 was created north from Carlisle at about the same time (1942-1945).

Never mind, sort of. Turns out the "1942" map is not actually from 1942. The 1941 map shows 13 existing both south from Pine Bluff and north from Carlisle. I guess they planned to connect them, but decided not to and so renumbered one. But why renumber the older one?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on December 02, 2013, 06:40:10 PM
Why was AR 47 renumbered as AR 37?  (Possibly to match MO 37?)

Duh.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on December 03, 2013, 12:11:27 AM

I want to see actual plans on AHTD's website.  For instance, the SPUI that will be constructed at Exit 85 on I-540 in NWA.  I just want to view the documents online.  I had to email a district engineer to view them.  More can be done with AHTD's website, but it's not horrible.  That's the least of the problems.

Those signs that you are referring to will also broadcast Amber Alerts, weather alerts, road closures, and civil emergencies... Every other state has them along Interstates.  If they are not included in the reconstruction of 540 in NWA, then we have a big problem.


AHTD doesn't even anticipate funding the SPUI project you referenced until 2015. I recently did some work related to the project and am somewhat familiar with it.

So you want to view plans of projects in the works in addition to bid projects, essentially? I suppose I wasn't aware that lots of DOTs upload plans during intermediate review submittals even prior to the finalized construction set.

I am not affiliated with AHTD, so I cannot speak to their hatred of street lights
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on December 03, 2013, 09:33:49 AM
Why was AR 47 renumbered as AR 37?  (Possibly to match MO 37?)

Duh.

Should have been done in 1930.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: NE2 on December 03, 2013, 10:52:18 AM
Why was AR 47 renumbered as AR 37?  (Possibly to match MO 37?)

Duh.

Should have been done in 1930.
Why 1930? Missouri had 37 there back in 1922, and Arkansas designated 47 (from Rogers, replacing the non-US 71 part of A-4) in 1926. Arkansas numbered 25 to match Missouri, and could have easily done the same with 37.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on December 03, 2013, 11:11:15 AM
Why was AR 47 renumbered as AR 37?  (Possibly to match MO 37?)

Duh.

Should have been done in 1930.
Why 1930? Missouri had 37 there back in 1922, and Arkansas designated 47 (from Rogers, replacing the non-US 71 part of A-4) in 1926. Arkansas numbered 25 to match Missouri, and could have easily done the same with 37.

47 ran from Rogers to the MO Line at Gateway. Most of it was replaced by US 62 in 1930, so that's when it should have been renumbered, IMO.

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: NE2 on December 03, 2013, 11:28:45 AM
I suppose. Or it could have been an extension of 72 in Arkansas multi-segment style.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on December 03, 2013, 11:36:57 AM
Why was AR 13 renumbered as AR 81 (and later US 425)?
I don't know. That one's fuckin weird, since a new 13 was created north from Carlisle at about the same time (1942-1945).

The initial guess would be because "13" is an "unlucky number."  But, as you said, it was reused in the Carlyle area.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on December 03, 2013, 11:50:51 AM
If I may be bold enough to offer a suggestion to the geographic difficulties of building through western Arkansas, why not simply build I-49 from Texarkana to Fort Smith  through eastern Oklahoma and link the new roadway at the southern current end of I-540?  It seems to me to be a way to save money and to build the road quicker (if Oklahoma is amenable to the prospect of the new interstate in their territory).  Oklahoma's hills are smaller and their terrain easier to surmount.  Go west young man...

Have you ever taken US 259 over Kiamichi Mountain?  I didn't think so.  A tunnel would be necessary if one were to build an interstate through here.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on December 03, 2013, 12:19:21 PM

If I may be bold enough to offer a suggestion to the geographic difficulties of building through western Arkansas, why not simply build I-49 from Texarkana to Fort Smith  through eastern Oklahoma and link the new roadway at the southern current end of I-540?  It seems to me to be a way to save money and to build the road quicker (if Oklahoma is amenable to the prospect of the new interstate in their territory).  Oklahoma's hills are smaller and their terrain easier to surmount.  Go west young man...

Once upon a time, there was a proposal to extend I-540 into Oklahoma, but that seems to have fallen by the wayside.

There is already a section of I-49 set to open next year between Barling and south of Ft Smith.  There is also a proposal to reroute I-540 near exit 12 to connect to I-49, so having having 49 connect to 540 near the OK/AR Line seems a moot point.

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on December 03, 2013, 12:59:16 PM

If I may be bold enough to offer a suggestion to the geographic difficulties of building through western Arkansas, why not simply build I-49 from Texarkana to Fort Smith  through eastern Oklahoma and link the new roadway at the southern current end of I-540?  It seems to me to be a way to save money and to build the road quicker (if Oklahoma is amenable to the prospect of the new interstate in their territory).  Oklahoma's hills are smaller and their terrain easier to surmount.  Go west young man...

Once upon a time, there was a proposal to extend I-540 into Oklahoma, but that seems to have fallen by the wayside.

There is already a section of I-49 set to open next year between Barling and south of Ft Smith.  There is also a proposal to reroute I-540 near exit 12 to connect to I-49, so having having 49 connect to 540 near the OK/AR Line seems a moot point.

Hoo, boy...I thought the same thing too, until I drove up and down the Oklahoma 59 stretch between the Talimena Scenic Drive access, the JFK memorial (interesting story behind that, and timely for this past month, too) and the "three sticks".  I can't imagine them building an interstate along that roadway unless it was like that one (I-24? don't have time to look it up) between Manchester and Chattanooga, TN that has the tunnel.  SHEESH, that makes building the Arkansas FSM-Texarkana stretch look easy contemplating that.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: codyg1985 on December 03, 2013, 01:06:49 PM

If I may be bold enough to offer a suggestion to the geographic difficulties of building through western Arkansas, why not simply build I-49 from Texarkana to Fort Smith  through eastern Oklahoma and link the new roadway at the southern current end of I-540?  It seems to me to be a way to save money and to build the road quicker (if Oklahoma is amenable to the prospect of the new interstate in their territory).  Oklahoma's hills are smaller and their terrain easier to surmount.  Go west young man...

Once upon a time, there was a proposal to extend I-540 into Oklahoma, but that seems to have fallen by the wayside.

There is already a section of I-49 set to open next year between Barling and south of Ft Smith.  There is also a proposal to reroute I-540 near exit 12 to connect to I-49, so having having 49 connect to 540 near the OK/AR Line seems a moot point.

Hoo, boy...I thought the same thing too, until I drove up and down the Oklahoma 59 stretch between the Talimena Scenic Drive access, the JFK memorial (interesting story behind that, and timely for this past month, too) and the "three sticks".  I can't imagine them building an interstate along that roadway unless it was like that one (I-24? don't have time to look it up) between Manchester and Chattanooga, TN that has the tunnel.  SHEESH, that makes building the Arkansas FSM-Texarkana stretch look easy contemplating that.

I-24 doesn't have a tunnel. Are you referring to Monteagle where each carriageway goes up each side of the mountain?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on December 03, 2013, 04:15:32 PM
Indeed, thanks...the Monteagle split is what I was thinking of.  It's been so long since I've traveled on that I really thought I remembered a tunnel.  (Must have been thinking of the Norfolk Southern, which DOES have a tunnel parallel to the Interstate north of Chattanooga.)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on December 04, 2013, 04:44:39 AM

I want to see actual plans on AHTD's website.  For instance, the SPUI that will be constructed at Exit 85 on I-540 in NWA.  I just want to view the documents online.  I had to email a district engineer to view them.  More can be done with AHTD's website, but it's not horrible.  That's the least of the problems.

Those signs that you are referring to will also broadcast Amber Alerts, weather alerts, road closures, and civil emergencies... Every other state has them along Interstates.  If they are not included in the reconstruction of 540 in NWA, then we have a big problem.


AHTD doesn't even anticipate funding the SPUI project you referenced until 2015. I recently did some work related to the project and am somewhat familiar with it.

So you want to view plans of projects in the works in addition to bid projects, essentially? I suppose I wasn't aware that lots of DOTs upload plans during intermediate review submittals even prior to the finalized construction set.

I am not affiliated with AHTD, so I cannot speak to their hatred of street lights

It's in the STIP, and will be funded, and I've received documents pertaining to it... And I already know that it's going to be at least 2015.

And yes, I want the basic information, and any plans should be on AHTD's website... Public meetings, etc.  If I-540 is being widened, or a certain interchange is going to be upgraded, I expect to see it on the state transportation site, with info... Where else would I go for info?

Yeah, well, I will forever drive in the dark here! :)

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on December 04, 2013, 05:16:48 AM

And yes, I want the basic information, and any plans should be on AHTD's website... Public meetings, etc.  If I-540 is being widened, or a certain interchange is going to be upgraded, I expect to see it on the state transportation site, with info... Where else would I go for info?

Yeah, well, I will forever drive in the dark here! :)


540 in Ft Smith is getting new exit signs, I can tell you that much ;)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on December 04, 2013, 05:44:53 AM
540 in Ft Smith is getting new exit signs, I can tell you that much ;)

So, Fort Smith will get their first taste of Clearview?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on December 04, 2013, 09:52:26 AM
540 in Ft Smith is getting new exit signs, I can tell you that much ;)

So, Fort Smith will get their first taste of Clearview?

Quite possibly, yes.

Right now, AHTD is just putting in the footings. I doubt we'll see anything until the rubbish reconstruction job is finished.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on December 04, 2013, 10:46:09 AM
If this was posted earlier on this thread, my apologies.  The Kansas City Southern is building a new concrete bridge over the Red River above Texarkana to replace one of those "Jimi Hendrix bridges" (named by me as when I see an old iron bridge with metal code wire poles atop it I think of this scene (0:58 mark of the video, sorry you have to wade through a stupid song to get to it) from "Easy Rider" (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0C3EPTOuBJ4) with Hendrix singing "If six was nine") on the railroad.  The person on the Facebook group who posted the new/old KCS bridge pictures said that a group is wanting to put a lock and dam on the Red right above or near Texarkana to make that river navigable for barges to that point, largely as a result of future I-49.  (I've seen how dry and small the Red can get in west Bowie County, TX so it seems to me that is pushing it, but given that the Little River flows into the Red a few miles downriver in Arkansas I can see where it could happen.)

Don't know if that will happen but if so, another feather in the cap potentially for TXK and I-49.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on December 06, 2013, 03:55:02 AM
If this was posted earlier on this thread, my apologies.  The Kansas City Southern is building a new concrete bridge over the Red River above Texarkana to replace one of those "Jimi Hendrix bridges" (named by me as when I see an old iron bridge with metal code wire poles atop it I think of this scene (0:58 mark of the video, sorry you have to wade through a stupid song to get to it) from "Easy Rider" (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0C3EPTOuBJ4) with Hendrix singing "If six was nine") on the railroad.  The person on the Facebook group who posted the new/old KCS bridge pictures said that a group is wanting to put a lock and dam on the Red right above or near Texarkana to make that river navigable for barges to that point, largely as a result of future I-49.  (I've seen how dry and small the Red can get in west Bowie County, TX so it seems to me that is pushing it, but given that the Little River flows into the Red a few miles downriver in Arkansas I can see where it could happen.)

Don't know if that will happen but if so, another feather in the cap potentially for TXK and I-49.

They'd need at least two additional locks and dams to get the Red navigable to that point. It's only navigable to Shreveport now. Maybe Landrieu and Pryor can hook up to get something done like Kerr and McClellan did on the Arkansas.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on December 19, 2013, 12:24:54 AM
I received this reply back from AHTD, concerning the I-540 widening in Northwest Arkansas:

The study you reference recommends I-540 to be widened to four lanes in each direction in select areas only. At this time we are not proceeding with that and will widen to three lanes. The study will probably be revisited once the current improvements are in place.

You would think that AHTD would have learned their lesson with current I-540, and the Bella Vista Bypass.  Do it right the first time, and you'll save money in the long run.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on December 19, 2013, 10:05:05 AM
I received this reply back from AHTD, concerning the I-540 widening in Northwest Arkansas:

The study you reference recommends I-540 to be widened to four lanes in each direction in select areas only. At this time we are not proceeding with that and will widen to three lanes. The study will probably be revisited once the current improvements are in place.

You would think that AHTD would have learned their lesson with current I-540, and the Bella Vista Bypass.  Do it right the first time, and you'll save money in the long run.

I just saw on the news last night that AHTD is about so start work on extra lanes from Wagon Wheel Road to AR 264 in Lowell.
http://www.4029tv.com/news/arkansas/northwest/highway-department-to-expand-i540-to-six-lanes/-/8897460/23558078/-/isva70z/-/index.html
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on December 25, 2013, 07:34:00 PM
The Arkansas Highway and Transportation Department said it could be years before the Intestate 49 project is completed through the River Valley. As construction continues, the department is seeking funds to complete a bridge over the Arkansas River and to connect I-49 to Interstate 40. “I know there are several leaders here in Fort Smith pushing for funding to be identified,”  said Chad Adams, district engineer for the state highway department. Adams said  six jobs have been added to complete construction of  the section of I-49 between U.S. 71 and Arkansas 22. That section should be opened by mid-2014, he said. Adams said project cost estimates for Arkansas’ portion of I-49 come in at about $96 million. Adams said once the project is completed, motorists will see big improvements.
 Also AHTD is looking for funding to complete the Bella Vista Bypass. They said about 50 million is needed with the 1/2 cent tax money they are to spend on it. Doesn't look good for quick progress.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on December 28, 2013, 05:31:38 AM
The Arkansas Highway and Transportation Department said it could be years before the Intestate 49 project is completed through the River Valley. As construction continues, the department is seeking funds to complete a bridge over the Arkansas River and to connect I-49 to Interstate 40. “I know there are several leaders here in Fort Smith pushing for funding to be identified,”  said Chad Adams, district engineer for the state highway department. Adams said  six jobs have been added to complete construction of  the section of I-49 between U.S. 71 and Arkansas 22. That section should be opened by mid-2014, he said. Adams said project cost estimates for Arkansas’ portion of I-49 come in at about $96 million. Adams said once the project is completed, motorists will see big improvements.
 Also AHTD is looking for funding to complete the Bella Vista Bypass. They said about 50 million is needed with the 1/2 cent tax money they are to spend on it. Doesn't look good for quick progress.


I-49 between Fort Smith and Texarkana won't be completed in my lifetime, and I'm 27.  I guarantee it.  Who wants to place bets? :)

AHTD needs to focus on the population areas (outside of Little Rock), like the Bella Vista Bypass.  This bypass should have been done years ago.

Also, *cough* Clean house *cough* comes to mind.  I've always sensed a "good ol' boy network" within AHTD.  I know that Dick Trammel needs to go.  He has done NOTHING for this area.

http://www.arkansashighways.com/commission.aspx (http://www.arkansashighways.com/commission.aspx) Why is it 10 year terms?  No wonder our highway system is the way it is.

Sorry.  It was good to vent.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on December 30, 2013, 03:02:49 PM
The Arkansas Highway and Transportation Department said it could be years before the Intestate 49 project is completed through the River Valley. As construction continues, the department is seeking funds to complete a bridge over the Arkansas River and to connect I-49 to Interstate 40. “I know there are several leaders here in Fort Smith pushing for funding to be identified,”  said Chad Adams, district engineer for the state highway department. Adams said  six jobs have been added to complete construction of  the section of I-49 between U.S. 71 and Arkansas 22. That section should be opened by mid-2014, he said. Adams said project cost estimates for Arkansas’ portion of I-49 come in at about $96 million. Adams said once the project is completed, motorists will see big improvements.
 Also AHTD is looking for funding to complete the Bella Vista Bypass. They said about 50 million is needed with the 1/2 cent tax money they are to spend on it. Doesn't look good for quick progress.


I-49 between Fort Smith and Texarkana won't be completed in my lifetime, and I'm 27.  I guarantee it.  Who wants to place bets? :)

AHTD needs to focus on the population areas (outside of Little Rock), like the Bella Vista Bypass.  This bypass should have been done years ago.

Also, *cough* Clean house *cough* comes to mind.  I've always sensed a "good ol' boy network" within AHTD.  I know that Dick Trammel needs to go.  He has done NOTHING for this area.

http://www.arkansashighways.com/commission.aspx (http://www.arkansashighways.com/commission.aspx) Why is it 10 year terms?  No wonder our highway system is the way it is.

Sorry.  It was good to vent.

Indeed, I saw a census estimate that the four county Northwest Arkansas metro area now has 500,000 people (not counting the 300,000 in the adjacent Fort Smith metro area, tied in so many ways to "NWA").  How many other half-million people metro areas don't have a through interstate?  (Which could have been completed years ago when Missouri was ready, had not Arkansas played Keystone Kop.)

A sad note for an area that has so many other things going for it.  And possibly could have a LOT more going right now were I-49 fully linking it between Joplin and metro Fort Smith.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on December 31, 2013, 06:27:32 AM
Agreed.  Northwest Arkansas is unique in that there is no solid city with suburbs.  It's just a mess of cities, competing against each other.



Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on December 31, 2013, 12:14:00 PM
If the cities in NW AR keep growing the way they're growing the highway infrastructure will be forced to improve to keep up with it. The big question is which highways in the region will be built or improved first? If AHTD can't find a way to build their portion of I-49 anytime in the foreseeable future improvements in some other corridors may pick up some of the slack. For instance, growth in both Dallas-Fort Worth and NW Arkansas could eventually force US-69 and US-412 in Oklahoma to be improved to Interstate standards.

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on December 31, 2013, 08:05:56 PM
The Bella Vista Bypass construction project from Hwy. 72 South to the future Hwy 71, I 540 Interchange is scheduled for 2/26/2014. It will be only 2 lanes of future I 49. Hopefully they will keep their commitment.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on January 08, 2014, 05:52:25 PM
this article (behind paywall) (http://www.nwaonline.com/news/2013/oct/27/i-49-designation-clears-roadblock-20131027/) reports that AHTD has already submitted its application to FHWA, FHWA has signaled that approval should be effective by Christmas, and that, after approval, "it will take a while longer before the new signs go up and the old ones come down":
Quote
Doug Hecox, a spokesman for the Federal Highway Administration, said Christmas is possible.
“I think that sounds like a very reasonable goal,”  he said.
“The proposal from the state is still being reviewed, so we don’t have any way to ballpark how long it’ll take.”

A recent email Q & A with FHWA's Washington office indicates that the above information may be incorrect and that AHTD has not even submitted an application to FHWA:

Quote
As you are probably aware, the redesignations of I-540 and AR 549 as I-49 were conditionally approved by AASHTO this Fall (2013), however the Federal Highway Administrator has not formally received a redesignation request.  Once an official request is submitted for the Administrator’s determination through our Arkansas Federal-Aid Division Office it will be reviewed and processed accordingly.

I wonder if AHTD even realizes that it has not properly submitted an application to FHWA?

edit

Or, maybe FHWA's Arkansas Federal-Aid Division Office is still reviewing it. Glacial progress.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Alps on January 08, 2014, 06:54:05 PM
this article (behind paywall) (http://www.nwaonline.com/news/2013/oct/27/i-49-designation-clears-roadblock-20131027/) reports that AHTD has already submitted its application to FHWA, FHWA has signaled that approval should be effective by Christmas, and that, after approval, "it will take a while longer before the new signs go up and the old ones come down":
Quote
Doug Hecox, a spokesman for the Federal Highway Administration, said Christmas is possible.
“I think that sounds like a very reasonable goal,”  he said.
“The proposal from the state is still being reviewed, so we don’t have any way to ballpark how long it’ll take.”

A recent email Q & A with FHWA's Washington office indicates that the above information may be incorrect and that AHTD has not even submitted an application to FHWA:

Quote
As you are probably aware, the redesignations of I-540 and AR 549 as I-49 were conditionally approved by AASHTO this Fall (2013), however the Federal Highway Administrator has not formally received a redesignation request.  Once an official request is submitted for the Administrator’s determination through our Arkansas Federal-Aid Division Office it will be reviewed and processed accordingly.

I wonder if AHTD even realizes that it has not properly submitted an application to FHWA?

edit

Or, maybe FHWA's Arkansas Federal-Aid Division Office is still reviewing it. Glacial progress.
We can now ask AHTD! They're on the forum!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: AHTD on January 13, 2014, 05:27:54 PM
 Currently we are working with the FHWA local division office to formally submit the application to that agency. We submitted an initial application to the local division office late last year and continue to work with this office to finalize the document. Essentially, the local division office is helping to guide AHTD through the application process.
 
 
In the fall of 2013, AHTD applied for I-49 designation in multiple locations during the annual meeting of the AASHTO U.S. Route Numbering Committee (see link to PDF map below). AASHTO is an organization of peers and as such, the peers on the U.S. Route Numbering Committee review requests made by member organizations. The peer review of AHTD's request was favorable and resulted in a committee recommendation that will be included as part of the application to FHWA.
 
 
http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49_Route_Request.pdf (http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49_Route_Request.pdf)
 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on January 13, 2014, 05:33:42 PM
I would like to say that its awesome AHTD is on this forum

 :cheers:
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on January 14, 2014, 12:31:34 AM
I would like to say that its awesome AHTD is on this forum

 :cheers:

Will they answer the hard questions from us on the forum?  We'll see.  They didn't respond to mine.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on January 14, 2014, 10:52:27 AM
I would like to say that its awesome AHTD is on this forum

 :cheers:

Will they answer the hard questions from us on the forum?  We'll see.  They didn't respond to mine.

I usually just e-mail them directly and get a response in 1-2 days.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: AHTD on January 14, 2014, 12:03:48 PM
You have questions?
 
Please feel free to ask anything, we are here to provide the answers.
 
 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: txstateends on January 14, 2014, 12:22:14 PM
OK, *if* the $$ was there right now for AR to finish I-49, how soon could what's left to do (Fort Smith-Texarkana, Ark. River bridge, Red River bridge, full 4-laning of the Bella Vista bypass) be built and opened?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on January 14, 2014, 12:22:53 PM
You have questions?
 
Please feel free to ask anything, we are here to provide the answers.
 
 

I've noticed new exit signs going up on I-540 in Ft Smith. but no exit numbers yet. Is the rumor true that the exit numbers are being shifted to match the Alma-Bentonville segment (ie Exit 1 will now be Hwy 271 instead of I-40 West? I am guessing that won't officially happen until the 540 rebuild is finished this Spring?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: AHTD on January 14, 2014, 03:07:37 PM
You have questions?
 
Please feel free to ask anything, we are here to provide the answers.
 
 

I've noticed new exit signs going up on I-540 in Ft Smith. but no exit numbers yet. Is the rumor true that the exit numbers are being shifted to match the Alma-Bentonville segment (ie Exit 1 will now be Hwy 271 instead of I-40 West? I am guessing that won't officially happen until the 540 rebuild is finished this Spring?

The project in question involves reconstruction of I-540 in Crawford and Sebastian Counties from State Highway 22 to I-40 (AHTD Job No. BB0407) and is part of our Interstate Rehabilitation Program (http://www.idrivearkansas.com/construction-programs/interstate-rehabilitation-program/). Replacement of signage is part of the contract. Our intent is to wait until the work is completed and then post exit numbers all at once. The current estimated completion for this project is mid-2014.
 
At one time there was discussion of renumbering these exits to complement the northern section of I-540 (I-40 to Bentonville), however that will not happen now that we are actively seeking re-designation of the northern section as I-49.
 
Both I-540 to the north and to the south are Interstate spurs (so too is I-530 in Southeast Arkansas). Numbering of exits for Interstate spurs begin at the parent Interstate — in this case I-40 — and proceed the distance. In the case of I-540 in Crawford and Sebastian Counties, the current exit numbers (the way they were prior to construction) are correct and will likely stay the way they have been. It is too early to say what will happen to exit numbers on the northern section once it is re-designated I-49.
 
Now for some interesting trivia! When I-540 in Crawford and Sebastian Counties was constructed, it was originally done so and signed as U.S. Highway 271. This is a west to east route and as such, the log miles begin at the state line and proceed the distance to I-40. Eventually this section of U.S. Highway 271 was re-designated as Interstate spur 540. What resulted is exit numbers that went one direction and log miles that go another.
 
Currently we have a request before FHWA to re-log this southern section of I-540 to match the progression of exit numbers — which is the standard practice.
 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on January 14, 2014, 03:51:55 PM

Now for some interesting trivia! When I-540 in Crawford and Sebastian Counties was constructed, it was originally done so and signed as U.S. Highway 271. This is a west to east route and as such, the log miles begin at the state line and proceed the distance to I-40. Eventually this section of U.S. Highway 271 was re-designated as Interstate spur 540. What resulted is exit numbers that went one direction and log miles that go another.
 

Very interesting!  I've seen some old maps that designated it AR 540 in the 1960's but was unaware of US 271, though I've been able to trace 271's other alignments in & around Ft Smith.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: rickmastfan67 on January 14, 2014, 04:06:39 PM
AHTD, when the 'Northern' segment of I-540 is re-designated as I-49, will it get new exit numbers at the same time?  If it does, it is possible to post the list here?

Also, will you be submitting an application to the AASHTO for removal of I-540 north of I-40 (and also along I-40) in the Spring '14 meeting since you now have I-49 approval from the AASHTO, and hopefully soon the FHWA?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: AHTD on January 14, 2014, 05:39:31 PM
OK, *if* the $$ was there right now for AR to finish I-49, how soon could what's left to do (Fort Smith-Texarkana, Ark. River bridge, Red River bridge, full 4-laning of the Bella Vista bypass) be built and opened?

 
Among other things, this map (http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49_Route_Request.pdf) illustrates the remaining sections of I-49 that are not under construction (red lines). The current gross estimate for completing everything is $2.8 Billion. This includes the river crossings (Arkansas River estimated around $500 million) and the remaining two lanes of the Bella Vista Bypass (estimated at $50 million). It does not include the first two lanes of the Bella Vista Bypass that are under construction; nor does it include those sections of the first two lanes that will be under construction as a result of the half-cent sales tax program.
 
It is important to note here the Bella Vista Bypass will not be completed as a two lane or a four lane facility until Missouri DOT is able to meet us at the state line. Through the years and during the course of this project’s development, there have been times when Arkansas was not ready to meet Missouri at the state line. Currently the bypass will be completed up to Benton County Road 34.
 
If the money were all of a sudden magically available as described in the original question quoted above, the planning estimates for the remaining sections would have to be updated. While the route (new alignment) is approved and environmental impact statements have been completed, design work has not been started.
 
Among the items to consider here include whether or not to divide the design into several projects that multiple consultants could tackle at the same time. Public meetings would be required. Purchase of right-of-way would be required. Not until all utilities are relocated would these projects be let to construction.
 
The amount of time it will take for a contractor to complete any of these projects will vary as it does on any other construction project. Depending upon how the job is set-up, a contractor’s bid may include the number of working days in which to complete the project. And then there are the river crossings…
 
Currently we are estimating 24 months for the U.S. Highway 70 (Broadway) bridge over the Arkansas River at Little Rock to be out of service while the old structure is demolished and the new one constructed. That is an estimate based on a fast-track schedule. A bridge over the Arkansas and Red Rivers on new location is not likely to be fast-tracked.
 
So how would this all play out if the money were available? While nothing is written in stone, it’s reasonable to assume that as money does come available, we would start by constructing bypasses around several of the communities along the route — Mena, DeQueen, Waldron, etc. Then as more money becomes available, we would begin to link those bypasses. Eventually we would have a highway.
 
As a comparison, consider the construction of I-540 between I-40 and the State Highway 265 interchange (Exit 60):
 
      · 42 miles in length
      · $459 million to construct (including $37.1 million for the twin tunnels)
      · Let as 24 separate contracts
      · Construction began in January 1987
      · Construction completed in January 1999
 
 
 
All of the above was after design was finalized, after public meetings were held, after right of way was purchased, and after utilities were relocated.
 
 
 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: AHTD on January 14, 2014, 05:45:23 PM
AHTD, when the 'Northern' segment of I-540 is re-designated as I-49, will it get new exit numbers at the same time?  If it does, it is possible to post the list here?

Also, will you be submitting an application to the AASHTO for removal of I-540 north of I-40 (and also along I-40) in the Spring '14 meeting since you now have I-49 approval from the AASHTO, and hopefully soon the FHWA?

Too early to tell if re-designation of I-49 will yield new exit numbers, and yes we can post those here when they are available. There will be a public information campaign necessary to ensure everyone knows about the change. Businesses will need to change letterhead, etc.
 
See our earlier post regarding application for re-designation: https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3324.msg270962#msg270962 (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3324.msg270962#msg270962)
 
Does this answer your question? Please advise otherwise.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on January 14, 2014, 06:07:57 PM
This is awesome, thanks AHTD

I think posting on a road-lover's message board is going above and beyond the call of duty

 :clap:
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on January 14, 2014, 06:20:14 PM
Currently we are working with the FHWA local division office to formally submit the application to that agency. We submitted an initial application to the local division office late last year and continue to work with this office to finalize the document. Essentially, the local division office is helping to guide AHTD through the application process.

AHTD, welcome to the Forum!

Does the application include a request for FHWA to make a determination as to whether I-540 north of I-40 and AR 549 meet current interstate standards?  Or, is it simply a numbering redesignation request?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: rickmastfan67 on January 15, 2014, 03:31:10 AM
Also, will you be submitting an application to the AASHTO for removal of I-540 north of I-40 (and also along I-40) in the Spring '14 meeting since you now have I-49 approval from the AASHTO, and hopefully soon the FHWA?

See our earlier post regarding application for re-designation: https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3324.msg270962#msg270962 (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3324.msg270962#msg270962)
 
Does this answer your question? Please advise otherwise.

For the 1st question, yes, it does.  However, for the second question it doesn't.

The PDF link you provided in the post you linked to is just the same map that you submitted to the AASHTO for the Fall '13 meeting for the creation of I-49 in the state.  What I was trying to get at, is that I think you still need to submit another application to the AASHTO to eliminate I-540 along and above I-40.  The reason I'm saying this is because of what Indiana did in the Fall '13 meeting to redesignate I-164 as I-69.  They submitted two separate applications to do that, one to eliminate I-164, and then another to establish I-69 along the same route.

All you've done right now is just ask to add I-49 along I-540, but not eliminate I-540 along that section of highway (including the I-40 co-sign) since no application was submitted for that segment of I-540 to be removed.  So, in the eyes of the AASHTO at least, they might think you're going to keep I-540 signed with I-49.  Thus, I think you need to get an application ready for the Spring '14 meeting asking for the elimination of I-540 along and above I-40.  I know that the FHWA has control of the Interstate #'s, but it's still good to have all the i's are dotted and t's are crossed when it comes to the logs and everything else.

I hope you understand what I was trying to get at in my previous post now. :)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: AHTD on January 15, 2014, 02:06:28 PM
Also, will you be submitting an application to the AASHTO for removal of I-540 north of I-40 (and also along I-40) in the Spring '14 meeting since you now have I-49 approval from the AASHTO, and hopefully soon the FHWA?

See our earlier post regarding application for re-designation: https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3324.msg270962#msg270962 (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3324.msg270962#msg270962)
 
Does this answer your question? Please advise otherwise.

For the 1st question, yes, it does.  However, for the second question it doesn't.

The PDF link you provided in the post you linked to is just the same map that you submitted to the AASHTO for the Fall '13 meeting for the creation of I-49 in the state.  What I was trying to get at, is that I think you still need to submit another application to the AASHTO to eliminate I-540 along and above I-40.  The reason I'm saying this is because of what Indiana did in the Fall '13 meeting to redesignate I-164 as I-69.  They submitted two separate applications to do that, one to eliminate I-164, and then another to establish I-69 along the same route.

All you've done right now is just ask to add I-49 along I-540, but not eliminate I-540 along that section of highway (including the I-40 co-sign) since no application was submitted for that segment of I-540 to be removed.  So, in the eyes of the AASHTO at least, they might think you're going to keep I-540 signed with I-49.  Thus, I think you need to get an application ready for the Spring '14 meeting asking for the elimination of I-540 along and above I-40.  I know that the FHWA has control of the Interstate #'s, but it's still good to have all the i's are dotted and t's are crossed when it comes to the logs and everything else.

I hope you understand what I was trying to get at in my previous post now. :)

Thank you for the clarification!
 
Like the application reviewed by the AASHTO U.S. Route Numbering Committee, the application we are currently assembling for submission to FHWA is a re-designation request. It is our understanding the entire action of removing 540 and replacing with 49 is a single action handled with a single application. As we continue to work with the local FHWA division office to assemble the application, if we are told otherwise, the appropriate action will be taken and we'll let you know. Understand we are taking very deliberate steps to ensure there aren't any snags along the way. Perhaps there was some other determining factor that required Indiana to submit two applications? Perhaps because I-540 is a spur makes a difference?
 
Speaking of spurs.... I-540 does not share alignment with I-40 and thus is not co-signed as such. Both stretches of I-540 are spurs that originate from I-40 separately. There is no continuity. Google Maps show this stretch of I-40 to be co-signed - implying there is a shared alignment. As we have stated previously in this forum, Google Maps contains several errors concerning the highway system in Arkansas. We are working with them to become a preferred ground truth provider to help make their product more accurate.
 
 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: NE2 on January 15, 2014, 02:45:06 PM
Speaking of spurs.... I-540 does not share alignment with I-40 and thus is not co-signed as such. Both stretches of I-540 are spurs that originate from I-40 separately. There is no continuity. Google Maps show this stretch of I-40 to be co-signed - implying there is a shared alignment.
Sigh. There is a shared alignment, since Interstate numbers cannot be repeated within a state. And it is signed as such:
(http://www.interstate-guide.com/images540/i-540_ar_hst_01.jpg)

AASHTO even approved the overlap. Peep and weep:
(http://imgur.com/tZkuAUX.png)

But go ahead, make the Goog suck more than it already does.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: AHTD on January 15, 2014, 03:34:11 PM
Currently we are working with the FHWA local division office to formally submit the application to that agency. We submitted an initial application to the local division office late last year and continue to work with this office to finalize the document. Essentially, the local division office is helping to guide AHTD through the application process.

AHTD, welcome to the Forum!

Does the application include a request for FHWA to make a determination as to whether I-540 north of I-40 and AR 549 meet current interstate standards?  Or, is it simply a numbering redesignation request?

 
This is an excellent question!
 
When I-540 was constructed from I-40 to the State Highway 265 interchange and tied-in with the existing bypass of Fayetteville, Springdale and points north, this question was raised during the application process for signing the new route as 540. Apparently a few areas in the older section of the route request were not in compliance with current standards at the time of application.
 
These areas were reviewed by FHWA and certain design exceptions were made as part of the application approval process. Now as we are moving forward with our application to re-designate the route as I-49, part of our due diligence includes making sure documentation of these exceptions are included in the application so we don’t have to go through another round of design exception requests — which would delay the route re-designation process.
 
The oldest parts of State Highway 549 were constructed recently enough to be in compliance with current standards, so it’s good to go. We are in the process of paving the remaining 4.5 miles of this route from Doddridge to the Louisiana State Line and current estimates are that it will be completed in mid-2014.
 
 
 
 
 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on January 15, 2014, 04:24:30 PM
Speaking of spurs.... I-540 does not share alignment with I-40 and thus is not co-signed as such. Both stretches of I-540 are spurs that originate from I-40 separately. There is no continuity. Google Maps show this stretch of I-40 to be co-signed - implying there is a shared alignment.
Sigh. There is a shared alignment, since Interstate numbers cannot be repeated within a state. And it is signed as such:
(http://www.interstate-guide.com/images540/i-540_ar_hst_01.jpg)


South I-540 is co-signed with West I-40 just past Exit 12. Is that a contractor error?

NB I-540 is also co-signed on overheads along EB  I-40
(http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2566/4073936764_369c78b817_z_d.jpg)
(http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2634/4073936870_95a7bca751_z_d.jpg)

If it's not duplexed, shouldn't the signs say TO I-540
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on January 15, 2014, 04:51:26 PM
Now for some interesting trivia! When I-540 in Crawford and Sebastian Counties was constructed, it was originally done so and signed as U.S. Highway 271. This is a west to east route and as such, the log miles begin at the state line and proceed the distance to I-40. Eventually this section of U.S. Highway 271 was re-designated as Interstate spur 540. What resulted is exit numbers that went one direction and log miles that go another.

Whaaaaa?  What years were I-540 signed as US 71.  I'm having a hard time buying this because I have maps that show I-540 ending at AR 22 and continuing to US 71 as AR 540.  The connection between US 71 and US 271 was the last portion completed, and at that time the entire road was signed as I-540 (I assume). 

What was the number of 271 north of 540?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on January 15, 2014, 05:04:11 PM
Too early to tell if re-designation of I-49 will yield new exit numbers, and yes we can post those here when they are available. There will be a public information campaign necessary to ensure everyone knows about the change. Businesses will need to change letterhead, etc.

Well, of course they will have to be renumbered.  There is no question of this.  Milepost 0 will be at the Arkansas/Louisiana line.    It would be confusing to have two Exit 62s off of I-49.

What initial number will the Bella Vista Bypass have?  It obviously won't be I-49 if it is 2 lanes.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: AHTD on January 15, 2014, 05:33:33 PM
Now for some interesting trivia! When I-540 in Crawford and Sebastian Counties was constructed, it was originally done so and signed as U.S. Highway 271. This is a west to east route and as such, the log miles begin at the state line and proceed the distance to I-40. Eventually this section of U.S. Highway 271 was re-designated as Interstate spur 540. What resulted is exit numbers that went one direction and log miles that go another.

Whaaaaa?  What years were I-540 signed as US 71.  I'm having a hard time buying this because I have maps that show I-540 ending at AR 22 and continuing to US 71 as AR 540.  The connection between US 71 and US 271 was the last portion completed, and at that time the entire road was signed as I-540 (I assume). 

What was the number of 271 north of 540?

Yeah we had to go back and look at that one too.
 
The route wasn't signed U.S. Highway 271, it originated FROM U.S. Highway 271. First section was constructed from U.S. 271 to State Highway 22. Minute order 4469 on January 31, 1962 approves the naming of this first section as State Highway 540. Since it progresses west to east (or actually south to north?), the log mile numbering began where it does.
 
Sorry for the confusion. We can upload a copy of the minute order with a graphic illustrating the above if someone can tell us how to paste photos in the thread. Have tried it but cannot seem to make it work.
 
Thanks!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on January 15, 2014, 05:51:30 PM

Sorry for the confusion. We can upload a copy of the minute order with a graphic illustrating the above if someone can tell us how to paste photos in the thread. Have tried it but cannot seem to make it work.
 
Thanks!

You can't post it directly, but use

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: AHTD on January 15, 2014, 06:00:58 PM
Too early to tell if re-designation of I-49 will yield new exit numbers, and yes we can post those here when they are available. There will be a public information campaign necessary to ensure everyone knows about the change. Businesses will need to change letterhead, etc.

Well, of course they will have to be renumbered.  There is no question of this.  Milepost 0 will be at the Arkansas/Louisiana line.    It would be confusing to have two Exit 62s off of I-49.

What initial number will the Bella Vista Bypass have?  It obviously won't be I-49 if it is 2 lanes.

Not sure at this time because of the way the modified connector will be constructed. Since the bypass cannot be fully completed until Missouri meets us at the state line, we cannot directly connect the bypass to I-540 and feed it through traffic. Until the bypass is completed to the state line, U.S. 71 will continue to be the main through traffic feed to I-540. The modified connector will function like a roundabout, so depending upon how they number exits in the modified connector, it could be any of a number of options.
 
We'll definitely keep everyone posted!
 
 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: rickmastfan67 on January 15, 2014, 06:09:21 PM
Speaking of spurs.... I-540 does not share alignment with I-40 and thus is not co-signed as such. Both stretches of I-540 are spurs that originate from I-40 separately. There is no continuity. Google Maps show this stretch of I-40 to be co-signed - implying there is a shared alignment. As we have stated previously in this forum, Google Maps contains several errors concerning the highway system in Arkansas. We are working with them to become a preferred ground truth provider to help make their product more accurate.

Might want to tell your signage department then.  As the posts above mine clearly show I-540 shields on the overhead signs.  And I found a pair of ground mounted signage showing both I-40 & I-540 being signed together. http://goo.gl/maps/KZpVu

So, Google Maps is correct in showing it as co-signed as of right now.

Speaking of spurs.... I-540 does not share alignment with I-40 and thus is not co-signed as such. Both stretches of I-540 are spurs that originate from I-40 separately. There is no continuity. Google Maps show this stretch of I-40 to be co-signed - implying there is a shared alignment.
Sigh. There is a shared alignment, since Interstate numbers cannot be repeated within a state. And it is signed as such:
(http://www.interstate-guide.com/images540/i-540_ar_hst_01.jpg)

AASHTO even approved the overlap. Peep and weep:
(http://imgur.com/tZkuAUX.png)

This also proves my point that there needs to be another application submitted for the I-540 removal.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on January 15, 2014, 06:11:10 PM
Speaking of spurs.... I-540 does not share alignment with I-40 and thus is not co-signed as such. Both stretches of I-540 are spurs that originate from I-40 separately. There is no continuity. Google Maps show this stretch of I-40 to be co-signed - implying there is a shared alignment. As we have stated previously in this forum, Google Maps contains several errors concerning the highway system in Arkansas. We are working with them to become a preferred ground truth provider to help make their product more accurate.

This is incorrect.  According to both AASHTO and the FHWA, I-540 shares pavement with I-40.  Also, the last time I was through there there was an I-540 sign westbound just west of the 40/Future 49 interchange.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: NE2 on January 15, 2014, 06:20:58 PM

Sorry for the confusion. We can upload a copy of the minute order with a graphic illustrating the above if someone can tell us how to paste photos in the thread. Have tried it but cannot seem to make it work.
 
Thanks!

You can't post it directly, but use



No need to use


because it's already OCRed at http://www.arkansashighways.com/minute_orders/minute_orders.aspx. (Any plans to put up actual images? There is the occasional OCR error.)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on January 15, 2014, 06:34:01 PM
Now for some interesting trivia! When I-540 in Crawford and Sebastian Counties was constructed, it was originally done so and signed as U.S. Highway 271. This is a west to east route and as such, the log miles begin at the state line and proceed the distance to I-40. Eventually this section of U.S. Highway 271 was re-designated as Interstate spur 540. What resulted is exit numbers that went one direction and log miles that go another.

Whaaaaa?  What years were I-540 signed as US 71.  I'm having a hard time buying this because I have maps that show I-540 ending at AR 22 and continuing to US 71 as AR 540.  The connection between US 71 and US 271 was the last portion completed, and at that time the entire road was signed as I-540 (I assume). 

What was the number of 271 north of 540?

Yeah we had to go back and look at that one too.
 
The route wasn't signed U.S. Highway 271, it originated FROM U.S. Highway 271. First section was constructed from U.S. 271 to State Highway 22. Minute order 4469 on January 31, 1962 approves the naming of this first section as State Highway 540. Since it progresses west to east (or actually south to north?), the log mile numbering began where it does.
 
Sorry for the confusion. We can upload a copy of the minute order with a graphic illustrating the above if someone can tell us how to paste photos in the thread. Have tried it but cannot seem to make it work.
 
Thanks!

Here is the minute order in question:

Quote
4469 In SEBASTIAN COUNTY, a proposed highway route is hereby established between State Highway No. US 271 south of Fort Smith and the proposed State Highway No. 22 Interchange of Interstate Route No. 540 in Fort Smith, a distance of approximately 6.0 miles, generally along the location shown on the attached sketch, and said route is hereby made a part of the State Highway System, subject to approval by the Bureau of Public Roads as part of the Federal-Aid Primary System.

This says nothing about US 271 following I-540.  It just gave a number for the proposed highway. 

There was, however, a plan to extend US 271 north along AR 59 into Missouri but it was denied by AASHTO (or AASHO).
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: AHTD on January 15, 2014, 06:48:56 PM

Sorry for the confusion. We can upload a copy of the minute order with a graphic illustrating the above if someone can tell us how to paste photos in the thread. Have tried it but cannot seem to make it work.
 
Thanks!

You can't post it directly, but use



No need to use


because it's already OCRed at http://www.arkansashighways.com/minute_orders/minute_orders.aspx (http://www.arkansashighways.com/minute_orders/minute_orders.aspx). (Any plans to put up actual images? There is the occasional OCR error.)
Not at this time but that doesn't mean it won't happen.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: AHTD on January 16, 2014, 10:46:40 AM
Now for some interesting trivia! When I-540 in Crawford and Sebastian Counties was constructed, it was originally done so and signed as U.S. Highway 271. This is a west to east route and as such, the log miles begin at the state line and proceed the distance to I-40. Eventually this section of U.S. Highway 271 was re-designated as Interstate spur 540. What resulted is exit numbers that went one direction and log miles that go another.

Whaaaaa?  What years were I-540 signed as US 71.  I'm having a hard time buying this because I have maps that show I-540 ending at AR 22 and continuing to US 71 as AR 540.  The connection between US 71 and US 271 was the last portion completed, and at that time the entire road was signed as I-540 (I assume). 

What was the number of 271 north of 540?

Yeah we had to go back and look at that one too.
 
The route wasn't signed U.S. Highway 271, it originated FROM U.S. Highway 271. First section was constructed from U.S. 271 to State Highway 22. Minute order 4469 on January 31, 1962 approves the naming of this first section as State Highway 540. Since it progresses west to east (or actually south to north?), the log mile numbering began where it does.
 
Sorry for the confusion. We can upload a copy of the minute order with a graphic illustrating the above if someone can tell us how to paste photos in the thread. Have tried it but cannot seem to make it work.
 
Thanks!

Here is the minute order in question:

Quote
4469 In SEBASTIAN COUNTY, a proposed highway route is hereby established between State Highway No. US 271 south of Fort Smith and the proposed State Highway No. 22 Interchange of Interstate Route No. 540 in Fort Smith, a distance of approximately 6.0 miles, generally along the location shown on the attached sketch, and said route is hereby made a part of the State Highway System, subject to approval by the Bureau of Public Roads as part of the Federal-Aid Primary System.

This says nothing about US 271 following I-540.  It just gave a number for the proposed highway. 

There was, however, a plan to extend US 271 north along AR 59 into Missouri but it was denied by AASHTO (or AASHO).

The link below will display a PDF copy of the graphic associated with MO4469. It illustrates how I-540 progressed from U.S. 271.
 
http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/minute_order_4469.pdf (http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/minute_order_4469.pdf)
 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on January 16, 2014, 01:04:21 PM

The link below will display a PDF copy of the graphic associated with MO4469. It illustrates how I-540 progressed from U.S. 271.
 
http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/minute_order_4469.pdf (http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/minute_order_4469.pdf)
 

AH! This makes more sense .
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on January 16, 2014, 10:27:12 PM
Now for some interesting trivia! When I-540 in Crawford and Sebastian Counties was constructed, it was originally done so and signed as U.S. Highway 271. This is a west to east route and as such, the log miles begin at the state line and proceed the distance to I-40. Eventually this section of U.S. Highway 271 was re-designated as Interstate spur 540. What resulted is exit numbers that went one direction and log miles that go another.

Whaaaaa?  What years were I-540 signed as US 71.  I'm having a hard time buying this because I have maps that show I-540 ending at AR 22 and continuing to US 71 as AR 540.  The connection between US 71 and US 271 was the last portion completed, and at that time the entire road was signed as I-540 (I assume). 

What was the number of 271 north of 540?

Yeah we had to go back and look at that one too.
 
The route wasn't signed U.S. Highway 271, it originated FROM U.S. Highway 271. First section was constructed from U.S. 271 to State Highway 22. Minute order 4469 on January 31, 1962 approves the naming of this first section as State Highway 540. Since it progresses west to east (or actually south to north?), the log mile numbering began where it does.
 
Sorry for the confusion. We can upload a copy of the minute order with a graphic illustrating the above if someone can tell us how to paste photos in the thread. Have tried it but cannot seem to make it work.
 
Thanks!

Here is the minute order in question:

Quote
4469 In SEBASTIAN COUNTY, a proposed highway route is hereby established between State Highway No. US 271 south of Fort Smith and the proposed State Highway No. 22 Interchange of Interstate Route No. 540 in Fort Smith, a distance of approximately 6.0 miles, generally along the location shown on the attached sketch, and said route is hereby made a part of the State Highway System, subject to approval by the Bureau of Public Roads as part of the Federal-Aid Primary System.

This says nothing about US 271 following I-540.  It just gave a number for the proposed highway. 

There was, however, a plan to extend US 271 north along AR 59 into Missouri but it was denied by AASHTO (or AASHO).

The link below will display a PDF copy of the graphic associated with MO4469. It illustrates how I-540 progressed from U.S. 271.
 
http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/minute_order_4469.pdf (http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/minute_order_4469.pdf)

No.  This shows proposed I-540 which originally ended at AR 22.  The map shows the proposed AR 540 running from AR 22 to US 271.  The section of I-540 (then AR 540, though likely never signed as such except from US 71 to AR 22) from US 271 to US 71 was the last section to be built.  Proof?  Check out the map on the AHTD website for Sebastian County labelled 1971.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on January 16, 2014, 10:31:59 PM

The link below will display a PDF copy of the graphic associated with MO4469. It illustrates how I-540 progressed from U.S. 271.
 
http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/minute_order_4469.pdf (http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/minute_order_4469.pdf)
 

AH! This makes more sense .

No, it doesn't.  The map, for some reason, shows completed I-540 north of AR 22 as proposed while it shows the proposed section of AR 540 as complete.  The map is wrong.  Compare it to the 1971 Sebastian County map or the state highway maps from the '70s.

Besides, why would they build that section first?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on January 16, 2014, 10:53:57 PM

The link below will display a PDF copy of the graphic associated with MO4469. It illustrates how I-540 progressed from U.S. 271.
 
http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/minute_order_4469.pdf (http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/minute_order_4469.pdf)
 

AH! This makes more sense .

No, it doesn't.  The map, for some reason, shows completed I-540 north of AR 22 as proposed while it shows the proposed section of AR 540 as complete.  The map is wrong.  Compare it to the 1971 Sebastian County map or the state highway maps from the '70s.

Besides, why would they build that section first?

OK. I'll pull my maps in the morning and see what I can find.  I believe the 271 to 22 segment was the last section to at least be designated I-540. I've seen a couple maps showing 540 complete, but being a state route south of AR 22/ Rogers Ave.
 
I think one of the old Arkansas Highways magazines has a photo of a Ar 22/Ar 540 sign assembly at the exit.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on January 16, 2014, 11:11:13 PM
I think one of the old Arkansas Highways magazines has a photo of a Ar 22/Ar 540 sign assembly at the exit.

What date?  I'd love to see this.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: AHTD on January 17, 2014, 10:51:23 AM

The link below will display a PDF copy of the graphic associated with MO4469. It illustrates how I-540 progressed from U.S. 271.
 
http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/minute_order_4469.pdf (http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/minute_order_4469.pdf)
 

AH! This makes more sense .

No, it doesn't.  The map, for some reason, shows completed I-540 north of AR 22 as proposed while it shows the proposed section of AR 540 as complete.  The map is wrong.  Compare it to the 1971 Sebastian County map or the state highway maps from the '70s.

Besides, why would they build that section first?

Sorry- our post was too general in terms. Didn't mean to imply I-540 originated from U.S. 271. It was AR540 that was constructed from U.S. 271 to SH22. Thus the log miles in said direction.
 
Upon further review of historical maps, it looks as if the Arkansas Highway Commission in those days designated routes before they were constructed. The minute order clearly designates the highway, but it doesn't appear on the map until the 1970s. And maps dated after this minute order show the progression of I-540 emanating from I-40.
 
These days an "official" designation is not done by minute order until the construction is nearly complete - just before the highway opens. Prior to this the route is "designated" in planning studies, design, etc.
 
You can find all of our historical highway maps here: http://www.arkansashighways.com/planning_research/mapping_graphics/archived_tourist_maps/archived_tourist_maps.aspx (http://www.arkansashighways.com/planning_research/mapping_graphics/archived_tourist_maps/archived_tourist_maps.aspx)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on January 18, 2014, 02:21:55 AM
AHTD,

What are the plans for Dynamic Message Signage along future I-49, but more specifically I-540 in NWA?  These signs alert motorists to Amber Alerts (Morgan Amber Alerts in AR), not to mention adverse weather conditions and road closures...

Also, US 71/I-540 between the Missouri border and the south side of Fayetteville, there is 40 miles without a mileage distance sign.  I talked with an engineer a year ago and say he would look into it, 
On US 71 southbound, right after the border and state/iDriveArkansas signs needs to be a mileage distance sign.  The same with the AR 340/Lancashire Blvd exit (both north and south bound).
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: AHTD on January 18, 2014, 03:33:20 PM
Will have to do some checking on the message boards. These along with our Highway Advisory Radio stations are evolving in a way that will allow us to be more responsive to real-time conditions.
 
The locations of all permanent message boards and all Highway Advisory Radio stations will soon be available as separate layers on IDrive Arkansas. We anticipate you will be able to see in real-time, the message being displayed by each permanent board and the recording being played by each radio station.
 
As for the mileage distance signs, do you mean mile markers or information signs that state: Fayetteville 23 miles, etc.????
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on January 19, 2014, 02:39:25 AM
As for the mileage distance signs, do you mean mile markers or information signs that state: Fayetteville 23 miles, etc.????
Mileage Distance Signs like right at the MO/AR state line on US 71, there should be a sign that states the distance to future points.  And again at the interchange with US 71 and AR 340.  Both north and south bound.

But it's via the MUTCD, which AHTD abides by.




Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on January 22, 2014, 12:34:21 PM
AHTD, do you work with Parks and Tourism at all on the visitor welcome centers?  Just wondering if you've heard whether a new visitor's center would be opened along I-49 (when it's eventually completed) at the Arkansas/Missouri border, given how big the combined Northwest Arkansas/Fort Smith area has now become, and how small the existing on at Bella Vista on U.S. 71 is?

Sorry if this is out of your agency's scope.  Just curious on it.  Thank you in advance for anything you can post.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on January 22, 2014, 03:10:04 PM
the modified connector (similar to a roundabout) is designed in such a way to ALLOW traffic on U.S. 71/I-540 to flow unimpeded as it does now (except for backups during peak times). The modiifed connector simply allows access to usable parts of the Bella Vista Bypass so that folks in Hiwassee, Gravette and those that live in west Bella Vista can use it.
I can see how this would be appropriate, as ridiculous as it sounds.  Thank you, AHTD.
I would love to see the plans, as others have stated.
(above quote from Question for AHTD: SPUI / DDI (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=11388.msg273068#msg273068) thread)

The January 21 AHTD Presentation to the Siloam Springs Rotary Club (http://www.arkansashighways.com/PowerPoints/2014/012114_Trammel_SiloamSpringsRotary.pdf) has been posted and it includes this depiction of the initial connection between Highway 71 and the Bella Vista Bypass:

(http://i.imgur.com/mpx7nhe.png)

AHTD, I assume this the concept that you have mentioned?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: NE2 on January 22, 2014, 03:14:56 PM
heh heh rotary club
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: AHTD on January 22, 2014, 03:30:23 PM
the modified connector (similar to a roundabout) is designed in such a way to ALLOW traffic on U.S. 71/I-540 to flow unimpeded as it does now (except for backups during peak times). The modiifed connector simply allows access to usable parts of the Bella Vista Bypass so that folks in Hiwassee, Gravette and those that live in west Bella Vista can use it.
I can see how this would be appropriate, as ridiculous as it sounds.  Thank you, AHTD.
I would love to see the plans, as others have stated.
(above quote from Question for AHTD: SPUI / DDI (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=11388.msg273068#msg273068) thread)

The January 21 AHTD Presentation to the Siloam Springs Rotary Club (http://www.arkansashighways.com/PowerPoints/2014/012114_Trammel_SiloamSpringsRotary.pdf) has been posted and it includes this depiction of the initial connection between Highway 71 and the Bella Vista Bypass:

(http://i.imgur.com/mpx7nhe.png)

AHTD, I assume this the concept that you have mentioned?

Indeed it is. Been working to get this and other graphics together to post in this forum and will do so once the traffic simulation model is ready.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: AHTD on January 22, 2014, 04:03:48 PM
AHTD, do you work with Parks and Tourism at all on the visitor welcome centers?  Just wondering if you've heard whether a new visitor's center would be opened along I-49 (when it's eventually completed) at the Arkansas/Missouri border, given how big the combined Northwest Arkansas/Fort Smith area has now become, and how small the existing on at Bella Vista on U.S. 71 is?

Sorry if this is out of your agency's scope.  Just curious on it.  Thank you in advance for anything you can post.

AHTD maintains and operates the welcome centers and rest areas in Arkansas. The welcome centers are staffed by the Arkansas Department of Parks & Tourism. AHTD owns all of the welcome centers except the one in Little Rock and the one in Mammoth Spring. These are owned by Parks & Tourism.
 
You can display the location of these facilities at www.idrivearkansas.com (http://www.idrivearkansas.com). Click on the location icons and a dialog box opens with pertinent information. Rest areas in Arkansas are not staffed. There is a great article in the current issue of Arkansas Highways about our welcome centers. It begins on page 10 here: http://www.arkansashighways.com/Magazine/2014/January/ARHighwaysMagazine_January2014_web2.pdf (http://www.arkansashighways.com/Magazine/2014/January/ARHighwaysMagazine_January2014_web2.pdf)
 
As for the location of a new welcome center at the Missouri state line on the Bella Vista Bypass, it has been discussed but no decision on whether a new facility would be in addition to or in place of the existing facility on U.S. 71 in Bella Vista.
 
 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: english si on January 22, 2014, 04:40:58 PM
Oh that, that's no hassle at all.

I expected from the doom and gloom on here that the trumpet would be replaced by a roundabout while the SPUI was built.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: rte66man on January 23, 2014, 08:02:45 PM
Oh that, that's no hassle at all.

I expected from the doom and gloom on here that the trumpet would be replaced by a roundabout while the SPUI was built.

I would disagree.  If you are northbound on 540, you would have to take the trumpet back under 540, then make a sharp right to get on the bypass.  Cars will do OK, but semis will have some trouble getting the acceleration needed to make it if they have to yield first.

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: NE2 on January 23, 2014, 09:15:25 PM
I would disagree.  If you are northbound on 540, you would have to take the trumpet back under 540, then make a sharp right to get on the bypass.  Cars will do OK, but semis will have some trouble getting the acceleration needed to make it if they have to yield first.
And where does the bypass go for now? Suburban nowhere.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: english si on January 24, 2014, 05:34:07 AM
I would disagree.  If you are northbound on 540, you would have to take the trumpet back under 540, then make a sharp right to get on the bypass.  Cars will do OK, but semis will have some trouble getting the acceleration needed to make it if they have to yield first.
And what would you put instead? Some sort of signalised junction where semis would need to stop, and then make a tighter turn? That roundabout doesn't look small or tight.

And what NE2 said about it going nowhere...
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on January 24, 2014, 04:00:39 PM
Well, Missouri needs another $25 million and Arkansas needs another $50 million to finish a four-lane BVB.

From a January 23 presentation to the Rogers-Lowell Area Chamber of Commerce (http://www.arkansashighways.com/PowerPoints/2014/012314_SEB_RogersChamber.pdf) (page 60/61 of pdf):

(http://i.imgur.com/ZMdwaeU.png)

AHTD is about to build a $30 million temporary roundabout for the Bella Vista Bypass.  If Missouri only needs another $25 million to finish its section of the Bella Vista Vypass, why can't AHTD and MoDOT work out a deal where AHTD would somehow "advance" $25 million of the $30 million roundabout money to MoDOT for immediate construction of the Missouri section of the BVB?  It would seem like a more efficient use of the money because Missouri would complete its section more quickly and there would be no need for the roundabout.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: codyg1985 on January 24, 2014, 04:38:40 PM
If the roundabout costs $30 million, then something is seriously wrong. I'm hoping that is the cost of the segment between Hiwassee and US 71, including the roundabout.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: AHTD on January 24, 2014, 05:28:54 PM
Whoops!
 
That slide was supposed to have been removed from this presentation. We are making that correction and re-posting the presentation.
 
HOWEVER - codyg1985 IS CORRECT - the modified connector AND the stretch of the BVB from the connector to State Highway 72 south will be let as one contract and the ballpark estimate for this is $30 million.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on January 24, 2014, 06:21:45 PM
Thanks AHTD for the info on the interchange. I recently wrote MTOD about there part of the bypass and here is what they said. With the Federal money uncertain and not enough state money to finish there part,  they will move the money that is planned in 2014 STIP to general funds because it doesn't make sense to do part of it. But they are looking to see if an Initiative petition process moves forward with the state of Missouri to put it up to voters to finish the Bella Vista Bypass.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: rte66man on January 24, 2014, 10:30:40 PM
I would disagree.  If you are northbound on 540, you would have to take the trumpet back under 540, then make a sharp right to get on the bypass.  Cars will do OK, but semis will have some trouble getting the acceleration needed to make it if they have to yield first.
And what would you put instead? Some sort of signalised junction where semis would need to stop, and then make a tighter turn? That roundabout doesn't look small or tight.

And what NE2 said about it going nowhere...

IIRC, Smithfield has a very large plant south of Gravette.  That is why I thought there would be more than a trickle of trucks.  Someone who is more familiar with the area can confirm or deny. 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on January 25, 2014, 01:34:48 AM
I would disagree.  If you are northbound on 540, you would have to take the trumpet back under 540, then make a sharp right to get on the bypass.  Cars will do OK, but semis will have some trouble getting the acceleration needed to make it if they have to yield first.
And what would you put instead? Some sort of signalised junction where semis would need to stop, and then make a tighter turn? That roundabout doesn't look small or tight.

And what NE2 said about it going nowhere...

IIRC, Smithfield has a very large plant south of Gravette.  That is why I thought there would be more than a trickle of trucks.  Someone who is more familiar with the area can confirm or deny. 

I'm not sure about the Gravette plant, but I think you're correct.  I know we have Walmart (as much as I despise them) distribution centers and Tyson plants. I see semis all the time through "town".

I feel for the semi truck drivers... This roundabout is going to be worse than what is there now, especially at peak times, like when traffic backs up in the afternoon all the way to the hill in Bella Vista on US 71 southbound.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: AHTD on January 28, 2014, 04:33:02 PM
As promised, see link below to view the animated traffic model of the Bella Vista modified connector.
 
http://vimeo.com/85181840 (http://vimeo.com/85181840)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on January 30, 2014, 02:11:16 AM
As promised, see link below to view the animated traffic model of the Bella Vista modified connector.
 
http://vimeo.com/85181840 (http://vimeo.com/85181840)

Thanks, AHTD. 
The signage and lighting need to be adequate for this to work efficiently.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on February 09, 2014, 09:41:59 PM
Normally this wouldn't really merit a mention on this forum alongside the genuine highway/lighting/signage etc. issues but given this is Bentonville it could be very germane...I'm hearing that it's been reported (no link yet) that Walmart has bought 125 acres next to Lowe's on the Bentonville/Bella Vista border.  That will put it right where the BV bypass meets the current north end of I-540.

If this has happened I may not be around to see what comes to fruition with this but that's said to be a very large tract for just a Supercenter or even a distribution center.  New office space?  Or something more significant?  Time will tell, but interesting that its essentially at this particular junction.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on February 09, 2014, 10:16:59 PM
Normally this wouldn't really merit a mention on this forum alongside the genuine highway/lighting/signage etc. issues but given this is Bentonville it could be very germane...I'm hearing that it's been reported (no link yet) that Walmart has bought 125 acres next to Lowe's on the Bentonville/Bella Vista border.  That will put it right where the BV bypass meets the current north end of I-540.

If this has happened I may not be around to see what comes to fruition with this but that's said to be a very large tract for just a Supercenter or even a distribution center.  New office space?  Or something more significant?  Time will tell, but interesting that its essentially at this particular junction.

There is already a distribution center at the State Line off 71. It's possible they could move to a better location or maybe just buy up the land so someone else doesn't move in.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on February 10, 2014, 02:33:07 AM
Normally this wouldn't really merit a mention on this forum alongside the genuine highway/lighting/signage etc. issues but given this is Bentonville it could be very germane...I'm hearing that it's been reported (no link yet) that Walmart has bought 125 acres next to Lowe's on the Bentonville/Bella Vista border.  That will put it right where the BV bypass meets the current north end of I-540.

If this has happened I may not be around to see what comes to fruition with this but that's said to be a very large tract for just a Supercenter or even a distribution center.  New office space?  Or something more significant?  Time will tell, but interesting that its essentially at this particular junction.

Even though I despise Walmart with every fiber of my being (and I live in NWA), they'd be smart to start a Walmart Truck Stop.  They've already started on a Walmart Convenience Store at 14th & Walton.  I doubt that is what they're doing.  I've always though that NWA needs a decent truck stop... I-540 is pretty much filled up.  And NWA needs a decent grocery chain! :)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on February 10, 2014, 09:24:09 AM
Normally this wouldn't really merit a mention on this forum alongside the genuine highway/lighting/signage etc. issues but given this is Bentonville it could be very germane...I'm hearing that it's been reported (no link yet) that Walmart has bought 125 acres next to Lowe's on the Bentonville/Bella Vista border.  That will put it right where the BV bypass meets the current north end of I-540.

If this has happened I may not be around to see what comes to fruition with this but that's said to be a very large tract for just a Supercenter or even a distribution center.  New office space?  Or something more significant?  Time will tell, but interesting that its essentially at this particular junction.

Even though I despise Walmart with every fiber of my being (and I live in NWA), they'd be smart to start a Walmart Truck Stop.  They've already started on a Walmart Convenience Store at 14th & Walton.  I doubt that is what they're doing.  I've always though that NWA needs a decent truck stop... I-540 is pretty much filled up.  And NWA needs a decent grocery chain! :)

What about Harp's or Marvins?  I've not seen the Wal-Mart c-store yet: is it where the Redbud used to be?
Wal-Mart tried the c-store format years ago with the Wal-Mart Super USA stores. For whatever reason, they failed. Of course, now that the conscience of the company is gone (Sam and Bud) maybe they decided to try again.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on February 10, 2014, 11:18:09 AM
Normally this wouldn't really merit a mention on this forum alongside the genuine highway/lighting/signage etc. issues but given this is Bentonville it could be very germane...I'm hearing that it's been reported (no link yet) that Walmart has bought 125 acres next to Lowe's on the Bentonville/Bella Vista border.  That will put it right where the BV bypass meets the current north end of I-540.

If this has happened I may not be around to see what comes to fruition with this but that's said to be a very large tract for just a Supercenter or even a distribution center.  New office space?  Or something more significant?  Time will tell, but interesting that its essentially at this particular junction.

There is already a distribution center at the State Line off 71. It's possible they could move to a better location or maybe just buy up the land so someone else doesn't move in.

It's on what was once Spur US 71.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on February 10, 2014, 04:36:04 PM
(http://s3.amazonaws.com/nwabj/955/wal-mart-land-deal--2-7-14.jpg)

Link about the land purchase by Walmart off future I-49 Bentonville/Bella Vista:  http://www.nwabusinessjournal.com/13066/walmart-buys-1261-acres-for-4-million
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on February 10, 2014, 06:11:59 PM
(http://s3.amazonaws.com/nwabj/955/wal-mart-land-deal--2-7-14.jpg)

Link about the land purchase by Walmart off future I-49 Bentonville/Bella Vista:  http://www.nwabusinessjournal.com/13066/walmart-buys-1261-acres-for-4-million

...and I'll go ahead and say it.

I wonder if Walmart has designs on building a new corporate HQ someday there?


I know it's fairly dangerous to speculate with this company.  But anything (earthly) is pretty much possible with them as well.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on February 11, 2014, 12:14:34 PM
(http://s3.amazonaws.com/nwabj/955/wal-mart-land-deal--2-7-14.jpg)

Link about the land purchase by Walmart off future I-49 Bentonville/Bella Vista:  http://www.nwabusinessjournal.com/13066/walmart-buys-1261-acres-for-4-million

...and I'll go ahead and say it.

I wonder if Walmart has designs on building a new corporate HQ someday there?

  • It was said Walmart was thinking about doing so off I-540 near Northwest Arkansas Community college right before "the" 9/11 happened, but scuttled plans because they thought a big building would be a potential target.
  • Walmart's current headquarters, er, likely leave something to be desired for the crop of Ivy League MBAs who are hitting that company now.  The building also had asbestos issues at one point, according to a woman I once worked with whose husband had to help remove said mineral insulation.
  • Bentonville is developing a significant arts district nearby, and the Walmart HQ building (if it's ever fully abandoned, which I very much doubt) would be prime property.
  • Sam's Club has a big, nice HQ fairly close to the Interstate.  Walmart doesn't.
  • Though employees come from all over at HQ, most of them live in Bentonville and Bella Vista...where this property is right in the middle of.

I know it's fairly dangerous to speculate with this company.  But anything (earthly) is pretty much possible with them as well.

Wal-Mart is norotious for trying to reuse many of their old buildings.

-Optical Factory (Fayetteville)
-Truck Logistics (Bentonville)
-Bookkeeping / Health Services (Rogers)
-Wal-Mart Museum (old Walton 5 & 10)

Wal-Mart used to like their old building as part of their illusion about being a small "aw shucks" company. That illusion died with Sam. They have to do something with all that money they're hoarding.
(http://www.cool-smileys.com/images/68.gif) (http://cool-smileys.com//smiley-with-dollar-eyes)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: codyg1985 on February 11, 2014, 04:27:08 PM
I don't know if there were any "Bud's" in NWS that the old Walmart buildings were converted to. I remember some of them in the mid 90's in Jasper, AL and Cullman, AL.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on February 11, 2014, 05:28:28 PM
I don't know if there were any "Bud's" in NWS that the old Walmart buildings were converted to. I remember some of them in the mid 90's in Jasper, AL and Cullman, AL.

Alma, AR had a Bud's.

I forgot Helen's Arts and Crafts too over some of the old Wal-Marts.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Scott5114 on February 11, 2014, 05:38:43 PM
Wal-Mart used to like their old building as part of their illusion about being a small "aw shucks" company. That illusion died with Sam.

I don't think anyone has actually bought into that illusion since at least the 1990s. I have never known Walmart as anything other than the canonical example of global capitalism–Walmart is the big business.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on February 11, 2014, 07:26:47 PM

I don't think anyone has actually bought into that illusion since at least the 1990s. I have never known Walmart as anything other than the canonical example of global capitalism–Walmart is the big business.

Sam died in 1992, so it was shortly after his passing that things changed. Bud tried to carry on, but was quickly silenced by the monied executives.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on February 13, 2014, 10:28:49 PM
In its January 23 Comment regarding the Draft Primary Freight Network (http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=FHWA-2013-0050-0139), AHTD contends that I-540/Future I-49 from I-40 to US 71B should be included in the draft network (http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/infrastructure/pfn/index.htm):

(http://i.imgur.com/6NRxCkz.jpg)

Previous discussion about the Draft Primary Freight Network can be found in this thread:

https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=11125.0
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on February 14, 2014, 11:27:58 PM
In its January 23 Comment regarding the Draft Primary Freight Network (http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=FHWA-2013-0050-0139), AHTD contends that I-540/Future I-49 from I-40 to US 71B should be included in the draft network (http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/infrastructure/pfn/index.htm):

(http://i.imgur.com/6NRxCkz.jpg)

Previous discussion about the Draft Primary Freight Network can be found in this thread:

https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=11125.0

Northwest Arkansas urbanized area (population of over 200,000)?!?!

The darn NWA metro is sitting on just over 500,000 right now, I do believe.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on February 15, 2014, 04:31:05 AM
I don't know if there were any "Bud's" in NWS that the old Walmart buildings were converted to. I remember some of them in the mid 90's in Jasper, AL and Cullman, AL.
Alma, AR had a Bud's

There was one in Hot Springs near the western US 70-270 split (now 70B-270B).
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: codyg1985 on February 15, 2014, 04:59:10 PM
In its January 23 Comment regarding the Draft Primary Freight Network (http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=FHWA-2013-0050-0139), AHTD contends that I-540/Future I-49 from I-40 to US 71B should be included in the draft network (http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/infrastructure/pfn/index.htm):

(http://i.imgur.com/6NRxCkz.jpg)

Previous discussion about the Draft Primary Freight Network can be found in this thread:

https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=11125.0

The Interstate 49? Are they turning into south Louisiana?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: AHTD on February 18, 2014, 06:02:25 PM
We received a request to post links to these documents in this thread.
 
FEIS: U.S. 71 - Texarkana to DeQueen and the Texarkana Northern Loop (90.4mb)
http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/FEIS_U.S.71_TXK-DeQueen_and_TXK_North_Loop.pdf (http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/FEIS_U.S.71_TXK-DeQueen_and_TXK_North_Loop.pdf)
 
FEIS: U.S. 71 - Texarkana to DeQueen and the Texarkana Northern Loop APPENDIX (100mb)
http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/FEIS_U.S.71_TXK-DeQueen_and_TXK_North_Loop_(appendix).pdf (http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/FEIS_U.S.71_TXK-DeQueen_and_TXK_North_Loop_(appendix).pdf)
 
FEIS: U.S. 71 - DeQueen to I-40 (77.3mb)
http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/FEIS_U.S.71_DeQueen-I-40.pdf (http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/FEIS_U.S.71_DeQueen-I-40.pdf)
 
FEIS: U.S. 71 - DeQueen to I-40 (APPENDIX) (15.9mb)
http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/FEIS_U.S.71_DeQueen-I-40_(appendix).pdf (http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/FEIS_U.S.71_DeQueen-I-40_(appendix).pdf)
 
Enjoy!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on February 19, 2014, 09:29:29 AM
^ AHTD, thanks for posting the above FEIS info. Great historical info.



I asked the AHTD bridge department when do they plan to design the I 49 Arkansas River Bridge In the Fort Smith area ...

Quote
Our bridge program through 2016 does not include that structure.
 
Carl J. Fuselier, P.E.
Division Head - Bridge
Arkansas Highway and Transportation Department
This article (http://www.thecitywire.com/node/29787#.UkR0HL7D-M8), primarily an update about the (non-Future I-49) I-540 construction work in Fort Smith, notes that the I-540 Arkansas River bridge is not being upgraded, primarily because funding for the Future I-49 Arkansas River bridge is a higher priority:
Quote
Arkansas Highway and Transportation Department District 4 Engineer Chad Adams ....
According to Adams, widening the bridge to conform with current federal highway standards, which is what the contractors are doing with many of the bridges along I-540, is not financially feasible, especially considering that the AHTD is attempting to secure funding for a river bridge along the I-49 route.
the river crossings (Arkansas River estimated around $500 million)

AHTD, in regard to the I-49 Arkansas River bridge, do you have any updates as to when design studies for the bridge might begin and/or funding updates?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on February 19, 2014, 11:08:15 AM
Let me guess: It will be a humpback concrete span with no superstructure and Jersey barriers, just like virtually every bridge AHTD has built in the last 70 years.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on February 19, 2014, 11:15:52 AM
Let me guess: It will be a humpback concrete span with no superstructure and Jersey barriers, just like virtually every bridge AHTD has built in the last 70 years.

UCEB: Ugley Concrete Eyesore Bridge (H/T to Bridgehunter.com)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on February 19, 2014, 01:28:46 PM
Let me guess: It will be a humpback concrete span with no superstructure and Jersey barriers, just like virtually every bridge AHTD has built in the last 70 years.

Cash-strapped agency not wasting money on unnecessary frills? Sounds like they deserve applause and a thank you from the public

They aren't opposed to it, but the money has to come from somewhere. See Broadway Bridge
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on February 19, 2014, 06:50:46 PM
How big a deal is it to have an Interstate that A) doesn't yet connect with its southern counterpart 150 miles away with no idea when said connection will ever happen, and; B) doesn't yet connect to its northern counterpart, either, and will require a billion dollar bridge to do so (kind of like how no one yet really knows when the Bella Vista connector will link to future I-49 right near that 125 acre land purchase Walmart has just made)?

THIS big (interstate just at the lower right of the attached image)...keep it up, AHTD...we're ALL going to be the better for this completed I-49 some day:

(http://swtimes.com/sites/swtimes.com/files/field/media/web1_News-5col-clr-Campus.jpg)

Quote

“The announcement is wonderful news for Fort Smith and Barling,”  Fort Smith Mayor Sandy Sanders said. “Not only will it provide a needed influx of physicians for this region, it will also provide a significant economic impact for all of this area.”

The Fort Smith Regional Healthcare Foundation intends to build what it calls the Arkansas College of Osteopathic Medicine on 200 acres near Chad Colley Boulevard at Chaffee Crossing.

“We are committing $58 million to this project,”  foundation board chairman Kyle Parker said during a meeting of the Fort Chaffee Redevelopment Authority’s Board of Trustees. “The proposed medical school will enrollarrow-10x10.png 150 students per year for a total of 600 students that will be attending.”

Parker added that current plans place the first crop of students in class by August 2017.

“There have been a lot of good days at Chaffee Crossing, but I think this one tops them all,”  FCRA executive director Ivy Owen said. “This fits perfectly in our land reuse plan.”

The acreage, located in both Fort Smith and Barling, was donated by the Fort Chaffee Redevelopment Authority on Tuesday.

“For us to give away $4 million worth of land doesn’t come easy,”  FCRA Board of Trustees chairman Dean Gibson said.

The foundation estimates an annual economic impact on the community of $75 million to $100 million.
“The impact of this besides the $75 million a year is just immeasurable in my opinion,”  Owen said.

Mercy System, Sparks, Cooper Clinic, the Choctaw Nation Health Services Authority and Community Health Centers of Arkansas have indicated their desire to play integral roles in the clinical rotations and residency education of the proposed college, according to Parker.

“What we fully anticipate doing is continuing to build a medical university,”  he said. “We will look at a dental school, a physician’s assistant school, physical therapy schools.”

Parker said the college will employ 65 teachers with annual salaries of at least $103,000. Owen said 60 percent of the graduating doctors will become family practice physicians, “but they can go specialized.”

“I think they’ve come up with the right idea,”  Barling Mayor Jerry Barling said. “Everybody is going to be a winner on this one.”

http://swtimes.com/news/plans-unveiled-regional-medical-school

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: AHTD on February 20, 2014, 12:03:36 AM
Indeed this is very good news!


Did you know we recently located our new District 04 HQ at Chaffee Crossing?
http://swtimes.com/sections/news/new-district-office-state-highway-department-open-barling.html (http://swtimes.com/sections/news/new-district-office-state-highway-department-open-barling.html)

Planning is currently working on revised estimates for the Arkansas River crossing, once that is available we will post in this forum.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on February 20, 2014, 02:35:20 AM
Did you know we recently located our new District 04 HQ at Chaffee Crossing?
http://swtimes.com/sections/news/new-district-office-state-highway-department-open-barling.html (http://swtimes.com/sections/news/new-district-office-state-highway-department-open-barling.html)

Any chance you can rework Districts 4 and 9?  District 9 has their headquarters in Harrison.  The NWA metro is nearing half of a million people.  Why would Benton County's district headquarters be almost 2 hours away?  It's makes no sense, and is clearly creating issues here.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on February 20, 2014, 07:58:39 AM
Good question. What is the process for redistricting, I assume it goes through the Commission?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on February 20, 2014, 09:29:27 AM
Indeed this is very good news!


Did you know we recently located our new District 04 HQ at Chaffee Crossing?
http://swtimes.com/sections/news/new-district-office-state-highway-department-open-barling.html (http://swtimes.com/sections/news/new-district-office-state-highway-department-open-barling.html)

Planning is currently working on revised estimates for the Arkansas River crossing, once that is available we will post in this forum.

I've seen your new area HQ.  Very nice.  :thumbsup:    The sentence you wrote that I bolded above is key...just yesterday it was officially announced that Northwest Arkansas is growing by 23 people per day and that the metro area is (officially) just about to cross the 500,000 threshold (http://www.nwahomepage.com/fulltext-news/d/story/nwa-population-grows-to-nearly-500000/20663/av7U-f44E0-YzLrBP-PxGg).  Between Fort Smith and "NWA" that's about 800,000 people.  I'm sure there are going to be NWA commuters (patients AND workers) to this new school if it becomes as big as they say, as Fort Smith seems to be the area where the specialized medical care really seems to be settling in.  I know it won't happen overnight, but I sure hope the crossing can happen reasonably soon.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on February 20, 2014, 09:58:07 AM

Did you know we recently located our new District 04 HQ at Chaffee Crossing?
http://swtimes.com/sections/news/new-district-office-state-highway-department-open-barling.html (http://swtimes.com/sections/news/new-district-office-state-highway-department-open-barling.html)


I've driven by a couple times on my way to the nature center or to check on 49 ;)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on February 20, 2014, 10:27:34 AM

Did you know we recently located our new District 04 HQ at Chaffee Crossing?
http://swtimes.com/sections/news/new-district-office-state-highway-department-open-barling.html (http://swtimes.com/sections/news/new-district-office-state-highway-department-open-barling.html)


I've driven by a couple times on my way to the nature center or to check on 49 ;)

US 71, I know AHTD (the poster and the entity) are working as hard as they can to make a completed I-49 a reality, likely starting from east Fort Smith to the Missouri border for obvious necessary reasons.

But, MAN, I hope that somewhere along future I-49 in Arkansas some restaurateur who "makes the perfect pizza" comes along and successfully sets up shop, and that I'm alive and able to eat pizza when you make the announcement of your discovery of the same.  :D
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on February 20, 2014, 10:47:32 AM

Did you know we recently located our new District 04 HQ at Chaffee Crossing?
http://swtimes.com/sections/news/new-district-office-state-highway-department-open-barling.html (http://swtimes.com/sections/news/new-district-office-state-highway-department-open-barling.html)


I've driven by a couple times on my way to the nature center or to check on 49 ;)

US 71, I know AHTD (the poster and the entity) are working as hard as they can to make a completed I-49 a reality, likely starting from east Fort Smith to the Missouri border for obvious necessary reasons.


Well, since I live fairly close, I like to track the progress (like when the Howard Hill Rd bridge was built last year ;) )

Gosh, that reminds me: I need to get some more photos soon ;)

Quote
But, MAN, I hope that somewhere along future I-49 in Arkansas some restaurateur who "makes the perfect pizza" comes along and successfully sets up shop, and that I'm alive and able to eat pizza when you make the announcement of your discovery of the same.  :D

Well, nobody's perfect though I have had several that come close.  Sadly, there is a dearth of even halfway decent places here :(
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on February 20, 2014, 11:49:13 AM
(http://swtimes.com/sites/swtimes.com/files/field/media/web1_News-5col-clr-Campus.jpg)

Again, noteworthy comparison that the proposed construction above in Fort Smith off future (very soon for this stretch) I-49 is 200 acres, and that the tract Walmart bought at the future I-49/Bella Vista bypass south interchange is 5/8 this size at 125 acres, whatever that project is going to be (or if it's just an investment, which I would doubt).
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on February 20, 2014, 07:13:30 PM
But, MAN, I hope that somewhere along future I-49 in Arkansas some restaurateur who "makes the perfect pizza" comes along and successfully sets up shop, and that I'm alive and able to eat pizza when you make the announcement of your discovery of the same.  :D

Next time you're in Mena try Il Primo Pizza.  It's on hwy 71 on the "north" (really east) side of town in the strip mall that has Atwoods and a gas station in it.  When I was last there they didn't even have the sign up yet, but it's 2 or 3 doors down from Atwoods on the right hand side.  Best pizza I've ever had.  The owner is a real Italian guy from Chicago, and the nicest guy you'll ever meet.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on February 20, 2014, 10:48:18 PM
But, MAN, I hope that somewhere along future I-49 in Arkansas some restaurateur who "makes the perfect pizza" comes along and successfully sets up shop, and that I'm alive and able to eat pizza when you make the announcement of your discovery of the same.  :D

Next time you're in Mena try Il Primo Pizza.  It's on hwy 71 on the "north" (really east) side of town in the strip mall that has Atwoods and a gas station in it.  When I was last there they didn't even have the sign up yet, but it's 2 or 3 doors down from Atwoods on the right hand side.  Best pizza I've ever had.  The owner is a real Italian guy from Chicago, and the nicest guy you'll ever meet.

Thank you, bugo.  I was going to say "A real Italian guy from Chicago to Mena?!?!", but then I thought of when I-49 is built some day and west Arkansas is opened up to a whole new world (the way only an Interstate can - bet most of America has no clue what "the Talimena Scenic Drive" is but more may find out) who knows who may be temped to settle among the Ozarks and Ouachitas...  BTW, one of the most interesting characters I've ever worked with was from Detroit but spent time with relatives in Ink, AR, also in the same county as Mena...he was in suburban Atlanta when I worked with him.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on February 21, 2014, 04:41:55 PM
But, MAN, I hope that somewhere along future I-49 in Arkansas some restaurateur who "makes the perfect pizza" comes along and successfully sets up shop, and that I'm alive and able to eat pizza when you make the announcement of your discovery of the same.  :D

Next time you're in Mena try Il Primo Pizza.  It's on hwy 71 on the "north" (really east) side of town in the strip mall that has Atwoods and a gas station in it.  When I was last there they didn't even have the sign up yet, but it's 2 or 3 doors down from Atwoods on the right hand side.  Best pizza I've ever had.  The owner is a real Italian guy from Chicago, and the nicest guy you'll ever meet.

Dang! You're making me want to take a day trip to Mena.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on February 21, 2014, 04:44:38 PM
In other news,  turn lanes and ramp tie-ins are coming for I-49 at US 71 south of Fort Smith.

http://5newsonline.com/2014/02/21/lane-closures-planned-for-highway-71/
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: AHTD on February 23, 2014, 12:42:12 AM
Did you know we recently located our new District 04 HQ at Chaffee Crossing?
http://swtimes.com/sections/news/new-district-office-state-highway-department-open-barling.html (http://swtimes.com/sections/news/new-district-office-state-highway-department-open-barling.html)

Any chance you can rework Districts 4 and 9?  District 9 has their headquarters in Harrison.  The NWA metro is nearing half of a million people.  Why would Benton County's district headquarters be almost 2 hours away?  It's makes no sense, and is clearly creating issues here.


Over the last 100 years we have had more or less than 10 districts. Can't say at the moment why districts are as they exist (data not handy), but you are correct, a minute order would be required to make any changes. That stated, we have TWO area maintenance offices in Benton County and residents should not feel like they aren't getting the service they deserve simply because the District HQ isn't located there.


Remember- the function of these offices is maintenance - not construction. That is to say AHTD does not construct the projects and the presence of the district office would not make any project happen faster. We do have a construction engineer in each district who oversees the REs and the inspectors to ensure construction is completed as it should be.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on February 24, 2014, 03:04:04 AM
Remember- the function of these offices is maintenance - not construction. That is to say AHTD does not construct the projects and the presence of the district office would not make any project happen faster. We do have a construction engineer in each district who oversees the REs and the inspectors to ensure construction is completed as it should be.

I'm very aware of the function of the maintenance offices... My comment wasn't about construction at all.

District 9 needs to look at signage in NWA.  I think there's a thread about the AR 12 routing.

If you can pass this along to District 9:

http://goo.gl/maps/6p9H3
I pass by this sign a lot in the dark... It's not readable at all.  Same with other state road signs along Monroe.
http://goo.gl/maps/ZuaVx

I noticed that Washington County did a refresh of signs recently along US 71B.

Benton County wasn't among that.

And there are no mileage distance signs on US 71/I-540 between the very south side of Fayetteville and the MO/AR state line... 40 miles.

Example:  http://goo.gl/maps/0u48s


This needs to be on the rebuild on I-540/Future I-49 in NWA:
http://goo.gl/maps/JkLHu








Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on February 24, 2014, 10:57:57 AM


This needs to be on the rebuild on I-540/Future I-49 in NWA:
http://goo.gl/maps/JkLHu


Sort of looks like they may be doing that along I-540 near Zero St here in Ft Smith: the Jersey Barrier was rebuilt last year and has "prongs" for either a signpost or a lightpole.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on February 24, 2014, 03:47:30 PM
Seems like they have those prongs on the I-40 rebuild in Conway as well
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on February 24, 2014, 03:52:24 PM
Seems like they have those prongs on the I-40 rebuild in Conway as well

Or maybe they are message boards (aka "Nag signs"):

Buckle up! State Law.
Don't Drink & Drive.
Don't Talk & Text
Don't Pick Your Nose.


;)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on February 24, 2014, 04:20:02 PM
I heard there are some issues on the new bridges in Fort Smith...the supports and bridge deck are 8" off where they are supposed to be.

Any delays that may come of this?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: AHTD on February 24, 2014, 11:02:18 PM
Which bridge specifically and we'll run it down for you.

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on February 24, 2014, 11:26:22 PM
I heard Highway 22 bridge

Thanks!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on March 08, 2014, 10:37:50 PM
The January 21 AHTD Presentation to the Siloam Springs Rotary Club (http://www.arkansashighways.com/PowerPoints/2014/012114_Trammel_SiloamSpringsRotary.pdf) has been posted and it includes this depiction of the initial connection between Highway 71 and the Bella Vista Bypass [page 25/44 of pdf]

AHTD's March 5 ASCE Day of Training (http://www.arkansashighways.com/PowerPoints/2014/030514_SEB_ASCENWA_Fayetteville3.pdf) powerpoint includes a slide that provides a good visual of the current construction schedule for the Bella Vista Bypass (page 27/64 of pdf):

(http://i.imgur.com/blVe8cf.jpg)

Spring 2014 is not too far off .... Fall 2014 is really not too far off, either.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on March 09, 2014, 12:06:09 AM
The January 21 AHTD Presentation to the Siloam Springs Rotary Club (http://www.arkansashighways.com/PowerPoints/2014/012114_Trammel_SiloamSpringsRotary.pdf) has been posted and it includes this depiction of the initial connection between Highway 71 and the Bella Vista Bypass [page 25/44 of pdf]

AHTD's March 5 ASCE Day of Training (http://www.arkansashighways.com/PowerPoints/2014/030514_SEB_ASCENWA_Fayetteville3.pdf) powerpoint includes a slide that provides a good visual of the current construction schedule for the Bella Vista Bypass (page 27/64 of pdf):

(http://i.imgur.com/blVe8cf.jpg)

Spring 2014 is not too far off .... Fall 2014 is really not too far off, either.

No, it isn't.  Also fascinating:

1.  What we see as "Gravette" on this map was once the unincorporated community of Hiwasse.  (To show how rural this area was not long ago, as recently as 1983 Jane/Caverna, MO got their mail delivery from Hiwasse!)  They've been laying new water lines along hwy. 72 east to the new bridge/interchange south of Mt. Pleasant Road on this map.  Guessing Gravette will benefit from growth along this corridor.

2. The smallest anticipated contract on the Arkansas side of the BV bypass is the County Rd. 34 - Missouri line section in green.  Tells me that when Missouri is able to see the light, this may not take that long to finish, relatively speaking.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: NE2 on March 09, 2014, 12:17:30 AM
Ah, Gravette annexed Hiwasse in 2012: http://www.eagleobserver.com/news/2012/feb/29/hiwasse-move-annex-gravette-okd-20120229/ http://www.cityofgravette-ar.gov/ord.%2012-03%20annex..pdf
Hiwasse will now go the way of Brooklyn.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on March 09, 2014, 12:29:28 AM
Ah, Gravette annexed Hiwasse in 2012: http://www.eagleobserver.com/news/2012/feb/29/hiwasse-move-annex-gravette-okd-20120229/ http://www.cityofgravette-ar.gov/ord.%2012-03%20annex..pdf
Hiwasse will now go the way of Brooklyn.

Yep.  They sure didn't want to go the way of Bella Vista, hence the annexation.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on March 09, 2014, 02:50:28 PM
AHTD's March 5 ASCE Day of Training (http://www.arkansashighways.com/PowerPoints/2014/030514_SEB_ASCENWA_Fayetteville3.pdf) powerpoint includes a slide that provides a good visual of the current construction schedule for the Bella Vista Bypass (page 27/64 of pdf):

Did you attend the day of training? I was there in the morning but was unable to stay for Scott Bennett's speech
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on March 09, 2014, 02:53:32 PM
Did you attend the day of training?

No, I am a non-engineer hobbyist and I just skimmed through the powerpoint after it was posted online.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on March 10, 2014, 01:53:43 AM
Seems like they have those prongs on the I-40 rebuild in Conway as well

Or maybe they are message boards (aka "Nag signs"):

Buckle up! State Law.
Don't Drink & Drive.
Don't Talk & Text
Don't Pick Your Nose.


;)

US71, do we have to go over this again?!  :P

Hey, those signs provide Amber Alerts, and in some states, weather and road conditions/closures.

I believe a few will be installed along I-540 in NWA, from what I've researched.  And if NWA gets it together, a sophisticated ITS system could be implemented along I-540/Future I-49.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on March 10, 2014, 09:07:57 PM
AHTD, I was looking at the Benton County construction map and it looks to me that the BVB sections being constructed are showing up as frontage roads for I-49, not as the main lanes. Is this the case? Hopefully the map is in error.

http://www.arkansashighways.com/programs_contracts_division/gis/Current_JobStatusMaps/job_status_benton.pdf (http://www.arkansashighways.com/programs_contracts_division/gis/Current_JobStatusMaps/job_status_benton.pdf)

I looked at the construction set for Hwy 72 north-Co. Rd. 34 (job 090293) and there is a (F) at the end of the job title. Does this indicate "frontage road"?

http://www.arkansashighways.com/ProgCon/PREVIOUS%20LETTING%20PLANS/2012/May%202012/090293.pdf (http://www.arkansashighways.com/ProgCon/PREVIOUS%20LETTING%20PLANS/2012/May%202012/090293.pdf)
(warning y'all, huge file)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on March 12, 2014, 12:57:40 AM
AHTD, I was looking at the Benton County construction map and it looks to me that the BVB sections being constructed are showing up as frontage roads for I-49, not as the main lanes. Is this the case? Hopefully the map is in error.

http://www.arkansashighways.com/programs_contracts_division/gis/Current_JobStatusMaps/job_status_benton.pdf (http://www.arkansashighways.com/programs_contracts_division/gis/Current_JobStatusMaps/job_status_benton.pdf)

I looked at the construction set for Hwy 72 north-Co. Rd. 34 (job 090293) and there is a (F) at the end of the job title. Does this indicate "frontage road"?

http://www.arkansashighways.com/ProgCon/PREVIOUS%20LETTING%20PLANS/2012/May%202012/090293.pdf (http://www.arkansashighways.com/ProgCon/PREVIOUS%20LETTING%20PLANS/2012/May%202012/090293.pdf)
(warning y'all, huge file)

I believe the (F) is for Federal.

Also, the district maps and their system of updating it, is ridiculous.  I'm definitely looking forward to an updated AHTD website!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: AHTD on March 13, 2014, 03:47:02 PM
AHTD, I was looking at the Benton County construction map and it looks to me that the BVB sections being constructed are showing up as frontage roads for I-49, not as the main lanes. Is this the case? Hopefully the map is in error.

http://www.arkansashighways.com/programs_contracts_division/gis/Current_JobStatusMaps/job_status_benton.pdf (http://www.arkansashighways.com/programs_contracts_division/gis/Current_JobStatusMaps/job_status_benton.pdf)

I looked at the construction set for Hwy 72 north-Co. Rd. 34 (job 090293) and there is a (F) at the end of the job title. Does this indicate "frontage road"?

http://www.arkansashighways.com/ProgCon/PREVIOUS%20LETTING%20PLANS/2012/May%202012/090293.pdf (http://www.arkansashighways.com/ProgCon/PREVIOUS%20LETTING%20PLANS/2012/May%202012/090293.pdf)
(warning y'all, huge file)

No frontage road depicted on that map. We just placed the construction job next to the planning job instead of laying one on top of another. The (F) you see after the job number is to indicate federal funding. These projects currently under construction are part of our STIP. The one we just let that includes the modified connector interchange is funded by the half-cent sales tax.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on March 28, 2014, 10:41:11 AM
And speaking of I-49....
The local FHWA Division Office approved our application for submittal to the FHWA in Washington, D.C.
This is not an approval of our request, only an authorization to proceed with official submittal to FHWA. This happened in the last week or so.
(above quote from Arkansas State Highway 245 Removed from System (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=11956.msg288805#msg288805) thread)

AHTD, this is great news! Has the local FHWA Division Office indicated whether, assuming no unforeseen problems/issues, FHWA Washington should approve the application before Arkansas and Louisiana meet at the state line?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on April 08, 2014, 09:20:12 PM
Interesting.  There are now "bagged up" (I don't know what the technical term the highway departments use for that  :spin: ) "Arkansas 549" signs installed on the new west Highway 72 bridge between Gravette and Hiwasse, even though no pavement whatsoever has yet been laid from just south of the bridge to (as far as I can tell) the dirt work's current northern terminus at Rocky Dell Hollow Road.

AHTD, I'm keeping an eye out for the fleet of equipment surely to descend around the new east Highway 72 bridge in Hiwasse in preparation for the Hiwasse-to-I-540 segment.  :nod:
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on April 08, 2014, 10:05:16 PM
Interesting.  There are now "bagged up" (I don't know what the technical term the highway departments use for that  :spin: ) "Arkansas 549" signs installed on the new west Highway 72 bridge between Gravette and Hiwasse, even though no pavement whatsoever has yet been laid from just south of the bridge to (as far as I can tell) the dirt work's current northern terminus at Rocky Dell Hollow Road.

AHTD, I'm keeping an eye out for the fleet of equipment surely to descend around the new east Highway 72 bridge in Hiwasse in preparation for the Hiwasse-to-I-540 segment.  :nod:

Ooh! Ooh! I'll have to go look :)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on April 08, 2014, 10:26:52 PM
Interesting.  There are now "bagged up" (I don't know what the technical term the highway departments use for that  :spin: ) "Arkansas 549" signs installed on the new west Highway 72 bridge between Gravette and Hiwasse, even though no pavement whatsoever has yet been laid from just south of the bridge to (as far as I can tell) the dirt work's current northern terminus at Rocky Dell Hollow Road.

AHTD, I'm keeping an eye out for the fleet of equipment surely to descend around the new east Highway 72 bridge in Hiwasse in preparation for the Hiwasse-to-I-540 segment.  :nod:

Ooh! Ooh! I'll have to go look :)

Hiwasse needs a pizza parlor.

(And seriously, seems a little early to put the "bagged up" signs out for that highway, but the highway department has the plans, not I.)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on April 09, 2014, 01:29:34 AM
Interesting.  There are now "bagged up" (I don't know what the technical term the highway departments use for that  :spin: ) "Arkansas 549" signs installed on the new west Highway 72 bridge between Gravette and Hiwasse, even though no pavement whatsoever has yet been laid from just south of the bridge to (as far as I can tell) the dirt work's current northern terminus at Rocky Dell Hollow Road.

AHTD, I'm keeping an eye out for the fleet of equipment surely to descend around the new east Highway 72 bridge in Hiwasse in preparation for the Hiwasse-to-I-540 segment.  :nod:

That's only about 15 miles from me... Road trip tomorrow for me, maybe.  I haven't been out that way for a while!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on April 09, 2014, 10:54:54 AM
Interesting.  There are now "bagged up" (I don't know what the technical term the highway departments use for that  :spin: ) "Arkansas 549" signs installed on the new west Highway 72 bridge between Gravette and Hiwasse, even though no pavement whatsoever has yet been laid from just south of the bridge to (as far as I can tell) the dirt work's current northern terminus at Rocky Dell Hollow Road.

AHTD, I'm keeping an eye out for the fleet of equipment surely to descend around the new east Highway 72 bridge in Hiwasse in preparation for the Hiwasse-to-I-540 segment.  :nod:

Ooh! Ooh! I'll have to go look :)

Hiwasse needs a pizza parlor.


Actually, Hiwasse is about to go the way of Baldwin, Arkansas (ie cease to exist as an independent entity).  BUT there's a c-store at 59/72 in Gravette that has Hunt Brothers (blarg!)   Once 49 (or 549) becomes some semblance of reality, I'm sure Kum & Go or Casey's will set up shop... not that their pizza is much better. 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on April 09, 2014, 10:58:26 AM
Interesting.  There are now "bagged up" (I don't know what the technical term the highway departments use for that  :spin: ) "Arkansas 549" signs installed on the new west Highway 72 bridge between Gravette and Hiwasse, even though no pavement whatsoever has yet been laid from just south of the bridge to (as far as I can tell) the dirt work's current northern terminus at Rocky Dell Hollow Road.

AHTD, I'm keeping an eye out for the fleet of equipment surely to descend around the new east Highway 72 bridge in Hiwasse in preparation for the Hiwasse-to-I-540 segment.  :nod:

Ooh! Ooh! I'll have to go look :)

Hiwasse needs a pizza parlor.


Actually, Hiwasse is about to go the way of Baldwin, Arkansas (ie cease to exist as an independent entity).  BUT there's a c-store at 59/72 in Gravette that has Hunt Brothers (blarg!)   Once 49 (or 549) becomes some semblance of reality, I'm sure Kum & Go or Casey's will set up shop... not that their pizza is much better.

Heard from the horse's mouth...Domino's will likely go out there, too.  (The city of Bella Vista owns land "for future development" all along future I-49 straight west of B.V. - Domino's Bella Vista, with few exceptions, does not deliver to the Highlands area (only about 1/2 of the city...)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: AHTD on April 09, 2014, 11:42:35 AM
Interesting.  There are now "bagged up" (I don't know what the technical term the highway departments use for that  :spin: ) "Arkansas 549" signs installed on the new west Highway 72 bridge between Gravette and Hiwasse, even though no pavement whatsoever has yet been laid from just south of the bridge to (as far as I can tell) the dirt work's current northern terminus at Rocky Dell Hollow Road.

AHTD, I'm keeping an eye out for the fleet of equipment surely to descend around the new east Highway 72 bridge in Hiwasse in preparation for the Hiwasse-to-I-540 segment.  :nod:

Shouldn't be long. The same contractor constructing the segment between State Highway 72 north of (the city formerly known as) Hiwasse to Benton County Road 34, will construct the part to I-540. We are working on putting together a "dirt turning" ceremony for this project in May to signify its importance as the first project under construction funded by the half-cent sales tax program.
 
More on this later.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on April 09, 2014, 02:34:58 PM
Interesting.  There are now "bagged up" (I don't know what the technical term the highway departments use for that  :spin: ) "Arkansas 549" signs installed on the new west Highway 72 bridge between Gravette and Hiwasse, even though no pavement whatsoever has yet been laid from just south of the bridge to (as far as I can tell) the dirt work's current northern terminus at Rocky Dell Hollow Road.

AHTD, I'm keeping an eye out for the fleet of equipment surely to descend around the new east Highway 72 bridge in Hiwasse in preparation for the Hiwasse-to-I-540 segment.  :nod:

Shouldn't be long. The same contractor constructing the segment between State Highway 72 north of (the city formerly known as) Hiwasse to Benton County Road 34, will construct the part to I-540. We are working on putting together a "dirt turning" ceremony for this project in May to signify its importance as the first project under construction funded by the half-cent sales tax program.
 
More on this later.

Excellent, AHTD.  And, thanks.
 
Fixed quote. (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=4000.0) - rmf67
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: AHTD on April 10, 2014, 05:07:18 PM
The request for I-49 designation in Arkansas has been submitted to the FHWA. We will post relevant documents in this thread as well as the thread for the Texarkana area.
 
Application Submitted to AASHTO (09-09-13)
http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49-Request-AASHTO.pdf (http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49-Request-AASHTO.pdf)
 
Application Submitted to FHWA for I-49 in Northwest Arkansas (02-03-14)
http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49-Request-north.pdf (http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49-Request-north.pdf)
 
Application Submitted to FHWA for I-49 in Southwest Arkansas (03-31-14)
http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49-Request-south.pdf (http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49-Request-south.pdf)

 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on April 11, 2014, 01:57:52 AM
The request for I-49 designation in Arkansas has been submitted to the FHWA. We will post relevant documents in this thread as well as the thread for the Texarkana area.
 
Application Submitted to AASHTO (09-09-13)
http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49-Request-AASHTO.pdf (http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49-Request-AASHTO.pdf)
 
Application Submitted to FHWA for I-49 in Northwest Arkansas (02-03-14)
http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49-Request-north.pdf (http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49-Request-north.pdf)
 
Application Submitted to FHWA for I-49 in Southwest Arkansas (03-31-14)
http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49-Request-south.pdf (http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49-Request-south.pdf)

 

I love how Scott Bennett crosses out the formal name of the recipient in the letter and writes their first name.  Props for that! 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: rickmastfan67 on April 11, 2014, 05:24:38 AM
Application Submitted to FHWA for I-49 in Northwest Arkansas (02-03-14)
http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49-Request-north.pdf (http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49-Request-north.pdf)

Quote from: PDF
Removal of the Interstate 540 designation from Interstate 40
(currently dual signed) between Van Buren and Alma

Thank you for listening to all of us about I-540 being officially approved along I-40 and needing to be eliminated as well when converting I-540 North of I-40 into I-49. :)

Still think you'll need to send a request into the AASHTO about it as well so it's removed from their logs too. ;)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: AHTD on April 11, 2014, 06:58:47 AM
And thank you for being vigilant about it. We have so much going on it was almost overlooked because we just always considered both stretches of I-540 internally as spurs.


Once we obtain approval for I-49, I-540 in Ft. Smith area WILL revert to a spur. Exit numbers start at I -40. We are in the process of re-logging this stretch because the log miles begin at the state line. To be consistent, log miles will begin at I-40 too.


Anyone catch that our request (to FHWA) didn't include the new location at Barling? It will be a separate request. This road should be almost complete and we are discussing a "ride before you drive" public event before it opens. Will be working with the good folks over at Chaffee Crossing to put this on.


Stay tuned for details!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: AHTD on April 11, 2014, 07:02:06 AM
The request for I-49 designation in Arkansas has been submitted to the FHWA. We will post relevant documents in this thread as well as the thread for the Texarkana area.
 
Application Submitted to AASHTO (09-09-13)
http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49-Request-AASHTO.pdf (http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49-Request-AASHTO.pdf)
 
Application Submitted to FHWA for I-49 in Northwest Arkansas (02-03-14)
http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49-Request-north.pdf (http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49-Request-north.pdf)
 
Application Submitted to FHWA for I-49 in Southwest Arkansas (03-31-14)
http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49-Request-south.pdf (http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49-Request-south.pdf)

 

I love how Scott Bennett crosses out the formal name of the recipient in the letter and writes their first name.  Props for that!


We have a GREAT working relationship with her and her staff. You will be pleased to know she represents Arkansas well at the Federal level.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: AHTD on April 16, 2014, 12:16:08 PM
 ARKANSAS RECEIVES APPROVAL FOR I-49 ROUTE DESIGNATION
 
It’s official!
 
We received approval from FHWA for a new Interstate in Arkansas. Here are a few facts:
 
The approval is for renaming I-540 from I-40 to U.S. 62/State Highway 102 (Exit 86) as I-49; and removal of the co-designation of I-540 from I-40 between Van Buren and Alma.
 
U.S. Highway 71 from U.S. Highway 62/State Highway 102 (Exit 86) to U.S. 71-B (Exit 93) has been ADDED to the Interstate system and is approved for designation as I-49. This increases Arkansas’ Interstate mileage by 5.72 miles for a total of 661.23 miles.
 
The completed portion of the Bella Vista Bypass (from State Highway 72 south of Hiwasse to State Highway 72 north of Hiwasse) is approved for designation as Future I-49. This stretch of road will actually open to traffic next week and will be co-signed as State Highway 549/Future I-49.
 
We will begin swapping route markers on I-540 next week. The first will be in the southbound direction at the northern most end of the route. There are approximately 697 new signs to erect. The I-540 signs will come down as the I-49 signs go up. We estimate one month to get this done.
 
New exit numbers for the ENTIRE I-49 corridor in Arkansas have already been logged, however these will not be signed until after the I-49 route has been approved and opened to traffic from U.S. Highway 71 North of Texarkana to the Louisiana state line.
 
 
Here is the approval letter from FHWA:
http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49-approval-north.pdf (http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49-approval-north.pdf)
 
 
Here is our news release about it:
http://www.arkansashighways.com/news/2014/NR%2014-098.pdf (http://www.arkansashighways.com/news/2014/NR%2014-098.pdf)


 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on April 16, 2014, 12:23:00 PM
ARKANSAS RECEIVES APPROVAL FOR I-49 ROUTE DESIGNATION
 
It’s official!
 
We received approval from FHWA for a new Interstate in Arkansas. Here are a few facts:
 
The approval is for renaming I-540 from I-40 to U.S. 62/State Highway 102 (Exit 86) as I-49; and removal of the co-designation of I-540 from I-40 between Van Buren and Alma.
 
U.S. Highway 71 from U.S. Highway 62/State Highway 102 (Exit 86) to U.S. 71-B (Exit 93) has been ADDED to the Interstate system and is approved for designation as I-49. This increases Arkansas’ Interstate mileage by 5.72 miles for a total of 661.23 miles.
 
The completed portion of the Bella Vista Bypass (from State Highway 72 south of Hiwasse to State Highway 72 north of Hiwasse) is approved for designation as Future I-49. This stretch of road will actually open to traffic next week and will be co-signed as State Highway 549/Future I-49.
 
We will begin swapping route markers on I-540 next week. The first will be in the southbound direction at the northern most end of the route. There are approximately 697 new signs to erect. The I-540 signs will come down as the I-49 signs go up. We estimate one month to get this done.
 
New exit numbers for the ENTIRE I-49 corridor in Arkansas have already been logged, however these will not be signed until after the I-49 route has been approved and opened to traffic from U.S. Highway 71 North of Texarkana to the Louisiana state line.
 
 
Here is the approval letter from FHWA:
http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49-approval-north.pdf (http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49-approval-north.pdf)
 
 
Here is our news release about it:
http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49-announcement-north.pdf (http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49-announcement-north.pdf)
 

You just posted new signs on the Ft Smith-Van Buren leg for I-40/I-540. Will those have to be replaced?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on April 16, 2014, 01:08:51 PM
Anyone catch that our request (to FHWA) didn't include the new location at Barling? It will be a separate request.
ARKANSAS RECEIVES APPROVAL FOR I-49 ROUTE DESIGNATION
 
It’s official! ....
Here is our news release about it:
http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49-announcement-north.pdf (http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49-announcement-north.pdf)

Great news, AHTD! Thanks for posting it.

The news release discusses the new location at Barling:

Quote
... the new route across Fort Chaffee near Fort Smith that [is] currently under construction will have dual designation as Highway 549 and Future Interstate 49,”  Bennett added.

Although I appreciate the confidence that FHWA will approve the Future I-49 request, aren't you jumping the gun a little bit?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: AHTD on April 16, 2014, 01:19:09 PM
You are correct. We edited that out at the last minute and there is another "final" version we will put in its place.
 
Sorry, busy day here!!!!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Scott5114 on April 16, 2014, 01:34:04 PM
Congrats on the redesignation. Hopefully this will make the political situation for the remaining segments easier since it will be more obvious that they represent a gap in a long Interstate route. I'm sure David will have some photos when the new signs go up; I'm looking forward to seeing those.

Suppose you guys already have plans of what to do with the old I-540 signs? :P I'm sure there's a few people on here who would like to have one!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: The High Plains Traveler on April 16, 2014, 02:08:51 PM
So, AHTD: are the mileposts and exit numbers along redesignated I-49 going to be changed now, or will those remain the same until a final alignment for the entire I-49 corridor south of Fort Smith is selected?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: AHTD on April 16, 2014, 02:29:47 PM
They will be changed when the southern part is approved (to the LA state line). Although we don't have a final alignment yet for the section between Ft. Smith and Texarkana, we made our best guess at what those mileposts and exits will be north of I-40. There may have to be adjustments in the future, but considering the time between now and when we would actually have to go back and make those adjustments, it will work for now.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on April 16, 2014, 06:20:44 PM
Congrats on the redesignation. Hopefully this will make the political situation for the remaining segments easier since it will be more obvious that they represent a gap in a long Interstate route. I'm sure David will have some photos when the new signs go up; I'm looking forward to seeing those.

Suppose you guys already have plans of what to do with the old I-540 signs? :P I'm sure there's a few people on here who would like to have one!
Most often, the ones in good condition are reused: they have a machine that will scrape off the old markings before applying new ones. (I read that in an Arkansas Highways once) . Years ago, I ran into the sign crew replacing AR 471 with US 71B and no amount of begging would persuade them to let me have a souvenir.   :thumbdown:
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: roadman65 on April 16, 2014, 07:52:19 PM
Newsflash from the owner of this site on his FB page!  I-540 in NW Arkansas is now officially I-49 and will officially be signed later this month.  Only south of I-40 will it remain I-540 as that is not going to be part of the KC to NO interstate, and the Bella Vista Bypass will become AR 549 for the time being.

http://arkansasnews.com/news/arkansas/highway-officials-announce-naming-part-i-49-statewide-construction-program
Here is a news article that I found to support this info.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: rickmastfan67 on April 16, 2014, 08:21:57 PM
The completed portion of the Bella Vista Bypass (from State Highway 72 south of Hiwasse to State Highway 72 north of Hiwasse) is approved for designation as Future I-49. This stretch of road will actually open to traffic next week and will be co-signed as State Highway 549/Future I-49.

I hope you'll do the 'Future I-49' shields in the same style as NCDOT has in the past. ;)
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v645/rickmastfan67/Interstates/NC/I-74/P1030940s.jpg)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: agentsteel53 on April 16, 2014, 08:24:38 PM

I hope you'll do the 'Future I-49' shields in the same style as NCDOT has in the past. ;)


I hope you don't.  Arkansas still uses '57 spec for its two-digit interstates, so I'm hoping 49 shows up that way.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: rickmastfan67 on April 16, 2014, 08:35:08 PM

I hope you'll do the 'Future I-49' shields in the same style as NCDOT has in the past. ;)


I hope you don't.  Arkansas still uses '57 spec for its two-digit interstates, so I'm hoping 49 shows up that way.

What I meant was how NC added the 'Future' text to the shield, just to be clear.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on April 16, 2014, 08:59:06 PM

I hope you'll do the 'Future I-49' shields in the same style as NCDOT has in the past. ;)


I hope you don't.  Arkansas still uses '57 spec for its two-digit interstates, so I'm hoping 49 shows up that way.

What I meant was how NC added the 'Future' text to the shield, just to be clear.

Like this?
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/6b/I-49_%28Future%29.svg/200px-I-49_%28Future%29.svg.png)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: agentsteel53 on April 16, 2014, 09:17:59 PM
(http://www.aaroads.com/shields/misc/future_arkansas_49.png)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on April 17, 2014, 01:36:09 AM
Locally, people are freaking out via social media.  But they're just not informed... And I blame the local media somewhat.

"$70,000 for the changing of signs?!  This should have gone to fixing roads!"

Bah... I wish the exit numbers would be changed with the conversion.  That's just going to create more madness.



Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on April 17, 2014, 09:27:49 AM
Locally, people are freaking out via social media.  But they're just not informed... And I blame the local media somewhat.

"$70,000 for the changing of signs?!  This should have gone to fixing roads!"

Bah... I wish the exit numbers would be changed with the conversion.  That's just going to create more madness.



The Build I-49 (https://www.facebook.com/pages/Build-I-49/288089113623) page on Facebook has experienced similar feedback.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on April 17, 2014, 12:29:14 PM
This TV video report (http://5newsonline.com/2014/04/16/some-road-projects-still-up-in-the-air-after-i-540-name-change/) provides a preliminary indication from the announcement ceremony that "Arkansas" will be missing from the I-49 shields that will be installed in the near future:

(http://i.imgur.com/yi9Vgs4.png)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: agentsteel53 on April 17, 2014, 12:34:19 PM
ugh.  when has Arkansas ever used large-number 70 spec, so why start now?  49 is an especially tough number to fit if you're trying to use large numbers (12" on a 24" blank; in this case it looks like a 36" blank with 18" numbers).

that shield looks completely stupid.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: AHTD on April 17, 2014, 04:58:19 PM
The sign unveiled at yesterday's event was indeed a 36-inch model. This is what we will use for route confirmation markers. The Future I-49 signs will be located at the project termini of the soon-to-be-opened completed portion of the Bella Vista Bypass and installed on green destination and distance boards. The Future I-49 signs will have the word "Future" where the word "Interstate" normally appears. The BVB route markers will be State Highway 549.
 
We will actually - and you read it here on AAROADS first - start changing out the I-540 signs Monday. Two crews will depart Little Rock Monday morning. One will head directly to the BVB and start installing signs. The other crew will start changing route markers on the northbound lanes just north of I-40. The overhead sign structures will be modified sometime in the next 30 days because we have to schedule crews and lane closures to make that happen.
 
BVB will officially open to traffic Tuesday morning before noon.
 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on April 17, 2014, 06:19:57 PM
This TV video report (http://5newsonline.com/2014/04/16/some-road-projects-still-up-in-the-air-after-i-540-name-change/) provides a preliminary indication from the announcement ceremony that "Arkansas" will be missing from the I-49 shields that will be installed in the near future:

(http://i.imgur.com/yi9Vgs4.png)

5News flubbed: they said Bella Vista would be I-549 not AR 549   :pan:

You'll also have to change some of the mileage signs along I-40 that show the distance to I-540 North.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on April 17, 2014, 07:31:13 PM
My gosh Arkansas's Interstate signage seems inconsistent

With this announcement reinforcing that feeling. Will all future Interstate signs be huge-number variety going forward?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on April 17, 2014, 08:01:02 PM
My gosh Arkansas's Interstate signage seems inconsistent

Honestly? It has been for a long time.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on April 17, 2014, 09:36:09 PM
Quote
Honestly? It has been for a long time.

Too true

AHTD needs to get on the same page, preferably not the massive-number page revealed at that ceremony. This $70k seems like a great opportunity. I'm sure they are already being fabricated though. Ugh
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: AHTD on April 17, 2014, 11:03:21 PM
It's $70,000. That includes labor.


They are already printed. I-540 signs that are taken down will be recycled as I-49 signs for the southern route.


Don't forget the significance of ADDING mileage to our Interstate system. The stretch of the route above the 62/102 exit is being signed from U.S. 71 to I -49.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: txstateends on April 17, 2014, 11:22:17 PM
This TV video report (http://5newsonline.com/2014/04/16/some-road-projects-still-up-in-the-air-after-i-540-name-change/) provides a preliminary indication from the announcement ceremony that "Arkansas" will be missing from the I-49 shields that will be installed in the near future:

(http://i.imgur.com/yi9Vgs4.png)

I was thinking this I-49 shield would be just a promotional prop and not the actual installed style.  Oh well, at least it was approved.  The style can always change later I guess.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: txstateends on April 17, 2014, 11:24:58 PM
I'm guessing (not that I know as much as others closer to the action) that all this flurry of change-out activity won't include any missing overlap signage for the US routes?

(oh well, why did I ask :-/ )
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: AHTD on April 17, 2014, 11:35:54 PM
Primary route markers at this time only.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on April 18, 2014, 12:41:12 AM
I'm guessing (not that I know as much as others closer to the action) that all this flurry of change-out activity won't include any missing overlap signage for the US routes?

(oh well, why did I ask :-/ )

Someday, I hope.  The local news station, 40/29, had a reporter next to an assembly with both I-49 and US 71 in Missouri, when the news broke for I-49 designation.  :P

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: codyg1985 on April 18, 2014, 07:11:17 AM
They are already printed. I-540 signs that are taken down will be recycled as I-49 signs for the southern route.

Although I can understand that this saves on material costs. putting a 2 digit interstate number inside of a 3 digit interstate shield will look strange.

You could always recycle the I-540 shields for I-555 if or when that is ever signed.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Anthony_JK on April 18, 2014, 07:46:09 AM
Don't mind me..I'm just watching all this and wondering why LADOTD doesn't do the same thing for US 90/Future I-49 South...
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on April 18, 2014, 08:32:21 AM
They are already printed. I-540 signs that are taken down will be recycled as I-49 signs for the southern route.

Although I can understand that this saves on material costs. putting a 2 digit interstate number inside of a 3 digit interstate shield will look strange.



Texas does it ;)
(https://farm3.staticflickr.com/2344/2528987372_6bedb2b4bb_z_d.jpg)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on April 18, 2014, 08:33:56 AM
Don't mind me..I'm just watching all this and wondering why LADOTD doesn't do the same thing for US 90/Future I-49 South...

There are already Future Corridor signs along US 90
(https://farm3.staticflickr.com/2718/4502458165_1b4185bec6_z_d.jpg)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Anthony_JK on April 18, 2014, 09:00:20 AM
Don't mind me..I'm just watching all this and wondering why LADOTD doesn't do the same thing for US 90/Future I-49 South...

There are already Future Corridor signs along US 90
(https://farm3.staticflickr.com/2718/4502458165_1b4185bec6_z_d.jpg)

True...but I'm talking about also putting actual I-49 shields on the completed Interstate-grade segments of US 90 and the Westbank Expressway and signing the exits thusly.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: roadman65 on April 18, 2014, 10:38:05 AM
What about Miller County?  Will Arkansas change its signs from AR 549 to I-49?  It seems now that would be the feasible thing to do because if they duplicate the number 49 in NW Arkansas they now can do it here.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on April 18, 2014, 12:43:59 PM
What about Miller County?  Will Arkansas change its signs from AR 549 to I-49?  It seems now that would be the feasible thing to do because if they duplicate the number 49 in NW Arkansas they now can do it here.

I think they will once 549 connects to Louisiana. (June?)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on April 19, 2014, 01:30:20 AM
Primary route markers at this time only.

US 71 isn't a "primary route"?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Scott5114 on April 19, 2014, 04:33:39 AM
Primary route markers at this time only.

US 71 isn't a "primary route"?

To the US route system, yes, but it's obviously secondary in importance to an Interstate designation.

The new 49 shields are pretty ugly. AHTD should have stuck with the '57 style (this is what we like to see):
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/40/040i_arshield.jpg/800px-040i_arshield.jpg)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on April 19, 2014, 11:08:33 AM
Major road construction to continue in Benton County (http://www.thecitywire.com/node/32746#.U1KQlfldWWY) (Arkansas - fascinating tidbits about future interchanges in this article for Bentonville area folks).
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: RBBrittain on April 19, 2014, 01:54:05 PM
Primary route markers at this time only.
I'm sure adding U.S. 71/62 shields to the newly-minted I-49 shields in NWA takes a back seat to, say, figuring out whether U.S. 67 follows I-30 or U.S. 70 thru central LR/NLR, or figuring out how to tell folks on I-55 SB approaching West Memphis that U.S. 63 turns west on I-40. (Not to mention the University Avenue exit signs on I-30 still say U.S. 70B even though the surface-street signs thru LR/NLR are all back to U.S. 70.)  But then, what about all the extra hardware needed to add two, three or even four U.S. highway shields (I-55 going to the Memphis & Arkansas Bridge carries U.S. 61, 64, 70 and 79) to interstate sign poles?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on April 19, 2014, 04:02:56 PM
Pictures I took today from north of the west side (brand new) Arkansas 72 bridge between "Hiwasse Gravette" and "Gravette Gravette".  :wave:

Standing in future southbound lanes of Bella Vista bypass/I-49.  A year ago old highway 72 ran right by that bridge almost as high as the bridge.  The mound of earth left over from where the old highway was was finally removed at least 1-2 months ago.  Access lanes are carved out either side out of my little phone camera's view.

(http://brazil.com.bz/images/0419_sfar.jpg)

Closer view of the bridge.  For you who know these things, why is there a type of green hay scattered on the future carriageways?  BTW, the section of future I-49 just south of this bridge to the new east Hiwasse Highway 72 bridge is set to open next week.

(http://brazil.com.bz/images/0419_sclose.jpg)

Looking northbound.  Rocky Dell Hollow Road (current northbound end of construction) is about 1-2 miles north.  This is set to be opened in the fall of this year, they say.  When it is, this is when the under-assembly Bella Vista bypass will start to get useful. Bella Vista is the widest of all the northwest Arkansas metro cities.  Most of the west half of BV has to rely on Glasgow (to the north) and Highlands (to the south) as its main arteries, both running east to west and very curvy and hilly, particularly for the latter.  Glasgow runs through much heavier residential area.  When this section from Rocky Dell Hollow (whose east end is where Glasgow and Highland both meet forming the left side of a large half-oval shape) to the bridge is finished, west Bella Vista residents can hop straight on it to go a ways down to 73, then onto Bentonville.  When the third segment (outlined in the City Wire article above from today) is finished, they'll just drive straight from Rocky Dell Hollow to I-540.

(http://brazil.com.bz/images/0419_nfar.jpg)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: txstateends on April 19, 2014, 08:27:48 PM
For you who know these things, why is there a type of green hay scattered on the future carriageways?

I'm not 'in the know' so to speak, but a guess would be that they want to preserve the way the dirt and base has been prepared up to now (until full construction commences) and not let wind or rain erode any of it in the meantime.  Also as an aside, it may keep any local dirt-bikers/ATVers from getting any off-road-while-the-road-isn't-built-yet ideas.  Either way, my uneducated theory is preservation, for now.  I've actually not seen this done before; maybe TxDOT does it a different way or feels like they don't have to do it at all.

And BTW, nice pix O.T.  Appreciate the update.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on April 19, 2014, 09:57:02 PM
Pictures I took today from north of the west side (brand new) Arkansas 72 bridge between "Hiwasse Gravette" and "Gravette Gravette".  :wave:


I was though there around 5pm. Didn't get any shots from the new roadway, though.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on April 20, 2014, 12:53:43 AM
Major road construction to continue in Benton County (http://www.thecitywire.com/node/32746#.U1KQlfldWWY) (Arkansas - fascinating tidbits about future interchanges in this article for Bentonville area folks).

O Tamandua, Can you tell me the significance of a County Judge?  Like Bob Clinard?  He's older than dirt, but what does he do?

And the article, while nice, has so many errors, I just can't.

I guess Arkansas Highway 72 is a US route now!

Thank you for the photos!  Great to see the progress!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on April 20, 2014, 03:26:26 AM
I hope to go there next week (the next day I have off after the 24th) and get some pictures and a video of the Hiwasee Bypass in each direction.  I don't want to go too soon and risk the signage not being up, so I'm going to wait a few days. 

Why isn't the Hiwasee bypass going to be a rerouting of AR 72?  It ends at AR 72 on each end and seems to be a superior routing for the highway.  Or name it Bypass AR 72 until I-49 comes along.  I'm sure if this happened, once I-49 gets signed that AR 72 would disappear along I-49 because AHTD (the organization, not the poster) are lazy idiots who don't know how to properly sign highways.  If the Oklafuckinghoma Department of Transportation can do it, then AHTD can do it too.  Even OK 66, which is worthless in Tulsa between the turnpikes, is fully signed along I-44.  Why can't major highways like US 71 and (especially) US 62 be signed along I-49?  It's two extra signs.  I know AHTD is not hurting for money because they waste money on "TO" signs where they are unnecessary and confusing.  Arkansas used to be excellent at cosigning roads, now they're the worst state in the country.  Show some pride, AHTD, and quit being "poor widdle Arkiesaw".
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on April 20, 2014, 08:17:16 AM
I hope to go there next week (the next day I have off after the 24th) and get some pictures and a video of the Hiwasee Bypass in each direction.  I don't want to go too soon and risk the signage not being up, so I'm going to wait a few days. 

Signage appears to be up, unless they're adding "Future I-49" signs.

Quote

Why isn't the Hiwasee bypass going to be a rerouting of AR 72?  It ends at AR 72 on each end and seems to be a superior routing for the highway.  Or name it Bypass AR 72 until I-49 comes along.  I'm sure if this happened, once I-49 gets signed that AR 72 would disappear along I-49 because AHTD (the organization, not the poster) are lazy idiots who don't know how to properly sign highways.  If the Oklafuckinghoma Department of Transportation can do it, then AHTD can do it too.  Even OK 66, which is worthless in Tulsa between the turnpikes, is fully signed along I-44.  Why can't major highways like US 71 and (especially) US 62 be signed along I-49?  It's two extra signs.  I know AHTD is not hurting for money because they waste money on "TO" signs where they are unnecessary and confusing.  Arkansas used to be excellent at cosigning roads, now they're the worst state in the country.  Show some pride, AHTD, and quit being "poor widdle Arkiesaw".

Been to Colorado? They don't co-sign either. US 87 "miraculously" appears on I-25 when you cross into Wyoming.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on April 20, 2014, 10:22:59 AM
I have a question for some of you that has seen the new Bella Vista Bypass. Are they doing the dirt work for both north and south lanes and just paving one side? So when they get the money to pave the other lane it will be paving only.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on April 20, 2014, 11:34:53 AM
I have a question for some of you that has seen the new Bella Vista Bypass. Are they doing the dirt work for both north and south lanes and just paving one side? So when they get the money to pave the other lane it will be paving only.

Yes. From what I have seen, dirt work has been done for both directions, but only one side has been paved.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on April 20, 2014, 03:50:19 PM
I'm planning on heading over to Bentonville on the next day I have off to take some I-49 sign pictures and a video of the Hiwasee bypass.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on April 20, 2014, 05:10:40 PM
(https://scontent-b-dfw.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash4/t1.0-9/10269589_10202845700215990_1344494415896218610_n.jpg)

Not a great photo since I was in a hurry, but this is 549 at the western AR 72 junction. You can see both sides have been graded.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on April 20, 2014, 08:59:01 PM
Thanks US71, I forgot to add bridges with paving so that not that more expensive. I am wondering about Missouri saying it will be more cost unless they are doing all of it to one contractor. I know design build is supposed to cheaper but Missouri says they have the engineering already done. I think they need to do 2 lanes if they can't get the money for 4 lanes. Hope they do something because they did say that they will match what Arkansas does.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Scott5114 on April 21, 2014, 01:56:13 AM
I want to say the plans for the MO portion of the Bella Vista Bypass have been posted to the forum at some point in the last few years.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on April 21, 2014, 11:14:42 AM
I want to say the plans for the MO portion of the Bella Vista Bypass have been posted to the forum at some point in the last few years.

Fascinating to see how Missouri prepared for this.  They have a cordoned off turn lane(s) for the future bypass southbound, sign bridges to accommodate the additional signage necessary for the future turns, rock cuts for future northbound lanes from the bypass to the highway, all along a 3-4 lane stretch in both directions at the future bypass turnoff south/southwest of Pineville on current I-49.

M86, sorry I can't answer your questions.  Per my paragraph above, it's as if Missouri knew there was going to be a need for the future BV bypass (and more importantly, a completed I-49) while Arkansas pretended it was Nigeria and saw no benefit whatsoever to the state if I-49 wasn't going to traverse Little Rock and East Arkansas.  (If I sound disappointed, it's because I am.  The BV bypass could have been built nearly 10 years ago if the Arkansas legislature had been ready when Missouri was.)

Right now, seeing all that's going on in NW Arkansas, and how a bull's eye is being drawn on this state by the I-49/I-69 developing system and its proponents (who have a VERY good argument for completion) I'm just happy to finally, finally see it coming to fruition now...
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: AHTD on April 21, 2014, 12:45:22 PM
What about Miller County?  Will Arkansas change its signs from AR 549 to I-49?  It seems now that would be the feasible thing to do because if they duplicate the number 49 in NW Arkansas they now can do it here.

I think they will once 549 connects to Louisiana. (June?)

The correct answer here is when we receive authorization from FHWA. We don't anticipate that until the Doddridge to LA SL is completed. And yes, mid-summer is the current completion estimate.
 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on April 21, 2014, 06:25:32 PM
Article about the first (two-lane) section of the Bella Vista bypass opening tomorrow. (http://www.arkansasbusiness.com/article/98279/first-section-of-bella-vista-bypass-to-open)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: rte66man on April 21, 2014, 07:42:50 PM
For you who know these things, why is there a type of green hay scattered on the future carriageways?

I'm not 'in the know' so to speak, but a guess would be that they want to preserve the way the dirt and base has been prepared up to now (until full construction commences) and not let wind or rain erode any of it in the meantime.  Also as an aside, it may keep any local dirt-bikers/ATVers from getting any off-road-while-the-road-isn't-built-yet ideas.  Either way, my uneducated theory is preservation, for now.  I've actually not seen this done before; maybe TxDOT does it a different way or feels like they don't have to do it at all.

You mean like this?
https://www.flickr.com/photos/rte66man/8593254285/in/photostream/
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: rte66man on April 21, 2014, 07:44:32 PM
Pictures I took today from north of the west side (brand new) Arkansas 72 bridge between "Hiwasse Gravette" and "Gravette Gravette".  :wave:

Standing in future southbound lanes of Bella Vista bypass/I-49.  A year ago old highway 72 ran right by that bridge almost as high as the bridge.  The mound of earth left over from where the old highway was was finally removed at least 1-2 months ago.  Access lanes are carved out either side out of my little phone camera's view.

(http://brazil.com.bz/images/0419_sfar.jpg)

Closer view of the bridge.  For you who know these things, why is there a type of green hay scattered on the future carriageways?  BTW, the section of future I-49 just south of this bridge to the new east Hiwasse Highway 72 bridge is set to open next week.

(http://brazil.com.bz/images/0419_sclose.jpg)

Looking northbound.  Rocky Dell Hollow Road (current northbound end of construction) is about 1-2 miles north.  This is set to be opened in the fall of this year, they say.  When it is, this is when the under-assembly Bella Vista bypass will start to get useful. Bella Vista is the widest of all the northwest Arkansas metro cities.  Most of the west half of BV has to rely on Glasgow (to the north) and Highlands (to the south) as its main arteries, both running east to west and very curvy and hilly, particularly for the latter.  Glasgow runs through much heavier residential area.  When this section from Rocky Dell Hollow (whose east end is where Glasgow and Highland both meet forming the left side of a large half-oval shape) to the bridge is finished, west Bella Vista residents can hop straight on it to go a ways down to 73, then onto Bentonville.  When the third segment (outlined in the City Wire article above from today) is finished, they'll just drive straight from Rocky Dell Hollow to I-540.

(http://brazil.com.bz/images/0419_nfar.jpg)

What it looked like last year:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/rte66man/8593256467/in/photostream/
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on April 22, 2014, 03:33:16 AM
I'm going to go to bed tonight, and probably weep enough tears to finance a concrete company to build the other set of lanes to complete this I-49 bypass.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on April 22, 2014, 02:11:04 PM
Had to give a friend a ride from Bentonville to Gravette this morning, just in time to travel the new future section of I-49 on its first day open.  Given that it's a workday I only had time to snap one picture, 1/4 east of the new Highway 72 west-of-Hiwasse bridge:

(http://www.brazil.com.bz/images/0422_new.jpg)

AHTD,

I know it's got to be frustrating to you and your colleagues to only be able to open two lanes of a future major U.S. interstate corridor under your agency's jurisdiction.  I'm not interested (or educated enough) about the process as so many are here...I'm interested in the progress.

And with that said, I loved driving this even as I was the only one on the entire brand new stretch.  (I'm reminded of an original Star Trek episode "The Tholian Web", where Captain Kirk (to his dismay) talked about briefly having an entire (alternate) universe to himself (that he was temporarily trapped in).

It was weird having an entire stretch of future interstate to myself today.  But it was a beaut to drive.  And when your next section opens (Rocky Dell Hollow Rd to AR 72) and the one after that (AR 72 east new bridge to I-49 north current terminus at Bentonville/Bella Vista line) people are going to be amazed at what a travel blessing this will be from a time-saving standpoint.  And a bunch of us are going to be wondering why this wasn't done sooner (gazing to the southeast in the direction of the Arkansas legislature).

Good job...excellent first step on this, IMO.

(EDIT: hope this ends well, but sadly U.S. Senator John Boozman was in NWA for the BV bypass section ribbon cutting ceremony but must have had a heart attack - he was taken to nearby Rogers for emergency surgery). (http://www.nwahomepage.com/story/d/story/-/mugW7Y-3Rke-ONkd33UsFw)  :no:  Prayers for Sen. Boozman and his family.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on April 23, 2014, 12:05:55 AM
Had to give a friend a ride from Bentonville to Gravette this morning, just in time to travel the new future section of I-49 on its first day open.  Given that it's a workday I only had time to snap one picture, 1/4 east of the new Highway 72 west-of-Hiwasse bridge:

No worries. I've got a bunch of photos I'll probably have on Flickr by the end of the week ;)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: apjung on April 23, 2014, 06:29:44 AM
I-49 signs now going up on I-540.
http://www.nwaonline.com/news/2014/apr/23/first-section-of-bella-vista-bypass-ope/?news-arkansas-nwa-fayetteville (paywall)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on April 23, 2014, 08:08:42 AM
I-49 signs now going up on I-540.
http://www.nwaonline.com/news/2014/apr/23/first-section-of-bella-vista-bypass-ope/?news-arkansas-nwa-fayetteville (paywall)

I was up there yesterday. They did the mainline SB from Exit 93 (71B) to Exit 76 (Wagon Wheel Rd),  then re-signed NB. Intersecting roads were unchanged as of 7pm last night.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Alex on April 23, 2014, 10:19:45 AM
Question for AHTD:

Now that all of I-540 north of I-40 is transferred over to I-49. What is the official mileage of I-540 south into Fort Smith, and what is the total official mileage of I-49 in Arkansas presently?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on April 23, 2014, 10:33:54 AM
Had to give a friend a ride from Bentonville to Gravette this morning, just in time to travel the new future section of I-49 on its first day open.  Given that it's a workday I only had time to snap one picture, 1/4 east of the new Highway 72 west-of-Hiwasse bridge:

No worries. I've got a bunch of photos I'll probably have on Flickr by the end of the week ;)

Hey, I was first.  ;-)  (Yours will likely be much better than mine.)

BTW, front page story (about time it made there) of the NWA Online and affiliate newspapers ($ .99 daily paywall): http://www.nwaonline.com/news/2014/apr/23/first-section-of-bella-vista-bypass-ope/
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: AHTD on April 23, 2014, 12:30:33 PM
Question for AHTD:

Now that all of I-540 north of I-40 is transferred over to I-49. What is the official mileage of I-540 south into Fort Smith, and what is the total official mileage of I-49 in Arkansas presently?

We posted some of this last week in the I-49 Texarkana thread and probably should have repeated it here. Thanks for asking! We are currently re-logging I-540 and will post that information once its available.
 
Here is the proposed logging of the entire I-49 corridor in Arkansas (and Texas).
http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49-Proposed-Mileage.pdf (http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49-Proposed-Mileage.pdf)
 
Proposed exit numbering from the Louisiana State Line (through Texas) and to the Polk County, Arkansas line:
http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49_Exits_1.pdf (http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49_Exits_1.pdf)
 
Proposed exit numbering from the Polk County line to the Ft. Chaffee area:
http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49_Exits_2.pdf (http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49_Exits_2.pdf)
 
Proposed exit numbering from the Ft. Chaffee area to the Missouri State Line:
http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49_Exits_3.pdf (http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49_Exits_3.pdf)
 
Please understand this is all PROPOSED and is subject to a tweak every now and then.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on April 23, 2014, 04:29:05 PM
Thank you, AHTD.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: AHTD on April 23, 2014, 04:43:07 PM
Had to give a friend a ride from Bentonville to Gravette this morning, just in time to travel the new future section of I-49 on its first day open.  Given that it's a workday I only had time to snap one picture, 1/4 east of the new Highway 72 west-of-Hiwasse bridge:

(http://www.brazil.com.bz/images/0422_new.jpg)

AHTD,

I know it's got to be frustrating to you and your colleagues to only be able to open two lanes of a future major U.S. interstate corridor under your agency's jurisdiction.  I'm not interested (or educated enough) about the process as so many are here...I'm interested in the progress.

And with that said, I loved driving this even as I was the only one on the entire brand new stretch.  (I'm reminded of an original Star Trek episode "The Tholian Web", where Captain Kirk (to his dismay) talked about briefly having an entire (alternate) universe to himself (that he was temporarily trapped in).

It was weird having an entire stretch of future interstate to myself today.  But it was a beaut to drive.  And when your next section opens (Rocky Dell Hollow Rd to AR 72) and the one after that (AR 72 east new bridge to I-49 north current terminus at Bentonville/Bella Vista line) people are going to be amazed at what a travel blessing this will be from a time-saving standpoint.  And a bunch of us are going to be wondering why this wasn't done sooner (gazing to the southeast in the direction of the Arkansas legislature).

Good job...excellent first step on this, IMO.

 
Thanks for those kind words!
 
Several of us attended the event yesterday and not only had the chance to drive the new section before it opened, but walked around and enjoyed what turned out to be an absolutely beautiful day for a ribbon-cutting. After all, one doesn’t often get the chance to enjoy a brand spankin’ new fully-controlled access facility before it opens!
 
Check it out: http://vimeo.com/92759115 (http://vimeo.com/92759115)
 
Of note was the vast quiet of the rural area and one could only imagine what it will be like when the project is fully realized. A few notes from the opportunity:
 
The route is officially signed State Highway 549
 http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/img_0596.jpg (http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/img_0596.jpg)
 
Signs for State Highway 549 with 90-degree arrows are posted on State Highway 72.
 
The section opened yesterday will become the southbound lanes. Although the grade is set for all four lanes in the vicinity of both State Highway 72 overpasses, the grade along this completed section is not. You can, however, see the right of way fencing and get an idea of where the northbound lanes will be constructed.
 
The double-yellow line separating north and south lanes is a thermo plastic. Should be relatively easy to replace with white skip lines.
 
The speed limit is 55 MPH.
 
A handful of residents attended the ribbon-cutting and were glad to see this first phase open. At least one resident (we assume) stood out on State Highway 72 holding up a sign that read: WASTE!
 
A work order was issued yesterday to Kolb Grading, LLC for the next section to be constructed (SH 72 to U.S. 71-B). The contractor is required to mobilize within 10 days so we should start seeing some action on this new project in May. This is a $53.6 million project and we estimate it will be completed in the first half of 2016.
 
Kolb Grading is also the contractor working on the section of the bypass currently under construction (SH 72 to Benton County Road 34). We estimate this will be completed in October 2014.
 
Truly one had to employ a healthy mix of imagination and anticipation to fully appreciate the event. All highways have to start somewhere. The first section of Interstate 30 in Arkansas was completed in 1954 from U.S. 67 to the Saline/Pulaski County Line. And that was just the westbound lanes. The eastbound lanes were completed in 1958. The entire I-30 in Arkansas wasn’t fully realized until 1971.
 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on April 23, 2014, 10:59:53 PM
No problem, AHTD (on the kind words).

BTW, in today's Northwest Arkansas newspaper (I read the Benton County Record, but I'm sure this article was the same across the various city papers up here):

- Per your comment "You never know when a billion dollar grant may come up" on another thread (that you cautioned may or may not happen, but that the AHTD is preparing for it if it happens), Dick Trammel was directly quoted as saying that the I-49 designation across these segments of highway increases the odds of getting a federal grant for more funds.  He didn't say it WOULD happen, but whatever anyone says about Mr. Trammel no one can convince me he doesn't love his state and the northwest Arkansas he's spent so much time in, and that he wouldn't say something like this if he didn't think there was a possibility it could happen.

- The AHTD person quoted said the (two lane) section of the BV bypass from Rocky Dell Hollow Road to the Hwy. 72 west Hiwasse bridge (the current west end of the new segment opened yesterday) is expected to be ready this October(!).

- ...and the east Hwy 72 bridge (current east end of yesterday's new segment) to U.S. 71 N at Bentonville (right by I-49's current north end there) is expected to be ready by Spring 2016.

- ...and that Arkansas is "ready to go" when Missouri gets their funding for their final 7 miles of I-49 in place.

The more we get completed, the faster this thing seems to go. :spin:
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: robbones on April 24, 2014, 05:18:48 PM
Is there any timeline on the Crawford County portion to be started? Will this section be at grade at any point or will it be all bridge?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: hizerbla on April 25, 2014, 08:20:02 AM
This is a question for AHTD concerning the Wagon Wheel Rd exit.
The city of Springdale, AR was allowed to create a 5-lane Rd and end it at there city limits.  This has increased traffic over the years and the traffic congestion on the bridge is very heavy during peak hours.  The south bound exit ramp dumps onto a county road with no form of traffic control and therefore the traffic trying to get onto the interstate has to sit and wait.  The city has informed me that this is an AHTD issue.  My question is either "why did the AHTD allow the city to create such a juggernaut with the traffic pattern with no consideration to increased traffic flow? or "Does AHTD have any plans to at least cooperate with the City to either sit a Stop light or at least Stop Signs to allow for a more controlled traffic pattern?  Thanks for you time.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on April 25, 2014, 11:18:38 AM
Small little piece of the puzzle within the Canada/Mexico/Gulf of Mexico future I-49/I-69 availability, but the Port of Fort Smith is starting to get more traffic thanks to new rail lines, and trucks are in the mix, too. (http://www.thecitywire.com/node/32855#.U1p7wvldWWY) 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on April 25, 2014, 12:58:41 PM
I have a question about the Don Tyson Parkway Exit:

I noticed the On Ramps from the Parkway to I-49 end right before the next exits (US 412 going north, Johnson Mill Blvd going south).  It would seem more logical (to me, at least) to extend the ramps to the exits and have them drop off there. I'm curious why the ramps weren't extended? Was there a logistical reason or a lack of funding?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: AHTD on April 25, 2014, 01:01:17 PM
Is there any timeline on the Crawford County portion to be started? Will this section be at grade at any point or will it be all bridge?

None identified. No money exists for it. The river crossing alone is ballparked at approximately $500 million. Once we get closer to design level, we should have a better idea of what will be required.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: AHTD on April 25, 2014, 01:07:11 PM
This is a question for AHTD concerning the Wagon Wheel Rd exit.
The city of Springdale, AR was allowed to create a 5-lane Rd and end it at there city limits.  This has increased traffic over the years and the traffic congestion on the bridge is very heavy during peak hours.  The south bound exit ramp dumps onto a county road with no form of traffic control and therefore the traffic trying to get onto the interstate has to sit and wait.  The city has informed me that this is an AHTD issue.  My question is either "why did the AHTD allow the city to create such a juggernaut with the traffic pattern with no consideration to increased traffic flow? or "Does AHTD have any plans to at least cooperate with the City to either sit a Stop light or at least Stop Signs to allow for a more controlled traffic pattern?  Thanks for you time.

This interchange is being reconfigured as part of our Interstate Rehabilitation Program. The contract should let sometime this year. Should resolve much of what you describe.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: txstateends on April 25, 2014, 01:09:32 PM
Local media was at the first I-49 installation:

(http://www.4029tv.com/image/view/-/25630460/highRes/1/-/maxh/460/maxw/620/-/qelja8/-/KHBS-I-49---img.jpg)
Story-- http://www.4029tv.com/news/crews-place-interstate-49-signs-along-roadway-during-rushhour-commute/25630374
Video-- http://www.4029tv.com/news/Ceremony-held-to-unveil-new-I-49-signs/25609244
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on April 26, 2014, 12:17:14 PM
As of 5pm Friday, I-49 has been signed all the way to I-40 at Alma. None of the intersecting roads have been changed out yet (nor the 40/540 overlap signs), so I'm guessing they will start on those next week.
(https://farm3.staticflickr.com/2900/14020742465_a8587d4b90_n_d.jpg)

Oh, do Fayetteville and Greenland know they need to change their signs, too?
(https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3645/3821890006_9231d0d190_n_d.jpg)    (https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3270/3068902787_bf3714853f_n_d.jpg)


Oh, and Rogers, too (though it's sooo cute ;) )
(https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3086/2626563973_3f3f51ebcd_n_d.jpg)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on April 26, 2014, 02:55:16 PM
Don't tell the city about those I-540 shields. If you tell them they will just replace them with I-49 signs.  If they stand for say 10 years some young road enthusiast might see the sign and think "why is there a sign pointing towards I-540?  I-540 is way down in Fort Smith" and could boost interest in the hobby.  Keep it a secret.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Scott5114 on April 27, 2014, 07:55:00 PM
And in the meantime, countless people who don't give a shit will get lost.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on April 27, 2014, 08:05:20 PM
They're not getting lost over AHTD's midnight resigning of I-540?
 already?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on April 28, 2014, 11:25:21 AM
And in the meantime, countless people who don't give a shit will get lost.

How cool would it be to find an I-440 sign in Oklahoma City?  An I-244 sign in Saint Louis?  I don't want to deny future road enthusiasts the chance to stumble across such a sign just because some anal geeks whined to the DOT.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on April 28, 2014, 05:13:31 PM
And in the meantime, countless people who don't give a shit will get lost.

How cool would it be to find an I-440 sign in Oklahoma City?  An I-244 sign in Saint Louis?  I don't want to deny future road enthusiasts the chance to stumble across such a sign just because some anal geeks whined to the DOT.

I think you've said that before. What would you call Named vs Neutered signs or posting of route overlaps?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Scott5114 on April 30, 2014, 07:28:58 PM
And in the meantime, countless people who don't give a shit will get lost.

How cool would it be to find an I-440 sign in Oklahoma City?  An I-244 sign in Saint Louis?  I don't want to deny future road enthusiasts the chance to stumble across such a sign just because some anal geeks whined to the DOT.

I think you've said that before. What would you call Named vs Neutered signs or posting of route overlaps?

Named vs. neutered shields are substantially the same in terms of utility. It could be argued either way on concurrencies: on the one hand you don't want to overwhelm the driver by presenting too many shields, but on the other you want to provide route continuity. I think that in general overlaps should be signed in order to err on the side of providing potentially useful information. While it is unlikely that a road user is following, say, OK-3 from terminus to terminus, we cannot rule out that someone might attempt it. 

As for the situation of an old shield not being updated after a redesignation, however, it is crystal clear that an update is warranted. Travelers just do not research old highway designations when traveling. If their map says I-49, an I-540 shield will not get them to their destination. Our likes and dislikes as road enthusiasts pale in comparison to ensuring that signs serve their purpose in directing motorists to their destinations.

Fear not,  Jeremy...the vast length of highway being renumbered means that it is near certain that at least one shield will be missed. And we probably won't discover it for a long while.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on May 02, 2014, 02:40:15 AM
Fear not,  Jeremy...the vast length of highway being renumbered means that it is near certain that at least one shield will be missed. And we probably won't discover it for a long while.

As soon as its location is publicized, some anal roadgeek will go whining to AHTD and it will be changed.

If I ever find an I-540 shield in NWA, I'm not revealing the location to anybody I don't trust.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on May 02, 2014, 11:05:42 AM
Fear not,  Jeremy...the vast length of highway being renumbered means that it is near certain that at least one shield will be missed. And we probably won't discover it for a long while.

As soon as its location is publicized, some anal roadgeek will go whining to AHTD and it will be changed.

If I ever find an I-540 shield in NWA, I'm not revealing the location to anybody I don't trust.

But if I find it, it'll be on my Flickr page. :p
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on May 03, 2014, 03:12:56 AM
Fear not,  Jeremy...the vast length of highway being renumbered means that it is near certain that at least one shield will be missed. And we probably won't discover it for a long while.

As soon as its location is publicized, some anal roadgeek will go whining to AHTD and it will be changed.

If I ever find an I-540 shield in NWA, I'm not revealing the location to anybody I don't trust.

But if I find it, it'll be on my living room wall. :p

More like it.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on May 03, 2014, 11:43:40 AM
Fear not,  Jeremy...the vast length of highway being renumbered means that it is near certain that at least one shield will be missed. And we probably won't discover it for a long while.

As soon as its location is publicized, some anal roadgeek will go whining to AHTD and it will be changed.

If I ever find an I-540 shield in NWA, I'm not revealing the location to anybody I don't trust.

But if I find it, it'll be on my living room wall. :p

More like it.

I already have one :p
(https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7035/6782381495_805a74f65c_z_d.jpg)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Scott5114 on May 03, 2014, 02:23:57 PM
Which reminds me that Jeremy already has what is apparently going to be the only state-name Arkansas I-49 shield ever made on his wall.

Wouldn't that confuse the sign collectors on eBay if it ended up there in 40 years...?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on May 03, 2014, 07:21:03 PM
Well, I can say with certainty that the intersecting roadways are being changed out. I spotted a couple places where the sign crews appear to have missed, but I'll say nothing at this time given this is a "work in progress".  :wave:

But here's an assembly spotted today near Rudy.
(https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5467/14096711752_2a8aeb1be4_z_d.jpg)

UPDATE
I-540 signs have been changed out to I-49 on the intersecting roads as far north as Exit 34 (AR 282 Chester), but ONLY at the interstate itself. There are at least 3 TO I-540 trailblazers at Mountainburg which have NOT been changed yet.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on May 03, 2014, 11:07:09 PM
(https://fbcdn-sphotos-d-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn1/t1.0-9/10176032_10202934861004954_3533204738154053510_n.jpg)

A small piece of history I found today. This is the AR 282 bridge over I-49 near Rudy, AR. 
When I-540 was planned north of Alma, it was intended to be a new alignment of US 71, replacing the old 2-Lane between Alma and Fayetteville. It was later decided to leave 71 where it was (and still is) and designate the new road as an extension of I-540.
Rumor has it the roadside craft shops and assorted cafes were afraid they would lose business from tourists not knowing AR 471 (the proposed re-designation) was actually old US 71, so 71 was allowed to remain on it's original (and current) alignment.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Scott5114 on May 04, 2014, 03:47:01 AM
Those 49s look really dumb next to the classic-style I-40...
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on May 04, 2014, 10:57:52 AM
This really could go in the Texas I-69 thread below, but given I-49 links up (indirectly now, directly in the future) with New Orleans and Baton Rouge I think it's appropriate here:

The Panama Canal expansion will make it more difficult for California to compete with Texas (http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2014/05/the_panama_canal_expansion_will_make_it_more_difficult_for_california_to_compete_with_texas.html)

Quote


The Toyota relocation to North Texas is one of the largest such corporate relocations in recent memory.   As others have mentioned, the move was about business climate factors, such as taxes and regulations.

I think that there is another reason for businesses leaving the West Coast and moving to our side of the country, i.e. the expansion of the Panama Canal!

In the next ten years, large ships will be able to cross the Canal and go to Houston, a port in "a right to work state" and with quicker access to much of the country.    New Orleans and other Gulf of Mexico ports will also benefit.

and;

Quote
An estimated $5.25 billion is now being spent to deepen and widen the Panama Canal’s Pacific and Atlantic entrance channels, to raise the water level of Gatun Lake – through which all ships must pass – and to install new locks on both sides of the waterway. It’s due to open in April 2015.

The project is a response to a problem.

The canal is reaching its maximum capacity.

It’s carrying more traffic than it was designed for and is unable to handle the Fabiolas of the world. Termed “post-Panamax”  vessels, these huge ships carry more than a quarter of the world’s containerized maritime shipments.

Today, cargo crossing the Pacific bound for the Midwest and Eastern United States must offload at a U.S. Pacific Coast port if the ship carrying it is too large to pass through the canal’s 50-mile waterway.

These goods are then routed across the country using the U.S. “land bridge,”  the network of highways and railways linking East and West.

Once the widened canal is navigable, many megaships will no longer need the land bridge.

Instead, they will pass through the canal’s wider locks to offload their cargo at a Gulf or East coast port, such as Houston, New Orleans or New York.

“Trade will shift,”  Bachkar said. “Instead of coming to the West Coast, it will go directly to the East Coast and on to Europe.”

These eastern ports are hoping the canal expansion will signal the end of an era – the end of the so-called West Coast Empire.


NOTE: while New York has continued to be a major port, team this story with one also in the American Thinker last year about how Houston has supplanted NYC as the America's #1 goods exporting region. (http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2013/07/houston_supplants_new_york.html)  Now, that being said, much of HOU's exports are petrochemical and likely won't traverse I-69 or I-49.

Yet this still tells me there's a LOT more interest in a completed I-49 (which will link to America's top Great Lakes port, Duluth, as well) than there ever has been...
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: txstateends on May 04, 2014, 02:28:12 PM

Yet this still tells me there's a LOT more interest in a completed I-49 (which will link to America's top Great Lakes port, Duluth, as well) than there ever has been...

OK, but does 'interest' = $$$$ enough to finish what's left? 

Political mindsets are going to have to shift notably and much quicker if the money will be in the transportation fund to do projects like I-49's remainder (among others that could use or need attention).
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on May 04, 2014, 03:45:12 PM

Yet this still tells me there's a LOT more interest in a completed I-49 (which will link to America's top Great Lakes port, Duluth, as well) than there ever has been...

OK, but does 'interest' = $$$$ enough to finish what's left? 

Political mindsets are going to have to shift notably and much quicker if the money will be in the transportation fund to do projects like I-49's remainder (among others that could use or need attention).

That's a very good question.  I stand by my contention that there's a lot more interest now...anyone wise enough to connect the dots can see multiple benefits for a completed I-49 that honestly were not there 40, 30, 20 or even perhaps 15 years ago.  As for the $$$$ and "political mindsets"...well-said.  I got in trouble the last time I said something about that, so for the sake of peace and quiet I'll abstain from further comment, for now at least.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: robbones on May 04, 2014, 06:35:50 PM
If there wasn't a money issue, could the entire interstate be done in 5 to 10 years?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on May 04, 2014, 08:52:57 PM
(http://www.brazil.com.bz/images/050414_pic.jpg)

Picture I took today where they're apparently building a bridge for what will be the farthest north exit (Rocky Dell Hollow Road) of the future border-to-border Arkansas section of I-49.  Not easy to see but both southern access lane paths for this exit are at either side of the picture.  Again, this is projected to be open by Fall (October, I believe) of this year, and will be where this existing part of the future interstate starts to get useful, as it will open a path from west Bella Vista to Arkansas 72 (and, projected in 2 years, to the both the current north end of I-49 at Bentonville and U.S. 71 in south Bella Vista).

Bella Vista is the very last of the Northwest Arkansas metro major cities not to have paved road exiting/entering from the west.  According to the big wall map at B.V.'s Allen's grocery store, all the land around this section of the future interstate up to the state line is owned by the city for "future use".
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on May 04, 2014, 09:04:12 PM
Which reminds me that Jeremy already has what is apparently going to be the only state-name Arkansas I-49 shield ever made on his wall.

Wouldn't that confuse the sign collectors on eBay if it ended up there in 40 years...?

It is a perfect replica of an Arkansas state named shield (1970 specs?) with the same fonts and overall style, so it could easily confuse future sign collectors.  If this forum were still archived in 40 years it would be easy to show that it was a fake, but what if all the information discussed in this forum disappears down the memory hole?

Here is the sign in question.

(http://i167.photobucket.com/albums/u126/bugo348/signs/routemarkerI-49.jpg)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: txstateends on May 05, 2014, 08:15:14 AM

Yet this still tells me there's a LOT more interest in a completed I-49 (which will link to America's top Great Lakes port, Duluth, as well) than there ever has been...

OK, but does 'interest' = $$$$ enough to finish what's left? 

Political mindsets are going to have to shift notably and much quicker if the money will be in the transportation fund to do projects like I-49's remainder (among others that could use or need attention).

That's a very good question.  I stand by my contention that there's a lot more interest now...anyone wise enough to connect the dots can see multiple benefits for a completed I-49 that honestly were not there 40, 30, 20 or even perhaps 15 years ago.  As for the $$$$ and "political mindsets"...well-said.  I got in trouble the last time I said something about that, so for the sake of peace and quiet I'll abstain from further comment, for now at least.

I kinda like 'peace and quiet' too, that's why I wasn't any more specific.  The Panama Canal expansion timetable, as well as other issues like need of better highways in growing metros, also continued vigilance and reconstruction need for aging bridges, are all things that can't really wait for those who don't need to be specified to decide to do things I won't get specific about.  It will help them, and all of us, in the long run.  Then, more 'peace and quiet'..... ;-)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Anthony_JK on May 05, 2014, 10:17:48 AM
This really could go in the Texas I-69 thread below, but given I-49 links up (indirectly now, directly in the future) with New Orleans and Baton Rouge I think it's appropriate here:

The Panama Canal expansion will make it more difficult for California to compete with Texas (http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2014/05/the_panama_canal_expansion_will_make_it_more_difficult_for_california_to_compete_with_texas.html)

Quote


The Toyota relocation to North Texas is one of the largest such corporate relocations in recent memory.   As others have mentioned, the move was about business climate factors, such as taxes and regulations.

I think that there is another reason for businesses leaving the West Coast and moving to our side of the country, i.e. the expansion of the Panama Canal!

In the next ten years, large ships will be able to cross the Canal and go to Houston, a port in "a right to work state" and with quicker access to much of the country.    New Orleans and other Gulf of Mexico ports will also benefit.

and;

Quote
An estimated $5.25 billion is now being spent to deepen and widen the Panama Canal’s Pacific and Atlantic entrance channels, to raise the water level of Gatun Lake – through which all ships must pass – and to install new locks on both sides of the waterway. It’s due to open in April 2015.

The project is a response to a problem.

The canal is reaching its maximum capacity.

It’s carrying more traffic than it was designed for and is unable to handle the Fabiolas of the world. Termed “post-Panamax”  vessels, these huge ships carry more than a quarter of the world’s containerized maritime shipments.

Today, cargo crossing the Pacific bound for the Midwest and Eastern United States must offload at a U.S. Pacific Coast port if the ship carrying it is too large to pass through the canal’s 50-mile waterway.

These goods are then routed across the country using the U.S. “land bridge,”  the network of highways and railways linking East and West.

Once the widened canal is navigable, many megaships will no longer need the land bridge.

Instead, they will pass through the canal’s wider locks to offload their cargo at a Gulf or East coast port, such as Houston, New Orleans or New York.

“Trade will shift,”  Bachkar said. “Instead of coming to the West Coast, it will go directly to the East Coast and on to Europe.”

These eastern ports are hoping the canal expansion will signal the end of an era – the end of the so-called West Coast Empire.


NOTE: while New York has continued to be a major port, team this story with one also in the American Thinker last year about how Houston has supplanted NYC as the America's #1 goods exporting region. (http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2013/07/houston_supplants_new_york.html)  Now, that being said, much of HOU's exports are petrochemical and likely won't traverse I-69 or I-49.

Yet this still tells me there's a LOT more interest in a completed I-49 (which will link to America's top Great Lakes port, Duluth, as well) than there ever has been...

This wouldn't be a good time to note that 4 of the top 10 shipping portals in the US are in South Louisiana (Port Fourchon, Port of South Louisiana, Avondale/New Orleans, Port of Iberia), right??
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on May 05, 2014, 10:39:23 AM


This wouldn't be a good time to note that 4 of the top 10 shipping portals in the US are in South Louisiana (Port Fourchon, Port of South Louisiana, Avondale/New Orleans, Port of Iberia), right??

Great point, Anthony.  Why stop there?  According to the DOT, here are the top American ports...take a look to see who's on the future I-49/I-69 line:

http://www.rita.dot.gov/bts/sites/rita.dot.gov.bts/files/publications/national_transportation_statistics/html/table_01_57.html
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on May 06, 2014, 12:07:22 AM
How is the I 49 section in Fort Smith coming along? Is the paving about finished except for the shoulders. Also the tie end with Hwy. 71 is it about complete? I haven't been up to that area sense last fall.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on May 06, 2014, 01:33:15 AM
How is the I 49 section in Fort Smith coming along? Is the paving about finished except for the shoulders. Also the tie end with Hwy. 71 is it about complete? I haven't been up to that area sense last fall.

Mostly paved. Work continues on tying in 71. I've not been down that way in a few weeks, so may try to check in the next couple days.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: AHTD on May 06, 2014, 05:36:30 PM
We are still projecting a fall completion for this project AND have discussed a "ride before you drive" event to give folks a preview of the facility before it opens to traffic. We will be coordinating this with the Ft. Chaffee Redevelopment Authority. More info as it becomes available!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on May 07, 2014, 08:12:03 PM
AHTD, I saw a LOT of construction / support vehicles off Peach Orchard Rd., S/SW of Lowe's Bentonville/Bella Vista today.  There's scraping going on there right now, and that is close to where the future roundabout/interchange will be. The trucks were from a Brookline, MO firm (which is near Springfield, not St. Louis).  Yours?

And do we know yet when the shovel-turning ceremony for the east Hwy 72 to north I-49 at the Bentonville/Bella Vista line will be?

Thank you in advance as always.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Arkansastravelguy on May 08, 2014, 10:47:22 AM
(http://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/05/08/gu2egy7y.jpg)(http://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/05/08/ege8a9ej.jpg)

For anyone interested


iPhone
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on May 08, 2014, 02:36:20 PM
Wow I still can't believe it. The 49 just looks so good in NWA!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Arkansastravelguy on May 08, 2014, 02:42:05 PM
(http://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/05/09/y4a8aga8.jpg)(http://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/05/09/zypa7e8y.jpg)

A couple more I've snapped


iPhone
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on May 08, 2014, 02:54:29 PM
(http://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/05/09/y4a8aga8.jpg)


Making progress, I see. As of last weekend, they had only made it as far as Chester, but left half of Collum Lane unchanged.

I heard a rumor that part of US 71 north of the 71B junction (where 49 ends for now) was also signed as I-49. Have you heard or seen anything on that?  I may be up that way in a few days, so I may check it myself ;)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Arkansastravelguy on May 08, 2014, 03:06:57 PM
I haven't been up that far yet but it would kind of make sense. I'll head up there soon , I want to check out NWA's newest highway AR 549


iPhone
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: AHTD on May 08, 2014, 03:47:12 PM
AHTD, I saw a LOT of construction / support vehicles off Peach Orchard Rd., S/SW of Lowe's Bentonville/Bella Vista today.  There's scraping going on there right now, and that is close to where the future roundabout/interchange will be. The trucks were from a Brookline, MO firm (which is near Springfield, not St. Louis).  Yours?

And do we know yet when the shovel-turning ceremony for the east Hwy 72 to north I-49 at the Bentonville/Bella Vista line will be?

Thank you in advance as always.

You are correct!

Kolb Grading mobilized this week and has begun moving dirt on the next phase of the BVB.
 
The groundbreaking ceremony for this project did not materialize. But you can bet on a ribbon-cutting when it's complete!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: AHTD on May 08, 2014, 04:00:17 PM
(http://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/05/09/y4a8aga8.jpg)


Making progress, I see. As of last weekend, they had only made it as far as Chester, but left half of Collum Lane unchanged.

I heard a rumor that part of US 71 north of the 71B junction (where 49 ends for now) was also signed as I-49. Have you heard or seen anything on that?  I may be up that way in a few days, so I may check it myself ;)

If it was, that is a mistake.
 
Someone may have confused the fact that I-540 ended at Exit 86 and continued as U.S. 71 past Exit 93 where the freeway ends. The section between Exits 86 and 93 was officially designated an Interstate and thus the first sign we changed out was the first U.S. 71 South route confirmation marker that appears just after you get on the freeway from U.S. 71-B.
 
GREAT progress has been made in the I-49 sign swap. Apparently we will do the overheads on I-40 last.
 
Once we proclaim here on AAROADS the sign swap is done, we'll rely on the road geek ground-truth squad to point out any that we missed.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on May 08, 2014, 07:47:02 PM


Making progress, I see. As of last weekend, they had only made it as far as Chester, but left half of Collum Lane unchanged.

I heard a rumor that part of US 71 north of the 71B junction (where 49 ends for now) was also signed as I-49. Have you heard or seen anything on that?  I may be up that way in a few days, so I may check it myself ;)

If it was, that is a mistake.
 
Someone may have confused the fact that I-540 ended at Exit 86 and continued as U.S. 71 past Exit 93 where the freeway ends. The section between Exits 86 and 93 was officially designated an Interstate and thus the first sign we changed out was the first U.S. 71 South route confirmation marker that appears just after you get on the freeway from U.S. 71-B.
 
GREAT progress has been made in the I-49 sign swap. Apparently we will do the overheads on I-40 last.
 
Once we proclaim here on AAROADS the sign swap is done, we'll rely on the road geek ground-truth squad to point out any that we missed.

Oh dear! Is that a challenge? ;)

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Arkansastravelguy on May 08, 2014, 08:21:56 PM
I'll drive the entire old 540 corridor if  I can keep a 540 sign they missed :)


iPhone
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on May 08, 2014, 08:49:53 PM
I'll drive the entire old 540 corridor if  I can keep a 540 sign they missed :)


iPhone

Don''t forget the intersecting roads ;)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Arkansastravelguy on May 08, 2014, 09:13:19 PM
I already know two they missed I'm just wondering if they will get then


iPhone
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on May 08, 2014, 09:55:43 PM
AHTD, I saw a LOT of construction / support vehicles off Peach Orchard Rd., S/SW of Lowe's Bentonville/Bella Vista today.  There's scraping going on there right now, and that is close to where the future roundabout/interchange will be. The trucks were from a Brookline, MO firm (which is near Springfield, not St. Louis).  Yours?

And do we know yet when the shovel-turning ceremony for the east Hwy 72 to north I-49 at the Bentonville/Bella Vista line will be?

Thank you in advance as always.

You are correct!

Kolb Grading mobilized this week and has begun moving dirt on the next phase of the BVB.
 
The groundbreaking ceremony for this project did not materialize. But you can bet on a ribbon-cutting when it's complete!

(Holding two thumbs WAAAAY up. :) )
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: codyg1985 on May 09, 2014, 05:10:09 AM

If it was, that is a mistake.
 
Someone may have confused the fact that I-540 ended at Exit 86 and continued as U.S. 71 past Exit 93 where the freeway ends. The section between Exits 86 and 93 was officially designated an Interstate and thus the first sign we changed out was the first U.S. 71 South route confirmation marker that appears just after you get on the freeway from U.S. 71-B.
 
GREAT progress has been made in the I-49 sign swap. Apparently we will do the overheads on I-40 last.
 
Once we proclaim here on AAROADS the sign swap is done, we'll rely on the road geek ground-truth squad to point out any that we missed.

I know this is slightly off-topic, but oh how I wished you could convince other DOT's, such as Alabama DOT, Tennessee DOT, or Mississippi DOT, to participate on these forums and work with us like you have to move things forward!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: txstateends on May 09, 2014, 09:22:02 AM
I know this is slightly off-topic, but oh how I wished you could convince other DOT's, such as Alabama DOT, Tennessee DOT, or Mississippi DOT, to participate on these forums and work with us like you have to move things forward!

I know, I wouldn't mind seeing a TxDOT rep come around regularly to add to TX project threads or talk about similar subjects also.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on May 10, 2014, 08:36:06 PM
I already know two they missed I'm just wondering if they will get then


I lost count at 15 ;)

I see the overhead signs are in the process of being changed.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Arkansastravelguy on May 10, 2014, 08:50:09 PM

I already know two they missed I'm just wondering if they will get then


I lost count at 15 ;)

I see the overhead signs are in the process of being changed.

The overheads in Fayetteville were changed Wednesday or Thursday. I'm going to St Louis Tuesday and I'll check if 71 is signed 49 in BV. Pictures will be taken if it is


iPhone
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on May 11, 2014, 07:40:25 AM
It wasn't on Friday from what I saw ;)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Arkansastravelguy on May 12, 2014, 01:41:56 PM
(http://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/05/13/vaqa5y2y.jpg)

40/540 still signed...


iPhone
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on May 12, 2014, 05:38:42 PM

40/540 still signed...


Yup. Just saw that a couple hours ago. ;)

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on May 12, 2014, 10:47:24 PM
Small story on desired relocation of route of AR 255 due to increased growth at Chaffee Crossing:  http://swtimes.com/news/fort-smith-barling-leaders-renew-push-relocation-arkansas-255
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on May 13, 2014, 10:08:40 AM
Small story on desired relocation of route of AR 255 due to increased growth at Chaffee Crossing:  http://swtimes.com/news/fort-smith-barling-leaders-renew-push-relocation-arkansas-255

Here is a  map (https://www.google.com/maps/@35.3177649,-94.3039125,16z) of the area.  Some of the street names are off: Fort Smith Blvd is now Frontier. What's labeled as Frontier is actually Taylor. The new AHTD shop is just west of Fort Smith Blvd and Frontier (shows up on the satellite view).  Wouldn't be too hard to do a reroute unless the whole road needed to be 4-Lanes instead of two.


Side note to AHTD: if you DO reroute 255, I want the old 255 sign (please?)
(https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3099/2837159229_c658ef39fc_n_d.jpg)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: mcdonaat on May 13, 2014, 08:59:59 PM
Just curious, but what ever happened to no US 49/I-49 in Arkansas? I remember a while back that someone posted that until US 49 was removed, I-49 would not be allowed as a number.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on May 13, 2014, 09:53:40 PM
Just curious, but what ever happened to no US 49/I-49 in Arkansas? I remember a while back that someone posted that until US 49 was removed, I-49 would not be allowed as a number.

That was some misinformation that came from AHTD (the DOT, not the poster).
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: AHTD on May 15, 2014, 06:06:09 PM
Thought you all might be interested in this little tidbit:
 
http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49-tech-corx.pdf (http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49-tech-corx.pdf)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: robbones on May 15, 2014, 06:25:15 PM
AHTD,

    There are a few through trucks must take 540 that need to be updated. I'm looking at the one at the south side of 40 and 71 in Alma. If i knew how to post pics on here I would show it.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on May 15, 2014, 07:32:18 PM
AHTD,

    There are a few through trucks must take 540 that need to be updated. I'm looking at the one at the south side of 40 and 71 in Alma. If i knew how to post pics on here I would show it.

You can't post photos directly, but can post a link (like from Flickr or Photobucket)

img  link name /img  with the img tag between brackets [   ]
Just about any os us Modes can help if you need it.

----

The sign crews actually missed a bunch of signs, like this one near Mountainburg:

(https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7364/14008245068_0c220b5be1_d.jpg)

Last weekend, I counted something like 20.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Arkansastravelguy on May 15, 2014, 07:41:59 PM
I've counted 10 north of west fork


iPhone
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: robbones on May 15, 2014, 07:59:55 PM
I saw a couple as I was cruising along today trying not to rear end idiots cutting me off  :banghead:
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: rickmastfan67 on May 15, 2014, 09:58:32 PM
AHTD,

    There are a few through trucks must take 540 that need to be updated. I'm looking at the one at the south side of 40 and 71 in Alma. If i knew how to post pics on here I would show it.

Is it on StreetView?  You could always post a link to it that way because it would give the location for it at the same time on Google Maps for AHTD.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on May 15, 2014, 10:58:14 PM
I've counted 10 north of west fork

Mountainburg: 6
Chester: 4
New Hope Rd: 3+

Got to find my notes for the others ;)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Arkansastravelguy on May 15, 2014, 11:12:15 PM

I've counted 10 north of west fork

Mountainburg: 6
Chester: 4
New Hope Rd: 3+

Got to find my notes for the others ;)

Lots between 49 and XNA


iPhone
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on May 16, 2014, 09:46:23 AM

I've counted 10 north of west fork

Mountainburg: 6
Chester: 4
New Hope Rd: 3+

Got to find my notes for the others ;)

Lots between 49 and XNA


iPhone

You think we should start a list? ;)

(Nah, Bugo would kill us)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: AHTD on May 16, 2014, 10:25:53 AM

I've counted 10 north of west fork

Mountainburg: 6
Chester: 4
New Hope Rd: 3+

Got to find my notes for the others ;)

Lots between 49 and XNA


iPhone

You think we should start a list? ;)

(Nah, Bugo would kill us)

ACTUALLY - if everyone will sit tight, we'll let you know when the sign crew thinks it's done. Then we'll start the AARoads Scavenger Hunt to locate the rest.
 
Should be fun!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on May 16, 2014, 10:39:38 AM

ACTUALLY - if everyone will sit tight, we'll let you know when the sign crew thinks it's done. Then we'll start the AARoads Scavenger Hunt to locate the rest.
 
Should be fun!

My error. I thought they had already finished.  (http://www.tlplanet.com/forums/images/smilies/doh.gif)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Arkansastravelguy on May 16, 2014, 02:29:12 PM


I've counted 10 north of west fork

Mountainburg: 6
Chester: 4
New Hope Rd: 3+

Got to find my notes for the others ;)

Lots between 49 and XNA


iPhone

You think we should start a list? ;)

(Nah, Bugo would kill us)

ACTUALLY - if everyone will sit tight, we'll let you know when the sign crew thinks it's done. Then we'll start the AARoads Scavenger Hunt to locate the rest.
 
Should be fun!

Does the winner get a 540 sign?


iPhone
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: agentsteel53 on May 16, 2014, 02:38:50 PM
winner gets to request '57 spec shields for I-49, as are used for the other two-digit routes in Arkansas (up 'til recently, anyway).
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on May 16, 2014, 07:27:59 PM
Just came up to NWA from Star City. The mileage signs that used to have I-540 shields have all been changed (westbound, anyway)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on May 16, 2014, 07:39:18 PM
Just came up to NWA from Star City. The mileage signs that used to have I-540 shields have all been changed (westbound, anyway)

I was wondering about those ;)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on May 18, 2014, 04:43:38 PM
AHTD,

    There are a few through trucks must take 540 that need to be updated. I'm looking at the one at the south side of 40 and 71 in Alma. If i knew how to post pics on here I would show it.

Thanks for the tip robbones. I snagged a photo today
(https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5565/14215423344_da0c3b7811_d.jpg)


Looks like all the overheads have been changed out now, except along 540 at Van Buren. Oh, and this one:
(https://farm3.staticflickr.com/2902/14215601805_7e6bf463a5_d.jpg)
But if you add a TO above South 540, you wouldn't have to replace this sign ;)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Scott5114 on May 18, 2014, 06:07:23 PM
Alternately the whole South I-540 block could be greened out.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: robbones on May 18, 2014, 07:04:55 PM
AHTD,

    There are a few through trucks must take 540 that need to be updated. I'm looking at the one at the south side of 40 and 71 in Alma. If i knew how to post pics on here I would show it.

Thanks for the tip robbones. I snagged a photo today
(https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5565/14215423344_da0c3b7811_d.jpg)


Looks like all the overheads have been changed out now, except along 540 at Van Buren. Oh, and this one:
(https://farm3.staticflickr.com/2902/14215601805_7e6bf463a5_d.jpg)
But if you add a TO above South 540, you wouldn't have to replace this sign ;)

I tried using street view on my phone, but won't let me view alma.  A sign that has been wrong for MANY YEARS:
exit 13 should say North US 71 since it runs cocurrent with 40 and 540 from Alma to Fort Smith.  If I'm correct, exit 7  is signed as I 540/US 71 South.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: corco on May 18, 2014, 07:07:09 PM
Alternately the whole South I-540 block could be greened out.

If they're insistent about not putting a former I-540 north shield up where I-49 hits I-40, they really ought to green it out because seeing that I-540 is still ahead could really confuse travelers unfamiliar with the change.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: roadman65 on May 18, 2014, 07:33:18 PM
Even a "TO I-540" would be better.  Just green out the "SOUTH" and replace it with "TO."
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on May 18, 2014, 07:45:02 PM
I tried using street view on my phone, but won't let me view alma.  A sign that has been wrong for MANY YEARS:
exit 13 should say North US 71 since it runs cocurrent with 40 and 540 from Alma to Fort Smith.  If I'm correct, exit 7  is signed as I 540/US 71 South.

Exit 13 should be 71 North and 71B South  Fayetteville/Alma

Exit 7 is 540/71 , but only has been posted that way since 2009 when the exit signs were upgraded. 71 has never been co-signed on 540 at Fort Smith.

Exit 1 (I-540) was 40/71, but got changed to 40/540 only when the new exit signs were erected (which will now have to be changed to eliminate reference to a 40/540 overlap)

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Arkansastravelguy on May 18, 2014, 08:18:29 PM

AHTD,

    There are a few through trucks must take 540 that need to be updated. I'm looking at the one at the south side of 40 and 71 in Alma. If i knew how to post pics on here I would show it.

Thanks for the tip robbones. I snagged a photo today
(https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5565/14215423344_da0c3b7811_d.jpg)


Looks like all the overheads have been changed out now, except along 540 at Van Buren. Oh, and this one:
(https://farm3.staticflickr.com/2902/14215601805_7e6bf463a5_d.jpg)
But if you add a TO above South 540, you wouldn't have to replace this sign ;)

I think the giant 49 shield looks ridiculous compared to the smaller and better looking 40/540 shields on overheads. My first thought was "why is it so damn big?" It's clearly disproportional to the size of the overhead.


iPhone
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: robbones on May 18, 2014, 09:31:13 PM
 When the Alma connector is ever finished, will the new section be exit 12A and the existing 12B or will it be the opposite?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: amroad17 on May 18, 2014, 09:55:46 PM
Arkansas DOT may have made that I-49 sign overly large to bring attention that the route number has changed from I-540 to I-49, although it does look silly.  It should be the same size as those on the pull-through sign. 

Also, I believe a simple green-out TO above the I-540 shield would suffice.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on May 19, 2014, 10:11:10 AM
When the Alma connector is ever finished, will the new section be exit 12A and the existing 12B or will it be the opposite?
Likely depends on how things are built.  My guess is SB will be 12A, NB will be 12B.

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on May 24, 2014, 11:38:22 PM
We are still projecting a fall completion for this project AND have discussed a "ride before you drive" event to give folks a preview of the facility before it opens to traffic. We will be coordinating this with the Ft. Chaffee Redevelopment Authority. More info as it becomes available!

This article (http://swtimes.com/news/mid-june-completion-targeted-interstate-540-construction) reports that it currently looks like it will be late fall, if not the early part of winter, for the opening of the Chaffee Crossing section for traffic:

Quote
Arkansas Highway and Transportation Department District 4 Engineer Chad Adams ....
also said the future I-49 corridor from U.S. 71 up to Arkansas 22 near Barling should be ready for traffic by the end of the year.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: apjung on May 25, 2014, 10:21:47 PM
Just realized that Fayetteville is indirectly named after Gen. Lafayette so I-49 passes thru two cities; the other being Lafayette, LA.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fayetteville,_Arkansas#Settlement_through_Antebellum_period

Are there any other Interstates that pass thru two cities with the same name or named after the same person?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: mcdonaat on May 25, 2014, 11:41:11 PM
Just realized that Fayetteville is indirectly named after Gen. Lafayette so I-49 passes thru two cities; the other being Lafayette, LA.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fayetteville,_Arkansas#Settlement_through_Antebellum_period

Are there any other Interstates that pass thru two cities with the same name or named after the same person?
If we can allow for "near" cities, I-49 passes through Pineville, MO, and comes within under a mile of Pineville, LA.

Or, if you want to be specific, US 71 passes through both Pinevilles, soon to be controlled access for the Louisiana city, with the opening of the Fort Buhlow Bridge.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bassoon1986 on May 26, 2014, 02:05:57 AM
What do you mean by controlled access in Pineville, LA? It won't have exits or be a freeway on US 71
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: apjung on May 26, 2014, 12:13:40 PM
Doh! Close enough, I forgot about both Pineville on I-49.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on May 26, 2014, 11:58:38 PM
Here's a question I know I can get an answer from this group (as opposed to practically anyone else) on.

On Wednesday, the Northwest Arkansas Metro area "officially" hits 500,000 residents (http://www.thecitywire.com/node/33237#.U4QNNfldVqM).

How many other metro areas of 1/2 million or more people in America do not (yet) have a through interstate?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Arkansastravelguy on May 27, 2014, 12:38:40 AM
District Of Columbia doesn't technically have a through interstate I don't think...


iPhone
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: english si on May 27, 2014, 05:15:04 AM
How big is the Miami met area? Clearly over 500k. That doesn't have a through Interstate!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Arkansastravelguy on May 27, 2014, 10:37:13 AM

How big is the Miami met area? Clearly over 500k. That doesn't have a through Interstate!

I suppose it depends on how technical you get. You can enter Miami on 95 and leave on 75 so it doesn't have a single interstate throughway but it does have a throughway on the interstate system


iPhone
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on May 27, 2014, 11:00:37 AM
District Of Columbia doesn't technically have a through interstate I don't think...


iPhone

One can drive through the D.C. metro area on a through interstate, though, can't they, even while not driving through "the District" proper?  (Not trying to sound sarcastic...just always thought the D.C. metro area did have through interstates.)

Miami's a good answer...guess I should have qualified my question as "Are there any metro areas of 500,000 or more that don't have a through interstate and don't have their metro boundary end either at a large body of water or an international border".  :sombrero:
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Arkansastravelguy on May 27, 2014, 11:20:07 AM

District Of Columbia doesn't technically have a through interstate I don't think...


iPhone

One can drive through the D.C. metro area on a through interstate, though, can't they, even while not driving through "the District" proper?  (Not trying to sound sarcastic...just always thought the D.C. metro area did have through interstates.)

Miami's a good answer...guess I should have qualified my question as "Are there any metro areas of 500,000 or more that don't have a through interstate and don't have their metro boundary end either at a large body of water or an international border".  :sombrero:

DC itself doesn't have interstates except 395 but the entire metropolitan area does 66 and 95). Long Island is another but it's an island lol.
I think your point is extremely valid, NWA is probably the highest populated area without a through interstate.


iPhone
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MSU John on May 27, 2014, 11:46:25 AM
Just realized that Fayetteville is indirectly named after Gen. Lafayette so I-49 passes thru two cities; the other being Lafayette, LA.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fayetteville,_Arkansas#Settlement_through_Antebellum_period

Are there any other Interstates that pass thru two cities with the same name or named after the same person?

I-64 travels through St. Louis and Louisville.
I-55 passes through Jackson, MO and Jackson, MS.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on May 27, 2014, 01:15:51 PM
Just realized that Fayetteville is indirectly named after Gen. Lafayette so I-49 passes thru two cities; the other being Lafayette, LA.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fayetteville,_Arkansas#Settlement_through_Antebellum_period

Are there any other Interstates that pass thru two cities with the same name or named after the same person?

I-64 travels through St. Louis and Louisville.
I-55 passes through Jackson, MO and Jackson, MS.

No offense, but I think St. Louis, Louisville and Louisiana (for that matter) are all named for different kings/rulers.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: english si on May 27, 2014, 03:45:28 PM
No offense, but I think St. Louis, Louisville and Louisiana (for that matter) are all named for different kings/rulers.
St Louis IX, Louis XIV and Louis XIV respectively. The last two are the same king (they are both kings), obviously...
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on May 27, 2014, 04:10:52 PM
No offense, but I think St. Louis, Louisville and Louisiana (for that matter) are all named for different kings/rulers.
St Louis IX, Louis XIV and Louis XIV respectively. The last two are the same king (they are both kings), obviously...

Wasn't Louisville named for King Louis XVI (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_XVI_of_France), and Louisiana for King Louis XIV (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_XIV)?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on May 27, 2014, 11:39:24 PM
Quote from: Arkansastravelguy
DC itself doesn't have interstates except 395 but the entire metropolitan area does 66 and 95). Long Island is another but it's an island lol. I think your point is extremely valid, NWA is probably the highest populated area without a through interstate.

Technically, DC is the start/end point for I-295, I-395, I-695 and I-66, even though all those routes have fairly short distances within DC. The Southern-most point of the DC border slices into about 400 feet of the Woodrow Wilson Bridge (and I-95/I-495). I-295 is about the nearest thing to a "through" Interstate, although some of it turns into DC-295 and MD-295 before rejoining I-95.

Anchorage is another large American city without a fully "through" Interstate highway.

Albuquerque is one of the largest cities in the United States without any sort of limited access loop highway, be it an Interstate, toll road or other limited access freeway with a US or state highway designation.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Arkansastravelguy on May 28, 2014, 02:30:54 AM

Quote from: Arkansastravelguy
DC itself doesn't have interstates except 395 but the entire metropolitan area does 66 and 95). Long Island is another but it's an island lol. I think your point is extremely valid, NWA is probably the highest populated area without a through interstate.

Technically, DC is the start/end point for I-295, I-395, I-695 and I-66, even though all those routes have fairly short distances within DC. The Southern-most point of the DC border slices into about 400 feet of the Woodrow Wilson Bridge (and I-95/I-495). I-295 is about the nearest thing to a "through" Interstate, although some of it turns into DC-295 and MD-295 before rejoining I-95.

Anchorage is another large American city without a fully "through" Interstate highway.

Albuquerque is one of the largest cities in the United States without any sort of limited access loop highway, be it an Interstate, toll road or other limited access freeway with a US or state highway designation.
The District line is the termini for 66 and 295. 395 is the only one that has exits in DC. 95/495 (695 is in Baltimore) may cross the boundary but they have no exits.

Anchorage has Interstate A1 and A3, so again not a sane number through interstate but the interstate system provides a thoroughfare.

I still contend DC is the winner.


iPhone
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on May 28, 2014, 09:18:13 AM
Anchorage, Albuquerque, D.C., Miami (though the latter has geographic considerations).

Gang, thanks.  I think I have my answer, as I was asking about metro areas 500,000 people or larger that didn't have a through interstate.  NWA (Northwest Arkansas) hits that mark "officially" today, and it doesn't yet have a through interstate and won't until A) they finish the Bella Vista bypass and said work is four-laned, and B) Missouri (McDonald County, MO is in this metro) finishes its portion of the bypass, four-laned.

It appears that NWA is the biggest such metropolitan area with this situation. Interestingly (as said here at least once before) NWA's main airport "XNA" (Northwest Arkansas Regional) is right now served by two-lane roads, no low-cost carriers.  And Fort Smith, which is separated by the highest hills of the Ozarks from NWA but whose metro area abuts the latter, has 300,000 in its metro, many of whom would likely come to XNA to fly were that airport to land a Southwest, etc.  I know someone at the airport who's told me the situation.  I get the feeling the airport management thinks they have bargaining chips, while the low cost air carriers (who are in business to make money, as they should be) may not be interested in playing with them.  We will see.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on May 28, 2014, 10:48:03 AM
Anchorage, Albuquerque, D.C., Miami (though the latter has geographic considerations).

Gang, thanks.  I think I have my answer, as I was asking about metro areas 500,000 people or larger that didn't have a through interstate.  NWA (Northwest Arkansas) hits that mark "officially" today, and it doesn't yet have a through interstate and won't until A) they finish the Bella Vista bypass and said work is four-laned, and B) Missouri (McDonald County, MO is in this metro) finishes its portion of the bypass, four-laned.

It appears that NWA is the biggest such metropolitan area with this situation. Interestingly (as said here at least once before) NWA's main airport "XNA" (Northwest Arkansas Regional) is right now served by two-lane roads, no low-cost carriers.  And Fort Smith, which is separated by the highest hills of the Ozarks from NWA but whose metro area abuts the latter, has 300,000 in its metro, many of whom would likely come to XNA to fly were that airport to land a Southwest, etc.  I know someone at the airport who's told me the situation.  I get the feeling the airport management thinks they have bargaining chips, while the low cost air carriers (who are in business to make money, as they should be) may not be interested in playing with them.  We will see.
XNA is overpriced for flying. I know many people who will drive to Tulsa to catch a plane. XNA primarily serves people flying in to see Wal-Mart, Tyson, and JB Hunt. Not bad for a cargo airport (as it was first envisioned).
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on May 28, 2014, 11:48:01 AM
According to Wikipedia (taking with a grain of salt), the metro population for the McAllen-Edinburg-Mission metropolitan statisical area had a 774,769 population as of the 2010 census, a 200,000+ person gain since the 2000 census. Add to this the Brownsville-Harlingen-Raymondville MSA popluation of 415,557 (2012 census estimate). That's nearly 1.2 million people living in the far South end of Texas. There's even more people living just on the other side of the Rio Grande in Mexico. Of couse, Texas DOT is working on connecting Interstates 69E and 69C to the rest of the Interstate highway system.

The Fayetteville-Springdale-Rogers MSA has a 2012 US Census estimated population of 482,200. It isn't as highly populated at the far South end of Texas, but it probably has much better income demographics.

Quote from: Arkansastravelguy
The District line is the termini for 66 and 295. 395 is the only one that has exits in DC. 95/495 (695 is in Baltimore) may cross the boundary but they have no exits.

Imagery in Google Street View contradicts this. Interstate 295 enters DC just North of its terminus at the Capitol Beltway. I-295 is signed at a handful of exits in DC, including one for the Naval Research Laboratory, Joint Base Anacostia-Bolling and Suitland Parkway. That's all in DC, not Maryland. DC doesn't end at the Anacostia River.

Interstate 295 doesn't cross the Anacostia River. It becomes DC-295 at the Interchange for the 11th Street Bridge, which is signed on at least a couple BGSes as I-695. One of the overhead signs on the Anacostia Freeway has Capitol Hill as the legend and I-695 and To I-395 as route markers. Google Earth has the freeway connecting I-295 and I-395 signed as I-695.

Interstate 66 doesn't extend far into DC, but it doesn't terminate on the Arlington Memorial Bridge either. It ends at the interchange of K Street and the Whitehurst Freeway. It has exits for Constitution Ave., E Street before it ends. I-66 isn't signed in the best way within DC, but there are signs for it in a few places. I've personally seen them when I lived in Northern Virginia.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on May 28, 2014, 02:50:08 PM
According to Wikipedia (taking with a grain of salt), the metro population for the McAllen-Edinburg-Mission metropolitan statisical area had a 774,769 population as of the 2010 census, a 200,000+ person gain since the 2000 census. Add to this the Brownsville-Harlingen-Raymondville MSA popluation of 415,557 (2012 census estimate). That's nearly 1.2 million people living in the far South end of Texas. There's even more people living just on the other side of the Rio Grande in Mexico. Of couse, Texas DOT is working on connecting Interstates 69E and 69C to the rest of the Interstate highway system.

The Fayetteville-Springdale-Rogers MSA has a 2012 US Census estimated population of 482,200. It isn't as highly populated at the far South end of Texas, but it probably has much better income demographics.

Quote from: Arkansastravelguy
The District line is the termini for 66 and 295. 395 is the only one that has exits in DC. 95/495 (695 is in Baltimore) may cross the boundary but they have no exits.

Imagery in Google Street View contradicts this. Interstate 295 enters DC just North of its terminus at the Capitol Beltway. I-295 is signed at a handful of exits in DC, including one for the Naval Research Laboratory, Joint Base Anacostia-Bolling and Suitland Parkway. That's all in DC, not Maryland. DC doesn't end at the Anacostia River.

Interstate 295 doesn't cross the Anacostia River. It becomes DC-295 at the Interchange for the 11th Street Bridge, which is signed on at least a couple BGSes as I-695. One of the overhead signs on the Anacostia Freeway has Capitol Hill as the legend and I-695 and To I-395 as route markers. Google Earth has the freeway connecting I-295 and I-395 signed as I-695.

Interstate 66 doesn't extend far into DC, but it doesn't terminate on the Arlington Memorial Bridge either. It ends at the interchange of K Street and the Whitehurst Freeway. It has exits for Constitution Ave., E Street before it ends. I-66 isn't signed in the best way within DC, but there are signs for it in a few places. I've personally seen them when I lived in Northern Virginia.

Thanks, Bobby, but McAllen/Brownsville (much bigger than NWA or NWA/Fort Smith right now, and that's not including people on the Mexico side, is it?  That would make the metros MUCH larger still) is, like Miami, a place that ends in both a large body of water and an international border.   

I believe right now as of today NWA is the only inland (not ending at either an international border or ocean/great lake) metro of 500,000 people where the metro area isn't served by a through interstate.  I'm glad they're working on it now.  (Interesting thing to watch...ArkDOT contractors are clearing the hillside just south of the Lowe's on the Bentonville/Bella Vista border...they're going to have to get that hill (at least a pass within it) down quite a bit though not necessarily to ground level for this bypass.  Will be fascinating to see progress.)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: english si on May 28, 2014, 04:17:00 PM
I believe right now as of today NWA is the only inland (not ending at either an international border or ocean/great lake) metro of 500,000 people where the metro area isn't served by a through interstate.
Fresno? I guess I-5 enters the Metro area though.

Met Fresno is over 1 million and the city itself (certainly no interstate, let alone a through one) is over half a million.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: TheStranger on May 28, 2014, 04:44:16 PM
I believe right now as of today NWA is the only inland (not ending at either an international border or ocean/great lake) metro of 500,000 people where the metro area isn't served by a through interstate.
Fresno? I guess I-5 enters the Metro area though.

Met Fresno is over 1 million and the city itself (certainly no interstate, let alone a through one) is over half a million.

I-5 enters the metro area if we just go by it traversing Madera and Fresno Counties.  At its closest to the city itself though it's 53 miles to the west!!!!  And if Kerman is considered a suburb, I-5 remains 39 miles to the west of that point.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: ARMOURERERIC on May 28, 2014, 06:53:22 PM
I was wondering about Bakersfield as well
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on May 30, 2014, 04:17:57 PM
Maybe this is small, but ArcBest, a Fort Smith based transportation services company, just announced today that they are opening a new HQ in Chaffee Crossing (http://www.arkansasbusiness.com/article/99014/arcbest-corp-to-build-new-HQ-in-fort-smith), likely near the future I-49 segment in that city.  JMO, but even though this isn't a true trucking facility I believe they, too, are getting ready for the inevitable.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on May 31, 2014, 07:29:25 PM
Future I-49 watchers...they've been excavating just south of the Lowe's near the Bella Vista/Bentonville line on the east side of the section that will link I-49 with the just completed two-lane section of the BV bypass...now they're finally working from the west side of this section, burning off stumps and underbrush and starting to bulldoze the future carriageway.  Though this will be a two year project I'm thinking we may see finally how this will cut through north Bentonville (city limits and / or (mainly) mailing address) all the way from former Hiwasse to the current northern terminus of I-49.

Here it comes.

(BTW, when I had that encounter with the subcontractors for this project, the man I talked with told me that his company cannot wait to finish the second section (Rocky Dell Hollow Road to west new bridge over 72) so they can bid on the final (Rocky Dell Hollow Road-to-Missouri state line) section.  Just passing along what he said.)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: AHTD on June 01, 2014, 11:32:17 AM
Go to www.idrivearkansas.com (http://www.idrivearkansas.com) and you can zoom into the construction route BVB is taking and get a good look at how this route will shape up.
 
The Missouri governor has set a special election in August for their transportation funding. Keep an eye on this. Success might mean they will meet us at the border sooner rather than later. Failure will make it anyone's guess.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on June 01, 2014, 06:05:53 PM
Go to www.idrivearkansas.com (http://www.idrivearkansas.com) and you can zoom into the construction route BVB is taking and get a good look at how this route will shape up.
 
The Missouri governor has set a special election in August for their transportation funding. Keep an eye on this. Success might mean they will meet us at the border sooner rather than later. Failure will make it anyone's guess.

Here is the story on this election posted last week, AHTD...thank you for the "heads up". (http://www.kansascity.com/2014/05/23/5042888/gov-jay-nixon-sets-election-dates.html)  This will be an interesting one...the highest tax increase in Missouri history teamed with some interesting other issues (i.e. the right to bear arms).  The people who support the other issues may not support this.  I wonder how many people have put the dots together to understand with all the issues (New freight traffic from the gulf via a widened Panama Canal, Houston becoming America's #1 goods export port, the Minnie-Winnie-New-Hou route becoming THE interstate link between Canada, Mexico and America's largest ocean AND Great Lakes ports) and all the freight traffic and tax revenue (freight, gas, maybe jobs) this could bring Missouri.  I wonder whether some would even WANT that communicated.

In the meantime, as I-49 slowly comes together, here are pics I snapped today from the Massard Road overpass of future I-49 at Fort Smith, a few blocks south from where both the new medical school and new ArcBest headquarters (announced just 2 days ago) will be built...and they are building, building, building homes and apartments out here, too):

Looking north, with the future med school and ArcBest (1,000 new jobs, biggest such announcement for FSM in at least 25 years) headquarters off a few blocks to the north and left of the flyover (bump) in the distance).

(http://www.brazil.com.bz/images/060114_i49north.jpg)

Looking south, with road curving in the distance to the left (SE) where a mile later it meets U.S. 71 north of Greenwood (junction under construction now)...if you look closely at the left lane of the northbound (left side) carriageway you can see a big smiley face drawn in somehow:

(http://www.brazil.com.bz/images/060114_i49south.jpg)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: AHTD on June 02, 2014, 06:05:19 PM
FINGERS CROSSED!

Missouri to Create Transportation Tax Project List
http://www.stltoday.com/news/state-and-regional/missouri/missouri-to-create-transportation-tax-project-list/article_8047f003-f9b6-5234-a381-5032807085d4.html (http://www.stltoday.com/news/state-and-regional/missouri/missouri-to-create-transportation-tax-project-list/article_8047f003-f9b6-5234-a381-5032807085d4.html)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on June 02, 2014, 11:15:22 PM
FINGERS CROSSED!

Missouri to Create Transportation Tax Project List
http://www.stltoday.com/news/state-and-regional/missouri/missouri-to-create-transportation-tax-project-list/article_8047f003-f9b6-5234-a381-5032807085d4.html (http://www.stltoday.com/news/state-and-regional/missouri/missouri-to-create-transportation-tax-project-list/article_8047f003-f9b6-5234-a381-5032807085d4.html)

Wow, that's in less than two weeks (June 13).
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: AHTD on June 03, 2014, 11:18:08 AM
Okay, AARoads Forum members- it's the moment for which you have all been waiting...
 
Time for the I-540 signage scavenger hunt!
 
Our AHTD sign crews think they have replaced and/or removed all of the I-540 signs in relation to the redesignation of the route north of Alma as I-49. Time for you to let us know if they got 'em all. Here are the rules:
 
 
Overhead signs do not count - we are in the process of coordinating and scheduling overnight lane closures to do that work.
 
Signs MUST be on an Arkansas State Highway, a U.S. Highway or an Interstate. City streets do not count - there are several municipalities that have installed their own signage on their right of way. But please feel free to pass that information along to the respective jurisdiction (including at the county level).
 
Finds must be reported in THIS thread AND submitted via our online "Report a Problem" tool found here at IDRIVEARKANSAS: http://www.idrivearkansas.com/contact/report-a-problem (http://www.idrivearkansas.com/contact/report-a-problem). Photos may be included, but please note at this time our "Report a Problem" feature does not support photo uploads. Just post them here in the forum.
 
Participants may not remove or keep any finds. Trust us - we checked to see if we could award a sign to the winner, but state law does not allow it. The municipalities may be a different story, however. Might want to check to see what their policies are for handling these.
 
 
HELPFUL HINTS:
Be sure to check I-40 - it was dual-signed with I-540 from Van Buren to Alma.
Also check I-540 south of I-40.
Don't forget the outlying highways that feed into I-49 - these might be several miles east or west of the corridor.
 
 
The winner gets bragging rights and our thanks for a job well done.
 
 
HAVE FUN and BE SAFE!
 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: robbones on June 03, 2014, 12:35:39 PM
Does the through truck signs count

BLU STAR4.0

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: agentsteel53 on June 03, 2014, 02:47:50 PM
you want us to do your work for you?  and our reward is that we got some shields bent into guardrails instead of being sold off to willing collectors? 

yeah, no.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on June 03, 2014, 05:00:08 PM
you want us to do your work for you?  and our reward is that we got some shields bent into guardrails instead of being sold off to willing collectors? 

yeah, no.

+1

Also, it would make things less interesting.  I'd love to find an I-540 sign in 10 years in Fayetteville.  Thanks, but no thanks.  If I find an I-540 shield north of I-40 I'll take a picture but I'm not sharing its location with anybody.

I do know where one is but I won't reveal the answer publicly.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: agentsteel53 on June 03, 2014, 05:02:42 PM
there was a New York I-78 shield in Queens (or eastern Brooklyn - nowhere near the modern I-78 terminus) well into the early 2000s.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on June 03, 2014, 06:27:56 PM
Okay, AARoads Forum members- it's the moment for which you have all been waiting...
 
Time for the I-540 signage scavenger hunt!
 
Our AHTD sign crews think they have replaced and/or removed all of the I-540 signs in relation to the redesignation of the route north of Alma as I-49. Time for you to let us know if they got 'em all. Here are the rules:

Can we make it a non-state name shield scavenger hunt instead?  Those new I-49 shields are hideous looking.  The style AHTD used about 10 years ago was much, much better.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: agentsteel53 on June 03, 2014, 06:35:16 PM
the worst part is that, unlike a Tennessee or Illinois or Minnesota neutered sign, these Arkansas shields leave no room for an aftermarket retrofit of a state name.

well, you can try...

(http://www.aaroads.com/shields/img/FL/FL19880041i1.jpg)

I of course in no way endorse the vandalism of public property, but if some state-named Arkansas I-49 shields appeared, I would not be too discriminating about their source.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Arkansastravelguy on June 04, 2014, 03:34:33 AM
(http://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/06/04/re6yqyqu.jpg)
Several 540 signs at AR 112 and AR 264


iPhone
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on June 04, 2014, 08:34:42 AM
HELPFUL HINTS:
Be sure to check I-40 - it was dual-signed with I-540 from Van Buren to Alma.


There was only one sign along I-40 that wasn't an overhead: it's just west of Exit 12 (I-49) along WB I-40. As of 6-1-14, it was still there.  540 was never co-signed along EB I-40, so there are no free standing signs heading east.
(https://farm3.staticflickr.com/2900/14020742465_a8587d4b90_d.jpg)

OK, no signs as a reward?  How about an official AHTD hat? ;)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Avalanchez71 on June 04, 2014, 10:16:00 AM
So is the Bella Vista bypass to be a "Super Two?"  I would be pissed if I bought a "Mountain Vista" only to have a highway in view of my piece of property.  You know that Eric Estrada sold peaceful mountain vistas on infomercials.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on June 05, 2014, 02:55:15 PM
So is the Bella Vista bypass to be a "Super Two?"  I would be pissed if I bought a "Mountain Vista" only to have a highway in view of my piece of property.  You know that Eric Estrada sold peaceful mountain vistas on infomercials.
If memory serves correct, it will be a "Super 2" until there is enough money to widen it.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: yakra on June 05, 2014, 03:08:47 PM
Or "twin" it, as they say in the Great White North.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Avalanchez71 on June 05, 2014, 03:37:54 PM
How long until they build it?  What is the traffic like now through this segment?  How long to you think that they four lane it?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: AHTD on June 05, 2014, 05:12:59 PM
That's just it....
 
There is no "through" traffic and there won't be until Missouri can meet us at the state line.
 
The current effort includes fully completed interchanges, so all we will have to do is add the additional two (northbound) lanes.
 
All it will take is an estimated $50 million.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: txstateends on June 06, 2014, 06:37:21 PM

All it will take is an estimated $50 million.

Maybe Steve Ballmer or Mark Cuban have that much in their couch cushions?? :D
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on June 09, 2014, 09:59:18 PM
OK, to those who are interested (in seeing the final leg of Missouri's I-49 finished): according to this Joplin Globe article, there will be public comment on the transporation priority lists for the proposed transportation tax up for a vote in August. (http://www.joplinglobe.com/topstories/x1760096084/MoDOT-to-accept-public-comment-on-priority-lists)  It looks like there will be both "open house" meetings and a public web site to be announced.

I know there are intrepid people here who will likely see any announcement on this before I do, but whatever I see germane to this I will post here.  If they pass it, let's get Missouri to finish the final McDonald County stretch of I-49 as we still focus on Arkansas building their share.

EDIT: Here is a link to the sales tax improvement program guide page they have for Missouri's Southwest District. (http://www.modot.org/plansandprojects/construction_program/STIP2015-2019/documents/Sec04f1cSWmap.pdf)  The final leg of I-49 is (Project #?)7PO601-H ("H" for "highway").  The forest green color of that link means the project is for Fiscal Year 2018.  Also, here is the main index page for the STIP 2015-2019 Draft proposals, and it says that (http://www.modot.org/plansandprojects/construction_program/STIP2015-2019/index.htm) one can call 1-888-275-6636 to make comments, or enter them online at http://modot.mo.gov/plansandprojects/construction_program/STIPComments.htm (http://modot.mo.gov/plansandprojects/construction_program/STIPComments.htm), or email them to STIPcomments@modot.mo.gov .

(Grzrd, in the spirit of your posts here, hope I done good.  :wave: )

(http://www.brazil.com.bz/images/060914_modotstip.jpg)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: rickmastfan67 on June 09, 2014, 10:38:22 PM
AHTD, when might the newly posted segment of I-49 (former I-540) be getting it's new exit numbers based on it's mileage?  I want to be able to update OSM (https://www.openstreetmap.org/) when they are getting posted.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on June 09, 2014, 11:28:25 PM
according to this Joplin Globe article, there will be public comment on the transporation priority lists for the proposed transportation tax up for a vote in August. (http://www.joplinglobe.com/topstories/x1760096084/MoDOT-to-accept-public-comment-on-priority-lists)  It looks like there will be both "open house" meetings and a public web site to be announced ....
Here is a link to the sales tax improvement program guide page they have for Missouri's Southwest District. (http://www.modot.org/plansandprojects/construction_program/STIP2015-2019/documents/Sec04f1cSWmap.pdf)
(http://www.brazil.com.bz/images/060914_modotstip.jpg)

O Tamadua, thanks for posting the map. It's a great visual!

The good news is that if the sales tax fails at the ballot, then the 2018 timetable for the BVB is in the STIP that you posted and which is reflected in the map.

There will soon be two concurrent public comment periods in Missouri: one for the STIP, and one, beginning June 13, for the sales tax transportation projects. As recently posted in the I-49 Coming to Missouri thread (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3239.msg304347#msg304347), it has been reported that the BVB will be included in the sales tax project list. MoDOT will probably post that list on June 13 (last week MoDOT had posted a link for regional priority lists that had no projects, but recently removed it, presumably because they are waiting for all of the lists to be completed). I'm guessing that the better news might be that, if the sales tax is approved by the voters, then the 2018 date for the BVB will be accelerated to perhaps 2015 or 2016 (it's worth mentioning that the BVB is one of only 25 "new" projects in the STIP because of the current budgetary constraints, which strongly suggests it is a high priority project for MoDOT).

FWIW that's simply my read on the situation in Missouri.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on June 10, 2014, 12:13:40 AM
according to this Joplin Globe article, there will be public comment on the transporation priority lists for the proposed transportation tax up for a vote in August. (http://www.joplinglobe.com/topstories/x1760096084/MoDOT-to-accept-public-comment-on-priority-lists)  It looks like there will be both "open house" meetings and a public web site to be announced ....
Here is a link to the sales tax improvement program guide page they have for Missouri's Southwest District. (http://www.modot.org/plansandprojects/construction_program/STIP2015-2019/documents/Sec04f1cSWmap.pdf)
(http://www.brazil.com.bz/images/060914_modotstip.jpg)

O Tamadua, thanks for posting the map. It's a great visual!

The good news is that if the sales tax fails at the ballot, then the 2018 timetable for the BVB is in the STIP that you posted and which is reflected in the map.

There will soon be two concurrent public comment periods in Missouri: one for the STIP, and one, beginning June 13, for the sales tax transportation projects. As recently posted in the I-49 Coming to Missouri thread (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3239.msg304347#msg304347), it has been reported that the BVB will be included in the sales tax project list. MoDOT will probably post that list on June 13 (last week MoDOT had posted a link for regional priority lists that had no projects, but recently removed it, presumably because they are waiting for all of the lists to be completed). I'm guessing that the better news might be that, if the sales tax is approved by the voters, then the 2018 date for the BVB will be accelerated to perhaps 2015 or 2016 (it's worth mentioning that the BVB is one of only 25 "new" projects in the STIP because of the current budgetary constraints, which strongly suggests it is a high priority project for MoDOT).

FWIW that's simply my read on the situation in Missouri.

Thank you, Grzrd!  Again, I know we're in a financial pinch, but if money is being spent, still, on highways it's hard for me to see why finishing I-49 is NOT a high priority now for Missouri, given that two weeks ago the Northwest Arkansas metro area (partially in Missouri) "hit" the 500,000 mark, plus all the other things happening with "lower I-49 and Texas I-69.  Exciting times, exciting times...)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: txstateends on June 10, 2014, 03:40:40 AM

(http://www.brazil.com.bz/images/060914_modotstip.jpg)

About the green section south of I-49, if it's supposed to represent the Bella Vista Bypass, the coloring went the way of US 71's current route into Bella Vista instead.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on June 10, 2014, 08:15:44 AM

(http://www.brazil.com.bz/images/060914_modotstip.jpg)

About the green section south of I-49, if it's supposed to represent the Bella Vista Bypass, the coloring went the way of US 71's current route into Bella Vista instead.

Awp!  Quite true, and that would make no sense because that portion of the highway is in very good shape right now and any bridges, etc. on it are very new.  Still, hoping this is meaning the BVP.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on June 10, 2014, 11:11:22 AM
About the green section south of I-49, if it's supposed to represent the Bella Vista Bypass, the coloring went the way of US 71's current route into Bella Vista instead.

I think you found a map error.  In defense of the mapmaker, the BVB is identified in the STIP as a "US 71" project.  As I posted approximately two years ago in the I-49 Coming to Missouri thread (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3239.msg151643#msg151643), the identification of the project as a "US 71" project made me question whether Project 7P0601 involved work on the Bella Vista Bypass.  I telephoned MoDOT and they confirmed that the project was in regard to the Bella Vista Bypass:

In looking at MoDOT's 2013-17 Draft STIP (http://contribute.modot.mo.gov/plansandprojects/construction_program/STIP2013-2017/districtconstruct/documents/1_Projects_006.pdf), I noticed what appears to be a Bella Vista Bypass project slated for the 7/2014 to 6/2015 time period (page 11/27 of pdf)
I spoke with a MoDOT individual today and he confirmed that the above 2015 project in the Draft STIP is for the Bella Vista Bypass.

Any confusion on the part of the mapmaker is understandable.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on June 10, 2014, 04:02:07 PM
Someone not from the SWMO district office who doesn't care about I-49 made the map

Intern screwed up
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on June 10, 2014, 06:38:24 PM
Interesting though not really surprising quote in this Northwest Arkansas Business Journal story which is mainly about a new 10-story building being built in the Pinnacle area of Rogers, AR:

Quote

Only four landowners – Hunt Ventures, Joe Whisenhunt, Chad Hatfield and the LaFrance family – have property in the immediate area, and all four of them know what they’re doing.

“Everyone is well-funded and positioned to build when the time is right,”  Ball said. “This is going to be rational, not speculative, development. There’s a long cycle of demand.”

Like George, Ball would not disclose the names of potential tenants, but he did say that moving forward the Pinnacle area would continue to attract companies of the highest caliber, and increasingly companies that do not yet have a presence in Northwest Arkansas.

The end result, Ball predicts, is that in about 10 years the Pauline Whitaker intersection will be completely built out. Looking at current and future indicators, it all makes sense, Ball said.

The Pinnacle Hills Promenade is essentially full, but the public’s appetite for retail has not yet been satisfied. In terms of offices, as long as Walmart is located here, there will always be a demand for both Class A and Class B space, and companies are now demanding floor plates of 10,000 SF and up.

And in terms of sheer growth, both the public and private sectors are trying to keep pace with the population. The Northwest Arkansas Council, using figures from the U.S. Census Bureau, estimates that as many as 23 people move to the region each day. Pinnacle and Pauline Whitaker, as well as places across the region, will have to grow to meet the pressure of that influx, Ball said.

http://www.nwabusinessjournal.com/13334/pinnacle-matures-poised-for-most-ambitious-building-yet


While there are several things fueling NWA's growth (mainly, a few big things) Pauline Whitaker Drive wouldn't have existed without former I-540 coming to the area, and that area was quite sparse 12 years ago (at least 2 years after I-540 opened up).  I'm guessing these owners see a completed I-49 (at least in the metro area) in NWA's future 10 years down...maybe more completion elsewhere.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on June 10, 2014, 07:47:09 PM

While there are several things fueling NWA's growth (mainly, a few big things) Pauline Whitaker Drive wouldn't have existed without former I-540 coming to the area, and that area was quite sparse 12 years ago (at least 2 years after I-540 opened up).  I'm guessing these owners see a completed I-49 (at least in the metro area) in NWA's future 10 years down...maybe more completion elsewhere.

This may be Chicken vs Egg, but the Promenade made a lot possible.  540/49 has been around since the mid- late 1980's when it was US 71. When the Promenade was built, there was little else there (though I think St Mary's/Mercy was scouting out land), though New Hope Road was already straining from excessive growth. The highway department was happy to build them an exit, though (and remove Perry Road).

IMO, Northwest Arkansas as a whole is experiencing explosive growth. I shudder to think what would happen if the bubble suddenly burst.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on June 10, 2014, 09:39:46 PM
At a steady 23 people per day, it would take 59.5 years for NWA to double its population from the current 500,000 to a million, and that sounds sustainable. A lot can happen in this time, though. It could accelerate, or Walmart could relocate to Dallas.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on June 10, 2014, 09:56:52 PM
Walmart isn't going anywhere.  They have too much money invested in Bentonville.  If you've never been there, it's basically Walmartville. 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on June 10, 2014, 10:32:08 PM
Walmart isn't going anywhere.  They have too much money invested in Bentonville.  If you've never been there, it's basically Walmartville. 

Waltonville ;)

Even though Wal-Mart is notorious for abandoning old stores, it would take a lot for them to abandon their cargo airport  XNA and I just don't see that happening.

Only WM Execs have money, so if they left who would buy their expensive houses?

Wal-Mart is in Bentonville to stay, I'm fairly sure.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on June 10, 2014, 11:39:38 PM
...and then there's Tyson Foods in Springdale, which just apparently was successful in bidding for the Hillshire Farms brands.  Given Tyson's earnings reports this year coupled with Hillshire's annual sales, that would put Tyson Foods at #78 in this year's Fortune 500 to Walmarts #1 position.  As a comparison, here are some American states that have either only one or zero corporate headquarters in the 1 to 78 spots on that list (and I'm not including NWA company J.B. Hunt which is somewhere around 470 on the list):

Massachusetts (Boston)
Maryland (Baltimore)
Wisconsin (Milwaukee)
Oklahoma (Tulsa, Oklahoma City)
Louisiana (New Orleans)
Utah (Salt Lake City)
Oregon (Portland)
Missouri (St. Louis, Kansas City)
Florida (Miami/Ft. Lauderdale, Tampa/St. Petersburg, Jacksonville, Orlando)
Colorado (Denver)
Indiana (Indianapolis)
Arizona (Phoenix)
Tennessee (Memphis, Nashville)

All but one of those cities has an NFL, NBA and/or MLB franchise (many with two or all three) and the one which doesn't, Tulsa, has a WNBA team. Amazing. I just don't see an NFL, NBA, MLB or WNBA team for Arkansas in the future...too close to other successful franchises and I"m not sure the state needs one, though I'll be cheering along if it ever happens in my lifetime.) Rather, I see a metro area where some unbelievable things are happening, and which will grow even more with a completed I-49.

(BTW, Road Hog, there are multiple counties bordering Benton County, AR which aren't yet in the NWA metro area but could be added...Adair and Delaware Counties in Oklahoma have been mentioned as candidates, for example.  Those two combined are 62,000 folks, which would be a big jump right there.)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on June 11, 2014, 08:52:06 AM
FWIW: Northwest Arkansas Metropolitan Area: Benton, Washington, Madison Counties in Arkansas, McDonald County in Missouri.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on June 11, 2014, 12:24:05 PM
FWIW: Northwest Arkansas Metropolitan Area: Benton, Washington, Madison Counties in Arkansas, McDonald County in Missouri.

Also: Fort Smith Metropolitan Area: Sebastian, Crawford, Franklin Counties in Arkansas, LeFlore and Sequoyah Counties in Oklahoma.  With a completed I-49 (between NWA and FSM) I don't expect a combined Metro, but I do expect a Combined Statistical Area (like Little Rock and Pine Bluff currently have).  Between Northwest Arkansas and Fort Smith right now, they have right at 800,000 people.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on June 11, 2014, 01:58:25 PM
FWIW: Northwest Arkansas Metropolitan Area: Benton, Washington, Madison Counties in Arkansas, McDonald County in Missouri.


Also: Fort Smith Metropolitan Area: Sebastian, Crawford, Franklin Counties in Arkansas, LeFlore and Sequoyah Counties in Oklahoma.  With a completed I-49 (between NWA and FSM) I don't expect a combined Metro, but I do expect a Combined Statistical Area (like Little Rock and Pine Bluff currently have).  Between Northwest Arkansas and Fort Smith right now, they have right at 800,000 people.

Most of the TV News in Fort Smith these days comes from Fayetteville/NWA with less emphasis on Fort Smith. 20 years ago, it was the opposite until they decided they needed to report more from "Piggy Land".
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on June 11, 2014, 02:23:04 PM
FWIW: Northwest Arkansas Metropolitan Area: Benton, Washington, Madison Counties in Arkansas, McDonald County in Missouri.


Also: Fort Smith Metropolitan Area: Sebastian, Crawford, Franklin Counties in Arkansas, LeFlore and Sequoyah Counties in Oklahoma.  With a completed I-49 (between NWA and FSM) I don't expect a combined Metro, but I do expect a Combined Statistical Area (like Little Rock and Pine Bluff currently have).  Between Northwest Arkansas and Fort Smith right now, they have right at 800,000 people.

Most of the TV News in Fort Smith these days comes from Fayetteville/NWA with less emphasis on Fort Smith. 20 years ago, it was the opposite until they decided they needed to report more from "Piggy Land".

US71, I didn't want to deviate much more from highway matters but since you brought it up (and I think this is germane to I-49):

- 20+ years ago, Benton County, AR wasn't even in the Fort Smith/Fayetteville market, but the Joplin, MO/Pittsburg, KS one.  I actually knew a sales manager for Channel 5 in FSM who was fighting to BRING Benton County into what was the Fort Smith Fayetteville DMA (still is by some definitions) (http://www.truckads.com/Affiliate/Ft_Smith_Fayetteville_Springdale_Rogers.htm).
- ...and here's where the bizarre stuff starts.  The NBC affiliate has closed their studio in Fort Smith even as they moved into palatial (by comparison to 20 years ago) offices in hi-rises both in Fayetteville and Rogers.  Why shouldn't they? (Not said as a smart aleck comment, but rather statement of fact.)  NWA is projected to be 1 million people strong in a few decades.  By comparison, FSM is "only" projected to get as big as NWA was 12 years ago "if" I-49 is completed.  (I personally agree with you that it is a stupid move to close an FSM office in this market, because I-49 is coming and it IS going to transform Fort Smith.  Already is, actually.)
- That being said, I think you'll find very few, if any, markets that have "flipped" in America like this TV DMA market has...with the "center of gravity" moving from what was the largest metro area in the market for multiple decades to a county that wasn't even IN the market less than 3 decades ago.
- Plus another thing...most metro areas have their entire metro area within a TV DMA.  As you noted above, McDonald County, MO is in NWA's metro, but it's still in the Joplin-Pittsburg DMA!! If Adair and Delaware Counties are added anytime soon, (and Siloam Springs metro area clearly is partially in Delaware County, OK), they will still be in the Tulsa DMA!  Carroll County, AR (and Barry County, MO) sends a lot of people across the county line (on less-than-ideal highway) to work, and Eureka Springs even has a sliver of its school district in Benton County: these two counties are in the Springfield, MO DMA.  Again, this is just beyond unusual for the most populous county in a metro area of over a half million people.  It shows how incredibly rapid the growth has been here.

And I agree that I don't think Walmart (or Tyson, or JB Hunt, certainly not the U of A flagship campus, now part of "SEC, Inc.", which is a story in itself) will ever leave here.  In Dallas/Fort Worth, they'd be just another billion dollar company.  Here, they ARE Northwest Arkansas.

Now back to I-49, which when fully completed in Arkansas will be this state's (and especially northwest Arkansas') "second 'Walmart' "...
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on June 11, 2014, 06:00:48 PM
...and then there's Tyson Foods in Springdale, which just apparently was successful in bidding for the Hillshire Farms brands.  Given Tyson's earnings reports this year coupled with Hillshire's annual sales, that would put Tyson Foods at #78 in this year's Fortune 500 to Walmarts #1 position.  As a comparison, here are some American states that have either only one or zero corporate headquarters in the 1 to 78 spots on that list (and I'm not including NWA company J.B. Hunt which is somewhere around 470 on the list):

Massachusetts (Boston)
Maryland (Baltimore)
Wisconsin (Milwaukee)
Oklahoma (Tulsa, Oklahoma City)
Louisiana (New Orleans)
Utah (Salt Lake City)
Oregon (Portland)
Missouri (St. Louis, Kansas City)
Florida (Miami/Ft. Lauderdale, Tampa/St. Petersburg, Jacksonville, Orlando)
Colorado (Denver)
Indiana (Indianapolis)
Arizona (Phoenix)
Tennessee (Memphis, Nashville)

All but one of those cities has an NFL, NBA and/or MLB franchise (many with two or all three) and the one which doesn't, Tulsa, has a WNBA team. Amazing. I just don't see an NFL, NBA, MLB or WNBA team for Arkansas in the future...too close to other successful franchises and I"m not sure the state needs one, though I'll be cheering along if it ever happens in my lifetime.) Rather, I see a metro area where some unbelievable things are happening, and which will grow even more with a completed I-49.

(BTW, Road Hog, there are multiple counties bordering Benton County, AR which aren't yet in the NWA metro area but could be added...Adair and Delaware Counties in Oklahoma have been mentioned as candidates, for example.  Those two combined are 62,000 folks, which would be a big jump right there.)

"We're No. 36" is a lot better than "Thank God for Mississippi." Not sure it's much to brag about, but it certainly is an impressive improvement.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on June 11, 2014, 09:25:17 PM
 :confused:  ^^
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on June 11, 2014, 10:38:25 PM
FWIW: Northwest Arkansas Metropolitan Area: Benton, Washington, Madison Counties in Arkansas, McDonald County in Missouri.

Also: Fort Smith Metropolitan Area: Sebastian, Crawford, Franklin Counties in Arkansas, LeFlore and Sequoyah Counties in Oklahoma.  With a completed I-49 (between NWA and FSM) I don't expect a combined Metro, but I do expect a Combined Statistical Area (like Little Rock and Pine Bluff currently have).  Between Northwest Arkansas and Fort Smith right now, they have right at 800,000 people.

That's funny that LeFlore county is part of a metro area, as the southern part of the county is extremely secluded and unpopulated.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on June 12, 2014, 08:34:29 AM
FWIW: Northwest Arkansas Metropolitan Area: Benton, Washington, Madison Counties in Arkansas, McDonald County in Missouri.

Also: Fort Smith Metropolitan Area: Sebastian, Crawford, Franklin Counties in Arkansas, LeFlore and Sequoyah Counties in Oklahoma.  With a completed I-49 (between NWA and FSM) I don't expect a combined Metro, but I do expect a Combined Statistical Area (like Little Rock and Pine Bluff currently have).  Between Northwest Arkansas and Fort Smith right now, they have right at 800,000 people.

That's funny that LeFlore county is part of a metro area, as the southern part of the county is extremely secluded and unpopulated.

Indeed.  Due to its immense size, the northernmost tip of the county abuts downtown Fort Smith; the southernmost contains some of the highest points of American land between the Appalachians and the Rockies, and is removed from the Texas border by one county and (technically) from the Dallas/Fort Worth Metroplex by only two counties.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on June 12, 2014, 10:10:57 AM
Both LeFlore and McCurtain counties are quite large.  Neither one of them, however, can hold a candle to the 2300 square mile Osage County, the largest in the state.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on June 12, 2014, 11:20:14 AM
Road Hog (and I WILL make this relevant to future I-49/Texas I-69), I'm guessing your comment about being "36th" was in regards to Arkansas' educational progress, when it used to be ranked last or next to (Mississippi) last in measures on that field for pre-college education.

Frankly, if you're quoting a survey from somewhere, 49 to 36 is quite a jump for Arkansas if true, though still far from #1.

That being said, here's an article on the new generation of national- and global-reach entrepreneurs in northwest Arkansas, and why they're here. (http://www.arkansasmoneyandpolitics.com/amp/May-June-2014/Northwestern-Exposure/)  I can assure you,  this ain't your father's (maybe not even your oldest brother's, if you've had one) Arkansas, and people like this won't be keen on subpar schools. (They don't have to be...many of the schools up here are doing some amazing things, and have some amazing grads they're turning out.)  The one thing...this article is talking about northwest Arkansas' growth now and the subpar highway structure...wait until they unexpectedly get slammed with traffic between Canada/the Great Lakes/Minneapolis-Kansas City and the Gulf Coast/Houston-New Orleans/Mexico with a completed I-49/Texas I-69:

(http://www.arkansasmoneyandpolitics.com/images/cache/cache_c/cache_2/cache_4/c24f09ed0bc9ae36ad5656187aa3e66b.jpeg?ver=1402465765&aspectratio=1.6756756756757)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on June 12, 2014, 12:55:53 PM

Now back to I-49, which when fully completed in Arkansas will be this state's (and especially northwest Arkansas') "second 'Walmart' "...

I thought that was Tyson Foods, especially considering they just bought Hillshire Farms. I can see I-49 benefiting Wal_Mart or Tyson, but I don't see the highway as a new industry.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on June 12, 2014, 02:06:39 PM

Now back to I-49, which when fully completed in Arkansas will be this state's (and especially northwest Arkansas') "second 'Walmart' "...

I thought that was Tyson Foods, especially considering they just bought Hillshire Farms. I can see I-49 benefiting Wal_Mart or Tyson, but I don't see the highway as a new industry.

1.  That map Grzrd furnished yesterday from Texas, on "their" I-69, empties out into Arkansas.  Yes, it will go to Shreveport, too (and then crisscross across Arkansas, too, if that ever gets built).  The main route from Arkansas from East Texas/Houston, the three Mexican interstate points closest to Mexico City to the upper south, midwest and upper east coast from Richmond north will be through Arkansas.

2.  The "Minnie/Winnie/New/Hou" corridor is not a funnel, but an hourglass.  Hate to talk about "hourglass-shaped figures", but if we were Northwest Arkansas will be the "belly button of the hourglass", not only between the "upper funnel" out of Kansas City and the "lower funnel" out of Shreveport/Texarkana, but also between I-44 and I-40.  No, not every route is feasible (doubt traffic would suddenly switch from Oklahoma City off I-44 to I-40/I-49/I-44, for example) but this completed route is going to see traffic from multiple areas converge on the state, much of it through NWA.

3.  It's been chronicled ad infinitum, but there's A) the biggest ports in America (Texas/Louisiana gulf coasts), B) now biggest goods export area in the country (Houston), C) Panama Canal Widening (will move much though certainly not all existing california traffic to the aforementioned ports), D) biggest port on the great lakes (Duluth/Superior) and a whole bunch of other things that are putting an economic bullseye squarely on Arkansas with this completed corridor.

U S 71, I remember a newspaper story on how Fort Smith is projected alone to grow as big as NWA with a completed I-49.  And yes, we can make surveys and studies say whatever we want.  But frankly, I fail to understand why this particular corridor wasn't built as an interstate a long time ago.  I really don't.

And I do think there is the potential for so many benefits economically that, yes, this could be Arkansas' "second Walmart".
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on June 12, 2014, 02:46:01 PM
Now Buzzfeed has bought into the hype.  Fayetteville's cramped, musty (but wonderful) Dickson Street Bookstore has been listed among "17 bookstores (throughout the world) that will literally change your life". (http://www.buzzfeed.com/erinlarosa/bookstores-that-will-literally-change-your-life)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on June 12, 2014, 08:11:57 PM
Heard that on KUAF-NPR ;)

MB886

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on June 12, 2014, 08:18:11 PM

Now back to I-49, which when fully completed in Arkansas will be this state's (and especially northwest Arkansas') "second 'Walmart' "...

I thought that was Tyson Foods, especially considering they just bought Hillshire Farms. I can see I-49 benefiting Wal_Mart or Tyson, but I don't see the highway as a new industry.

1.  That map Grzrd furnished yesterday from Texas, on "their" I-69, empties out into Arkansas.  Yes, it will go to Shreveport, too (and then crisscross across Arkansas, too, if that ever gets built).  The main route from Arkansas from East Texas/Houston, the three Mexican interstate points closest to Mexico City to the upper south, midwest and upper east coast from Richmond north will be through Arkansas.

2.  The "Minnie/Winnie/New/Hou" corridor is not a funnel, but an hourglass.  Hate to talk about "hourglass-shaped figures", but if we were Northwest Arkansas will be the "belly button of the hourglass", not only between the "upper funnel" out of Kansas City and the "lower funnel" out of Shreveport/Texarkana, but also between I-44 and I-40.  No, not every route is feasible (doubt traffic would suddenly switch from Oklahoma City off I-44 to I-40/I-49/I-44, for example) but this completed route is going to see traffic from multiple areas converge on the state, much of it through NWA.

3.  It's been chronicled ad infinitum, but there's A) the biggest ports in America (Texas/Louisiana gulf coasts), B) now biggest goods export area in the country (Houston), C) Panama Canal Widening (will move much though certainly not all existing california traffic to the aforementioned ports), D) biggest port on the great lakes (Duluth/Superior) and a whole bunch of other things that are putting an economic bullseye squarely on Arkansas with this completed corridor.

U S 71, I remember a newspaper story on how Fort Smith is projected alone to grow as big as NWA with a completed I-49.  And yes, we can make surveys and studies say whatever we want.  But frankly, I fail to understand why this particular corridor wasn't built as an interstate a long time ago.  I really don't.

And I do think there is the potential for so many benefits economically that, yes, this could be Arkansas' "second Walmart".
It wasn't built mostly due to money. Getting FtChaffee land for cheap helped. Plus Ft Smith as a whole is sort of a closed society...they don't like strangers.
Maybe they expected 71 to be upgraded eventually, but Arkansas is always short on money. If Mr Hammerschmidt had stayed around longer, maybe something would have been done sooner.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on June 12, 2014, 10:20:15 PM
Time for the I-540 signage scavenger hunt!

Two in Cave Springs at the Hwy 264/Hwy 112 junction as of yesterday

(http://i1273.photobucket.com/albums/y405/porkerface/firstimg_zps4adc18aa.jpg)
(http://i1273.photobucket.com/albums/y405/porkerface/1image_zpsb8a0bc27.jpg)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on June 12, 2014, 11:56:23 PM

Now back to I-49, which when fully completed in Arkansas will be this state's (and especially northwest Arkansas') "second 'Walmart' "...

I thought that was Tyson Foods, especially considering they just bought Hillshire Farms. I can see I-49 benefiting Wal_Mart or Tyson, but I don't see the highway as a new industry.

1.  That map Grzrd furnished yesterday from Texas, on "their" I-69, empties out into Arkansas.  Yes, it will go to Shreveport, too (and then crisscross across Arkansas, too, if that ever gets built).  The main route from Arkansas from East Texas/Houston, the three Mexican interstate points closest to Mexico City to the upper south, midwest and upper east coast from Richmond north will be through Arkansas.

2.  The "Minnie/Winnie/New/Hou" corridor is not a funnel, but an hourglass.  Hate to talk about "hourglass-shaped figures", but if we were Northwest Arkansas will be the "belly button of the hourglass", not only between the "upper funnel" out of Kansas City and the "lower funnel" out of Shreveport/Texarkana, but also between I-44 and I-40.  No, not every route is feasible (doubt traffic would suddenly switch from Oklahoma City off I-44 to I-40/I-49/I-44, for example) but this completed route is going to see traffic from multiple areas converge on the state, much of it through NWA.

3.  It's been chronicled ad infinitum, but there's A) the biggest ports in America (Texas/Louisiana gulf coasts), B) now biggest goods export area in the country (Houston), C) Panama Canal Widening (will move much though certainly not all existing california traffic to the aforementioned ports), D) biggest port on the great lakes (Duluth/Superior) and a whole bunch of other things that are putting an economic bullseye squarely on Arkansas with this completed corridor.

U S 71, I remember a newspaper story on how Fort Smith is projected alone to grow as big as NWA with a completed I-49.  And yes, we can make surveys and studies say whatever we want.  But frankly, I fail to understand why this particular corridor wasn't built as an interstate a long time ago.  I really don't.

And I do think there is the potential for so many benefits economically that, yes, this could be Arkansas' "second Walmart".
It wasn't built mostly due to money. Getting FtChaffee land for cheap helped. Plus Ft Smith as a whole is sort of a closed society...they don't like strangers.
Maybe they expected 71 to be upgraded eventually, but Arkansas is always short on money. If Mr Hammerschmidt had stayed around longer, maybe something would have been done sooner.

(http://www.menahistory.com/_Media/arthur_stilwell-2.jpeg)

Good point.

Then again, there's also the fact that Shreveport and Texarkana weren't linked by interstate, either, for the longest time.  And that there was no interstate straight south from Kansas City for the longest time, either.

I think we've talked here before about Arthur Stilwell (above) founder of the Kansas City Southern Railroad (which I-49 south of Kansas City to Shreveport follows the route of - strangely, though acquisition the new KCS route to Laredo follows roughly the path of Texas I-69).  He connected dots before others did both about the shortest route from Kansas City to the gulf of Mexico plus the future importance of Mexico in our transportation system.  Possibly a paranoid schizophrenic (Mr. Stilwell claimed he got a lot of his ideas from "brownies" or "fairies"), the man had a clue what this route could be.  For a long time the KCS was called "the haywire" and was at best a middleweight railroad, frequently underfunded, mentioned as a takeover target.  Now, it's an incredibly critical railroad (helped by its acquisition of what's now called "The Meridian Speedway", the best rr route between Atlanta and D/FW) linking Kansas City to the Pacific coast at the emerging Mexican seaport of Lazaro Cardenas.

But even he wouldn't have known about Walmart/Tyson/JB Hunt and the explosive growth of NWA, or that Texas would be America's second biggest state not only in size but population some day, or several other things.  Part of what we see happening is because this area is indeed strategic as Mr. Stilwell envisioned, yet part of it is because of things no one in the 1960s (when much of our interstate system was being drawn up and built) or earlier could likely have seen.  That's just how things work.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on June 13, 2014, 12:13:17 AM
Those TO I-540 signs are still technically correct,  because that is the way you would go if you wanted to get to I-540.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Arkansastravelguy on June 13, 2014, 02:32:34 AM

Those TO I-540 signs are still technically correct,  because that is the way you would go if you wanted to get to I-540.
I wonder if those are AHTD signs or owned by the city or county


iPhone
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on June 13, 2014, 09:55:06 AM
AHTD.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: roadman65 on June 13, 2014, 10:25:37 AM
I was noticing on US 71B in Bentonville at the junction with previous I-540 and present day I-49 and US 71 from GSV, there was no mention of its parent route there going NB except in text going NB with a "TO US 71" at the ramp there.

Hope with the new I-49 signs they corrected that mistake.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on June 14, 2014, 02:35:06 AM
Time for the I-540 signage scavenger hunt!
Story about it in the local news:   http://www.4029tv.com/news/Old-I-540-signs-create-confusion/26488828

So, AHTD says that they have a sign log... And it's a folder (paper or electronic?)...  And if it's district level, this doesn't surprise me... XNA is in Benton County, and the district transportation HQ is in Harrison.   Any decently run large organization/business creates an inventory of everything, and it's not done on paper.  I just hope change will happen.

I just wish I could go in and fix all of this crap with AHTD... Especially this, because documentation and inventory.  Sorry, I'm done venting.

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on June 14, 2014, 12:24:53 PM
Grzrd, among other things, with this sales tax in August the State of Missouri is proposing 6-laning I-70 between St. Louis and Kansas City (http://www.kansascity.com/news/local/article543391/Proposed-Missouri-sales-tax-would-finance-a-three-lane-I-70-and-other-projects.html).  Shee-yeesh.

I-49 isn't mentioned in the above story (which is pretty much the same one I read in the Springfield News-Leader today, too), but maybe it's because compared with the aforementioned project finishing a few-mile stretch of I-49 from south of Pineville down to the state line seems like a piece of cake.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Arkansastravelguy on June 14, 2014, 02:50:06 PM

Grzrd, among other things, with this sales tax in August the State of Missouri is proposing 6-laning I-70 between St. Louis and Kansas City (http://www.kansascity.com/news/local/article543391/Proposed-Missouri-sales-tax-would-finance-a-three-lane-I-70-and-other-projects.html).  Shee-yeesh.

I-49 isn't mentioned in the above story (which is pretty much the same one I read in the Springfield News-Leader today, too), but maybe it's because compared with the aforementioned project finishing a few-mile stretch of I-49 from south of Pineville down to the state line seems like a piece of cake.

Constructing the Bella Vista bypass is on the draft list


iPhone
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: robbones on June 14, 2014, 09:33:44 PM
Does anybody know what section of 49 going to be constructed when Barling to Greenwood is complete?

IMO they should just work on the Crawford County section next to have a 540 detour and possibly relieve some traffic off of there.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Arkansastravelguy on June 14, 2014, 09:49:49 PM
http://www.modot.org/movingforward/documents/StatewideList.pdf

Missouri draft list for projects to be done with the sales tax increase


iPhone
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on June 14, 2014, 09:59:53 PM
Does anybody know what section of 49 going to be constructed when Barling to Greenwood is complete?

IMO they should just work on the Crawford County section next to have a 540 detour and possibly relieve some traffic off of there.

I would be in favor of them starting work on parts bypassing the towns along the route – Waldron, Mena, DeQueen, etc. It would improve drive times and show that AHTD is somewhat serious about completing I-49 through the Ouachitas.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on June 14, 2014, 10:54:11 PM
Does anybody know what section of 49 going to be constructed when Barling to Greenwood is complete?

IMO they should just work on the Crawford County section next to have a 540 detour and possibly relieve some traffic off of there.

I would be in favor of them starting work on parts bypassing the towns along the route – Waldron, Mena, DeQueen, etc. It would improve drive times and show that AHTD is somewhat serious about completing I-49 through the Ouachitas.

The rumor is that the Mena bypass will be the next portion of I-49 to be built.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: amroad17 on June 16, 2014, 03:54:25 AM
This would mean that the "freeway" around Mena that Stephen Hunter mentioned in his book Point of Impact will actually come to fruition.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on June 16, 2014, 07:38:08 AM
Does anybody know what section of 49 going to be constructed when Barling to Greenwood is complete?

IMO they should just work on the Crawford County section next to have a 540 detour and possibly relieve some traffic off of there.
should be open sometime this Fall. AHTD is working on the approaches at the south end
Does anybody know what section of 49 going to be constructed when Barling to Greenwood is complete?

IMO they should just work on the Crawford County section next to have a 540 detour and possibly relieve some traffic off of there.


MB886

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MSU John on June 17, 2014, 12:12:10 PM

Constructing the Bella Vista bypass is on the draft list

iPhone

Correct. Here's a link to the map of projects in SW Missouri:
http://www.modot.org/MovingForward/Regions/documents/Southwest.pdf
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Arkansastravelguy on June 17, 2014, 12:45:16 PM
So if the sales tax is approved and MODOT start their section, will AHTD scrap the roundabout at 71 and start constructing the entire bypass to Interstate grade instead of continuing the super two?


iPhone
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: codyg1985 on June 17, 2014, 03:31:00 PM
So if the sales tax is approved and MODOT start their section, will AHTD scrap the roundabout at 71 and start constructing the entire bypass to Interstate grade instead of continuing the super two?


iPhone

My understanding is that they will build the BVB as a super-2 regardless at first, but if Missouri passes the sales tax hike, then I could see where AHTD would consider building their portion of the BVB to connect with Missouri. I'm not sure if they would still do the roundabout, but I would think they would since the contract has already been let to do the work.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on June 17, 2014, 07:54:29 PM
So if the sales tax is approved and MODOT start their section, will AHTD scrap the roundabout at 71 and start constructing the entire bypass to Interstate grade instead of continuing the super two?


iPhone

My understanding is that they will build the BVB as a super-2 regardless at first, but if Missouri passes the sales tax hike, then I could see where AHTD would consider building their portion of the BVB to connect with Missouri. I'm not sure if they would still do the roundabout, but I would think they would since the contract has already been let to do the work.
The highway department has been known to change the terms of the contract. the original contract for the i-540 rebuild called for replacing the Arkansas River Bridge, which was changed to repair only.

MB886

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: AHTD on June 17, 2014, 10:43:08 PM
So if the sales tax is approved and MODOT start their section, will AHTD scrap the roundabout at 71 and start constructing the entire bypass to Interstate grade instead of continuing the super two?


iPhone

My understanding is that they will build the BVB as a super-2 regardless at first, but if Missouri passes the sales tax hike, then I could see where AHTD would consider building their portion of the BVB to connect with Missouri. I'm not sure if they would still do the roundabout, but I would think they would since the contract has already been let to do the work.

Close! We have already COMMITTED to completing this route to the state line and the money will be available to make it happen. But only as a super two. As for the modified connector, we'll consult with our engineers tomorrow and see how that scenario would play out. Money for the orginial SPUI will be available too, so when it's all said and done, we will have a super two with a SPUI all the way to the Missouri line.
 
Now all we have to do is come up with an additional $50 million to add the northbound lanes and we'll have an Interstate!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: AHTD on June 18, 2014, 03:16:02 PM
In our contracts, we reserve the right to modify the scope. In this case - eliminate the modified connector. The phasing of this project is such that the connector is the last piece of the puzzle, so this buys time to see what happens in Missouri. If their tax passes, we'll likely bid the SPUI and the stretch to the state line separately.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on June 18, 2014, 04:50:13 PM
Currently we are estimating 24 months for the U.S. Highway 70 (Broadway) bridge over the Arkansas River at Little Rock to be out of service while the old structure is demolished and the new one constructed. That is an estimate based on a fast-track schedule. A bridge over the Arkansas and Red Rivers on new location is not likely to be fast-tracked.
So how would this all play out if the money were available? While nothing is written in stone, it’s reasonable to assume that as money does come available, we would start by constructing bypasses around several of the communities along the route — Mena, DeQueen, Waldron, etc. Then as more money becomes available, we would begin to link those bypasses. Eventually we would have a highway.

AHTD, this TV video (http://www.katv.com/story/25802534/ahtd-beginning-plans-for-new-i-30-arkansas-river-bridge) indicates that the I-30 Arkansas River bridge will be next in line after the Broadway Bridge.  Since it is already funded by the half-cent sales tax, is it safe to assume that it will have no impact on potential progress (particularly design work and preliminary engineering) for the I-49 Arkansas River bridge?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: AHTD on June 18, 2014, 06:04:46 PM
What the report did not clearly state is that replacement of the I-30 Arkansas River crossing is but a PORTION of a larger, I-30 corridor widening project between I-40 and I-530/I-440. Ballpark estimates are around $300 to $400 million and will be funded by the Connecting Arkansas Program (half-cent sales tax).
 
Not sure what is meant by "next in line," but we think the reporter was trying to illustrate that we must complete the U.S. 70 (Broadway) bridge before we can take on the I-30 corridor project. The U.S. 70 bridge is a STIP project.
 
Neither of these projects have an impact on an I-49 river crossing because we are just not far enough along with it.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on June 18, 2014, 07:13:59 PM
Is the SPUI going to be at the 49/71/71B interchange between Bentonville and Bella Vista?

Are there any plans to renumber US 71B to ordinary US 71?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: robbones on June 19, 2014, 12:27:56 PM
I have a feeling that the Alma-Barling section of I-49 will be the final piece of the puzzle if not next to last with the river bridge costing so much money.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: codyg1985 on June 19, 2014, 02:42:03 PM
Does anyone know what segment of I-49 in Arkansas will be constructed after the Bella Vista Bypass is finished?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on June 20, 2014, 08:57:40 AM
I have a feeling that the Alma-Barling section of I-49 will be the final piece of the puzzle if not next to last with the river bridge costing so much money.

This article (http://swtimes.com/news/interstate-dedication-slated-wednesday) reports on a dedication ceremony celebrating the redesignation of I-540 as I-49 and that the ceremony is being touted as the beginning of an "I-49 Build the Bridge" campaign:

Quote
It was announced Thursday that a dedication ceremony for Interstate 49, “the future for the next generation,”  will be held next week in Alma.
The ceremony will celebrate the U.S. Department of Transportation officially designating Interstate 540 from Alma north to the Missouri border as Interstate 49, according to a joint news release from the Fort Chaffee Redevelopment Authority and Alma Area Chamber of Commerce.
The dedication ceremony will take place at 11 a.m. Wednesday in the parking lot of Grace Church of Alma at 330 Rudy Road.
“That parking lot there has a great view of I-49,”  FCRA Executive Director Ivy Owen said Thursday. “What’s so important about this is that it puts the onus now on the (Arkansas Highway and Transportation Department) to get the rest of this done. It’s I-49 all the way to Bella Vista until you get to Alma. This section will be I-549, our 6.5 miles, until it connects to I-49.”  ....
Expected at next week’s ceremony is AHTD Commissioner Dick Trammel and a number of local leaders. Trammel, former state Rep. Ed Thicksten, Owen and I-49 International Coalition executive director Gard Wayt will speak. Following their remarks, AHTD workers will unveil a new I-49 sign on the Rudy Road Interstate 40 overpass. ....
Wednesday’s ceremony is also touted as the launch of an “I-49 Build the Bridge”  campaign.
“Representatives of cities, counties, chambers of commerce and other public works entities across the western Arkansas region are banding together to show a concerted, cohesive push to secure funding for the 13-mile stretch of I-49 south of Alma that will connect at Chaffee Crossing, including a new bridge across the Arkansas River,”  the news release states.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: codyg1985 on June 20, 2014, 09:14:13 AM
Quote
This section will be I-549, our 6.5 miles, until it connects to I-49.”

I-549? Are they referring to the Chaffee Crossing portion? I assume this was a typo and they meant AR 549?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Avalanchez71 on June 20, 2014, 10:03:32 AM
Does anyone know what segment of I-49 in Arkansas will be constructed after the Bella Vista Bypass is finished?

None I hope.  What a huge waste of money.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on June 20, 2014, 10:56:50 AM
Does anyone know what segment of I-49 in Arkansas will be constructed after the Bella Vista Bypass is finished?

None I hope.  What a huge waste of money.

Indeed.  It's only the shortest Interstate route from central Canada and the largest cities in 5-7 American states to the Gulf of Mexico (and someday Mexico City via Texas I-69).
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: robbones on June 20, 2014, 10:57:04 AM
I'm glad I'm taking vacation next week. Might have to attend the ceremony.

BLU STAR4.0
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on June 20, 2014, 12:58:26 PM
I'm glad I'm taking vacation next week. Might have to attend the ceremony.

BLU STAR4.0
Doubtful I will be there. Work has me in Missouri until at least Tuesday.


MB886

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on June 20, 2014, 08:37:05 PM
Does anyone know what segment of I-49 in Arkansas will be constructed after the Bella Vista Bypass is finished?

None I hope.  What a huge waste of money.

Maybe if you or a family member were killed on the deathtrap that is US 71 you would feel differently.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: robbones on June 20, 2014, 09:08:40 PM
Does anyone know what segment of I-49 in Arkansas will be constructed after the Bella Vista Bypass is finished?

None I hope.  What a huge waste of money.

Maybe if you or a family member were killed on the deathtrap that is US 71 you would feel differently.
Mountainburg was notorious for auto wrecks before 49 was built. There used to be a sign right before you went down the grade saying 7 people were killed in the past year or something along those lines. 49 is not only good economically, but its a safer route to get through Western Arkansas once its completed.

BLU STAR4.0

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on June 20, 2014, 10:46:14 PM
Quote
This section will be I-549, our 6.5 miles, until it connects to I-49.”
I-549? Are they referring to the Chaffee Crossing portion? I assume this was a typo and they meant AR 549?

This later article (http://www.thv11.com/story/news/local/2014/06/20/alma-to-mark-designation-of-i-49-in-west-arkansas/11105495/) reports that it will be "Highway 549", which indicates that it will not receive an I-549 designation and will indeed be AR 549:

Quote
A 6½ -mile section of the highway through Chaffee Crossing is scheduled to open in October. It will initially be designated Highway 549.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Arkansastravelguy on June 20, 2014, 11:04:18 PM

Does anyone know what segment of I-49 in Arkansas will be constructed after the Bella Vista Bypass is finished?

None I hope.  What a huge waste of money.
You are obviously not from Arkansas. That would be like saying I-40 through Tennessee is a huge waste of money.


iPhone
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on June 21, 2014, 12:04:17 AM
Does anyone know what segment of I-49 in Arkansas will be constructed after the Bella Vista Bypass is finished?

None I hope.  What a huge waste of money.

Maybe if you or a family member were killed on the deathtrap that is US 71 you would feel differently.
Mountainburg was notorious for auto wrecks before 49 was built. There used to be a sign right before you went down the grade saying 7 people were killed in the past year or something along those lines. 49 is not only good economically, but its a safer route to get through Western Arkansas once its completed.

BLU STAR4.0
Actually, Winslow to south of Mountainburg was bad. The area just below Artists Point was/is especially bad with the steep grades and nasty curves and has been poorly maintained for years.

MB886

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Arkansastravelguy on June 21, 2014, 12:21:20 AM
There is usually a wreck when I drive that way. Which is surprising considering how lightly the road is traveled


iPhone
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on June 21, 2014, 01:46:21 AM
There is usually a wreck when I drive that way. Which is surprising considering how lightly the road is traveled


iPhone

...and it's amazing what the south left-to-be-constructed stretch of U.S. 71 also holds, even though it's not steep like 71 in Crawford County. *

Around the Logan County line, I think, there's a curvy spot where it feels like a two-lane paved county road instead of a significant highway link.  At Ashdown, the Arkansas Western railroad (used about once a day both ways between Ashdown and Nashville (AR)) literally turns into the right northbound lane of 71 before curving across the road into the Kansas City Southern's mainline..and being a shortline there are no electric/electronic lights, bells and/or gates!  Not as bad in many places as it used to be, but MAN I can't wait for us to "waste money" building that stretch of I-49.

*I never hear about them, but even Crawford County's U.S.71 stretch ain't NOTHING compared to the Ouachita Mountains' parallel U.S 59 in south LeFlore County, OK between Rich Mountain and "Three sticks", and other points close by.  How many bad accidents has THAT stretch seen, I wonder?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on June 21, 2014, 03:21:26 AM
Three Sticks is on US 259.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on June 21, 2014, 11:24:53 AM
Three Sticks is on US 259.

Thanks for the correction...that's the route I meant to say.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: robbones on June 21, 2014, 07:25:44 PM
Three Sticks is on US 259.

Thanks for the correction...that's the route I meant to say.

i have drove that route in my big rig and some curves i prayed no oncoming traffic was coming since my trailer would be in the other lane.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on June 23, 2014, 11:09:57 AM
This article (http://swtimes.com/news/interstate-dedication-slated-wednesday) reports on a dedication ceremony celebrating the redesignation of I-540 as I-49 and that the ceremony is being touted as the beginning of an "I-49 Build the Bridge" campaign

This editorial (http://swtimes.com/opinion/how-we-see-it/editorial-i-49-builds-bridge-future) mentions that former state Rep. Ed Thicksten will head up the "I-49 Build the Bridge" campaign and that he apparently has a track record of success in obtaining funding for major highway projects:

Quote
By the yard, undoubtedly the most expensive and challenging piece of the I-49 puzzle remaining undone is that new bridge across the Arkansas River.
Thus, on Wednesday, community leaders will celebrate the signage that renames Interstate 540 from Alma north as Interstate 49. And they will grab that opportunity and all the media attention it garners to begin the I-49 Build the Bridge campaign.
And before you decide that’s a fool’s errand, take note of the guy heading up the effort: former state Rep. Ed Thicksten. Folks from Crawford County will tell you, that’s a force to be reckoned with. He knows how to get it done from his time in the Legislature, when funding for that newly renamed stretch of highway was appropriated.
And he knows the stakes: “I think we have boundless opportunities here to move the river valley forward just like northwest Arkansas, and that bridge across the Arkansas River can be the key to our success.”
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MaxConcrete on June 23, 2014, 06:35:21 PM
Some of these views may already have been posted, but this thread is so long I could not go all the way back (I checked about 15 pages back and found similar but not identical views.) In any case, here is how the Bella Vista Bypass super-2 looked yesterday. For those not familiar, an isolated section about 2 miles long is open, with the end points both on AR 72.

Saturday I drove the full I-49 corridor and took numerous exits from IH 40 to the Missouri border. I did not notice any Interstate 540 signs anywhere. It seems to be a complete re-signing job, which is impressive since so many signs are involved.

(http://oscarmail.net/photos/i49/20140622_NWA_0246_entering.jpg)
Entering going westbound from AR 72 on the east end of the super-2.

(http://oscarmail.net/photos/i49/20140622_NWA_0247_future_49.jpg)
The Future I-49 sign

(http://oscarmail.net/photos/i49/20140622_NWA_0247_future_49_large.jpg)
Closer view

(http://oscarmail.net/photos/i49/20140622_NWA_0250_driving.jpg)
Typical view

(http://oscarmail.net/photos/i49/20140622_NWA_0252_exit.jpg)
Exit

(http://oscarmail.net/photos/i49/20140622_NWA_0255_looking_west.jpg)
At the west end, looking west from the AR 72 bridge

(http://oscarmail.net/photos/i49/20140622_NWA_0259_looking_east.jpg)
At the west end, looking east from the AR 72 bridge
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on June 25, 2014, 08:06:01 PM
Planning is currently working on revised estimates for the Arkansas River crossing, once that is available we will post in this forum.
This editorial (http://swtimes.com/opinion/how-we-see-it/editorial-i-49-builds-bridge-future) mentions that former state Rep. Ed Thicksten will head up the "I-49 Build the Bridge" campaign and that he apparently has a track record of success in obtaining funding for major highway projects

This article (http://www.thecitywire.com/node/33618#.U6tab5RdWSo) includes some photos from today's I-49 dedication in Alma, including one of a "Build the Bridge" banner:

(http://i.imgur.com/OL8Fz7h.jpg)

The article also reports that Thicksten has started his efforts on behalf of the bridge and that The City Wire has joined the members of this Forum in waiting for the new cost estimate for the Arkansas River bridge:

Quote
Arkansas Highway Commissioner Dick Trammel ....
said while he can't promise anything, he is confident the designation of I-49 in Benton, Crawford and Washington Counties is just the beginning of what will eventually be an interstate that stretches through all of Arkansas and brings a non-stop flow of traffic from Canada to the ports in New Orleans.
Former Rep. Ed Thicksten of Alma said all of that starts with the bridge over the Arkansas River, and urged residents from across the region to visit Interstate49BuildtheRoad.org to sign a petition urging funding and construction of the bridge.
Previous estimates to build the I-49 connection from Alma, across the Arkansas River and connect to the I-49 route in Barling have been around $350 million. The City Wire has requested from the Arkansas Highway & Transportation Department an update on the estimate.



Another article about the Alma I-49 dedication (http://swtimes.com/news/officials-celebrate-interstate-49-designation-launch-bridge-campaign) quotes Thicksten as saying that AHTD "soon will begin" a feasibility study for the bridge:

Quote
Thicksten said the highway department soon will begin a feasibility study to develop cost estimates to build the bridge.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on June 25, 2014, 10:32:45 PM
Planning is currently working on revised estimates for the Arkansas River crossing, once that is available we will post in this forum.
This editorial (http://swtimes.com/opinion/how-we-see-it/editorial-i-49-builds-bridge-future) mentions that former state Rep. Ed Thicksten will head up the "I-49 Build the Bridge" campaign and that he apparently has a track record of success in obtaining funding for major highway projects

This article (http://www.thecitywire.com/node/33618#.U6tab5RdWSo) includes some photos from today's I-49 dedication in Alma, including one of a "Build the Bridge" banner:

(http://i.imgur.com/OL8Fz7h.jpg)

The article also reports that Thicksten has started his efforts on behalf of the bridge and that The City Wire has joined the members of this Forum in waiting for the new cost estimate for the Arkansas River bridge:

Quote
Arkansas Highway Commissioner Dick Trammel ....
said while he can't promise anything, he is confident the designation of I-49 in Benton, Crawford and Washington Counties is just the beginning of what will eventually be an interstate that stretches through all of Arkansas and brings a non-stop flow of traffic from Canada to the ports in New Orleans.
Former Rep. Ed Thicksten of Alma said all of that starts with the bridge over the Arkansas River, and urged residents from across the region to visit Interstate49BuildtheRoad.org to sign a petition urging funding and construction of the bridge.
Previous estimates to build the I-49 connection from Alma, across the Arkansas River and connect to the I-49 route in Barling have been around $350 million. The City Wire has requested from the Arkansas Highway & Transportation Department an update on the estimate.



Another article about the Alma I-49 dedication (http://swtimes.com/news/officials-celebrate-interstate-49-designation-launch-bridge-campaign) quotes Thicksten as saying that AHTD "soon will begin" a feasibility study for the bridge:

Quote
Thicksten said the highway department soon will begin a feasibility study to develop cost estimates to build the bridge.

Just saw the City WIre article, Grzrd, with this quote (not unexpected, just confirming the near obvious):

Quote

 He said without the interstate development taking place, large projects like the Arkansas College of Osteopathic Medicine and ArcBest were unlikely to have located out on the far eastern edge of Fort Smith.

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: kendancy66 on June 25, 2014, 11:28:24 PM
Go to www.idrivearkansas.com (http://www.idrivearkansas.com) and you can zoom into the construction route BVB is taking and get a good look at how this route will shape up.
 
The Missouri governor has set a special election in August for their transportation funding. Keep an eye on this. Success might mean they will meet us at the border sooner rather than later. Failure will make it anyone's guess.

Thanks for the link.  I see from the map that US-66 exists from Rolla, MO to Flagstaff, AZ
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on June 26, 2014, 01:41:16 AM
@MaxConcrete: Looks like the completed section is just the one lane, with no construction yet on the second lane. But both lanes seem to be under construction the farther along you go. That seems odd.

Did AHTD just intend intitally to build a Super 2 and decide later to go ahead and add the second lane?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on June 26, 2014, 07:17:51 AM
@MaxConcrete: Looks like the completed section is just the one lane, with no construction yet on the second lane. But both lanes seem to be under construction the farther along you go. That seems odd.

Did AHTD just intend intitally to build a Super 2 and decide later to go ahead and add the second lane?
To my recollection ,yes.  They acquired Right of Way for all 4 lanes, but are currently only building 2 due to lack of funding.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: AHTD on June 26, 2014, 12:48:12 PM
Planning is currently working on revised estimates for the Arkansas River crossing, once that is available we will post in this forum.
This editorial (http://swtimes.com/opinion/how-we-see-it/editorial-i-49-builds-bridge-future) mentions that former state Rep. Ed Thicksten will head up the "I-49 Build the Bridge" campaign and that he apparently has a track record of success in obtaining funding for major highway projects

This article (http://www.thecitywire.com/node/33618#.U6tab5RdWSo) includes some photos from today's I-49 dedication in Alma, including one of a "Build the Bridge" banner:

(http://i.imgur.com/OL8Fz7h.jpg)

The article also reports that Thicksten has started his efforts on behalf of the bridge and that The City Wire has joined the members of this Forum in waiting for the new cost estimate for the Arkansas River bridge:

Quote
Arkansas Highway Commissioner Dick Trammel ....
said while he can't promise anything, he is confident the designation of I-49 in Benton, Crawford and Washington Counties is just the beginning of what will eventually be an interstate that stretches through all of Arkansas and brings a non-stop flow of traffic from Canada to the ports in New Orleans.
Former Rep. Ed Thicksten of Alma said all of that starts with the bridge over the Arkansas River, and urged residents from across the region to visit Interstate49BuildtheRoad.org to sign a petition urging funding and construction of the bridge.
Previous estimates to build the I-49 connection from Alma, across the Arkansas River and connect to the I-49 route in Barling have been around $350 million. The City Wire has requested from the Arkansas Highway & Transportation Department an update on the estimate.



Another article about the Alma I-49 dedication (http://swtimes.com/news/officials-celebrate-interstate-49-designation-launch-bridge-campaign) quotes Thicksten as saying that AHTD "soon will begin" a feasibility study for the bridge:

Quote
Thicksten said the highway department soon will begin a feasibility study to develop cost estimates to build the bridge.

Just saw the City WIre article, Grzrd, with this quote (not unexpected, just confirming the near obvious):

Quote

 He said without the interstate development taking place, large projects like the Arkansas College of Osteopathic Medicine and ArcBest were unlikely to have located out on the far eastern edge of Fort Smith.


It is important to note that yesterday's ceremony in Alma was not an AHTD event. We were asked to participate by unveiling an I-49 sign.
One of the articles incorrectly states that AHTD has launched its "build the bridge campaign." This is not correct. That campaign is a local effort.
 
Our current estimate for this facility is about $350 to $400 million for a 13-mile Interstate facility between I-40 and State Highway 22 with an Arkansas River crossing. This is ballpark at best. We have no engineering into this other than we know the corridor. High level estimates are often ballparked for various presentations, etc. that require planning to provide numbers.
 
One article incorrectly stated we will soon begin a feasibility study. The person quoted probably just used the wrong term. We will need to complete an EIS and at this time we don't have that programmed.
 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on June 26, 2014, 03:11:21 PM
$350-$400 million sounds more logical for the entire 13 mile segment between the I-40 interchange, the Arkansas River crossing and connection into Future I-49 at AR-22. When I first heard $350 million for the Arkansas River crossing alone I was wondering just what kind of bridge was going to be built.

Would that $350-$400 million ballpark figure also include the connector ramp additions to the existing I-40 & I-49 interchange at Alma?

I think if funding could be located to "build the bridge," connecting current I-49 with the segment at Fort Chaffee, it would help put the rest of I-49 in Arkansas on more of a fast track. The road could be extended farther South, piece by piece. Long term, I still think I-49 will ultimately be completed with the last, most difficult to build segments meeting in the mountains halfway between Fort Smith & Texarkana.

(http://i.imgur.com/OL8Fz7h.jpg)

The I-49 shield doesn't look like it has the correct typefaces. OTOH, the kerning for the "49" numerals looks a LOT BETTER than the I-49 markers being installed. I don't know what it is about I-x9 routes, but many of those signs have horrible kerning. Too often the 9 is hugged way too close to the right edge of the shield. This is especially true for much of I-49, be it in Louisiana, Missouri or the newly signed stretch in Arkansas. The bad spacing effect is even more pronounced on neutered shields.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: agentsteel53 on June 26, 2014, 03:13:34 PM
is that 49 font one of the Blue Highway variants?  looks pretty good.

29 gets pretty bad too:

(http://www.aaroads.com/shields/img/NE/NE19880291i1.jpg)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on June 26, 2014, 04:19:48 PM
The I-29 shield wouldn't look so bad if not for the over-sized numerals that come with neutered Interstate shields.

Honestly, the spacing issues with neutered shields are so bad that the FHWA ought to consider mandating Series C numerals for all Interstate shields lacking state names, whether they're 2 digit or 3 digit routes. Series D numerals on neutered shields usually sucks. It's horrible graphic design. And it does nothing to improve legibility. The only exception to this is single digit routes or 2 digit routes with a "1" in them. Series D can work on a neutered shield then, but not often otherwise.

Here's a tip for any DOT people who might be lurking: letter and numeral legibility is about more than just the character size alone. The space around and between the characters is every bit as important. IMHO, the practice of dropping state names from Interstate shields and enlarging the numerals is just plain stupid. The freaking numerals don't fit the shield properly.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: agentsteel53 on June 26, 2014, 06:02:25 PM

Honestly, the spacing issues with neutered shields are so bad that the FHWA ought to consider mandating Series C numerals for all Interstate shields lacking state names, whether they're 2 digit or 3 digit routes. Series D numerals on neutered shields usually sucks. It's horrible graphic design. And it does nothing to improve legibility. The only exception to this is single digit routes or 2 digit routes with a "1" in them. Series D can work on a neutered shield then, but not often otherwise.

I disagree.  if we're gonna have the truncated-crown, narrow-margin shields (70 spec), then the height of the number should be diminished.  on the 24" blank, the 12" numbers look terrible, while the 10" look passable.

(http://www.aaroads.com/shields/img/TN/TN19790402i1.jpg)

that said - while we're at it, why not use '61 spec neutered?  same space for numbers, same crown height, but much less silly proportions.

(http://www.aaroads.com/shields/img/OH/OH19590801i1.jpg)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on June 26, 2014, 06:53:16 PM

It is important to note that yesterday's ceremony in Alma was not an AHTD event. We were asked to participate by unveiling an I-49 sign.
One of the articles incorrectly states that AHTD has launched its "build the bridge campaign." This is not correct. That campaign is a local effort.
 
That explains why so much of it seemed like they were patting each other on the back.  I noticed Mr Bennett was missing, but assumed he was busy elsewhere.  Personally, I thought the "unveiling" was kind of silly, but maybe I'm just cynical. :(
(https://fbcdn-sphotos-c-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xaf1/v/t1.0-9/10301515_10152509267393624_5672801818792658299_n.jpg?oh=1bfab5705e99aec0ed9a7e990ba04ee0&oe=540DA22E&__gda__=1411685786_40a978abb0f1c9124ecf9fbc5c4b4dd4)

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on June 26, 2014, 07:40:23 PM
Looks like the I-540 shield is still there. Shouldn't AHTD at least add a "To", if not outright remove it?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on June 26, 2014, 07:45:11 PM
Also, not sure if this AHTD or City of Fayetteville, but the sign still says I-540 at the Wedington Drive exit

(http://i1273.photobucket.com/albums/y405/porkerface/20140620_130451_zps10a2853d.jpg)

and this is at the Greenland exit

(http://i1273.photobucket.com/albums/y405/porkerface/20140620_135653_zpsa996559a.jpg)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Arkansastravelguy on June 26, 2014, 10:35:43 PM
The 540 signs are hit and miss, I've seen several I-540s on mileage signs and at exit 61 it still has the thru trucks to I 40 use 540 sign. Yet in Farmington the milage sign says I-49


iPhone
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on June 26, 2014, 10:36:22 PM
Looks like the I-540 shield is still there. Shouldn't AHTD at least add a "To", if not outright remove it?

They HAVE removed the 540 shields approaching I-40. They also removed the free-standing 540 along WB I-40.

I agree that it should be changed to "TO 540" . It would seem to be the easiest solution.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on June 26, 2014, 10:40:03 PM
The 540 signs are hit and miss, I've seen several I-540s on mileage signs and at exit 61 it still has the thru trucks to I 40 use 540 sign. Yet in Farmington the milage sign says I-49


iPhone
This one still remains, as well, though it's probably City of Rogers' sign (but I'd love to have it for my collection ;) )
(https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3086/2626563973_3f3f51ebcd_z_d.jpg)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Arkansastravelguy on June 26, 2014, 10:44:31 PM

The 540 signs are hit and miss, I've seen several I-540s on mileage signs and at exit 61 it still has the thru trucks to I 40 use 540 sign. Yet in Farmington the milage sign says I-49


iPhone
This one still remains, as well, though it's probably City of Rogers' sign (but I'd love to have it for my collection ;) )
(https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3086/2626563973_3f3f51ebcd_z_d.jpg)

I've wondered if that's a Rogers sign or if Promonade Mall bought it


iPhone
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on June 27, 2014, 01:31:19 AM
The 540 signs are hit and miss, I've seen several I-540s on mileage signs and at exit 61 it still has the thru trucks to I 40 use 540 sign. Yet in Farmington the milage sign says I-49

iPhone
This one still remains, as well, though it's probably City of Rogers' sign (but I'd love to have it for my collection ;) )
(https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3086/2626563973_3f3f51ebcd_z_d.jpg)

Definitely a City of Rogers sign... The font gives it away.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on June 27, 2014, 10:46:25 AM
Quote from: agentsteel53
I disagree.  if we're gonna have the truncated-crown, narrow-margin shields (70 spec), then the height of the number should be diminished.  on the 24" blank, the 12" numbers look terrible, while the 10" look passable.

I don't think you understand my point. The bureaucrats seem to insist on squeezing 12" Series D numerals onto 24" Interstate highway shields when they clearly do not fit properly. If having the letters 12" tall is the top priority then they need to change them to Series C numerals.

Note: last time I checked the MUTCD SHS, there was no spec explicitly allowing these 120% larger numerals onto an Interstate highway shield. A 24" shield is supposed to have 10" Series D numerals, not 12". Proportionately it scales on up from there for 36" and 48" shields.

I agree 10" numerals do work better on Interstate shields, even set in Series D. Aesthetically, I prefer the look of state names on Interstate shields. But if the FHWA wants a neutered look on Interstate shields the 10" tall characters are going to work better. I would even be willing to bet the more generous spacing around the numerals would actually make these shields more legible than the current, very ugly shields with stupidly over-sized numerals.

The neutered look with 12" numerals just plain sucks. And this is my expert opinion based on over 20 years of sign design work on top of having a 4 year New York art school degree. Really, no one needs expert credentials to see that design formula isn't working. It just involves looking at the design results and being objectively honest over how it looks.

Basically, the Interstate highway shields looked fine from the 1950's and through the 1970's until some bureaucrat in recent years decided we need to squeeze the same size numerals used on US Highway and State Highway markers onto existing Interstate shield designs. I wonder if the person who made this decision flunked geometry in high school.

In order for 12" numerals to work properly on a standard Interstate highway shield the whole freaking shield must be redesigned to accommodate them.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on June 27, 2014, 11:09:09 AM
Congrats on the four year New York art school degree, but this rant seems to be unrelated to I-49
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on June 27, 2014, 12:23:52 PM
Since we're talking about signs:

(https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8084/8268947069_7c0ec25419_z_d.jpg)
MODOT

(https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7319/13998205735_168b1d2b62_d.jpg)
AHTD

(https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3741/10927102465_d5be4c8b00_z_d.jpg)
LADOTD
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: agentsteel53 on June 27, 2014, 01:10:16 PM
I don't think you understand my point. The bureaucrats seem to insist on squeezing 12" Series D numerals onto 24" Interstate highway shields when they clearly do not fit properly. If having the letters 12" tall is the top priority then they need to change them to Series C numerals.

how do we know 12" is the priority, as opposed to Series D being the priority?

Quote
Basically, the Interstate highway shields looked fine from the 1950's and through the 1970's until some bureaucrat in recent years decided we need to squeeze the same size numerals used on US Highway and State Highway markers onto existing Interstate shield designs. I wonder if the person who made this decision flunked geometry in high school.

1965, Pennsylvania.  we have them to thank for garish '70 spec US and interstate shields.

(http://www.aaroads.com/shields/img/PA/PA19663221i1.jpg)

photo taken Dec. 10, 1965.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: agentsteel53 on June 27, 2014, 01:10:46 PM
Congrats on the four year New York art school degree, but this rant seems to be unrelated to I-49

congrats on the anti-intellectualism.  your anti-intellectualism also seems to be unrelated to I-49.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on June 27, 2014, 03:08:00 PM
and this is at the Greenland exit
(http://i1273.photobucket.com/albums/y405/porkerface/20140620_135653_zpsa996559a.jpg)

That one is still technically correct.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on June 27, 2014, 09:24:36 PM
Congrats on the four year New York art school degree, but this rant seems to be unrelated to I-49

congrats on the anti-intellectualism.  your anti-intellectualism also seems to be unrelated to I-49.

chill out, I have a pricey education as well. I am more laughing at your usage of New York to make whatever school you went to sound high class
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Arkansastravelguy on June 27, 2014, 09:26:22 PM

Since we're talking about signs:

(https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8084/8268947069_7c0ec25419_z_d.jpg)
MODOT

(https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7319/13998205735_168b1d2b62_d.jpg)
AHTD

(https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3741/10927102465_d5be4c8b00_z_d.jpg)
LADOTD

Hmm which one looks the best?


iPhone
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Arkansastravelguy on June 27, 2014, 09:27:44 PM
(http://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/06/28/e7y7uqad.jpg)

While we're still talking about signs: Don Tyson is getting signed


iPhone
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: rickmastfan67 on June 27, 2014, 10:01:48 PM
No need for any personal attacks here guys, alright?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on June 27, 2014, 11:10:05 PM
(http://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/06/28/e7y7uqad.jpg)

While we're still talking about signs: Don Tyson is getting signed


iPhone
Glad I didn't make any bets: I was expecting Exit 71  :thumbdown:
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: apjung on June 27, 2014, 11:11:58 PM
Since we're talking about signs:

(https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8084/8268947069_7c0ec25419_z_d.jpg)
MODOT

(https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7319/13998205735_168b1d2b62_d.jpg)
AHTD

(https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3741/10927102465_d5be4c8b00_z_d.jpg)
LADOTD

Arkansas is a bit cheap since they use the u-channel post commonly seen in residential areas instead of the breakaway bolted post on a concrete base that Louisiana uses. U-channel signs usually can't withstand the high winds from passing traffic and over time the posts will bend and warp.

It's probably the only interstate that is in all three states it traverses but not connected at any of the state borders at this moment.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: robbones on June 29, 2014, 07:54:50 PM
Looks like the I-540 shield is still there. Shouldn't AHTD at least add a "To", if not outright remove it?

They HAVE removed the 540 shields approaching I-40. They also removed the free-standing 540 along WB I-40.

I agree that it should be changed to "TO 540" . It would seem to be the easiest solution.

EB 40 before the 540 interchange is still incorrect.  It still shows 540 north continues onto 40. It should state TO 49 Fayetteville in its place.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: J N Winkler on June 29, 2014, 08:34:55 PM
I don't think you understand my point. The bureaucrats seem to insist on squeezing 12" Series D numerals onto 24" Interstate highway shields when they clearly do not fit properly. If having the letters 12" tall is the top priority then they need to change them to Series C numerals.

Note: last time I checked the MUTCD SHS, there was no spec explicitly allowing these 120% larger numerals onto an Interstate highway shield. A 24" shield is supposed to have 10" Series D numerals, not 12". Proportionately it scales on up from there for 36" and 48" shields.

I agree 10" numerals do work better on Interstate shields, even set in Series D. Aesthetically, I prefer the look of state names on Interstate shields. But if the FHWA wants a neutered look on Interstate shields the 10" tall characters are going to work better. I would even be willing to bet the more generous spacing around the numerals would actually make these shields more legible than the current, very ugly shields with stupidly over-sized numerals.

The problem here is that the two references--the MUTCD and Standard Highway Signs--contradict each other.  The MUTCD (Table 2E-2) requires digits half shield height all the way down the line (US, state, and Interstate):  this means 12" on 24" shield, 18" on 36" shield, etc.  On the other hand, Standard Highway Signs requires digits 5/12 shield height all the way down the line, the digits in question being Series D on two-digit shields and Series C on three-digit shields.  Which standard governs?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on June 30, 2014, 01:50:13 AM
Since we're talking about signs:

(https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8084/8268947069_7c0ec25419_z_d.jpg)
MODOT

(https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7319/13998205735_168b1d2b62_d.jpg)
AHTD

(https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3741/10927102465_d5be4c8b00_z_d.jpg)
LADOTD

Arkansas is a bit cheap since they use the u-channel post commonly seen in residential areas instead of the breakaway bolted post on a concrete base that Louisiana uses. U-channel signs usually can't withstand the high winds from passing traffic and over time the posts will bend and warp.

It's probably the only interstate that is in all three states it traverses but not connected at any of the state borders at this moment.

Agree with the U-Channel posts... That needs to be changed.

But it's better than the wooden posts I've seen in Iowa: http://goo.gl/maps/zD2TD

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on June 30, 2014, 01:53:22 AM
Quote from: J N Winkler
The problem here is that the two references--the MUTCD and Standard Highway Signs--contradict each other.  The MUTCD (Table 2E-2) requires digits half shield height all the way down the line (US, state, and Interstate):  this means 12" on 24" shield, 18" on 36" shield, etc.  On the other hand, Standard Highway Signs requires digits 5/12 shield height all the way down the line, the digits in question being Series D on two-digit shields and Series C on three-digit shields.  Which standard governs?

Common sense in terms of what actually fits the space on an Interstate shield (what the SHS dictates) should override the contradictory rule (what the MUTCD says). 12" Series D numerals do not fit a 24" Interstate highway shield properly in most cases. The only way they would have a chance to fit properly is if they got rid of the top "Interstate" portion of the route marker and centered the numerals vertically on the shield. But that would only yield a slight gain in space for the numerals. It's either that or re-design the shields so 12" Series D numerals would fit on the 24" shield.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: apjung on June 30, 2014, 11:35:29 AM
Since we're talking about signs:

(https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8084/8268947069_7c0ec25419_z_d.jpg)
MODOT

(https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7319/13998205735_168b1d2b62_d.jpg)
AHTD

(https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3741/10927102465_d5be4c8b00_z_d.jpg)
LADOTD

Arkansas is a bit cheap since they use the u-channel post commonly seen in residential areas instead of the breakaway bolted post on a concrete base that Louisiana uses. U-channel signs usually can't withstand the high winds from passing traffic and over time the posts will bend and warp.

It's probably the only interstate that is in all three states it traverses but not connected at any of the state borders at this moment.

Agree with the U-Channel posts... That needs to be changed.

But it's better than the wooden posts I've seen in Iowa: http://goo.gl/maps/zD2TD



Speaking of wooden posts, it's seems that CA uses nothing but wooden posts on all signs. The only metal used are the gantry signs.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on June 30, 2014, 01:26:22 PM

Speaking of wooden posts, it's seems that CA uses nothing but wooden posts on all signs. The only metal used are the gantry signs.

MoDOT used to use wooden posts almost exclusively except along expressways. The last few years, they seem to be using more square metal posts and some U-channel, but not a lot. I still see wood posts, but they seem fewer and fewer these days.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on July 01, 2014, 07:45:55 AM
Quote
Citing a map showing the mean population center of the United States now on the border of Laclede and Pulaski counties in South Central Missouri, he said, “In the 2020 Census, it is quite possible that Neosho or some area within a few miles of us would be the mean population center of the United States. Meaning exactly half of the population will reside east of us and exactly half of the population will reside to the west of us. So we are perfectly located not just geographically, but in terms of the distribution of our population as well.”

This could (and should also go) in the Missouri forum, but Neosho is figuratively little more than a whisker's breadth outside the Northwest Arkansas metro.  This is a four page article on the proposed Crowder Intermodal facility (that would indeed eventually use I-49) on the Kansas City Southern railroad just south of that city.  It shows how significant this corridor is becoming to people who are connecting the dots.

http://www.neoshodailynews.com/article/20140630/NEWS/140639877/1994/NEWS
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Avalanchez71 on July 01, 2014, 11:35:27 AM
I think some folks fail to see the picture that Arkansas is trying to paint.  They may be witholding building a larger capacity highway in lieu of a smaller one to keep people in Arkansas.  If Arkansas was to build a nice four lane plus facility into MO without a stop light what can happen? 

Well MO could start offering incentives for folks to move north to move to a get a place out in the country and new subdivisions could be going up in MO.  AR keeping this a super two keeps the capacity down and keeps folks in AR.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on July 01, 2014, 12:46:55 PM
Um, not likely

Northwest Arkansas doesn't need to "trap" people, they are willingly moving there by the thousands

Missouri, not so much. None of the things people move to NWA for are available in Missouri, and that will not change with a bypass

Also, AHTD doesnt sit in their offices dreaming about the socioeconomic impact on population shifts their projects will have. They make decisions on traffic counts, engineering, etc

Also, it is Missouri holding up the completion at present. If there were thousands of folks just waiting to move north, they may have a little more urgency
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on July 01, 2014, 01:10:28 PM
I think some folks fail to see the picture that Arkansas is trying to paint.  They may be witholding building a larger capacity highway in lieu of a smaller one to keep people in Arkansas.  If Arkansas was to build a nice four lane plus facility into MO without a stop light what can happen? 

Well MO could start offering incentives for folks to move north to move to a get a place out in the country and new subdivisions could be going up in MO.  AR keeping this a super two keeps the capacity down and keeps folks in AR.

Maybe for some, but not all. Many people like the metro area. Plus SW Missouri can be a little too conservative for some people's liking. I have a friend who just moved from Fayetteville to Bella Vista. The running joke is now that Benton County is wet, Bella Vista is the place to be ;)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on July 01, 2014, 02:24:22 PM
Um, not likely

At one point last decade McDonald people were believing their high school could get as big as Bentonville in terms of population.  Don't shoot the messenger, that's what I was told (and maybe read in their paper, can't remember for sure).
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on July 01, 2014, 03:19:47 PM
Yeah and people in Arkansas City believe their high school will see the same thing once I-69 comes through. Doesn't mean it will happen
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Avalanchez71 on July 01, 2014, 03:22:15 PM
So you don't think the Delta will see the same growth.   :-P
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on July 01, 2014, 03:28:23 PM
I don't think McDonald County is going to have a high school that would be one of the largest in the state if it were in Arkansas, no

The only people moving to McDonald County are people who work in NWA. No one moves here from CA for a job in SWMO. The jobs are in Benton and Washington Co
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on July 01, 2014, 03:43:56 PM
Let's put it this way:

Assume 60% of a counties population works

Benton 221k x 0.6 = 133k
Washington 203k x 0.6 = 131k

So the Arkansas workforce in NWA is 264k.

McDonald 23k x 0.6 = 14k or 5% of the regions workforce (assuming every single soul works in Benton or Washingto  Counties)

McDonald County is pretty demographically insignificant today and probably will be forever
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Avalanchez71 on July 01, 2014, 03:55:24 PM
I don't think McDonald County is going to have a high school that would be one of the largest in the state if it were in Arkansas, no

The only people moving to McDonald County are people who work in NWA. No one moves here from CA for a job in SWMO. The jobs are in Benton and Washington Co


True but the roadway system keeps folks in NWA.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on July 01, 2014, 04:04:17 PM
I think the jobs, housing and cultural amenities keep people in NWA more than the roads. Do you ever think McDonald County will grow at a faster rate than Benton or Washington?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: agentsteel53 on July 01, 2014, 04:06:22 PM
pretty sure these five, and perhaps one and only one more, are in NWA.

(http://factmag-images.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/nwa4.11.2012.jpg)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on July 01, 2014, 05:23:38 PM
I don't think McDonald County is going to have a high school that would be one of the largest in the state if it were in Arkansas, no

The only people moving to McDonald County are people who work in NWA. No one moves here from CA for a job in SWMO. The jobs are in Benton and Washington Co


True but the roadway system keeps folks in NWA.

Well, Arkansas doesn't have John Paul Hammerschmidt in the US House anymore to bring home the pork, so we build roads as we have the money, though I honestly believe some of our existing roads could be better maintained rather than constantly building new. But I'm not in charge of state highway policy.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: AHTD on July 01, 2014, 06:17:37 PM
Well stay tuned.... you're about to see a shift away from new construction to just that- taking care of what we have.
 
This is not an official statement other than the fact Director Scott Bennett has floated this before the Commission as they look to prepare the next STIP.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on July 01, 2014, 08:49:38 PM
71 below Artist's Point is in really bad shape. :(
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on July 01, 2014, 11:42:27 PM
Well stay tuned.... you're about to see a shift away from new construction to just that- taking care of what we have.
 
This is not an official statement other than the fact Director Scott Bennett has floated this before the Commission as they look to prepare the next STIP.

Blast.

Oh well...I-49 was a fun dream while it lasted.  ;-)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on July 02, 2014, 01:56:01 AM
McDonald County is bound to grow some, if just from people who move to the area and would prefer to live in the countryside.

Is there an advantage to living in Missouri and working in Arkansas? What are the differences between Missouri and Arkansas in terms of cost of living, taxes, license fees, etc?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Arkansastravelguy on July 03, 2014, 09:59:18 PM
(http://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/07/04/ybu6y9yg.jpg)

This new sign showed up at the new Don Tyson interchange and I must say it is a huge improvement! Love it!


iPhone
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on July 03, 2014, 10:04:22 PM
(http://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/07/04/ybu6y9yg.jpg)

This new sign showed up at the new Don Tyson interchange and I must say it is a huge improvement! Love it!


iPhone

Ribbon cutting for the new intetrchange will be Monday, July 7 at 1pm
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on July 03, 2014, 10:44:28 PM
(http://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/07/04/ybu6y9yg.jpg)

This new sign showed up at the new Don Tyson interchange and I must say it is a huge improvement! Love it!


iPhone

Saw that today too. Tried to get a pic but failed. That sign is BEAUTIFUL! I think it was designed by Garver, with the rest of the project, not AHTD
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on July 03, 2014, 11:27:40 PM

Speaking of wooden posts, it's seems that CA uses nothing but wooden posts on all signs. The only metal used are the gantry signs.

MoDOT used to use wooden posts almost exclusively except along expressways. The last few years, they seem to be using more square metal posts and some U-channel, but not a lot. I still see wood posts, but they seem fewer and fewer these days.

I remember seeing wooden posts on US 71 north of Jasper back in the early-mid '80s on the expressway section. 

Kansas also used to use wooden posts, but I don't think they do anymore.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on July 07, 2014, 01:01:04 PM
Here is an article on the Don Tyson parkway opening today off I-49 in Springdale. (http://www.nwaonline.com/news/2014/jul/07/new-interchange-open-i-49-springdale/?latest)

Timely.  Just last week,  Hillshire Farm agreed to be acquired by Tyson. (http://www.thecitywire.com/node/33716#.U7avmfldXUR)  This would make Tyson Foods (using 2014 Fortune 500 numbers) the #75 company on that list, and will make Tyson (which was already the world's largest beef/pork/chicken processor) to meat what Procter & Gamble is to consumer products, Coca-Cola is to non-dairy beverages and General Mills is to breakfast food/baking items...all the brands below will be under the Tyson umbrella as of September 27th.  There have been, are and likely will be a lot of people flying into NWA Regional Airport to drive up this parkway to Tyson hq.  Never though I'd see things like this (and Walmart) happening in Northwest Arkansas.

(http://www.brazil.com.bz/images/tyson.jpg)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on July 07, 2014, 01:29:20 PM
Here is an article on the Don Tyson parkway opening today off I-49 in Springdale. (http://www.nwaonline.com/news/2014/jul/07/new-interchange-open-i-49-springdale/?latest)

Timely.  Just last week,  Hillshire Farm agreed to be acquired by Tyson. (http://www.thecitywire.com/node/33716#.U7avmfldXUR)  This would make Tyson Foods (using 2014 Fortune 500 numbers) the #75 company on that list, and will make Tyson (which was already the world's largest beef/pork/chicken processor) to meat what Procter & Gamble is to consumer products, Coca-Cola is to non-dairy beverages and General Mills is to breakfast food/baking items...all the brands below will be under the Tyson umbrella as of September 27th.  There have been, are and likely will be a lot of people flying into NWA Regional Airport to drive up this parkway to Tyson hq.  Never though I'd see things like this (and Walmart) happening in Northwest Arkansas.

(http://www.brazil.com.bz/images/tyson.jpg)

I miss the "original" Mexican Original: their corn chips were the best, until Tyson bought them out and ruined everything :(
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on July 07, 2014, 02:06:24 PM
Here is an article on the Don Tyson parkway opening today off I-49 in Springdale. (http://www.nwaonline.com/news/2014/jul/07/new-interchange-open-i-49-springdale/?latest)

Timely.  Just last week,  Hillshire Farm agreed to be acquired by Tyson. (http://www.thecitywire.com/node/33716#.U7avmfldXUR)  This would make Tyson Foods (using 2014 Fortune 500 numbers) the #75 company on that list, and will make Tyson (which was already the world's largest beef/pork/chicken processor) to meat what Procter & Gamble is to consumer products, Coca-Cola is to non-dairy beverages and General Mills is to breakfast food/baking items...all the brands below will be under the Tyson umbrella as of September 27th.  There have been, are and likely will be a lot of people flying into NWA Regional Airport to drive up this parkway to Tyson hq.  Never though I'd see things like this (and Walmart) happening in Northwest Arkansas.

(http://www.brazil.com.bz/images/tyson.jpg)

I miss the "original" Mexican Original: their corn chips were the best, until Tyson bought them out and ruined everything :(

 :eyebrow: Though there's no "perfect pizza" I'm guessing in the grocery store refrigerators, I wonder what would happen if they buy, say, Totino's?  That being said, I'm very grateful that the Hillshire brands remain in American hands.  Tyson outbid a Brazilian firm for it.  A Chinese firm now owns Smithfield meats.  The "BRICS" nations are turning hostile to the U. S. dollar (can't say I blame them given our decisions right now).  Keeping these brands American may have more benefits than we will know, and I'm saying this even though I'm heartily involved with web ministries to help the people of Brazil.  Plus, it doesn't seem proper for names like "Ball Park franks" and "State Fair corn dogs" to be anything but USA-owned.

Back to highway matters, it appears this was completed a month ahead of schedule? To AHTD, City of Springdale and/or whomever was involved, congratulations, and job well done on the timetable.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Avalanchez71 on July 07, 2014, 04:13:37 PM
That will drive traffic over to XNA.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Arkansastravelguy on July 07, 2014, 04:36:28 PM
(http://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/07/08/e3y8enad.jpg)(http://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/07/08/5aduguba.jpg)(http://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/07/08/apasy2ag.jpg)(http://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/07/08/eva9azys.jpg)(http://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/07/08/u9uhydaq.jpg)(http://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/07/08/5ute9upa.jpg)(http://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/07/08/eqyrynaj.jpg)(http://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/07/08/ujyqudap.jpg)

New Don Tyson Pkwy


iPhone
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on July 07, 2014, 04:41:17 PM
Quote from: Arkansastravelguy
(http://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/07/04/ybu6y9yg.jpg)

It's not as bad as neutered shields with over-sized numerals. However, the numerals are positioned too close to the Interstate header. They need to be shifted downward a bit into the proper position where the "Arkansas" state name could be added whether it was actually added or not. It would look more balanced that way.

One other note: while I do prefer FHWA Series Gothic numerals for route markers, I don't like the "9". It looks like it is floating above the baseline. That appearance is even more exaggerated on the 24" shields with 12" numerals.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on July 07, 2014, 04:47:14 PM
That will drive traffic over to XNA.

Hope so, but more likely it will be seeing people from XNA for now.

Arkansastravelguy, thanks for the photos.  This was a big enough "to-do" that a TV station or two carried the ribbon-cutting, opening live.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on July 07, 2014, 08:47:50 PM
Just wait until they start in on the roundabout at 56th and Don Tyson...y'all will love that
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on July 07, 2014, 09:56:50 PM
Just wait until they start in on the roundabout at 56th and Don Tyson...y'all will love that
Only if I go to Arvest Ballpark ;)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on July 08, 2014, 02:43:14 AM
(http://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/07/04/ybu6y9yg.jpg)

This new sign showed up at the new Don Tyson interchange and I must say it is a huge improvement! Love it!


iPhone

Huge improvement, how?  That shield is awful (kerning seems off), and doesn't conform to the rest of the I-49 shields in NWA!  Not to mention my OCD is going off.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on July 08, 2014, 02:50:22 AM
Just wait until they start in on the roundabout at 56th and Don Tyson...y'all will love that
Please tell me you're joking about that.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on July 08, 2014, 07:50:54 AM
Nope, its in design I believe
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on July 08, 2014, 09:30:34 AM
Google Maps has updated its imagery of the Bella Vista Bypass:

https://maps.google.com/maps?q=Hiwasse,+AR&hl=en&ll=36.442276,-94.354019&spn=0.051371,0.077162&sll=33.605899,-91.760387&sspn=0.10637,0.154324&oq=hiwasse,+AR&t=h&hnear=Hiwasse,+Benton+County,+Arkansas&z=14
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Avalanchez71 on July 08, 2014, 10:36:14 AM
Was that area not sold as quiet mountain vistas?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on July 08, 2014, 11:04:08 AM
Nope, its in design I believe
I can find nothing on Springdale's Master Street Plan.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on July 08, 2014, 11:42:33 AM
From today's Ft. Smith edition of The City Wire, about the proposed I-49 Arkansas River bridge:

Quote

Their are two sections of I-49 in western Arkansas without designated funding or engineering work. The shortest is the 15-mile section between the I-40/I-49 interchange near Alma and across the Arkansas River into Barling. That work, according to Randy Ort with the Arkansas Highway & Transportation Department, will cost in today’s dollars around $350 million. That’s about $23.3 million per mile.

...

Thicksten, a former Arkansas legislator from Alma who does not hold an official position with the I-49 Coalition but has become an advocate for the “I-49 Build the Bridge”  push, said lobbying for precise engineering on the bridge is key to obtaining federal and state dollars for the 15-mile section.

“It’s the cornerstone, if you would, for everything that will happen for everything to connect that road between Alma and Texarkana,”  Thicksten said. “If you don’t do the engineering, and don’t get firm figures, then our federal legislators and our state legislators can’t do anything. You can’t go to Congress, you can’t go to Congressman (Steve) Womack and say, ”˜This is about what we think it will cost.’ That won’t work with this. That just won’t work.”

Thicksten said part of the lobbying push is to convince the AHTD to move forward on precise engineering work. He admitted that Congressional inability to restore future solvency to the federal Highway Trust Fund “puts in jeopardy”  existing highway projects and causes state highway agencies to be reluctant to study future project.

“But what we’d like is to get a commitment from them (AHTD), as much as they can, on this because Congress, at some point, Congress will get this (Highway Trust Fund) done. ... Let’s not wait, let’s be prepared to go forward,”  he said.

http://www.thecitywire.com/node/33760#.U7wQuvldXUQ

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on July 08, 2014, 06:17:49 PM
Nope, its in design I believe
I can find nothing on Springdale's Master Street Plan.

I've seen it, Crafton Tull is doing the design I believe
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on July 09, 2014, 01:05:57 AM
Nope, its in design I believe
I can find nothing on Springdale's Master Street Plan.

I've seen it, Crafton Tull is doing the design I believe
Damn.  I know (and it's been said) that Springdale is going to exceed Fayetteville, eventually population wise.
Don't put in roundabouts at potential major intersections!  Roundabouts work great on lower traffic roads.

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on July 09, 2014, 01:25:12 AM
Roundabouts work better on low speed roads.  The roundabouts in, say, Kansas, for example the one at the US 59/169 split near Garnett is horrible.  It's tiny, and the recommended speed is something like 10 MPH.  It's almost too small for big trucks.  If you're going to have a roundabout on a high speed road, it needs to be a really big one.  The roundabout east of Kansas City at MO 7 and MO 78 isn't too bad.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on July 09, 2014, 07:49:17 AM
It is plenty big IIRC
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on July 10, 2014, 06:33:13 PM
So I heard the engineers with Bentonville are really unhappy with the proposed $10 million roundabout

If Missouri doesn't pass the funding for the BVB, it will be around 10 years before MoDOT funds the BVB. So since the roundabout contract is for 700ish working days (not including winters), it will be at least 3 years (probably 4) before the roundabout is built. Meaning it will have a useful life of 5 years before it begins to be torn out for the SPUI
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: RBBrittain on July 12, 2014, 02:19:22 AM
pretty sure these five, and perhaps one and only one more, are in NWA.

(http://factmag-images.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/nwa4.11.2012.jpg)
Alas, Compton, AR is in Newton County -- just a little too far east for "our" NWA. ;)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: robbones on July 12, 2014, 04:26:42 PM
AHTD,
 
through trucks sign at exit 61 SB still says 540
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on July 12, 2014, 05:14:27 PM
AHTD,
 
through trucks sign at exit 61 SB still says 540

Also in Fayetteville at 71 and S. School.
There's also a NO Access to I-540 in Greenland at CR 65 and Wilson St.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Arkansastravelguy on July 12, 2014, 08:31:23 PM
(http://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/07/13/mezy7ymu.jpg)
49 and Garland


iPhone
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on July 12, 2014, 11:11:34 PM
(http://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/07/13/mezy7ymu.jpg)
49 and Garland

Probably city, is my guess.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Arkansastravelguy on July 12, 2014, 11:17:14 PM

(http://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/07/13/mezy7ymu.jpg)
49 and Garland

Probably city, is my guess.
I'm thinking that as well


iPhone
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on July 12, 2014, 11:44:45 PM
Yep, city blade signs are the city's responsibility to change.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on July 16, 2014, 04:34:44 PM
Quote
The Arkansas portion of the road is already funded, and partially complete, but the highway department won't build the final section until Missouri plans to extend I-49 to the state line. The 3/4 cent tax would pay for more than 800 projects statewide, including the missing link in I-49. Missouri voters will decide on August 5.

Once completed, the bypass will change the flow of traffic to and from Missouri, and the city of Gravette wants to revitalize its downtown now, to draw new investment as crews continue work on the road.

"This downtown used to be the heart of Gravette," says Mayor Byron Warren.

Unfortunately, the buildings on Main Street have seen better days.

"They are kind of in disrepair from the roofs leaking," Warren says.

The city is making a new push to draw businesses downtown to prepare for thousands of drivers expected once the Bella Vista bypass is complete.

"Bringing back what we've lost is our main focus," Warren says. "The traffic is going to grow by 3-4 more thousand cars through here daily, and it will make Gravette a little bit busier town. We want to make sure that when people get off on the exit they'll have things to, to come to shop and to eat, and enjoy our little community."

http://www.nwahomepage.com/fulltext-news/d/story/gravette-prepares-for-bella-vista-bypass/17837/lW4ZTEtq-kSEAUwA2UE54Q

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on July 17, 2014, 08:19:05 PM
I'm not fully sure, even though we've been talking about it here, why I-49 is suddenly getting more headlines in places that hadn't been discussing it, but I'm guessing it's because more and more are recognizing what an incredibly key piece of work this thing will be:

Arkansas 4th district (south Arkansas) congressional candidates discuss I-49 and other issues. (http://www.thecitywire.com/node/33897#.U8hnSPldXUQ)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on July 17, 2014, 09:53:40 PM
That was basically the point of the designation
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on July 18, 2014, 07:47:26 AM
This article (http://www.nwaonline.com/news/2014/jul/18/planners-told-interstate-49-bella-vista/) reports that the Bella Vista Bypass would be southwest Missouri's top priority if Missouri voters approve the transportation sales tax and that Arkansas Highway Commissioner Dick Trammel is strongly hinting that Arkansas would then be able to come up with the extra $50 million to complete the Arkansas section of the BVB as a four-lane facility:

Quote
Finishing Interstate 49 around Bella Vista would be a priority in southwest Missouri if voters approve a tax Aug. 5 dedicated to building and improving state highways, regional planners were told Thursday.
"I would say No. 1 is the Bella Vista Bypass," Jason Ray, of the Harry S. Truman Coordinating Council, told members of a regional planning committee in Springdale." If the sales tax passes, it will pay for the extension of I-49 to the state line.
Arkansas will be ready to go on the last 2.5-mile section from Benton County 34 to the state line when Missouri is ready to do its final 7-mile section, highway officials said recently during a ceremony marking the opening of the bypass around Hiwasse.
Dick Trammel, Arkansas Highway commissioner, said if Missouri voters approve the tax and the project north of the state line becomes a reality, it could speed up construction of all four lanes on this side of the line. Arkansas needs an estimated $50 million more to finish the bypass as a four-lane divided highway.
"If they get it, maybe we can get our other two lanes," Trammel said.

A $13.7 million project is under way to extend the bypass from Hiwasse north to Benton County 34 on the west side of Bella Vista and should be complete before the end of this year. The state has awarded a $52.6 million contract to extend the bypass east from Hiwasse to a new interchange on I-49 on the north side of Bentonville. That section is expected to open by the spring of 2016 ....
Ray said polling has been positive but also indicates the Missouri vote will be close. Business entities have shown support for the measure but several environmental groups have come out against the tax because it includes only highway projects, Ray said. Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon is on record opposing the tax.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on July 18, 2014, 08:59:46 PM
Why is their governor against it?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on July 18, 2014, 09:07:37 PM
Why is their governor against it?

That's a huge head-scratcher. Jay Nixon is a Democrat, so he can't be philosophically against gov't spending. He is term-limited, so he can't run again. And he's a two-time loser in running for the U.S. Senate, so I don't know what kind of future he's looking to lay the groundwork for. The only thing I can reckon is the enviros have his ear.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on July 18, 2014, 09:08:02 PM
Why is their governor against it?

Here is a link to a Kansas City Star blog about Gov. Nixon's opposition:

http://www.kansascity.com/opinion/opn-columns-blogs/yael-t-abouhalkah/article453179/Jay-Nixon-rips-Missouri%E2%80%99s-huge-transportation-sales-tax-increase.html
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on July 19, 2014, 02:43:54 AM
So I heard the engineers with Bentonville are really unhappy with the proposed $10 million roundabout

If Missouri doesn't pass the funding for the BVB, it will be around 10 years before MoDOT funds the BVB. So since the roundabout contract is for 700ish working days (not including winters), it will be at least 3 years (probably 4) before the roundabout is built. Meaning it will have a useful life of 5 years before it begins to be torn out for the SPUI

Unreal... Bentonville has some pull, especially with Walmart.  Affix a Walmart/Walton name to the interchange and/or highway... Just a crazy idea!

I live here... anything to get stuff built/improved... This area has some work to do!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on July 19, 2014, 09:06:39 AM
Well right now it is Missouri in the way of progress
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on July 19, 2014, 09:33:17 AM
Why is their governor against it?

That's a huge head-scratcher. Jay Nixon is a Democrat, so he can't be philosophically against gov't spending. He is term-limited, so he can't run again. And he's a two-time loser in running for the U.S. Senate, so I don't know what kind of future he's looking to lay the groundwork for. The only thing I can reckon is the enviros have his ear.

That's precisely what I was thinking, Roadhog.  Everything I've seen about him tells me he's a true believer as well.  And those who fall into that category today are not for progress whatsoever, just like their historic counterparts.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on July 19, 2014, 10:07:26 AM
So I heard the engineers with Bentonville are really unhappy with the proposed $10 million roundabout

If Missouri doesn't pass the funding for the BVB, it will be around 10 years before MoDOT funds the BVB. So since the roundabout contract is for 700ish working days (not including winters), it will be at least 3 years (probably 4) before the roundabout is built. Meaning it will have a useful life of 5 years before it begins to be torn out for the SPUI

Unreal... Bentonville has some pull, especially with Walmart.  Affix a Walmart/Walton name to the interchange and/or highway... Just a crazy idea!

I live here... anything to get stuff built/improved... This area has some work to do!

In Missouri that would be John Q Hammons, but his sphere of influence was predominantly Springfield. :|
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: hizerbla on July 21, 2014, 08:45:55 AM
Does anyone know what is happening at the Wagon Wheel exit (76) in Springdale, AR?  Equipment has been moving in and a job board has been set up but I can't find any info posted on it.  Thanks.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on July 21, 2014, 10:23:32 AM
Does anyone know what is happening at the Wagon Wheel exit (76) in Springdale, AR?  Equipment has been moving in and a job board has been set up but I can't find any info posted on it.  Thanks.

Maybe another widening project?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on July 21, 2014, 03:30:57 PM
Quote
This section will be I-549, our 6.5 miles, until it connects to I-49.”
I-549? Are they referring to the Chaffee Crossing portion? I assume this was a typo and they meant AR 549?
This later article (http://www.thv11.com/story/news/local/2014/06/20/alma-to-mark-designation-of-i-49-in-west-arkansas/11105495/) reports that it will be "Highway 549", which indicates that it will not receive an I-549 designation and will indeed be AR 549

I have a more authoritative source, Arkansas State Highway Commission Minute Order 2014-047 (http://www.arkansashighways.com/minute_orders/2014/041614_minute%20orders.pdf), which orders that this section will be dually signed as Highway 549 and Future Interstate 49 (page 16/27 of pdf; page 14 of document):

Quote
WHEREAS, the Department has received approval from the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) to designate this segment as Future Interstate 49, contingent upon Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) approval.
NOW THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that upon approval by the FHWA and upon official notification by the Deputy Director and Chief Engineer, the following changes are hereby made to the State Highway System as shown on the attached sketch.
- The newly constructed portion of roadway from Highway 71 to the junction with Highway 22 in the vicinity of Fort Smith and Barling is hereby designated as Highway 549, Section 6.
- The newly constructed portion of roadway from Highway 71 to the junction with Highway 22 in the vicinity of Fort Smith and Barling will be dual-signed as Highway 549 and Future Interstate 49.

AHTD, has the Department submitted an application to FHWA for this section of Future I-49?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Avalanchez71 on July 21, 2014, 04:44:48 PM
If they can dual sign that why don't they dual sign elsewhere?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: rte66man on July 21, 2014, 07:56:40 PM
Does anyone know what is happening at the Wagon Wheel exit (76) in Springdale, AR?  Equipment has been moving in and a job board has been set up but I can't find any info posted on it.  Thanks.

Isn't that where the US412 bypass is supposed to go?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on July 21, 2014, 08:03:53 PM
Does anyone know what is happening at the Wagon Wheel exit (76) in Springdale, AR?  Equipment has been moving in and a job board has been set up but I can't find any info posted on it.  Thanks.

Isn't that where the US412 bypass is supposed to go?
Yes, but I'm not sure they've actually set a starting date.  I think the next widening project is Wagon Wheel to Elm Springs Rd, so that may be what's coming up.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: hizerbla on July 21, 2014, 09:09:43 PM
The work at the exit is at the intersection of Wagon Wheel and Puppy Creek rd.  Work has been done today, but it looks like their are putting a second lane on the north side of Wagon Wheel for a right turn.  If this is the only thing they are going to do, it will not help the congestion trying to get onto I-49 from Wagon Wheel heading south.

 I just don't understand why the state will not give any kind of answer as to what they are going to do or why they allowed the cluster to happen.  If I remember right, Wagon Wheel on and off ramps are just about the only ones in NWA not signed or lighted.  just my opinion in frustration :banghead:.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on July 21, 2014, 10:41:15 PM
The work at the exit is at the intersection of Wagon Wheel and Puppy Creek rd.  Work has been done today, but it looks like their are putting a second lane on the north side of Wagon Wheel for a right turn.  If this is the only thing they are going to do, it will not help the congestion trying to get onto I-49 from Wagon Wheel heading south.

 I just don't understand why the state will not give any kind of answer as to what they are going to do or why they allowed the cluster to happen.  If I remember right, Wagon Wheel on and off ramps are just about the only ones in NWA not signed or lighted.  just my opinion in frustration :banghead:.

I believe the on-ramps ARE signed. Given the layout of the interchange, the SB on-ramp is off Wagon Wheel just south of the Puppy Creek intersection.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Arkansastravelguy on July 21, 2014, 10:52:34 PM

Does anyone know what is happening at the Wagon Wheel exit (76) in Springdale, AR?  Equipment has been moving in and a job board has been set up but I can't find any info posted on it.  Thanks.

Isn't that where the US412 bypass is supposed to go?
The 412 bypass will be right at the Goad Springs bridge between exit 76 and 78.


iPhone
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Arkansastravelguy on July 21, 2014, 10:54:24 PM
(http://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/07/22/yhemedes.jpg)


iPhone
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Arkansastravelguy on July 21, 2014, 10:57:37 PM

The work at the exit is at the intersection of Wagon Wheel and Puppy Creek rd.  Work has been done today, but it looks like their are putting a second lane on the north side of Wagon Wheel for a right turn.  If this is the only thing they are going to do, it will not help the congestion trying to get onto I-49 from Wagon Wheel heading south.

 I just don't understand why the state will not give any kind of answer as to what they are going to do or why they allowed the cluster to happen.  If I remember right, Wagon Wheel on and off ramps are just about the only ones in NWA not signed or lighted.  just my opinion in frustration :banghead:.

I believe the on-ramps ARE signed. Given the layout of the interchange, the SB on-ramp is off Wagon Wheel just south of the Puppy Creek intersection.
Those ramps are signed. They are designed for low volume traffic... Which was fine at the time. No one anticipated the amount of growth Benton county has endured, especially Lowell and northern Springdale. ADHT doesn't have the money to keep up with such rapid growth.


iPhone
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: hizerbla on July 22, 2014, 08:59:32 AM
Okay, after rereading my post and seeing the other answers given I may have miss-worded some of the comments.  Yes, the entire intersection is "signed" with I-49 signs and no issues there.  What I meant was the use of common STOP Signs for the ease of traffic management.  Currently there is a single stop sign at the end of Wagon Wheel (west bound) and vehicles have to wait for the never ending traffic coming off of the south bound ramp, on Puppy Creek.  My suggestion to AHTD is to add two more signs to make it a three way stop for each vehicle to have the same equal chance of travel.  I understand money is an issue, but some common sense in traffic management in this area would be helpful.  Thanks from a newbie.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on July 22, 2014, 10:36:00 AM
Okay, after rereading my post and seeing the other answers given I may have miss-worded some of the comments.  Yes, the entire intersection is "signed" with I-49 signs and no issues there.  What I meant was the use of common STOP Signs for the ease of traffic management.  Currently there is a single stop sign at the end of Wagon Wheel (west bound) and vehicles have to wait for the never ending traffic coming off of the south bound ramp, on Puppy Creek.  My suggestion to AHTD is to add two more signs to make it a three way stop for each vehicle to have the same equal chance of travel.  I understand money is an issue, but some common sense in traffic management in this area would be helpful.  Thanks from a newbie.
I'm surprised there's not a Stop on Puppy Creek Rd at Wagon Wheel.  Of course, Wagon Wheel is seeing a lot more traffic than it originally did since it was realigned at the east end .
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: AHTD on July 22, 2014, 10:51:07 AM
Does anyone know what is happening at the Wagon Wheel exit (76) in Springdale, AR?  Equipment has been moving in and a job board has been set up but I can't find any info posted on it.  Thanks.

Isn't that where the US412 bypass is supposed to go?
Yes, but I'm not sure they've actually set a starting date.  I think the next widening project is Wagon Wheel to Elm Springs Rd, so that may be what's coming up.

The next travel lane widening project scheduled for letting was from New Hope Road to U.S. Highway 62/State Highway 102 (AHTD Job No. 090305), but it has been pulled form the letting tomorrow due to uncertainty with the Highway Trust Fund.
 
Next on the schedule should be the U.S. Highway 412 Bypass. Should let sometime this year, and it's funded by the half-cent sales tax, so should be a go.
 
 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: AHTD on July 22, 2014, 04:16:54 PM
Quote
This section will be I-549, our 6.5 miles, until it connects to I-49.”
I-549? Are they referring to the Chaffee Crossing portion? I assume this was a typo and they meant AR 549?
This later article (http://www.thv11.com/story/news/local/2014/06/20/alma-to-mark-designation-of-i-49-in-west-arkansas/11105495/) reports that it will be "Highway 549", which indicates that it will not receive an I-549 designation and will indeed be AR 549

I have a more authoritative source, Arkansas State Highway Commission Minute Order 2014-047 (http://www.arkansashighways.com/minute_orders/2014/041614_minute%20orders.pdf), which orders that this section will be dually signed as Highway 549 and Future Interstate 49 (page 16/27 of pdf; page 14 of document):

Quote
WHEREAS, the Department has received approval from the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) to designate this segment as Future Interstate 49, contingent upon Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) approval.
NOW THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that upon approval by the FHWA and upon official notification by the Deputy Director and Chief Engineer, the following changes are hereby made to the State Highway System as shown on the attached sketch.
- The newly constructed portion of roadway from Highway 71 to the junction with Highway 22 in the vicinity of Fort Smith and Barling is hereby designated as Highway 549, Section 6.
- The newly constructed portion of roadway from Highway 71 to the junction with Highway 22 in the vicinity of Fort Smith and Barling will be dual-signed as Highway 549 and Future Interstate 49.

AHTD, has the Department submitted an application to FHWA for this section of Future I-49?

We are not required to run a "Future" route signing by FHWA. That only requires approval by the AASHTO Special Committee on Route Numbering. And we have that:
 
http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/aashto-I-49-approval.pdf (http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/aashto-I-49-approval.pdf)
 
This map is referenced in the above document:
http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49_Route_Request.pdf (http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49_Route_Request.pdf)
 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: rickmastfan67 on July 22, 2014, 06:29:52 PM
So AHTD, when might I-49 'North' be getting it's new exit numbers so that there is no chance of duplication when the 'South' segment gains it's I-49 shields later this year?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: AHTD on July 23, 2014, 11:00:29 AM
Our current understanding is that I-49 route markers south of Texarkana will be installed AFTER the ribbon cutting (currently looking more toward November).
 
Once that is complete, the next step will be to renumber the exits. Yes, there will be a (hopefully short) timeframe where you have two stretches of I-49 that restart exit numbers. But since they aren't contiguous, that shouldn't be a problem for the short duration.
 
We have previously published the list of anticipated exit numbers in this forum. Can't remember which thread, so we'll post again below. Note some of this data is subject to change. Not sure if these maps account for the newly opened Don Tyson Parkway interchange.
 
Louisiana State Line to Polk County Line
http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49_Exits_1.pdf (http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49_Exits_1.pdf)
 
Sevier County Line to Crawford County Line
http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49_Exits_2.pdf (http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49_Exits_2.pdf)
 
Sebastian County Line to the Missouri State Line
http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49_Exits_3.pdf (http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49_Exits_3.pdf)
 
 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on July 23, 2014, 11:26:50 AM
Our current understanding is that I-49 route markers south of Texarkana will be installed AFTER the ribbon cutting (currently looking more toward November).
 
Once that is complete, the next step will be to renumber the exits. Yes, there will be a (hopefully short) timeframe where you have two stretches of I-49 that restart exit numbers. But since they aren't contiguous, that shouldn't be a problem for the short duration.
 
We have previously published the list of anticipated exit numbers in this forum. Can't remember which thread, so we'll post again below. Note some of this data is subject to change. Not sure if these maps account for the newly opened Don Tyson Parkway interchange.
 
Louisiana State Line to Polk County Line
http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49_Exits_1.pdf (http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49_Exits_1.pdf)
 
Sevier County Line to Crawford County Line
http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49_Exits_2.pdf (http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49_Exits_2.pdf)
 
Sebastian County Line to the Missouri State Line
http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49_Exits_3.pdf (http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49_Exits_3.pdf)
 
 
Will the Ft Smith to Barling section be posted or will that wait until more of the highway has been built?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on July 24, 2014, 01:03:54 AM
Our current understanding is that I-49 route markers south of Texarkana will be installed AFTER the ribbon cutting (currently looking more toward November).
 
Once that is complete, the next step will be to renumber the exits. Yes, there will be a (hopefully short) timeframe where you have two stretches of I-49 that restart exit numbers. But since they aren't contiguous, that shouldn't be a problem for the short duration.
 
We have previously published the list of anticipated exit numbers in this forum. Can't remember which thread, so we'll post again below. Note some of this data is subject to change. Not sure if these maps account for the newly opened Don Tyson Parkway interchange.
 
Louisiana State Line to Polk County Line
http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49_Exits_1.pdf (http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49_Exits_1.pdf)
 
Sevier County Line to Crawford County Line
http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49_Exits_2.pdf (http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49_Exits_2.pdf)
 
Sebastian County Line to the Missouri State Line
http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49_Exits_3.pdf (http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49_Exits_3.pdf)

Are there really going to be only two interchanges in Sevier County?  That's quite a stretch with no access.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on July 24, 2014, 08:57:51 AM
This article (http://www.nwaonline.com/news/2014/jul/18/planners-told-interstate-49-bella-vista/) reports that the Bella Vista Bypass would be southwest Missouri's top priority if Missouri voters approve the transportation sales tax and that Arkansas Highway Commissioner Dick Trammel is strongly hinting that Arkansas would then be able to come up with the extra $50 million to complete the Arkansas section of the BVB as a four-lane facility

This article (http://swtimes.com/news/state-news/arkansas-highway-commission-wants-hear-congressional-candidates) reports that AHTD Director Scott Bennett advised the Arkansas State Highway Commission on July 23 that Arkansas needs to be prepared to come up with the $50 million to complete the BVB if Missouri's transportation sales tax passes on August 5:

Quote
Also Wednesday, Bennett told the commission that Missouri voters will decide Aug. 5 on a proposed 3/4 cent sales tax increase to fund highway projects. Included in those projects would be completion of Missouri’s portion of the Bella Vista Bypass, which is to link Arkansas and Missouri and become part of the I-49 corridor.
The bypass cannot be designated as part of I-49 until both the Arkansas and Missouri portions of it are completed as four-lane highways that meet interstate standards. Completing Arkansas’ portion of the bypass would cost $50 million, Bennett said.
“That’s the last gap between I-40 and Alma and Kansas City, so if Missouri’s tax passes Aug. 5 … we need to be prepared to consider how we come up with that $50 million to complete this interstate segment,”
he said.
Completion of the entire Arkansas stretch of I-49 reaching across the western side of the state between Missouri and Louisiana would cost $2.7 billion, Bennett said.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: AHTD on July 24, 2014, 10:30:15 AM
Our current understanding is that I-49 route markers south of Texarkana will be installed AFTER the ribbon cutting (currently looking more toward November).
 
Once that is complete, the next step will be to renumber the exits. Yes, there will be a (hopefully short) timeframe where you have two stretches of I-49 that restart exit numbers. But since they aren't contiguous, that shouldn't be a problem for the short duration.
 
We have previously published the list of anticipated exit numbers in this forum. Can't remember which thread, so we'll post again below. Note some of this data is subject to change. Not sure if these maps account for the newly opened Don Tyson Parkway interchange.
 
Louisiana State Line to Polk County Line
http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49_Exits_1.pdf (http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49_Exits_1.pdf)
 
Sevier County Line to Crawford County Line
http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49_Exits_2.pdf (http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49_Exits_2.pdf)
 
Sebastian County Line to the Missouri State Line
http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49_Exits_3.pdf (http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49_Exits_3.pdf)
 
 
Will the Ft Smith to Barling section be posted or will that wait until more of the highway has been built?

Assuming you mean "Future I-49" signs... yes. At this time it is intended to be signed AR 549/Future I-49. Probably similar to the sign that exists on the completed portion of the BVB.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Wayward Memphian on July 24, 2014, 03:14:17 PM
Just came back from Texas yesterday, the over the road signs from the Okie line to mile maker 11 still show 540 North Fayetteville. It changes to I 49 at the sign right at that 11 mile maker. A little OT but what is OK during on the north side of I-40 just past the Arkansas line near Sallisaw.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on July 27, 2014, 03:44:29 PM
JMO, but...I've seen a sparse few signs for the highway funding tax being voted on in Missouri a week from Tuesday (in Springfield this weekend).

Yet my Mother is very much a liberal and has been for years, but says she's voting against the highway tax.  And again, there just aren't that many campaign signs I've seen for this here.  Now, Springfield is a more conservative area than St.L or K.C., so maybe the sentiment is different there.

Nonetheless, I won't be surprised if it goes down in flames.  And NWA gets to be the largest over-500,000 metro area without a through interstate (I know Fresno doesn't have one but it appears Fresno metro does) in the U.S.A. for awhile longer.   :-/  Even though McDonald County, MO is in our metro we don't have a say, but that's what state sovereignity should be about.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on July 27, 2014, 06:25:35 PM
Missouri standing in the way of Arkansas's progress

Those uppity yankees would get a kick out of knowing they are secretly sticking it to the "backwoods hillbillies" in Arkansas if they were smart enough to know what the implications of the proposed bill were
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on July 27, 2014, 08:28:04 PM
Missouri standing in the way of Arkansas's progress


Missouri standing in the way of Arkansas, who was standing in the way of Missouri :p

And yes, the north often does have Arkansas pegged as "backwards hillbillies". Oddly enough, central Illinois sounds a bit more "southern" than Chicago ;)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: robbones on July 27, 2014, 09:04:31 PM
Today as I was heading back to my truck to hit the road, I noticed a TO I 540 on a GS  in a place that I bet nobody would even think of looking. Its in Crawford county and I need to take a pic of it before I reveal the exact location to have a snapshot of history.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on July 28, 2014, 07:22:28 AM
Missouri standing in the way of Arkansas's progress


Missouri standing in the way of Arkansas, who was standing in the way of Missouri :p

And yes, the north often does have Arkansas pegged as "backwards hillbillies". Oddly enough, central Illinois sounds a bit more "southern" than Chicago ;)

Indeed, and note, though, how some crucial Interstate connections into Chicago come through southern Illinois.  And Missouri, sticking it to the "hillbillies" of Arkansas by not completing "their" I-49, may very well be sticking it to themselves also.  (Again, noting how Texas, which has a LOT more people and $$$$ than Missouri is falling all over itself to finish "their" I-69 while promoting a finished I-49 (and I-69).)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on August 05, 2014, 09:29:52 PM
Well, looks like the Missouri Proposition 7 (the highway tax) is (http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/missouri-propositions/html_15e86acd-a148-58a1-ae79-d8452c48322b.html) going down in flames tonight.

In 10 years we may indeed see the BVP complete.  In the meantime, well, I guess west Bella Vista gets to stay rustic (at least, "quiet") for a decade longer.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on August 05, 2014, 09:34:48 PM
Well, looks like the Missouri Proposition 7 (the highway tax) is (http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/missouri-propositions/html_15e86acd-a148-58a1-ae79-d8452c48322b.html) going down in flames tonight.

In 10 years we may indeed see the BVP complete.  In the meantime, well, I guess west Bella Vista gets to stay rustic (at least, "quiet") for a decade longer.
I may be entirely wrong, but I wonder if MoDOT will pull the plug on another project to complete I-49?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on August 06, 2014, 12:37:44 AM
Latest results: 59 percent Opposed, 41 percent in Favor of the 3/4 cent tax.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on August 06, 2014, 08:35:04 AM
This article (http://5newsonline.com/2014/08/06/bella-vista-bypass-dead-ends-after-missouri-vote-fails/) reports on how the Missouri vote will delay the BVB in Arkansas:

Quote
... John McLarty, transportation study director for the Northwest Arkansas Regional Planning Commission.
“It’s not a road to nowhere, but it would be a road to a county road up in North Arkansas on the west side of Bella Vista,”  McLarty said. “But it would be much nicer to go to Pineville, MO in the Missouri portion of it.”



As previously posted over in the Missouri thread (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3239.msg299545#msg299545), even though the vote failed, it looks like Missouri is scheduled to start some grading work on the BVB in 2018.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on August 06, 2014, 10:21:49 AM
This article (http://5newsonline.com/2014/08/06/bella-vista-bypass-dead-ends-after-missouri-vote-fails/) reports on how the Missouri vote will delay the BVB in Arkansas:

Quote
... John McLarty, transportation study director for the Northwest Arkansas Regional Planning Commission.
“It’s not a road to nowhere, but it would be a road to a county road up in North Arkansas on the west side of Bella Vista,”  McLarty said. “But it would be much nicer to go to Pineville, MO in the Missouri portion of it.”



As previously posted over in the Missouri thread (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3239.msg299545#msg299545), even though the vote failed, it looks like Missouri is scheduled to start some grading work on the BVB in 2018.

Grzrd, knowing all the myriad of facts between Duluth/Winnipeg and Brownsville(Mexico)/Houston/New Orleans that have been posted here at length, I'm convinced the Missouri side of the BVP will still happen.

It just won't happen through the measure that got defeated yesterday.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on August 06, 2014, 09:20:17 PM
Cheap Republicans, too stingy to pay slightly more in taxes for something that would greatly help the citizens of Missouri.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Anthony_JK on August 06, 2014, 09:37:20 PM
To be fair, the Democratic governor of MO, Jay Nixon, publically opposed the tax hike; and several enviromental groups and public transportation groups also expressed opposition due to no transit projects being included.

But, I'm guessing that it's still the usual anti-tax/anti-government mood that mostly killed this proposal. Unless/until that changes, it looks more and more like tolls will be the future for funding major highway projects. Too bad. (At least, IMO.)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: rte66man on August 06, 2014, 10:46:01 PM
To be fair, the Democratic governor of MO, Jay Nixon, publically opposed the tax hike; and several enviromental groups and public transportation groups also expressed opposition due to no transit projects being included.

But, I'm guessing that it's still the usual anti-tax/anti-government mood that mostly killed this proposal. Unless/until that changes, it looks more and more like tolls will be the future for funding major highway projects. Too bad. (At least, IMO.)

This was a bipartisan defeat.  Issues ranged from not wanting a sales tax to pay for transportation to the already mentioned antitax folks.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on August 07, 2014, 01:04:28 AM
The next travel lane widening project scheduled for letting was from New Hope Road to U.S. Highway 62/State Highway 102 (AHTD Job No. 090305), but it has been pulled form the letting tomorrow due to uncertainty with the Highway Trust Fund.
Next on the schedule should be the U.S. Highway 412 Bypass. Should let sometime this year, and it's funded by the half-cent sales tax, so should be a go.

I hate to rehash older comments, but if anything, that stretch should be a top priority.  Why isn't this part of the Connecting Arkansas Program?  Is it not possible to transfer that stretch into that program?  I've cheated death a few times on that stretch.  :-D
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikeSantNY78 on August 07, 2014, 01:08:25 PM
To be fair, the Democratic governor of MO, Jay Nixon, publically opposed the tax hike; and several enviromental groups and public transportation groups also expressed opposition due to no transit projects being included.

But, I'm guessing that it's still the usual anti-tax/anti-government mood that mostly killed this proposal. Unless/until that changes, it looks more and more like tolls will be the future for funding major highway projects. Too bad. (At least, IMO.)
And sadly, there are no toll exits on MO's portion of the BVB to warrant an expeditious connection w/Arkansas...so square one it is again...
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on August 07, 2014, 01:11:59 PM
Cheap Republicans, too stingy to pay slightly more in taxes for something that would greatly help the citizens of Missouri.

My Mom's a JFK-era liberal Democrat and she wasn't for it, either.  When I heard her say that and saw only 2 lawn signs in the Springfield area for the transportation amendment, I had a feeling that it was doomed.  (Springfield's said to be "the northernmost southern city", but it makes Bella Vista/Bentonville look like a confederate capital.)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on August 07, 2014, 01:21:12 PM
Blue Dog Democrats, which aren't much different from conservative Republicans.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on August 07, 2014, 05:15:50 PM
Cheap Republicans, too stingy to pay slightly more in taxes for something that would greatly help the citizens of Missouri.


My Mom's a JFK-era liberal Democrat and she wasn't for it, either.  When I heard her say that and saw only 2 lawn signs in the Springfield area for the transportation amendment, I had a feeling that it was doomed.  (Springfield's said to be "the northernmost southern city", but it makes Bella Vista/Bentonville look like a confederate capital.)

Springfield is an odd place. Ultra-Conservative with a semi-underground Liberal bent.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on August 07, 2014, 06:58:50 PM
Blue Dog Democrats, which aren't much different from conservative Republicans.

Not in the least, sir.

But she is wise, and I'm guessing that she sees a lot of people hurting around her (she's a retired teacher (and was an excellent teacher while she was working) and is blessed to have a good pension) and knew they didn't need a higher tax burden than they already have, and are about to have even more.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on August 07, 2014, 07:02:27 PM
Cheap Republicans, too stingy to pay slightly more in taxes for something that would greatly help the citizens of Missouri.


My Mom's a JFK-era liberal Democrat and she wasn't for it, either.  When I heard her say that and saw only 2 lawn signs in the Springfield area for the transportation amendment, I had a feeling that it was doomed.  (Springfield's said to be "the northernmost southern city", but it makes Bella Vista/Bentonville look like a confederate capital.)
Springfield is an odd place. Ultra-Conservative with a semi-underground Liberal bent.

Indeed.  I've seen "adopt-a-mile" signs around Springfield sponsored by NORML, The southwest Missouri socialists, and some other radical causes.  Springfield tends to support conservative Republican politicians but (probably largely due to the Missouri State and Drury campus populations, and also because there are a lot of unionized workers in the city) tends to C-O-E-X-I-S-T with a lot of leftists.  The city's much more "southern" than St. Louis or Kansas City (that's not hard to do) but again, it feels much less so than northwest Arkansas three counties to the southwest.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on August 07, 2014, 09:47:22 PM
There was a nice photo of the hill at 71 hwy & I 49 interchange at Bella Vista, Bentonville interchange  progress in the Arkansas democrat Gazette today being remomed for I 49. Hope to see update photos of the work going on of that progress.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on August 07, 2014, 11:48:23 PM
Cheap Republicans, too stingy to pay slightly more in taxes for something that would greatly help the citizens of Missouri.


My Mom's a JFK-era liberal Democrat and she wasn't for it, either.  When I heard her say that and saw only 2 lawn signs in the Springfield area for the transportation amendment, I had a feeling that it was doomed.  (Springfield's said to be "the northernmost southern city", but it makes Bella Vista/Bentonville look like a confederate capital.)
Springfield is an odd place. Ultra-Conservative with a semi-underground Liberal bent.

Indeed.  I've seen "adopt-a-mile" signs around Springfield sponsored by NORML, The southwest Missouri socialists, and some other radical causes.  Springfield tends to support conservative Republican politicians but (probably largely due to the Missouri State and Drury campus populations, and also because there are a lot of unionized workers in the city) tends to C-O-E-X-I-S-T with a lot of leftists.  The city's much more "southern" than St. Louis or Kansas City (that's not hard to do) but again, it feels much less so than northwest Arkansas three counties to the southwest.
There's a section of Grant near Grand that is (or was) adopted by a Druidic group.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Arkansastravelguy on August 08, 2014, 12:06:55 AM
Looks like AHTD doesn't need to redo the roundabout plans :(
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on August 08, 2014, 01:04:57 AM
Looks like AHTD doesn't need to redo the roundabout plans :(

Not a valid vimeo URL
I actually thought the main traffic movement was going to go through a roundabout.  It's just the interchange, and the 2 lane connection to the west.

Missouri will figure it out.  I'm still trying to figure out why only 2 lanes of a 4 lane facility is being built.  Huge waste of money in the long run.  Sigh.  I guess something is better than nothing.

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on August 08, 2014, 09:14:31 AM
Looks like AHTD doesn't need to redo the roundabout plans :(

Not a valid vimeo URL
I actually thought the main traffic movement was going to go through a roundabout.  It's just the interchange, and the 2 lane connection to the west.

Missouri will figure it out.  I'm still trying to figure out why only 2 lanes of a 4 lane facility is being built.  Huge waste of money in the long run.  Sigh.  I guess something is better than nothing.


Looks like a clusterfork to me.

I think 2 lanes is all they have money for at this time.

BTW: as you come down the hill on I-49 into Bella Vista, you can get a glimpse of the work being done.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on August 08, 2014, 01:57:06 PM
Quote
Missouri will figure it out.  I'm still trying to figure out why only 2 lanes of a 4 lane facility is being built.  Huge waste of money in the long run.  Sigh.  I guess something is better than nothing.

I think Dick Trammel hinted that if Missouri got this vote passed AHTD would find the money to add the other two lanes.

But there's no need to build a 4 lane road to nowhere.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on August 09, 2014, 03:08:13 AM
Dick Trammel?  Biggest let-down to this area.  But I guess being old is something.
AHTD, we're sick of him!  We need new reps!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on August 09, 2014, 07:32:18 PM
Dick Trammel?  Biggest let-down to this area.  But I guess being old is something.
AHTD, we're sick of him!  We need new reps!
Mr Trammel likes to talk a lot. Part salesman, part huckster.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Arkansastravelguy on August 09, 2014, 11:47:10 PM
(http://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/08/10/mu9ujesa.jpg)
The future road to nowhere
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on August 10, 2014, 08:50:58 AM

The future road to nowhere
No, it's a gateway to rural Benton County ;)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on August 10, 2014, 10:00:12 AM
The future road to nowhere
No, it's a gateway to rural Benton County ;)

Since Hiwasse has been annexed into Gravette (http://www.nwaonline.com/news/2012/mar/30/hiwasse-annexed-gravette/), it could also be viewed as the Gravette Divider/Connector ("GDC"), although some might prefer to refer to it as the "GD Connector".  :spin:
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on August 10, 2014, 12:07:58 PM
The future road to nowhere
No, it's a gateway to rural Benton County ;)

Since Hiwasse has been annexed into Gravette (http://www.nwaonline.com/news/2012/mar/30/hiwasse-annexed-gravette/), it could also be viewed as the Gravette Divider/Connector ("GDC"), although some might prefer to refer to it as the "GD Connector".  :spin:
I guess "Hiwasee Bypass" is obsolete now.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on August 10, 2014, 06:49:32 PM
This mightn't mean much, but...it's looking ever more like Asa Hutchinson will be the next governor of Arkansas.  And just a week or so ago, Sen. Jim Hendren (Republican, and like Hutchinson from the Gravette area) was elected as Arkansas senate majority leader by acclamation (http://www.thecitywire.com/node/34139#.U-f1MvldXUQ).  Today, an editorial in the local paper ran saying it looks like Hutchinson is going to be a guy Republicans can really rally around.  (The new Republican State Senate whip will be from Texarkana, another I-49 city.)

If elected, Hutchinson would be the first governor from what is now "Northwest Arkansas" (metro) since Orval Faubus left office in 1967.  John Boozman of northwest Arkansas is one of the Natural State's senators, and Steve Womack (R-Rogers) is said to be rising in stature among the (old guard, I fear, not necessarily conservative) Washington congressional Republicans.

Makes me wonder if such a combination of NWA-bred elected officials might help the BV Bypass in any way.  They sure can't overturn last week's Missouri election results.  But I'd think with as much potential money as a completed I-49 can bring to NWA there might be some stronger interest in seeing this highway get finished than there has been.

Time will tell.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on August 10, 2014, 07:18:05 PM
I don't see any of those guys asking BO or Hillary for highway handouts

Looks like another roadblock to progress
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: ARMOURERERIC on August 10, 2014, 07:22:01 PM
If a farmer owns enough land, maybe he can build a 2 lane toll road from US 71 in Mo to the state line :)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on August 10, 2014, 08:12:51 PM
I don't see any of those guys asking BO or Hillary for highway handouts

Looks like another roadblock to progress

Huckabee, maybe.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on August 10, 2014, 08:26:33 PM
I don't see any of those guys asking BO or Hillary for highway handouts

Looks like another roadblock to progress

Huckabee, maybe.

Huckabee is too busy pushing his agenda and trying to be Prez.

As far as "local" politicians, they have their own agendas (like getting reelected) and highways are not a priority as they were with John Paul Hammerschmidt.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on August 10, 2014, 10:58:43 PM
I don't see any of those guys asking BO or Hillary for highway handouts

Looks like another roadblock to progress

Huckabee, maybe.

Huckabee is too busy pushing his agenda and trying to be Prez.

As far as "local" politicians, they have their own agendas (like getting reelected) and highways are not a priority as they were with John Paul Hammerschmidt.

"Maybe" on all counts.

But given that northwest Arkansas' metro has passed the 500,000 mark (going by their figures the population will be 501.800 as of tomorrow) I still believe the first big post-half million change for this metro area, which is becoming the eye of an economic hurricane in mid-America, will (and will have to) relate to "Transportation, transportation, transportation."

And I get the feeling with all the news we've seen on I-49 and Texas I-69 there's a LOT more going on behind the scenes than we know.  You can exchange the words "going on" with "interest" in my previous sentence as well.  And whoever gets I-49 finished is going to leave a significant legacy, which many of these men would also be interested in.  BTW, as far as Gov. Huckabee goes, many of my fellow conservatives think he's a RINO (Republican In Name Only).  Same with Boozman.  Same with Womack.  Same with Hutchinson.  Don't know on Hendren.  But though he wasn't a perfect conservative Arkansas has been a changed state, largely for the better, since Huckabee was in office.  Again, I'm guessing these men have a clue how important this highway will be...though if Huckabee (who is one of many potentially running as a Republican for president now) would be elected he will indeed have a lot greater worries for our country than just a new interstate.

Like I said, time will tell.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: amroad17 on August 11, 2014, 06:17:17 PM
(http://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/08/10/mu9ujesa.jpg)
The future road to nowhere
Could this be Arkansas' version of the "Goat Path Expressway"?  It could be called the "Hog Path Expressway"!  :colorful:
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Brandon on August 12, 2014, 01:54:05 PM
Could this be Arkansas' version of the "Goat Path Expressway"?  It could be called the "Hog Path Expressway"!  :colorful:

Arkanland?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: robbones on August 12, 2014, 02:17:48 PM
AHTD,

There are 2 GS at the junction of AR 60 north and AR 282 in Rudy that still have TO I 540 posted.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on August 12, 2014, 04:54:30 PM
AHTD,

There are 2 GS at the junction of AR 60 north and AR 282 in Rudy that still have TO I 540 posted.

I just found those last week :)
(https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3925/14854063284_2e613ae43c_z_d.jpg)
(https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3863/14669897649_bd7b7dd775_z_d.jpg)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Arkansastravelguy on August 12, 2014, 04:57:02 PM
I know where a 540 shield is in Washington Co. Hee hee
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on August 12, 2014, 06:14:14 PM
I know where a 540 shield is in Washington Co. Hee hee

(https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3270/3068902787_bf3714853f_d.jpg)
Not AHTD's

(https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3645/3821890006_9231d0d190_z_d.jpg)
Also not AHTD.
 
Or do you mean the one near the Subaru dealer? I'm not sure it's AHTD either.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Arkansastravelguy on August 12, 2014, 06:30:05 PM
(http://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/08/13/agu7ejy6.jpg)
There's a ton of these around on back roads
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on August 12, 2014, 07:49:49 PM
I will not be revealing the locations of several I-540 shields I recently found in the Lowell area.  Find them yourself.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on August 12, 2014, 07:55:29 PM
(http://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/08/13/agu7ejy6.jpg)
There's a ton of these around on back roads
Never seen this one, but it's likely a city or county maintained sign.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Arkansastravelguy on August 12, 2014, 08:23:35 PM

I will not be revealing the locations of several I-540 shields I recently found in the Lowell area.  Find them yourself.
If you are referring to 112/264 intersection, they've been replaced.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Arkansastravelguy on August 12, 2014, 08:25:04 PM

(http://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/08/13/agu7ejy6.jpg)
There's a ton of these around on back roads
Never seen this one, but it's likely a city or county maintained sign.
That one is on New Hope Rd in Johnson
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on August 12, 2014, 08:54:46 PM

That one is on New Hope Rd in Johnson

So very likely not AHTD issue.

These, however, likely ARE
(https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3914/14898877281_8cdc005868_z_d.jpg)
Greenland

(https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3924/14878933986_cfd95c5a76_d.jpg)
South Fayetteville
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: robbones on August 13, 2014, 08:33:46 PM
I noticed that the BGS were finally fixed on I 40 EB west of the 540 interchange. Now just to do a simple fix on the BGS at the 49 interchange to say TO 540 instead of South.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on August 19, 2014, 06:25:12 PM
The three remaining I-49 Arkansas pieces: the bypass, the bridge, the big one (between Greenwood and TXK).  Looks like "the bridge" is where eyes are fixed now:

Quote
U.S. Sen. Jim Inhofe, R-Okla., said during a visit to Fort Smith Tuesday (Aug. 19) that while he is against higher taxes, the gasoline tax that funds the Highway Trust Fund should be re-worked as a "percentage" versus a "centage" tax in order to keep infrastructure projects moving forward across the nation.

Inhofe, a senior member of the Senate's Environment and Public Works (EPW) Committee, was in Fort Smith with U.S. Sen. John Boozman, R-Ark., to see the area's infrastructure needs and to meet with the Regional Intermodal Transportation Authority for a question and answer session Tuesday morning. The meeting was held at the Arkansas River Valley Nature Center at Chaffee Crossing.

The statement by Oklahoma's senior senator was in response to a question by RITA board member George Moschner, an executive vice president of risk management and compliance at Baldor Electric Co., about how to secure funding to complete the section of Interstate 49 between Alma and Chaffee Crossing. The section would include a bridge across the Arkansas River and is estimated to at least $350 million.

Inhofe first said locals must get the Arkansas Highway and Transportation Department to make completion of that section of I-49 its number one priority in order to get the attention of Washington.

"The second thing is you're going to see coming up between now and May a funding mechanism that is going to change the way we're looking at funding our roads and highways.
And again, this is not an announcement on my part because I still am going to maintain opposition to any new tax increases. However, I don't see that. It's more of a user fee than a tax increase and it's going to have to affect that. So those are two things that are going to have to happen before (that stretch of I-49can be funded)."

and;

Quote
Sebastian County Judge David Hudson asked what RITA and other local governments could do to ensure projects of significance in the Fort Smith region, namely the I-49 project between Alma and Chaffee Crossing, receive funding.

Without providing specifics, Inhofe said the answer would come before a vote is taken on a final transportation bill in May, which Boozman said could be a five-year bill that would provide funding for a variety of projects nationally.

http://www.thecitywire.com/node/34312#.U_POHfldXUQ
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Arkansastravelguy on August 21, 2014, 01:37:08 PM
(http://tapatalk.imageshack.com/v2/14/08/21/28a0996155db2088722cfbffb60378af.jpg)
This monstrosity is at the Pinnacle Hills Promenade roundabout 


iPhone
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on August 21, 2014, 02:01:33 PM
Oof! That's one ugly sign. I can't tell from the not so great quality of the photo, but I wonder if a sign contractor merely did a patch job on a previously existing I-540 shield. The least thing they could have done is get the freaking typeface correct.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: agentsteel53 on August 21, 2014, 02:10:56 PM
what font is that?  it looks vaguely like a slightly compressed Oregon 1942 custom font.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on August 21, 2014, 03:23:55 PM
Oof! That's one ugly sign. I can't tell from the not so great quality of the photo, but I wonder if a sign contractor merely did a patch job on a previously existing I-540 shield. The least thing they could have done is get the freaking typeface correct.
The direction is off, too.

I'd put money on City of Rogers Street Department. I'll have to investigate this personally ;)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Brandon on August 21, 2014, 05:44:15 PM
(http://tapatalk.imageshack.com/v2/14/08/21/28a0996155db2088722cfbffb60378af.jpg)
This monstrosity is at the Pinnacle Hills Promenade roundabout 

Let's see...

3di shield for a 2di.  Check!
Odd font, maybe a version of arialhevticesk or some such thing.  Check!
Improper color banners with interstate shield.  Check!
Wrong direction for this particular interstate.  Check!

Four for four on this one.  Yeah, this needs to be in the "worst of" thread like yesterday.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Scott5114 on August 21, 2014, 06:40:47 PM
That might be an actual font, but if so, I have no idea what it is. Certainly isn't in the Arial/Helvetica family (none of those fonts have a flat-sided 9). Closest thing to it I've seen is Gothic No. 13, but that's still pretty far off. My guess is it's either a custom font or some default font included in the sign-making hardware.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: cjk374 on August 22, 2014, 11:03:43 PM
(http://tapatalk.imageshack.com/v2/14/08/21/28a0996155db2088722cfbffb60378af.jpg)
This monstrosity is at the Pinnacle Hills Promenade roundabout 


iPhone

Wow...there are no words in the english language that can perfectly quantify the...the...the...crap bolted to that metal post.  :ded:  :thumbdown:
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Arkansastravelguy on August 23, 2014, 09:42:19 AM
Has AHTD posted anything in the last little while?


iPhone
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on August 23, 2014, 11:29:38 PM
Has AHTD posted anything in the last little while?


iPhone

Well, there seems to be a lot of work on the bridge/connection for the future BV bypass at I-49 in Bentonville, but I see barely anything going on in the section at West Bella Vista, which as recently as spring was predicted to be open by October.  Doubt it now.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on August 24, 2014, 10:25:57 AM
Are you writing about the paving from HWY 72 to County RD. 34 section? Hope it still will be opened for traffic and not be delayed until next year because of Missouri in no hurry to do anything.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on August 26, 2014, 03:07:38 AM
(http://tapatalk.imageshack.com/v2/14/08/21/28a0996155db2088722cfbffb60378af.jpg)
This monstrosity is at the Pinnacle Hills Promenade roundabout 


iPhone
That's the font that the City of Rogers uses on street name signs.  I've seen a few speed limit signs with this font as well.  Hate it.  And not MUTCD approved.


Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on August 26, 2014, 08:58:36 AM
(http://tapatalk.imageshack.com/v2/14/08/21/28a0996155db2088722cfbffb60378af.jpg)
This monstrosity is at the Pinnacle Hills Promenade roundabout 


iPhone
That's the font that the City of Rogers uses on street name signs.  I've seen a few speed limit signs with this font as well.  Hate it.  And not MUTCD approved.


I thought it was a city job. Wouldn't be so bad if they'd just used FHWA numbers.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on August 26, 2014, 11:04:03 AM
Are you writing about the paving from HWY 72 to County RD. 34 section? Hope it still will be opened for traffic and not be delayed until next year because of Missouri in no hurry to do anything.

Gordon, I think that's the one.

BTW, here's an article in today's City Wire on the 8th St. Expansion (which will link up with I-49) (http://www.thecitywire.com/node/34388) in Bentonville.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikeSantNY78 on August 26, 2014, 02:40:57 PM
(http://tapatalk.imageshack.com/v2/14/08/21/28a0996155db2088722cfbffb60378af.jpg)
This monstrosity is at the Pinnacle Hills Promenade roundabout 


iPhone
That's the font that the City of Rogers uses on street name signs.  I've seen a few speed limit signs with this font as well.  Hate it.  And not MUTCD approved.
Looks close to the numbers on a Wheel Of Fortune scoreboard...
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on August 27, 2014, 02:57:36 AM
BTW, here's an article in today's City Wire on the 8th St. Expansion (which will link up with I-49) (http://www.thecitywire.com/node/34388) in Bentonville.

That link was in a loop... Maybe since I'm trying to access it overnight.  ETA:  Link loaded.
Bentonville has severe traffic issues.  This 8th Street interchange and improvements will help.
Exit 86 (Hudson/14th Street) on I-49 is of particular interest.

I have contacted AHTD, the city of Bentonville, and the city of Rogers.

Nobody can tell me what is going to happen at Exit 86.  It sounds like AHTD has handed off this interchange to the locals (big shock there).

The fact is, an additional interchange at 8th Street to the north will not fix the congestion to the east (Rogers).
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on August 27, 2014, 08:20:13 AM
BTW, here's an article in today's City Wire on the 8th St. Expansion (which will link up with I-49) (http://www.thecitywire.com/node/34388) in Bentonville.

That link was in a loop... Maybe since I'm trying to access it overnight.  ETA:  Link loaded.
Bentonville has severe traffic issues.  This 8th Street interchange and improvements will help.
Exit 86 (Hudson/14th Street) on I-49 is of particular interest.

I have contacted AHTD, the city of Bentonville, and the city of Rogers.

Nobody can tell me what is going to happen at Exit 86.  It sounds like AHTD has handed off this interchange to the locals (big shock there).

The fact is, an additional interchange at 8th Street to the north will not fix the congestion to the east (Rogers).

IIRC, AHTD is building the interchange (State ROW), but Bentonville is supposed to be doing all the street and approach work.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on September 01, 2014, 08:39:08 PM
Wow.  Just saw today where the (approximately foot deep) blacktop/asphalt has been laid between the Rocky Dell Hollow Road new bridge (getting ever closer to completion itself) in far west Bella Vista and the current west terminus of the first completed (2-lane) section of the BV bypass.  Shoulders are being put in from the south northward.

(BTW, the roadbed is starting to take shape for a few block lengths from the east end of said "completed" section toward Bentonville as well.)

Wondering if we may see that October deadline for the Rocky Dell Hollow to west Hwy 72 new bridge section opening take place after all.  Great work, AHTD!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on September 10, 2014, 05:12:15 PM
OK, Mid-southers.

Here are pictures I snapped this afternoon on the second (new Hwy 72 bridge in Gravette to Rocky Dell Hollow bridge west of Bella Vista Highlands) section of the Bella Vista Bypass, future I-49.  See if you notice something that looks unusual:

Facing north, new Rocky Dell Hollow Road bridge in distance:

(http://www.brazil.com.bz/images/091014_rocky_n.jpg)

Facing south, same location as above:

(http://www.brazil.com.bz/images/091014_rocky_s.jpg)

Facing north from new (West) Highway 72 bridge between old Gravette and Gravette/Hiwasse:

(http://www.brazil.com.bz/images/091014_72_n.jpg)

Facing south, same location as above:

(http://www.brazil.com.bz/images/091014_72_s.jpg)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: ARMOURERERIC on September 10, 2014, 08:40:45 PM
Yes, they are paving all 4 lanes
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on September 10, 2014, 10:39:19 PM
Yes, they are paving all 4 lanes

Am I the last to know on this or what?!?!

BTW, they're working furiously on this now.  There were crews working tonight in the dark on the west end of the third segment (East new Ark. 72 bridge at former Hiwasse to Bentonville I-49 junction). An acquaintance who lives 500 feet away from that segment highway in Bentonville said they were working so hard on Labor Day that you could hear their equipment even with all windows and doors shut in her house.  And they're SWARMING on this segment which I posted pictures of today.  Never seen so many cement and rock trucks coming and going as I did between Gravette and Gravette/Hiwasse today.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: ARMOURERERIC on September 10, 2014, 11:32:14 PM
I mean I was pleasantly surprised when I saw your pics.  I was under the impression that this was to be a stupor 2 as well.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on September 10, 2014, 11:44:03 PM
I mean I was pleasantly surprised when I saw your pics.  I was under the impression that this was to be a stupor 2 as well.

Thanks.  Again, as mentioned previously, the likely (up by 9 points on his Democratic opponent) next governor of Arkansas and the brand new Senate Majority Leader (also a Republican) are both from this community (Gravette), within whose school district about 4/5 of the Arkansas-side Bella Vista bypass runs.  They can't do anything about Missouri, but I still get a feeling they'll take a keen interest in the progress of I-49.  The more of this future Interstate that's built as they assume their new office, the better.

However much of this four-lane is paved, it's still WONDERFUL news.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: codyg1985 on September 11, 2014, 06:37:41 AM
Maybe they are just paving where the exit ramps will be?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on September 11, 2014, 08:19:41 AM
Quote
Maybe they are just paving where the exit ramps will be?

I don't think so.  The exit ramp future carriageways (isn't that what you call it) have been cut/dug.  You can see them in the Rocky Dell Hollow pictures.  Interestingly, for the most part the exits on the 2nd section (Rocky Dell Hollow Rd. to the new west Highway 72 bridge) are still dirt.

OK, Mid-southers.

Here are pictures I snapped this afternoon on the second (new Hwy 72 bridge in Gravette to Rocky Dell Hollow bridge west of Bella Vista Highlands) section of the Bella Vista Bypass, future I-49.  See if you notice something that looks unusual:

Facing north, new Rocky Dell Hollow Road bridge in distance:

(http://www.brazil.com.bz/images/091014_rocky_n.jpg)

Facing south, same location as above:

(http://www.brazil.com.bz/images/091014_rocky_s.jpg)

Facing north from new (West) Highway 72 bridge between old Gravette and Gravette/Hiwasse:

(http://www.brazil.com.bz/images/091014_72_n.jpg)

Facing south, same location as above:

(http://www.brazil.com.bz/images/091014_72_s.jpg)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: codyg1985 on September 11, 2014, 08:30:16 AM
^ I hope you are right and that they are paving both sides. Here is an example (https://www.google.com/maps/@36.4284111,-94.3643736,634m/data=!3m1!1e3) of where they paved both sides around where the exit ramp is on the recently-opened section of the BVB.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on September 11, 2014, 10:56:59 AM
...and in a timely story in the City Wire today:

Quote
The Regional Intermodal Transportation Authority is scheduled to meet with the chairman of the U.S. House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee next month, the second meeting with a high-ranking Washington politician in Fort Smith since August regarding infrastructure-related issues.

According to RITA Executive Director Mat Pitsch, U.S. Rep. Bill Shuster, a Republican from Pennsylvania and chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, was invited to visit Fort Smith and meet with RITA by U.S. Rep. Steve Womack, R-Rogers.

http://www.thecitywire.com/node/34679#.VBG3TvldXUQ

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on September 11, 2014, 11:57:29 PM
Thanks.  Again, as mentioned previously, the likely (up by 9 points on his Democratic opponent) next governor of Arkansas and the brand new Senate Majority Leader (also a Republican) are both from this community (Gravette), within whose school district about 4/5 of the Arkansas-side Bella Vista bypass runs.  They can't do anything about Missouri, but I still get a feeling they'll take a keen interest in the progress of I-49.  The more of this future Interstate that's built as they assume their new office, the better.

However much of this four-lane is paved, it's still WONDERFUL news.
Politics on this forum is really frowned upon... FYI

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on September 12, 2014, 12:05:47 AM
Thanks.  Again, as mentioned previously, the likely (up by 9 points on his Democratic opponent) next governor of Arkansas and the brand new Senate Majority Leader (also a Republican) are both from this community (Gravette), within whose school district about 4/5 of the Arkansas-side Bella Vista bypass runs.  They can't do anything about Missouri, but I still get a feeling they'll take a keen interest in the progress of I-49.  The more of this future Interstate that's built as they assume their new office, the better.

However much of this four-lane is paved, it's still WONDERFUL news.
Politics on this forum is really frowned upon... FYI

He didn't post a political opinion so it's not really political. Besides, you can't separate roads from politics because most roads are built by the government.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on September 12, 2014, 12:34:19 AM
I can't tell if they're laying asphalt or wet concrete. I didn't see any rebar. Which is the final surfacing going to be?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Scott5114 on September 12, 2014, 03:19:28 AM
Thanks.  Again, as mentioned previously, the likely (up by 9 points on his Democratic opponent) next governor of Arkansas and the brand new Senate Majority Leader (also a Republican) are both from this community (Gravette), within whose school district about 4/5 of the Arkansas-side Bella Vista bypass runs.  They can't do anything about Missouri, but I still get a feeling they'll take a keen interest in the progress of I-49.  The more of this future Interstate that's built as they assume their new office, the better.

However much of this four-lane is paved, it's still WONDERFUL news.
Politics on this forum is really frowned upon... FYI

He didn't post a political opinion so it's not really political. Besides, you can't separate roads from politics because most roads are built by the government.

This. "Highway 43 is likely to be built because it runs by Senator Greene's town" is acceptable. "Senator Greene is wasting government money on pork barrel highway 43 death benghazis because single-payer ISIS gun control abortions are sequestered" is not.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on September 12, 2014, 03:03:28 PM
Thanks.  Again, as mentioned previously, the likely (up by 9 points on his Democratic opponent) next governor of Arkansas and the brand new Senate Majority Leader (also a Republican) are both from this community (Gravette), within whose school district about 4/5 of the Arkansas-side Bella Vista bypass runs.  They can't do anything about Missouri, but I still get a feeling they'll take a keen interest in the progress of I-49.  The more of this future Interstate that's built as they assume their new office, the better.

However much of this four-lane is paved, it's still WONDERFUL news.
Politics on this forum is really frowned upon... FYI

He didn't post a political opinion so it's not really political. Besides, you can't separate roads from politics because most roads are built by the government.

This. "Highway 43 is likely to be built because it runs by Senator Greene's town" is acceptable. "Senator Greene is wasting government money on pork barrel highway 43 death benghazis because single-payer ISIS gun control abortions are sequestered" is not.

Thanks, Scott.  And that's as far as I'm going to go with it, save to add (again) there hasn't been an Arkansas governor from this region of the state since the early 60s.  If Rep. Hutchinson's gubernatorial hopes materialize, we'll see what they do.

Road Hog, I couldn't get close enough to take a picture (and feel stupid saying it this way) but there was SOMETHING buried in the ground beneath where they were paving (in the West Hwy. 72 bridge north-facing pictures) the day or two before they started paving...you see those square shapes before the equipment in the north-facing picture.  Whatever they've done, the pavement now extends to at least the end of the dirt in that picture, as far as the eye can see, as of yesterday, which is where the equipment was when I drove by as well.  BTW, at the East new Hwy. 72 bridge (Hiwasse/Gravette to Bentonville/I-49 segment) they were working in the dark two nights ago at 8:45 pm, as if it were the resurfacing of an active interstate.  Not sure why everyone's flying about now but BOY have they been active this month.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on September 12, 2014, 06:25:05 PM
FWIW, I saw 4 dump trucks pull off of Sunset Dr onto US 71 this afternoon. That's almost 2 miles north of the 49 construction, so maybe they were working on the road further west.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: cjk374 on September 12, 2014, 11:38:02 PM
I hope they take their time and put enough pride in their work to do the paving job right instead of making mistakes that will cost more money in the VERY near future to fix broken concrete way before its time.

They got in that kind of hurry in the late 60s/early 70s when they built the "new" US 65 between Little Rock and Pine Bluff.  The builders were dragging the concrete pavers over muddy roadbed with bulldozers so they could get the paving job done quicker.  Those of us who drove over that road regularly felt the results of that for many years.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on September 13, 2014, 08:05:57 AM
I hope they take their time and put enough pride in their work to do the paving job right instead of making mistakes that will cost more money in the VERY near future to fix broken concrete way before its time.

They got in that kind of hurry in the late 60s/early 70s when they built the "new" US 65 between Little Rock and Pine Bluff.  The builders were dragging the concrete pavers over muddy roadbed with bulldozers so they could get the paving job done quicker.  Those of us who drove over that road regularly felt the results of that for many years.

I-57 in Illinois was built with substandard materials and had to be rebuilt in the late 70's/early 80's.  I think the state wound up paying for the repairs.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on September 16, 2014, 12:08:40 PM
Nothing new on the highway, but in this glowing article on Northwest Arkansas growth today (http://www.thecitywire.com/node/34714#.VBhdHvldXUQ) I-49 is listed as the biggest project and called "the spine" for all the development. 

(EDIT #1: and note again that NWA is predicted to be America's third-fastest growing metropolitan area through the year 2020 after Austin and Raleigh/Durham).

(EDIT #2: In a following story also published today, northwest Arkansas also had the most economic growth (http://www.thecitywire.com/node/34725#.VBi10vldXUQ) of any of the top 300+ American metro areas in 2013.)

Again, JMO, but I doubt even Missouri voters can stop the interest in this highway (and the Texas I-69 it will link to) from growing ever stronger.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: galador on September 17, 2014, 09:50:52 AM
(EDIT #2: In a following story also published today, northwest Arkansas also had the most economic growth (http://www.thecitywire.com/node/34725#.VBi10vldXUQ) of any of the top 300+ American metro areas in 2013.)

My friend and I were discussing this article yesterday and, if you consider Fort Smith part of "NWA"1, then NWA (the Fayetteville-Springdale-Rogers MSA + the Fort Smith MSA) is already getting very close to passing up Central Arkansas (Little Rock-North Little Rock-Conway MSA + the Pine Bluff MSA) as both the most populous area (761,796 vs. 800,015 respectively, as of 2010 census data) the largest economic driver in the state ($34.2 billion GDP vs. $44.2 billion GDP).

Obviously, NWA still has a bit to go before it surpasses Central Arkansas, but it is slowly getting there.

All this to say... it's clear that the improvements to I-49 are going to be increasingly important in the coming years.  :)

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on September 17, 2014, 11:54:29 AM
(EDIT #2: In a following story also published today, northwest Arkansas also had the most economic growth (http://www.thecitywire.com/node/34725#.VBi10vldXUQ) of any of the top 300+ American metro areas in 2013.)

My friend and I were discussing this article yesterday and, if you consider Fort Smith part of "NWA"1, then NWA (the Fayetteville-Springdale-Rogers MSA + the Fort Smith MSA) is already getting very close to passing up Central Arkansas (Little Rock-North Little Rock-Conway MSA + the Pine Bluff MSA) as both the most populous area (761,796 vs. 800,015 respectively, as of 2010 census data) the largest economic driver in the state ($34.2 billion GDP vs. $44.2 billion GDP).

Obviously, NWA still has a bit to go before it surpasses Central Arkansas, but it is slowly getting there.

All this to say... it's clear that the improvements to I-49 are going to be increasingly important in the coming years.  :)

  • This is debatable, but anecdotally, there was a news story on one of the local TV stations about the groundbreaking of the new osteopathic medical college (http://www.thecitywire.com/node/31809#.VBmLDxYa7eU) in Fort Smith, and the lead was "There's a new medical college coming to NWA..."

Two things:

1. Actually, the combined NWA/FSM population is just over 801,000 now, I believe.  LR (if you would add Searcy, Pine Bluff and Hot Springs) is over 900,000.  Both will surpass 1,000,000 some day if growth holds.

2.  On the way to Arkadelphia last Saturday, I stopped at the Long John Silver's restaurant on Rogers Ave. in Fort Smith.  They were playing a Fayetteville station, and the break I heard was advertised by Windstream Casino in Joplin, both up I-49 from FSM.  If and when the I-49 river bridge is built, my guess is we'll at least some day see NWA and FSM as a Combined Statistical Area (like Little Rock is with Searcy and Pine Bluff).
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on September 17, 2014, 11:54:40 AM
(EDIT #2: In a following story also published today, northwest Arkansas also had the most economic growth (http://www.thecitywire.com/node/34725#.VBi10vldXUQ) of any of the top 300+ American metro areas in 2013.)

My friend and I were discussing this article yesterday and, if you consider Fort Smith part of "NWA"1, then NWA (the Fayetteville-Springdale-Rogers MSA + the Fort Smith MSA) is already getting very close to passing up Central Arkansas (Little Rock-North Little Rock-Conway MSA + the Pine Bluff MSA) as both the most populous area (761,796 vs. 800,015 respectively, as of 2010 census data) the largest economic driver in the state ($34.2 billion GDP vs. $44.2 billion GDP).

Obviously, NWA still has a bit to go before it surpasses Central Arkansas, but it is slowly getting there.

All this to say... it's clear that the improvements to I-49 are going to be increasingly important in the coming years.  :)

  • This is debatable, but anecdotally, there was a news story on one of the local TV stations about the groundbreaking of the new osteopathic medical college (http://www.thecitywire.com/node/31809#.VBmLDxYa7eU) in Fort Smith, and the lead was "There's a new medical college coming to NWA..."

Fayetteville and Fort Smith are supposed to be separate Metropolitan Survey Areas,  but media has blurred the lines. A lot of our local news in Fort Smith comes Fayetteville/NW Arkansas. Part of it is probably because of the University of Arkansas and their athletic teams.
Part of it is probably Wal-Mart/Tyson/ JBHunt: not a day goes by that one of them has an "important" announcement.

It's also interesting to note that our local newspaper, The Southwest Times Record is now being printed in NW Arkansas and trucked to Fort Smith.

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on September 17, 2014, 11:58:19 AM
(EDIT #2: In a following story also published today, northwest Arkansas also had the most economic growth (http://www.thecitywire.com/node/34725#.VBi10vldXUQ) of any of the top 300+ American metro areas in 2013.)

My friend and I were discussing this article yesterday and, if you consider Fort Smith part of "NWA"1, then NWA (the Fayetteville-Springdale-Rogers MSA + the Fort Smith MSA) is already getting very close to passing up Central Arkansas (Little Rock-North Little Rock-Conway MSA + the Pine Bluff MSA) as both the most populous area (761,796 vs. 800,015 respectively, as of 2010 census data) the largest economic driver in the state ($34.2 billion GDP vs. $44.2 billion GDP).

Obviously, NWA still has a bit to go before it surpasses Central Arkansas, but it is slowly getting there.

All this to say... it's clear that the improvements to I-49 are going to be increasingly important in the coming years.  :)

  • This is debatable, but anecdotally, there was a news story on one of the local TV stations about the groundbreaking of the new osteopathic medical college (http://www.thecitywire.com/node/31809#.VBmLDxYa7eU) in Fort Smith, and the lead was "There's a new medical college coming to NWA..."

Fayetteville and Fort Smith are supposed to be separate Metropolitan Survey Areas,  but media has blurred the lines. A lot of our local news in Fort Smith comes Fayetteville/NW Arkansas. Part of it is probably because of the University of Arkansas and their athletic teams.
Part of it is probably Wal-Mart/Tyson/ JBHunt: not a day goes by that one of them has an "important" announcement.

It's also interesting to note that our local newspaper, The Southwest Times Record is now being printed in NW Arkansas and trucked to Fort Smith.

US 71, that's an ironic twist, because NWA and FSM are in the same Nielsen DMA (Designated Market Area).  Fay and FSM have been together for decades, but FSM TV station managers fought to pry Benton County AR AWAY from its former market (Joplin, MO-Pittsburg, KS) in the late 80s.  The more counties in a DMA, the more ad dollars a DMA TV station can get.  And what an amazing thing that Benton County is now the most populous of all the counties in this market:

(http://www.truckads.com/highslide/image/ft_smith_fayetteville_springdale_rogers_designated_market_map.gif)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on September 17, 2014, 12:34:53 PM
Getting (sort of) back on topic here, some of the   Jersey Barrier  (http://www.nwaonline.com/news/2014/sep/12/interstate-49-retaining-wall-at-lowell-/) on I-49 in Lowell is having to be replaced
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on September 17, 2014, 05:31:54 PM
Its a retaining wall in some sections too, not just a Jersey

Hopefully the footing is ok. Its underground so they probably haven't checked
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: galador on September 26, 2014, 08:51:33 AM
There is a new article (http://www.thecitywire.com/node/34888#.VCVdZxYa7eU) this morning in The City Wire about some further improvements on I-49, including plans for a new set of interchanges where Fullbright Expressway (Hwy. 71), Highway 112 (Razorback Road/Cato Springs Road), and I-49 come together.

Having just had to navigate this interchange recently, I can say that this can't come soon enough. In order to get from anywhere to the south on Fullbright Expressway to I-49 South, you have to get off Fullbright Expressway onto Highway 112 (which is not signaled, there is only a stop sign), and then get on the I-49 ramp from 112 (again, not signaled). Especially when there is traffic from a UofA event, this is awful.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on September 26, 2014, 09:19:38 AM
There is a new article (http://www.thecitywire.com/node/34888#.VCVdZxYa7eU) this morning in The City Wire about some further improvements on I-49, including plans for a new set of interchanges where Fullbright Expressway (Hwy. 71), Highway 112 (Razorback Road/Cato Springs Road), and I-49 come together.

Having just had to navigate this interchange recently, I can say that this can't come soon enough. In order to get from anywhere to the south on Fullbright Expressway to I-49 South, you have to get off Fullbright Expressway onto Highway 112 (which is not signaled, there is only a stop sign), and then get on the I-49 ramp from 112 (again, not signaled). Especially when there is traffic from a UofA event, this is awful.

This is actually on Garland Ave near the Autopark....other side of town :)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: galador on September 26, 2014, 09:46:04 AM
This is actually on Garland Ave near the Autopark....other side of town :)

Hah, oops.  Guess I totally mis-read it then. :)

All complaints with the other interchange still apply, though... maybe they need to look at that end of 112, too...
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on September 26, 2014, 10:41:51 AM
This is actually on Garland Ave near the Autopark....other side of town :)

Hah, oops.  Guess I totally mis-read it then. :)

All complaints with the other interchange still apply, though... maybe they need to look at that end of 112, too...
Once they start to widen that end, maybe they will.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on September 30, 2014, 02:56:40 PM
AHTD has released a  map (http://arkansashighways.com/public_meetings/2014/BB0414/BB0414_2014.09.25_PIPIHO_Aer.pdf) of proposed improvements to I-49 in the vicinity of AR 112/US 71B on the north end of Fayetteville.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: rte66man on September 30, 2014, 08:43:53 PM
AHTD has released a  map (http://arkansashighways.com/public_meetings/2014/BB0414/BB0414_2014.09.25_PIPIHO_Aer.pdf) of proposed improvements to I-49 in the vicinity of AR 112/US 71B on the north end of Fayetteville.

This is an improvement??
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: amroad17 on October 01, 2014, 04:41:55 AM
That's the problem when the original freeway bypass is not that anymore.  The whole section around Fayetteville has been built in stages.  First, the original US 71 freeway bypass was built, then AHTD had to figure out where to tie-in former I-540/current I-49 to the existing bypass.  Because of this, there are interchanges looking like the one in the map.  AHTD did well in doing this with the land available at these points, but the current "thru traffic" has to exit itself to continue on the mainline.  The exit in the map looks like the I-695 exit (Exit 36) with MD 702 northeast of Baltimore flipped around.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: yakra on October 01, 2014, 11:20:24 AM
I thought that was the way it operated for the longest time, but -- holy blap! -- I-49 actually is the thru movement northbound, with the Fulbright exiting. There *is* a left entrance southbound, however...

As for I-695 and MD702, what's with the ghost ramp?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on October 01, 2014, 12:13:53 PM
I thought that was the way it operated for the longest time, but -- holy blap! -- I-49 actually is the thru movement northbound, with the Fulbright exiting. There *is* a left entrance southbound, however...


If you look at the satellite imagery, you see part of a former lane on NB 49 at Exit 67. This was part of US 71 while the expressway to Bentonville was being built. The exit was originally two lanes of traffic, but was changed after expressway was finished.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: amroad17 on October 02, 2014, 09:00:56 PM
I thought that was the way it operated for the longest time, but -- holy blap! -- I-49 actually is the thru movement northbound, with the Fulbright exiting. There *is* a left entrance southbound, however...

As for I-695 and MD702, what's with the ghost ramp?
This was to be a loop ramp from MD 702 to a proposed extension of the Windlass Freeway to MD 43 in Middle River.  This extension was cancelled in 1978.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: codyg1985 on October 03, 2014, 07:56:03 AM
Will I-49 be four or six lanes through the new interchange with the Fulbright Expressway? It looks like it may only be four lanes from that plan.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: galador on October 03, 2014, 09:03:46 AM
The City Wire has a new article (http://www.thecitywire.com/node/34971#.VC6ZiBYa7eU) this morning about the "State of the Region" panel that happened yesterday with the mayors of Fayetteville, Springdale, Rogers, and Bentonville.

Also involved was Dick Trammel of the Arkansas Highway Commission. I don't think that there's any "new" information, but he gave a quick update on the infrastructure improvements in NWA:

Quote
Trammel said the price of progress among the nearly 30 major road projects across Benton and Washington counties is more than $698 million and the work is expected to continue until 2019. Trammel said the orange barrels are a sign “things will get better.”  But he added, “it won’t be anytime soon.”

The much-needed widening of the Interstate 49 corridor that links the region together and to the rest of the state and country entails 25 different projects slated through 2017 for a total price tag of $605 million. Trammel said four of those have been completed at a cost of $40 million and there are seven more underway now with at a cost of $110 million. The biggest expense is yet to come, as 14 more future projects carry an estimated price tag of $455 million.

The $605 million being spent along I-49 in the two counties is broken down as follows:
- Bella Vista Bypass: 14.5 miles of new construction which is complete on the Arkansas side at a cost of $150 million.

- The U.S. 412 Bypass: 4.5 miles of new road construction from I-49 in north Springdale toward Northwest Regional Airport back around to Hwy. 412 out near Tontitown. This project is one of the last to begin around 2017 at a cost of $125 million.

- I-49 widening along 26 miles from Fayetteville to North Bentonville. The cost of this work is $200 million with a expected completion date of 2017.

- I-49 interchange work which is ongoing is expected to cost $130 million and take three more years to complete.

Trammel said there are four other large road projects in the region already underway that are not part of the I-49 work, but notable. Those are the Highway 62 Prairie Grove Bypass at $16 million; Highway 62 widening from Avoca to Garfield costing $24 million; Highway 102 through Centerton of which $5 million of work is complete and $15 million more is committed; and the widening of Highway 265 from North Fayetteville through Springdale that has a price tag of $25 million.

The cities along the I-49 corridor have also anted-up millions of their own from the Fayetteville Flyover to Don Tyson Parkway in Springdale to the $53 million 8th Street interchange coming to Bentonville by 2016.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on October 03, 2014, 04:22:14 PM
Will I-49 be four or six lanes through the new interchange with the Fulbright Expressway? It looks like it may only be four lanes from that plan.

Eight
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on October 03, 2014, 07:48:10 PM
Will I-49 be four or six lanes through the new interchange with the Fulbright Expressway? It looks like it may only be four lanes from that plan.

Eight
That's going to be hell during construction :(
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on October 04, 2014, 12:07:06 AM
Will I-49 be four or six lanes through the new interchange with the Fulbright Expressway? It looks like it may only be four lanes from that plan.

Eight
Can you provide anything to verify that?  I know that there was a study done by AHTD in the early 2000s.  That study recommended 4 lanes in each direction for most of I-49 in NWA, but AHTD seems to ignore that.
Saying that, I've viewed the documents for the Garland/Fulbright area... There isn't 8 lanes, but what I saw was good.
Currently, I hate that huge curve, and that I-49 basically reduces to one lane going south.  This will change.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on October 05, 2014, 09:54:05 PM
The bridge at Rocky Dell Hollow Road (the final Arkansas exit heading northbound on future I-49/BV bypass) is cement covered at the top now, though at mid-week there was only chat on either side of the bridge.  Talked with a man on the construction team who said the concrete spreader for the section from Rocky Dell Hollow to the new west side of former Hiwasse Arkansas 72 bridge (northern terminus of the first section of the BV Bypass opened earlier this year) starts spreading concrete tomorrow.  Snapped some pictures and I'll try to upload them when possible.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on October 06, 2014, 02:23:22 AM
The bridge at Rocky Dell Hollow Road (the final Arkansas exit heading northbound on future I-49/BV bypass) is cement covered at the top now, though at mid-week there was only chat on either side of the bridge.  Talked with a man on the construction team who said the concrete spreader for the section from Rocky Dell Hollow to the new west side of former Hiwasse Arkansas 72 bridge (northern terminus of the first section of the BV Bypass opened earlier this year) starts spreading concrete tomorrow.  Snapped some pictures and I'll try to upload them when possible.
Good to hear.  It's just so sad that this very needed bypass took this long, and it's only a 2 laner.  I just don't get it, especially when I look at what other road projects have gone ahead in AR...

They shut down a lane on I-49 today and Saturday... It backed up traffic northbound for miles... Monroe Ave in Lowell to Sunset Ave in Springdale, over 6 miles.  I have never seen traffic backed up that bad... It was just miles upon miles of cars piled up.

Who's running the show here?  Why wasn't this done at night?  AHTD?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on October 06, 2014, 09:53:59 AM
The bridge at Rocky Dell Hollow Road (the final Arkansas exit heading northbound on future I-49/BV bypass) is cement covered at the top now, though at mid-week there was only chat on either side of the bridge.  Talked with a man on the construction team who said the concrete spreader for the section from Rocky Dell Hollow to the new west side of former Hiwasse Arkansas 72 bridge (northern terminus of the first section of the BV Bypass opened earlier this year) starts spreading concrete tomorrow.  Snapped some pictures and I'll try to upload them when possible.
Good to hear.  It's just so sad that this very needed bypass took this long, and it's only a 2 laner.  I just don't get it, especially when I look at what other road projects have gone ahead in AR...

They shut down a lane on I-49 today and Saturday... It backed up traffic northbound for miles... Monroe Ave in Lowell to Sunset Ave in Springdale, over 6 miles.  I have never seen traffic backed up that bad... It was just miles upon miles of cars piled up.

Who's running the show here?  Why wasn't this done at night?  AHTD?

I know the electric company was hanging new lines recently and had to restrict lanes. Could this have been it?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: The Great Zo on October 06, 2014, 11:08:37 AM
Here are some pictures I took of the "Hiwasse Bypass" on Sunday, August 24. Just wanted to document the progress while I was driving through the area.

East end of the bypass, looking east:

(http://i.imgur.com/ANTXlFP.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/w0Dv8Jf.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/QbUBeJ3.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/agKyTQC.jpg)

East end of the bypass, looking west:

(http://i.imgur.com/JZWDNFS.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/ue8dBE2.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/SjT9MGw.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/WgivRaY.jpg)

Driving the bypass:

(http://i.imgur.com/xfROtGd.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/XlDhvNZ.jpg)

West end of the bypass, looking southeast:

(http://i.imgur.com/1IyOb7G.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/GCKtjGD.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/7DR92m0.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/u2zHLBo.jpg)

West end of the bypass, looking northwest:

(http://i.imgur.com/BzPU436.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/sotPft9.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/f8wknFb.jpg)

Air Force plane in Gravette:

(http://i.imgur.com/g8Pi0aQ.jpg)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on October 06, 2014, 08:38:36 PM
I believe that plane is a T-33 from the 1950s.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on October 07, 2014, 02:30:02 AM
They shut down a lane on I-49 today and Saturday... It backed up traffic northbound for miles... Monroe Ave in Lowell to Sunset Ave in Springdale, over 6 miles.  I have never seen traffic backed up that bad... It was just miles upon miles of cars piled up.

Who's running the show here?  Why wasn't this done at night?  AHTD?

I know the electric company was hanging new lines recently and had to restrict lanes. Could this have been it?
http://www.4029tv.com/news/highway-department-believes-weekend-went-well-despite-traffic-delays/28980828

The news story speaks for itself.  I sat in that for 45 minutes.  Fix NWA!


Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on October 07, 2014, 09:10:11 AM
They shut down a lane on I-49 today and Saturday... It backed up traffic northbound for miles... Monroe Ave in Lowell to Sunset Ave in Springdale, over 6 miles.  I have never seen traffic backed up that bad... It was just miles upon miles of cars piled up.

Who's running the show here?  Why wasn't this done at night?  AHTD?

I know the electric company was hanging new lines recently and had to restrict lanes. Could this have been it?
http://www.4029tv.com/news/highway-department-believes-weekend-went-well-despite-traffic-delays/28980828

The news story speaks for itself.  I sat in that for 45 minutes.  Fix NWA!


OK, I missed that memo ;)
Actually, this part of "fixing" NWA. The road is 25+ years old and no one ever anticipated the growth in the area and need for better roads....until it was too late.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on October 07, 2014, 01:31:45 PM
Quote
"I have pleaded with him, given the opportunities I see in my own district, I've pleaded with him to come down to the district and see it first hand," Womack said, adding that the process of getting the Pennsylvania Republican to Arkansas began with a series of presentations in Washington highlighting the local infrastructure needs.

Shuster's visit not only gives Womack and local and state officials the opportunity to highlight the infrastructure needs including dredging the Arkansas River to 12 feet, but it gives Shuster an opportunity to see first hand the ongoing work to make Arkansas stand out as a state that is investing more local money in federal projects, such as completing Interstate 49 and highway rehabilitation across the state.

Womack said he and Shuster started the day in Benton County with a flyover of the Bella Vista Bypass that will eventually reroute traffic away from the city and through rural Benton County and McDonald County in Missouri. A vote for an increase in taxes to fund Missouri's portion of the project and several other statewide projects failed to win approval earlier this year, putting into question when the project could be completed.

After meeting with stakeholders in Northwest Arkansas, Womack brought Shuster to the Fort Smith area, where the two were presented with information on infrastructure needs along the Arkansas River, such as the dredging, but also discussed in detail additional I-49 construction. Shuster said he was impressed with the intermodal opportunities he saw in region, noting that highway, water and rail were "the fundamentals for growing an economy and you have all that right here in Fort Smith."

He said the knowledge of the region he gained through Monday's trip would be beneficial when returning to Washington to work on a "surface transportation bill.”

"This will be something that we look at and try to focus those dollars really on the major corridors in this country that move freight, that move people, and I-49 is one of those corridors. So (I will be) working with Steve (Womack) in Washington on the next surface bill, making sure we're focusing those dollars to go to places that you see right here, this roadway, that need to be completed from Canada down to Louisiana.”

The surface transportation bill Shuster discussed would likely be a five to six-year bill to appropriate funds for as many as 40 different transportation corridors across the nation, of which I-49 would likely be included, he said.

http://www.thecitywire.com/node/35008#.VDQWkPldXUR
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on October 15, 2014, 10:30:16 PM
Quote
"I have pleaded with him, given the opportunities I see in my own district, I've pleaded with him to come down to the district and see it first hand," Womack said, adding that the process of getting the Pennsylvania Republican to Arkansas began with a series of presentations in Washington highlighting the local infrastructure needs ....
[Shuster] said the knowledge of the region he gained through Monday's trip would be beneficial when returning to Washington to work on a "surface transportation bill.”
"This will be something that we look at and try to focus those dollars really on the major corridors in this country that move freight, that move people, and I-49 is one of those corridors. So (I will be) working with Steve (Womack) in Washington on the next surface bill, making sure we're focusing those dollars to go to places that you see right here, this roadway, that need to be completed from Canada down to Louisiana.”
The surface transportation bill Shuster discussed would likely be a five to six-year bill to appropriate funds for as many as 40 different transportation corridors across the nation, of which I-49 would likely be included, he said.
http://www.thecitywire.com/node/35008#.VDQWkPldXUR

This October 8 article (http://arkansasnews.com/news/arkansas/shuster-womack-eye-many-options-highway-trust-fund) indicates that Arkansas is willing to put up 60 to 65% of the funding for I-49 in order to complete it, with an immediate focus on the I-49 Arkansas River bridge and the associated thirteen-mile stretch from I-40 to the section currently under construction at Chaffee Crossing (where is the money supposed to come from?):

Quote
“A lot of states including Arkansas have been saying ”˜We don’t have time to wait for this, so we’re going to put up 60 or 65 percent and take a 40 percent piece from the federal government and move forward,’” Shuster said. “I think we ought to be rewarding states that are doing that and get those projects moving quicker.”
Womack and Shuster said their goal is to get a five- to six-year Highway Trust Fund bill passed next year to create some “certainty”  for large ongoing projects like a 13-mile stretch of Interstate 49 and a bridge across the Arkansas River at Alma, which have a combined estimate of $550 million. The longer it is put off, the more it will cost, Womack added.
“We have to figure out the funding, and there are a number of different options on the table, and that will determine the five- to six-year bill,”  Shuster said. “Once we do that, states can say ”˜OK there’s X amount of dollars in that trust fund, now let’s start allocating.’”

This TV video clip (http://www.4029tv.com/politics/commitment-2014-arkansas-senatorial-debate-how-will-you-ensure-federal-funding-for-insterstate-49/29151072) features responses from Arkansas U.S. Senatorial candidates Mark Pryor and Tom Cotton to an I-49-specific question, "How will you ensure federal funding for Interstate 49, and do you support earmarks for Arkansas highway projects?"  With Shuster's above-quoted comments hinting at a movement towards quasi-earmarks for major corridors (such as I-49) and stepped-up funding by Arkansas, I wish the panelists and/or moderator would have used Shuster's comments as the basis for a followup question regarding what type of Senatorial earmark reform each candidate might deem acceptable to help finish I-49 (or whether the current MAP-21 provisions regarding freight corridors already sufficiently serve that purpose), whether Arkansas should put up 60 to 65% of the funding, and whether they have any idea where Arkansas would find the money to pay that share.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: adventurernumber1 on October 18, 2014, 11:56:28 PM
There is no general topic for I-49 as a whole, so I decided to create one, also along with a question:

Have they done any work or preparation at all for the future section of I-49 between Texarkana and Fort Smith in Arkansas? I personally haven't thought that there's a lot of activity going on with that section at this point in time.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: NE2 on October 19, 2014, 12:16:10 AM
Between the ends of the new Fort Smith and Texarkana bypasses? Nothing on the ground, but somewhere in https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3324 is discussion of the alignment details.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on October 19, 2014, 01:00:51 AM
AHTD posted links to relevant FEIS documents here:

https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3324.msg279459#msg279459

Just ignore the post's Reply Number.   :evilgrin:

edit

AHTD has also posted information about I-49 logs and exit numbers in this post:

https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3321.msg293262#msg293262

... which served as a basis for a thread about the exit numbers:

https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=13010.0
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on October 19, 2014, 07:53:33 PM
I've been out of town for a few days, so I apologize is this has already been announced:

There will be a ribbon cutting for I-49 south of Doddridge at Noon on November 10, 2014 at the Louisiana-Arkansas State Line, officially opening the roadway.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on October 20, 2014, 04:15:09 PM
Have they done any work or preparation at all for the future section of I-49 between Texarkana and Fort Smith in Arkansas? I personally haven't thought that there's a lot of activity going on with that section at this point in time.
Nothing on the ground
AHTD posted links to relevant FEIS documents here:
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3324.msg279459#msg279459
AHTD has also posted information about I-49 logs and exit numbers in this post:
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3321.msg293262#msg293262
... which served as a basis for a thread about the exit numbers:
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=13010.0

Also, in this post (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3324.msg271196#msg271196), AHTD described how the remainder of I-49 in Arkansas might play out:

... The current gross estimate for completing everything is $2.8 Billion .... Currently we are estimating 24 months for the U.S. Highway 70 (Broadway) bridge over the Arkansas River at Little Rock to be out of service while the old structure is demolished and the new one constructed. That is an estimate based on a fast-track schedule. A bridge over the Arkansas and Red Rivers on new location is not likely to be fast-tracked .... So how would this all play out if the money were available? While nothing is written in stone, it’s reasonable to assume that as money does come available, we would start by constructing bypasses around several of the communities along the route — Mena, DeQueen, Waldron, etc. Then as more money becomes available, we would begin to link those bypasses. Eventually we would have a highway.

Who knows?  If Missouri takes a long time to complete their section of the Bella Vista Bypass, and if the Arkansas River bridge runs into severe funding challenges, then in a few years we might see work begin on one of the bypasses that AHTD mentioned.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on October 24, 2014, 06:13:10 PM
City wire article on the roundabout at Bella Vista/Bentonville (http://www.thecitywire.com/node/35238#.VErOhfnF_UQ).
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on October 24, 2014, 06:39:09 PM
Are they retarded? A roundabout on a mainline interstate?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: NE2 on October 24, 2014, 06:40:38 PM
Didn't we already discuss this?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on October 24, 2014, 07:06:35 PM
Only if poo.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: NE2 on October 24, 2014, 07:16:49 PM
Poo. (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3324.msg273487#msg273487)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on October 24, 2014, 08:03:17 PM
Danny Straessel may have the hardest job in Arkansas. Explaining the bonehead AHTD decisions to the general boneheaded public

I hope he makes $150k/year
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on October 24, 2014, 08:14:18 PM
Are they retarded? A roundabout on a mainline interstate?

"Interim solution". Translation: we'll do it until 49 reaches Missouri, then we'll rebuild it all over again :p
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on October 24, 2014, 08:16:57 PM

And where does the bypass go for now? Suburban nowhere.

Gravette, Arkansas: Gateway to Pineville :p
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on October 24, 2014, 08:19:27 PM
(http://brazil.com.bz/images/rdhbridge.jpg)

Had a little "Hello!" moment tonight.

As Grzrd said, a big (though not yet the "biggest") event for I-49 Arkansas will be in a bit over two weeks when the Texarkana/Shreveport segment is officially opened.  But very quietly another event happened this week, as I discovered.  The third and final Arkansas-side Bella Vista highway overpass (not connected with that roundabout mess / the future BVB/I-49 interchange and the BV/Bentonville line) is now open at Rocky Dell Hollow Road, though obviously it doesn't yet connect fully to the future interstate 49.  I hope it's partially visible in this pic I took an hour ago looking westbound as the sun was setting.

The bridge will be four lanes.  It links on the east side to both of west Bella Vista's main thoroughfares, Glasgow and Highlands.  (Neither of which picks up east of Forest Hills...they each merge about a long block before the gate into the Highlands (what west Bella Vista is called).  East of Forest Hills the combined road becomes Lancashire, which indeed is the primary east-west corridor for the rest of Bella Vista.  Rocky Dell narrows to two lanes about 1/8 mile east of the brand new bridge.  Both Glasgow and Highlands are also two-lane (and winding and narrow at that).  On the west side of the bridge about 1/4 mile, the new road from the bridge dead ends into a perpendicular new road which runs about 1/2 or more of a mile each direction (north and south) before turning back into a dirt road.  Brand new above ground utility lines have been installed paralleling this road, obviously for predicted development at the interchange.

Just another piece of this big puzzle, but I wasn't expecting it to be open.  The concrete for the first two lanes of the BVB south of the bridge is being slowly spread from north to south.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on October 26, 2014, 12:28:32 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=He-qx16srSM (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=He-qx16srSM) YouTube - 40/29 News To Go for October 25th

First of all, Highway (Arkansas) 102 only exists west of I-49.  East of I-49, it is US 62.  Was there a AR 102 designation east of I-49?

With that out of that way, did AHTD combine jobs?  The Pinnacle Hills exit to the US 62/AR 102 is enough to give any regular commuter hell.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on October 26, 2014, 11:52:02 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=He-qx16srSM (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=He-qx16srSM) YouTube - 40/29 News To Go for October 25th

First of all, Highway (Arkansas) 102 only exists west of I-49.  East of I-49, it is US 62.  Was there a AR 102 designation east of I-49?

With that out of that way, did AHTD combine jobs?  The Pinnacle Hills exit to the US 62/AR 102 is enough to give any regular commuter hell.


Before I-49(aka I-540, aka US 71 Freeway) 102 ran east to N Second St and the junction of US 62 and AR 94, in addition to its trek west to AR 43.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on October 29, 2014, 01:37:39 PM
If you enjoy images of rock blasting explosions, then this TV video (http://5newsonline.com/2014/10/28/explosions-clear-way-for-bella-vista-bypass/) about construction of the Bella Vista Bypass should be entertaining:

Quote
Some people living in Bentonville say they are hearing explosions. That’s because the Arkansas State Highway and Transportation Department is rock blasting in the area as part of the construction on the Bella Vista Bypass.
Adam Jenkins, project manager at Kolb Grading, said construction crews are working on a 6.36-mile section of the bypass. Jenkins, whose company is under contract with the state, said crews are constructing a two-lane roadway between U.S. 71B in Bella Vista and Arkansas 72 southeast of Hiwasse.
“This whole six\-mile section and the other two sections through Hiwasse and Gravette will eventually get two extra lanes on the north side of them for the entire stretch,”  he said.
Jenkins said in order to finish this section of the bypass crews need to take down part of a hill next to Interstate 49 to level the landscape, and they are doing that by blasting it.
“We are quite a ways higher at this point, and that road has to follow a gentle slope for all of the vehicles and traffic,”  he said.  “It has to fall quite a few feet in elevation to get down to the level of Walton Boulevard.”

The rock blasting is happening on the west side of McKissic Creek Road in Benton County. Crews said the blasting will continue through the end of this year.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on October 29, 2014, 05:11:43 PM
If you enjoy images of rock blasting explosions, then this TV video (http://5newsonline.com/2014/10/28/explosions-clear-way-for-bella-vista-bypass/) about construction of the Bella Vista Bypass should be entertaining:

Quote
Some people living in Bentonville say they are hearing explosions. That’s because the Arkansas State Highway and Transportation Department is rock blasting in the area as part of the construction on the Bella Vista Bypass.
Adam Jenkins, project manager at Kolb Grading, said construction crews are working on a 6.36-mile section of the bypass. Jenkins, whose company is under contract with the state, said crews are constructing a two-lane roadway between U.S. 71B in Bella Vista and Arkansas 72 southeast of Hiwasse.
“This whole six\-mile section and the other two sections through Hiwasse and Gravette will eventually get two extra lanes on the north side of them for the entire stretch,”  he said.
Jenkins said in order to finish this section of the bypass crews need to take down part of a hill next to Interstate 49 to level the landscape, and they are doing that by blasting it.
“We are quite a ways higher at this point, and that road has to follow a gentle slope for all of the vehicles and traffic,”  he said.  “It has to fall quite a few feet in elevation to get down to the level of Walton Boulevard.”

The rock blasting is happening on the west side of McKissic Creek Road in Benton County. Crews said the blasting will continue through the end of this year.
I've not been around for the blasting, but I've seen where the road is going through.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: robbones on October 29, 2014, 07:04:14 PM
I remember when they were building 49 and hearing all of the blasts while at school
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on October 29, 2014, 10:01:22 PM
I remember when they were building 49 and hearing all of the blasts while at school


I think it would have been interesting to see the Bobby Hopper Tunnel being built.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: robbones on October 30, 2014, 05:00:15 AM
I remember when they were building 49 and hearing all of the blasts while at school


I think it would have been interesting to see the Bobby Hopper Tunnel being built.

I think they did a story since it was the first tunnel built in Arkansas.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Henry on October 30, 2014, 02:29:56 PM
So it'll be anybody's guess as to when the missing link (from Fort Smith to Texarkana) will be completed. But it's good to see the sections to the north and south of it complete and ready to drive.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on October 30, 2014, 06:30:29 PM
So it'll be anybody's guess as to when the missing link (from Fort Smith to Texarkana) will be completed. But it's good to see the sections to the north and south of it complete and ready to drive.
All the politicians are running around saying "we need to finish I-49", but I've yet to any of them actually propose anything.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: codyg1985 on October 31, 2014, 07:00:53 AM
So it'll be anybody's guess as to when the missing link (from Fort Smith to Texarkana) will be completed. But it's good to see the sections to the north and south of it complete and ready to drive.
All the politicians are running around saying "we need to finish I-49", but I've yet to any of them actually propose anything.

I'm surprised that tolling hasn't been brought up as an option.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on October 31, 2014, 07:52:25 AM
Probably because that would cost more votes than it would gain
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: codyg1985 on October 31, 2014, 07:54:37 AM
Probably because that would cost more votes than it would gain

While that may be true, I don't know if Arkansas voters would be willing to have another tax hike to support building I-49.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on October 31, 2014, 10:05:32 AM
Probably because that would cost more votes than it would gain

While that may be true, I don't know if Arkansas voters would be willing to have another tax hike to support building I-49.

It can be done, but would take some creativity & hard choices. Neither of which I see happening in the immediate future.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on October 31, 2014, 10:33:41 AM
Probably because that would cost more votes than it would gain

While that may be true, I don't know if Arkansas voters would be willing to have another tax hike to support building I-49.

Exactly, I dont see either as being popular

Thats why we havent been hearing specifics on the stump
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on October 31, 2014, 11:51:10 AM
Horses running loose on Bella Vista U.S. 71 cause crash, Highway patrol blames A T & T workers. (http://www.4029tv.com/news/horses-running-loose-in-bella-vista-cause-crashes/29427806?utm_source=hootsuite&utm_medium=facebook&utm_campaign=4029%2Bnews)

FINISH THIS ABOMINABLE BYPASS/I-49 SECTION A.S.A.P.!  PLEASE!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Wayward Memphian on October 31, 2014, 01:06:44 PM
Probably because that would cost more votes than it would gain

While that may be true, I don't know if Arkansas voters would be willing to have another tax hike to support building I-49.

It's horse manure, they can drive the old US71 if they choose to not pay up. Every person I know would gladly give 5 bucks each way for a interstate from FSM to Texarkana. Just like no one batches about paying 2.50 each way to Tulsa. It's folks that would likely never travel or rarely use it that does the griping along with the constantly whining trucking industry that gives us the governed truck passing another governed truck clusters on I-40.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on October 31, 2014, 01:51:22 PM
Well really all that matters is the trucks

If they raise hell, they have the power to kill it

I-49 isnt being built for the convenience of people vacationing in NOLA though. This whole thing is about the trucks. They want the road but not if they have to bear the brunt of the cost
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: dfwmapper on October 31, 2014, 02:43:03 PM
It's horse manure, they can drive the old US71 if they choose to not pay up. Every person I know would gladly give 5 bucks each way for a interstate from FSM to Texarkana. Just like no one batches about paying 2.50 each way to Tulsa. It's folks that would likely never travel or rarely use it that does the griping along with the constantly whining trucking industry that gives us the governed truck passing another governed truck clusters on I-40.
$5? Triple or quadruple that and you might be a little closer to what it would actually cost. 180 miles of new construction through some pretty rough terrain isn't going to happen at 2.78 cents per mile.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on October 31, 2014, 04:54:10 PM
Probably because that would cost more votes than it would gain

While that may be true, I don't know if Arkansas voters would be willing to have another tax hike to support building I-49.

It's horse manure, they can drive the old US71 if they choose to not pay up. Every person I know would gladly give 5 bucks each way for a interstate from FSM to Texarkana. Just like no one batches about paying 2.50 each way to Tulsa. It's folks that would likely never travel or rarely use it that does the griping along with the constantly whining trucking industry that gives us the governed truck passing another governed truck clusters on I-40.

BUT, Arkansas Highway Law would have to be rewritten: Toll Roads are verboten (as are Red Light Cameras)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on November 01, 2014, 06:18:52 AM
I remember when they were building 49 and hearing all of the blasts while at school


I think it would have been interesting to see the Bobby Hopper Tunnel being built.

I think they did a story since it was the first tunnel built in Arkansas.

The first highway tunnel but not the first tunnel, period. There is a railroad tunnel north of Conway.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on November 01, 2014, 08:56:59 AM
There are also several railroad tunnels (at least 3, to my recollection) on the current Missouri & North Arkansas (former Missouri Pacific) railroad between the Missouri state line south of Branson/Hollister and Norfork.  Plus the railroad tunnel on the Arkansas & Missouri railroad (former St. Louis San Francisco) south of Winslow, about parallel in latitude to the Bobby Hopper tunnel.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Wayward Memphian on November 01, 2014, 09:43:23 AM
Probably because that would cost more votes than it would gain

While that may be true, I don't know if Arkansas voters would be willing to have another tax hike to support building I-49.

It's horse manure, they can drive the old US71 if they choose to not pay up. Every person I know would gladly give 5 bucks each way for a interstate from FSM to Texarkana. Just like no one batches about paying 2.50 each way to Tulsa. It's folks that would likely never travel or rarely use it that does the griping along with the constantly whining trucking industry that gives us the governed truck passing another governed truck clusters on I-40.

BUT, Arkansas Highway Law would have to be rewritten: Toll Roads are verboten (as are Red Light Cameras)

If you limit the scope of a ballot measure to I 49, I-69 and maybe a couple of other routes like a Turnpike across North Arkansas for an interstate quaility US 412. Speak the truth about the ecomonic benefits of being on two NAFTA influenced routes, I think you'll find Arkansas receptive. Just like they were when they voted for the bond issues and the sales tax for Game and Fish and State Parks.

Just one ad touting a third lane from LR to Memphis that was truck free would garner tons of support.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on November 01, 2014, 09:44:10 AM
 Missouri & Northern Arkansas Railroad (formerly MOPAC) has a tunnel at Cotter
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on November 04, 2014, 08:39:52 PM
Asa Hutchinson (R), like the incoming State Senate Majority leader Kim Hendren a native of Gravette, AR where 3/4 of the future Bella Vista Bypass (Arkansas-side) runs, has won election tonight.  Can't be bad news for future I-49, though we don't know how good it will be yet.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on November 04, 2014, 08:42:02 PM
Um, yeah it can be
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on November 04, 2014, 09:58:51 PM
Asa Hutchinson (R), like the incoming State Senate Majority leader Kim Hendren a native of Gravette, AR where 3/4 of the future Bella Vista Bypass (Arkansas-side) runs, has won election tonight.  Can't be bad news for future I-49, though we don't know how good it will be yet.
I'm curious what his plan is, if he has one. During the campaign, he would talk about in vague terms without saying what he wanted to do. I have suspicions, but will keep my political opinion out of this.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on November 05, 2014, 11:55:37 AM
Um, yeah it can be

Maybe, if they pass deep tax cuts.  I couldn't get mad at that.

But I've yet to see many abandoned interstates.  And (like it or not) "Northwest Arkansas/Fort Smith" is becoming a major metro area (bigger than Wichita/Hutchinson, Des Moines/Ames, Huntsville/Decatur/Florence, Chattanooga/Dalton, Springfield/Branson, Shreveport/Texarkana, etc.) that NEEDS a north/south through interstate, and (the more I-49 is completed around Fort Smith) will see more jobs and economic growth for the current 800,000+ people of the combined NWA/FSM metro area.

So, yeah, I don't think they'll be against I-49.  (Especially since Steve Womack (R-AR) just took House Transportation Committee Chairman Bud Shuster (R-PA) on that little helicopter ride along the future interstate path last month.)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on November 07, 2014, 07:55:44 AM
I don't see Asa supporting any sort of spending large enough to progress I-49. Hell he was probably against the CAP program

Just because he is not against it doesn't mean he is a boon for I-49 just because he is from NWA
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on November 07, 2014, 10:01:17 AM
I don't see Asa supporting any sort of spending large enough to progress I-49. Hell he was probably against the CAP program

Just because he is not against it doesn't mean he is a boon for I-49 just because he is from NWA
Asa talks about lower taxes, but 49 almost needs a bond issue, unless you raise gas taxes again like Huckabee did
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on November 07, 2014, 11:43:43 AM
I don't see Asa supporting any sort of spending large enough to progress I-49. Hell he was probably against the CAP program

Just because he is not against it doesn't mean he is a boon for I-49 just because he is from NWA
Asa talks about lower taxes, but 49 almost needs a bond issue, unless you raise gas taxes again like Huckabee did

As we speculate on this, the clamp gets even tighter on Arkansas (and the small part of McDonald County, MO) with the opening of the Texarkana/Shreveport I-49 section in three days...
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: codyg1985 on November 07, 2014, 12:13:03 PM
Don't forget the small portion that goes through Bowie County, TX.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: TheStranger on November 07, 2014, 12:28:13 PM
Apologies if this question was already asked but...when the Texas portion of I-49 is constructed, will the exit numbering continue from the Arkansas sequence?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: codyg1985 on November 07, 2014, 12:30:29 PM
I would assume that to be the case. A precedent for that is I-24 dipping down from Tennessee into Georgia then back into Tennessee.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: galador on November 07, 2014, 12:58:17 PM
Apologies if this question was already asked but...when the Texas portion of I-49 is constructed, will the exit numbering continue from the Arkansas sequence?

Based on a post from AHTD (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3321.msg293262#msg293262) earlier this year, it appears that it will.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on November 09, 2014, 11:35:55 AM
Looks as if I'll be a No Show at the Ribbon Cutting: I've had a last minute "emergency" and won't make it. Very slim chance I msy get to Day Trip, but iffy.  :thumbdown: :thumbdown:

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: robbones on November 09, 2014, 01:09:07 PM
Any news on the Fort Smith section
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Henry on November 09, 2014, 01:24:07 PM
Any news on the Fort Smith section

Well, there's one small piece on the former Fort Chaffee that's completed and open to traffic, at least according to the latest Rand McNally atlas. To get a better idea of what the entire route will look like, I refer you to the text listing on Froggie's website (http://www.ajfroggie.com/roads/fictional/future/i49la-ar-exits.htm).
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: galador on November 09, 2014, 01:27:04 PM
Any news on the Fort Smith section

Well, there's one small piece on the former Fort Chaffee that's completed and open to traffic, at least according to the latest Rand McNally atlas. To get a better idea of what the entire route will look like, I refer you to the text listing on Froggie's website (http://www.ajfroggie.com/roads/fictional/future/i49la-ar-exits.htm).

I don't think it's open, yet. Most of the exits, they haven't been started paving yet, and I don't think any of the sections have had lines painted (unless they've made extremely good progress since I passed by a week or so ago).
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on November 09, 2014, 06:13:53 PM
Any news on the Fort Smith section

IDriveArkansas (http://www.idrivearkansas.com/) is still estimating an early 2015 completion date (it will be designated upon completion as Future I-49 and I think as AR 549 instead of US 71):

(http://i.imgur.com/w1qh722.jpg)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on November 09, 2014, 10:28:38 PM
Any news on the Fort Smith section

Well, there's one small piece on the former Fort Chaffee that's completed and open to traffic, at least according to the latest Rand McNally atlas. To get a better idea of what the entire route will look like, I refer you to the text listing on Froggie's website (http://www.ajfroggie.com/roads/fictional/future/i49la-ar-exits.htm).

I don't think it's open, yet. Most of the exits, they haven't been started paving yet, and I don't think any of the sections have had lines painted (unless they've made extremely good progress since I passed by a week or so ago).

It's not. it's close, but not yet open. I think they are wrapping up the work at 71. If I get free, I'll try to check  this week on progress.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on November 10, 2014, 04:22:20 PM
It's  official (http://www.arkansasmatters.com/story/d/story/i-49-opens-between-texarkana-and-shreveport/31221/Y-h5RW7NakuvnzKpuYRNwg) : I-49 is now open at the AR/LA State Line.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on November 10, 2014, 05:59:15 PM
It's  official (http://www.arkansasmatters.com/story/d/story/i-49-opens-between-texarkana-and-shreveport/31221/Y-h5RW7NakuvnzKpuYRNwg) : I-49 is now open at the AR/LA State Line.

What in the world is up with the stripe that seems to end at the state line (Louisiana's, I believe) in that photograph?   :confused:
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: txstateends on November 10, 2014, 07:05:42 PM
Meanwhile..... someone has goofed up by re-labeling the I-540 section in Fort Smith as I-49 on Google Maps ( http://goo.gl/maps/uUo42 ).
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on November 10, 2014, 07:26:54 PM
It's  official (http://www.arkansasmatters.com/story/d/story/i-49-opens-between-texarkana-and-shreveport/31221/Y-h5RW7NakuvnzKpuYRNwg) : I-49 is now open at the AR/LA State Line.

What in the world is up with the stripe that seems to end at the state line (Louisiana's, I believe) in that photograph?   :confused:

The white on black? Probably lane separation line.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: NE2 on November 10, 2014, 07:48:33 PM
It's  official (http://www.arkansasmatters.com/story/d/story/i-49-opens-between-texarkana-and-shreveport/31221/Y-h5RW7NakuvnzKpuYRNwg) : I-49 is now open at the AR/LA State Line.

What in the world is up with the stripe that seems to end at the state line (Louisiana's, I believe) in that photograph?   :confused:

It's a standard lane separator?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on November 10, 2014, 09:49:01 PM
It's  official (http://www.arkansasmatters.com/story/d/story/i-49-opens-between-texarkana-and-shreveport/31221/Y-h5RW7NakuvnzKpuYRNwg) : I-49 is now open at the AR/LA State Line.

What in the world is up with the stripe that seems to end at the state line (Louisiana's, I believe) in that photograph?   :confused:

I know that...but isn't it supposed to continue across the state lines instead of just ending in Arkansas?

BTW, I think this is an open Facebook page for the city of Doddridge, AR.  A FB friend posted a picture and I surmised it was from this album, so here are some other pics from the site:  https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.795828830476665.1073741861.284528544940032&type=1

It's a standard lane separator?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: rickmastfan67 on November 10, 2014, 10:19:59 PM
Meanwhile..... someone has goofed up by re-labeling the I-540 section in Fort Smith as I-49 on Google Maps ( http://goo.gl/maps/uUo42 ).

The person changed it on 11/3.  He gave this to justify the change: http://5newsonline.com/2014/04/20/signs-go-up-this-week-for-official-name-change-of-interstate-540/
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: rlb2024 on November 10, 2014, 10:20:28 PM
It's  official (http://www.arkansasmatters.com/story/d/story/i-49-opens-between-texarkana-and-shreveport/31221/Y-h5RW7NakuvnzKpuYRNwg) : I-49 is now open at the AR/LA State Line.

What in the world is up with the stripe that seems to end at the state line (Louisiana's, I believe) in that photograph?   :confused:

It's a standard lane separator?

Louisiana is now doing that on several of its concrete roads.  The black edges accent the white lane separation stripe on the almost-white concrete.  You will also see it where there is flat black on one end of the white stripe -- that is how they are re-striping the lane separators on the  Lake Pontchartrain Causeway.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: NE2 on November 10, 2014, 10:31:31 PM
I know that...but isn't it supposed to continue across the state lines instead of just ending in Arkansas?
Ever hear of a dashed line?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on November 10, 2014, 11:49:14 PM
Sigh...OK, I give up.  Regardless, it's a day and event to celebrate.  :clap:
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: apjung on November 11, 2014, 12:10:03 AM
Here's a great article on the AR/LA segment ribbon cutting and opening
http://txktoday.com/news/49-ribbon-cutting-ceremony-opens-49-shreveport/

Nice aerial drone footage
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on November 11, 2014, 02:00:44 PM
in this post (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3324.msg271196#msg271196), AHTD described how the remainder of I-49 in Arkansas might play out:
While nothing is written in stone, it’s reasonable to assume that as money does come available, we would start by constructing bypasses around several of the communities along the route — Mena, DeQueen, Waldron, etc.

This Texarkana Gazette article (behind paywall) (http://www.texarkanagazette.com/news/2014/11/11/i-49-opens-from-city-to-shreveport-600007.php) suggests that Mena may be the first town on the Fort Smith-to-Texarkana section to have I-49 construction:

Quote
Curt Green, president of the I-49 International Coalition ....
said Mena, Ark., now stands right in the middle of the 150-mile stretch of I-49 still left to be completed (which would connect Texarkana to Fort Smith).
“Right now I-49 is about 80 to 85 percent complete and right now Mena is putting up more money per capital the any other Arkansas city to see that I-49 comes through.”
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on November 13, 2014, 08:45:53 AM
City wire article on the roundabout at Bella Vista/Bentonville (http://www.thecitywire.com/node/35238#.VErOhfnF_UQ).
Danny Straessel may have the hardest job in Arkansas. Explaining the bonehead AHTD decisions to the general boneheaded public

AHTD has posted some materials from a recent meeting about the roundabout, including a map (http://www.arkansashighways.com/public_meetings/2014/CA0904/CA0904_2014.10.23_PIPIDisp_DistrictEmail.pdf) that shows both the terrain for the project and the roundabout:

(http://i.imgur.com/R7c2RGt.jpg)

The materials also include a Roundabout Striping Detail (http://www.arkansashighways.com/public_meetings/2014/CA0904/rCA0904%20roundabout%20(updated).pdf):

(http://i.imgur.com/u4gIDci.jpg)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: galador on November 13, 2014, 09:20:31 AM
Certainly an interesting design...
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on November 13, 2014, 09:38:23 AM
I assume that roundabout will be a lower cost, temporary connection between the 2-lane Belle Vista Bypass and I-49.

There's no way that thing is going to fly as a permanent connection once the Belle Vista Bypass is 4-laned, fully built out to Interstate standards and intended to be marked as I-49. That kind of "Breezewood" might prevent the bypass from being called I-49 unless the roundabout is replaced with a different, proper interchange or bypassed by thru traffic via flyover ramps built over the roundabout.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: codyg1985 on November 13, 2014, 10:30:59 AM
There's no way that thing is going to fly as a permanent connection once the Belle Vista Bypass is 4-laned, fully built out to Interstate standards and intended to be marked as I-49. That kind of "Breezewood" might prevent the bypass from being called I-49 unless the roundabout is replaced with a different, proper interchange or bypassed by thru traffic via flyover ramps built over the roundabout.

I believe the ultimate plan is to construct a SPUI at that location. I'm sure until that happens, the future I-49 will be signed as AR 549.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: apjung on November 14, 2014, 01:10:50 AM
Google Maps has updated I-49, now waiting for the updated satellite maps. It still looks so beautiful to see I-49 as one continuous stretch from Texarkana to Shreveport.
http://goo.gl/maps/9G0nC
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: dfwmapper on November 14, 2014, 06:05:19 AM
Google Maps has updated I-49, now waiting for the updated satellite maps. It still looks so beautiful to see I-49 as one continuous stretch from Texarkana to Shreveport.
http://goo.gl/maps/9G0nC
You're welcome. Now just trying to get that ugly 549 off the map...

*edit* reposted in Arkansas thread
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on November 14, 2014, 08:39:07 AM
Meanwhile..... someone has goofed up by re-labeling the I-540 section in Fort Smith as I-49 on Google Maps ( http://goo.gl/maps/uUo42 ).
The person changed it on 11/3.  He gave this to justify the change: http://5newsonline.com/2014/04/20/signs-go-up-this-week-for-official-name-change-of-interstate-540/
Now just trying to get that ugly 549 off the map...

While you are trying to get rid of that 549, please try and get rid of the 49 and return the 540 to Fort Smith.  The article cited to justify the change of I-540 to I-49 in the Fort Smith area clearly states that the change only went into effect from Alma northward to the Bella Vista area:

Quote
The Arkansas Highway Department got approval by the Federal Government Wednesday (April 16) to rename the route from Interstate 40 near Alma, to the U.S. Highway 71B Interchange south of Bella Vista.

Aside from reality, the change back to I-540 would be consistent with the article.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on November 14, 2014, 08:45:18 AM
Meanwhile..... someone has goofed up by re-labeling the I-540 section in Fort Smith as I-49 on Google Maps ( http://goo.gl/maps/uUo42 ).
The person changed it on 11/3.  He gave this to justify the change: http://5newsonline.com/2014/04/20/signs-go-up-this-week-for-official-name-change-of-interstate-540/
Now just trying to get that ugly 549 off the map...

While you are trying to get rid of that 549, please try and get rid of the 49 and return the 540 to Fort Smith.  The article cited to justify the change of I-540 to I-49 in the Fort Smith area clearly states that the change only went into effect from Alma northward to the Bella Vista area:

Quote
The Arkansas Highway Department got approval by the Federal Government Wednesday (April 16) to rename the route from Interstate 40 near Alma, to the U.S. Highway 71B Interchange south of Bella Vista.

Aside from reality, the change back to I-540 would be consistent with the article.

Plus our AHTD Forum Rep said "old" 540 would remain 540... and HAS
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: dfwmapper on November 14, 2014, 06:25:09 PM
While you are trying to get rid of that 549, please try and get rid of the 49 and return the 540 to Fort Smith.  The article cited to justify the change of I-540 to I-49 in the Fort Smith area clearly states that the change only went into effect from Alma northward to the Bella Vista area:

Quote
The Arkansas Highway Department got approval by the Federal Government Wednesday (April 16) to rename the route from Interstate 40 near Alma, to the U.S. Highway 71B Interchange south of Bella Vista.

Aside from reality, the change back to I-540 would be consistent with the article.
The US 271 portion has had I-49 removed, but the change back to I-540 between I-40 and US 271 is still pending.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on November 15, 2014, 11:50:26 AM
I-540 ends at the Oklahoma line but is unsigned west of US 271.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on November 16, 2014, 04:18:31 PM
I-540 ends at the Oklahoma line but is unsigned west of US 271.
Even though there's an end sign at 271?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on November 17, 2014, 01:17:48 AM
Since when is there an end sign at US 271?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on November 18, 2014, 08:35:09 AM
Since when is there an end sign at US 271?

There's a small green mileage sign END 540 14.7 (?).
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on November 18, 2014, 09:31:48 AM
Not sure if they mean 38,000 cars per day when I-49 is at least linked across the river, or when the new section in Barling/southeast Fort Smith is opened next year, but:

Quote
The next big piece for Chaffee Crossing has been a bit of a tantalizing tease: the completion of the Interstate 49 link, a 6.5-mile stretch that will connect state Highway 59 in Van Buren with U.S. Highway 71 in southeast Fort Smith. The link was scheduled to be completed by the end of this year but is now expected to be finished in early 2015.

FCRA officials traveled last week to south Arkansas to see the opening of the interstate at the Arkansas-Louisiana border. The completed interstate will eventually connect Canada with New Orleans, and Fort Smith’s profile should only increase with its location at the intersection of I-49 and I-40.

Owen said the stretch of interstate will send 35,000 cars daily through Chaffee Crossing, where there will be three exits. Cooper said almost all of those interchanges have long been scooped up by investors.

“It’s going to mean accessibility, visibility, traffic,”  Owen said.

http://www.arkansasbusiness.com/article/101879/investment-jobs-buoy-fort-smiths-chaffee-crossing?page=2
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on November 18, 2014, 03:01:29 PM
There's an exception:

(http://i167.photobucket.com/albums/u126/bugo348/i-540us271_zps43793039.jpg)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on November 24, 2014, 10:31:23 PM
I-49 has now officially replaced AR 549 from US 71/59 north of Texarkana towards the Louisiana State Line
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: dariusb on November 30, 2014, 11:55:37 PM
Cool beans! Now Arkansas needs to dig their heels in and get 'er done to Ft. Smith. C'mon lets go!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on December 01, 2014, 09:08:47 AM
Cool beans! Now Arkansas needs to dig their heels in and get 'er done to Ft. Smith. C'mon lets go!

First, they have to find the money.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: robbones on December 01, 2014, 02:27:19 PM
What are they going to do with the exit 98 on US 71 when the renumbering on I 49 north happens?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on December 01, 2014, 05:24:31 PM
Cool beans! Now Arkansas needs to dig their heels in and get 'er done to Ft. Smith. C'mon lets go!

You better hope you live a long time because I know I won't live to see it completed.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: dariusb on December 02, 2014, 03:42:15 AM
Cool beans! Now Arkansas needs to dig their heels in and get 'er done to Ft. Smith. C'mon lets go!

First, they have to find the money.
Very true.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on December 02, 2014, 05:10:25 PM
What are they going to do with the exit 98 on US 71 when the renumbering on I 49 north happens?

You mean AR 340? It should never have been given an exit number, IMO.  Hopefully, it will be un-numbered
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: adventurernumber1 on December 02, 2014, 05:49:32 PM
What are they going to do with the exit 98 on US 71 when the renumbering on I 49 north happens?

You mean AR 340? It should never have been given an exit number, IMO.  Hopefully, it will be un-numbered

Indeed, it should be un-numbered since I-49 will not be using US 71's route through Bella Vista, but it'll be bypassing it. Speaking of the section of I-49 that will be bypassing Bella Vista, anybody have any updates on it? Looking at Google Maps I can tell there's already a short smidget of freeway numbered as AR SR. 549 at Hiwasse.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on December 02, 2014, 08:01:20 PM
What are they going to do with the exit 98 on US 71 when the renumbering on I 49 north happens?

You mean AR 340? It should never have been given an exit number, IMO.  Hopefully, it will be un-numbered

Indeed, it should be un-numbered since I-49 will not be using US 71's route through Bella Vista, but it'll be bypassing it. Speaking of the section of I-49 that will be bypassing Bella Vista, anybody have any updates on it? Looking at Google Maps I can tell there's already a short smidget of freeway numbered as AR SR. 549 at Hiwasse.

They are blowing up rock near Bella Vista. There is also dirt work north of the western 549/72 junction.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on December 03, 2014, 02:14:38 AM
Why can't it remain Exit 98? What is it hurting to have an exit number? I-49's exit numbers will be in the 200s at this point and there won't be any confusion. Besides, I-49 traffic won't be anywhere near this exit. Numbered exits are always superior to unnumbered exits (I believe all exits should be numbered) and it's been exit 98 for years. Why should you have to say "Take the AR 340 exit" when it's always been "Take exit 98"? Removing the exit number would have no benefit for the traveler, especially the out of towner.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on December 03, 2014, 09:07:58 AM
Cool beans! Now Arkansas needs to dig their heels in and get 'er done to Ft. Smith. C'mon lets go!

First, they have to find the money.
Very true.


Dariusb, here's the big difference now:

Back in the 80s, 90s, maybe even the very early 2000s, it was foolish to dream of a completed I-49. (Or whatever the interstate would have been numbered.)

Now, with all that's happened and/or happening, it's ever-more-foolish NOT to dream of it.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on December 03, 2014, 09:18:10 AM
Cool beans! Now Arkansas needs to dig their heels in and get 'er done to Ft. Smith. C'mon lets go!

First, they have to find the money.
Very true.


Dariusb, here's the big difference now:

Back in the 80s, 90s, maybe even the very early 2000s, it was foolish to dream of a completed I-49. (Or whatever the interstate would have been numbered.)

Now, with all that's happened and/or happening, it's ever-more-foolish NOT to dream of it.

In the 80's, it was a "new and improved" US 71. Fayetteville to Bella Vista was built as a new 71. Alma to Fayetteville was proposed as a new 71. South of there, there had been rumblings of improving 71, but nothing much was done.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on December 03, 2014, 05:27:18 PM
Cool beans! Now Arkansas needs to dig their heels in and get 'er done to Ft. Smith. C'mon lets go!

First, they have to find the money.
Very true.


Dariusb, here's the big difference now:

Back in the 80s, 90s, maybe even the very early 2000s, it was foolish to dream of a completed I-49. (Or whatever the interstate would have been numbered.)

Now, with all that's happened and/or happening, it's ever-more-foolish NOT to dream of it.

In the 80's, it was a "new and improved" US 71. Fayetteville to Bella Vista was built as a new 71. Alma to Fayetteville was proposed as a new 71. South of there, there had been rumblings of improving 71, but nothing much was done.

Understood, US71.

Yet in the 80s, FSM/NWA didn't have 802,000+ people between them, plus a few of the world's largest corporations to boot...
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on December 03, 2014, 05:35:14 PM

Yet in the 80s, FSM/NWA didn't have 802,000+ people between them, plus a few of the world's largest corporations to boot...

I have an AHTD Crawford County map from 1969 (?) that showed a proposed extension of I-540 heading north,  so it was in some semblance of "planning" for years. It just took John Paul Hammerschmidt and lots of earmarks to make it happen.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: robbones on December 11, 2014, 05:42:39 PM
The Greenwood side of I 49 is starting to take shape. Northbound on ramp has the travel lane paved and the traffic lights have been installed.   I would say by spring the road should be open to traffic.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on December 11, 2014, 11:44:50 PM
The Greenwood side of I 49 is starting to take shape. Northbound on ramp has the travel lane paved and the traffic lights have been installed.   I would say by spring the road should be open to traffic.
Sign posts up yet? They were drilling post holes the week before Thanksgiving? Guess I need to pop down there to look. Barling ramps look paved, but no shoulders yet as of a week ago.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: robbones on December 12, 2014, 09:33:27 AM
Not yet
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on December 17, 2014, 03:45:11 PM
I'm not sure whether AHTD has confidence that MoDOT will be able to build their section of the Bella Vista Bypass in a few years or whether AHTD simply must honor its Connecting Arkansas Program commitment to Arkansas voters, but nevertheless a slide from the December 17 presentation to the Arkansas State Highway Commission (http://www.arkansashighways.com/PowerPoints/2014/121714_Commission%20Meeting.pdf) indicates that the final section of the BVB to the state line and the US 71 major interchange to replace the roundabout are scheduled for construction during the 2017-19 time period (page 28/38 of pdf):

(http://i.imgur.com/tQQTn2u.png)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on December 17, 2014, 08:33:00 PM
What are they going to do with hwy 70 east of Hot Springs?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on December 17, 2014, 08:41:01 PM
What are they going to do with hwy 70 east of Hot Springs?
http://connectingarkansasprogram.com/corridors/12/highway-70-garland-saline-county/#.VJIwlYfnRcY
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on December 17, 2014, 10:04:45 PM
What are they going to do with hwy 70 east of Hot Springs?
http://connectingarkansasprogram.com/corridors/12/highway-70-garland-saline-county/#.VJIwlYfnRcY

That doesn't really give much information. Is it going to be a divided highway or an "Arkansas freeway"? Are they going to straighten it out? If it ends up being undivided it will still be dangerous because of all the curves.

Speaking of that area, they need to extend AR 9 to Malvern to hook up with the southern portion. There's no good way to go from EB I-30 to NB AR 9 and vice versa without backtracking. It's a huge missing link in the state highway system.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: codyg1985 on December 18, 2014, 07:39:56 AM
What are they going to do with hwy 70 east of Hot Springs?
http://connectingarkansasprogram.com/corridors/12/highway-70-garland-saline-county/#.VJIwlYfnRcY

That doesn't really give much information. Is it going to be a divided highway or an "Arkansas freeway"? Are they going to straighten it out? If it ends up being undivided it will still be dangerous because of all the curves.

Speaking of that area, they need to extend AR 9 to Malvern to hook up with the southern portion. There's no good way to go from EB I-30 to NB AR 9 and vice versa without backtracking. It's a huge missing link in the state highway system.

Pure speculation, but the picture at the top of the page shows a divided highway, so maybe that is what will go in. We all can hope.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on December 18, 2014, 09:08:39 AM
I'm not sure whether AHTD has confidence that MoDOT will be able to build their section of the Bella Vista Bypass in a few years or whether AHTD simply must honor its Connecting Arkansas Program commitment to Arkansas voters, but nevertheless a slide from the December 17 presentation to the Arkansas State Highway Commission (http://www.arkansashighways.com/PowerPoints/2014/121714_Commission%20Meeting.pdf) indicates that the final section of the BVB to the state line and the US 71 major interchange to replace the roundabout are scheduled for construction during the 2017-19 time period (page 28/38 of pdf):

(http://i.imgur.com/tQQTn2u.png)

Grzrd, like I told bugo (I think) earlier: back in the 80s, 90s, very early 2000s, it was pretty much foolish to dream too much about a completed I-49 in Arkansas.

Now, with everything that's happened recently in Miller County plus Louisiana, Missouri and Texas (the latter with the emerging I-69), it's very foolish to NOT dream about the same.

(That being said, they're doing some quirky things on the section just below (Rocky Dell Hollow Road, home of the brand new bridge - to the new west Hiwasse bridge connecting the currently-open 2-lane first stretch of future BVB/I-49).  At both ends, there are four-lane sections paved, two in each way, but the one that won't link to the initial two-lane stretches for multiple block-lengths on the south end, and an approximate block or less on the north.  If I go out there when the ATHD contractors are working and see one I'll ask him; they've been most friendly the few times I've gone to walk there after hours when they're shutting down daily operations.)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on December 18, 2014, 09:28:55 AM
Grzrd,

Remember also (and I can't remember where the image is) that the Missouri HTD had a slide that indicated that construction on their final side (Pineville-to-the-Arkansas-line, with at least one interchange on the highway between the Missouri small cities of Jane and Noel) was scheduled to start in 2018 regardless of whether that big highway tax that flopped in August 2014 passed.  All the tax if passed would have done was moved up the scheduled final Missouri I-49 segment start date, not that it wouldn't have been both important and a blessing.  Nonetheless, if their last segment (Anderson-Lanagan exit-Pineville) is any indication, they'll be ready to MOVE on this quickly.

That would dovetail with the Arkansas presentation you linked to above.

In Arkansas, it can be said that we're (and much of the rest of America, plus Canada and Mexico) waiting for the "3 Bs" on I-49:

- The Bypass (scheduled for 2019 at this point)
- The Bridge (linking Alma over the Arkansas River to the soon-to-be-completed Barling-west FSM-north Greenwood segment), and;
- The Big one (Greenwood - Texarkana).

Driving through the NWA metro area as I have the past few days and seeing the growth here in spite of not having a through interstate (or a 4-lane road, now under construction, to the XNA airport (http://www.thecitywire.com/node/35851#.VJLkfyvF_UQ), or even a low-cost air carrier), I still think (barring an American catastrophe) that the completed interstate will still be as significant for NWA/FSM as anything Walmart has done to date.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on December 18, 2014, 12:59:27 PM
That article indicates that the first part of the US 412 bypass will be opened from I-49 to AR 112. That is probably why the signage plans have "TBD" in a US shield instead of "412".
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on December 18, 2014, 02:39:52 PM
That article indicates that the first part of the US 412 bypass will be opened from I-49 to AR 112. That is probably why the signage plans have "TBD" in a US shield instead of "412".

I'm guessing there's a route map for this somewhere?  The article said it would be four miles long, but the distance from the I-49 exit at Wagon Wheel to AR 112 is 2 miles.  4 miles would take this new road to about the south entrance to the XNA airport.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: yakra on December 18, 2014, 08:11:33 PM
A rough approximation of the alignment can be seen on OpenStreetMap.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on December 19, 2014, 01:04:52 PM
That article indicates that the first part of the US 412 bypass will be opened from I-49 to AR 112. That is probably why the signage plans have "TBD" in a US shield instead of "412".

I'm guessing there's a route map for this somewhere?  The article said it would be four miles long, but the distance from the I-49 exit at Wagon Wheel to AR 112 is 2 miles.  4 miles would take this new road to about the south entrance to the XNA airport.
Yes, and that is part of the project: to build to where the XNA access road will be built.

http://kuaf.com/post/springdale-northern-bypass-gets-green-light
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on January 09, 2015, 04:16:17 PM
I'm not sure whether AHTD has confidence that MoDOT will be able to build their section of the Bella Vista Bypass in a few years or whether AHTD simply must honor its Connecting Arkansas Program commitment to Arkansas voters, but nevertheless a slide from the December 17 presentation to the Arkansas State Highway Commission (http://www.arkansashighways.com/PowerPoints/2014/121714_Commission%20Meeting.pdf) indicates that the final section of the BVB to the state line and the US 71 major interchange to replace the roundabout are scheduled for construction during the 2017-19 time period (page 28/38 of pdf)

In AHTD's January 7, 2015 presentation to the Asphalt Pavement Association (http://www.arkansashighways.com/PowerPoints/2015/010715_SEB_AsphaltPavers.pdf), a Connecting Arkansas Program slide has the final section of the BVB to the state line and the US 71 major interchange to replace the roundabout scheduled for 2015 (page 8/18 of pdf):

(http://i.imgur.com/hV9VfCO.png)


Assuming this information is accurate, does this mean that AHTD has scratched the interim roundabout project?  Also, has MoDOT given AHTD positive signals about a "go" on their side of the state line?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on January 09, 2015, 09:46:20 PM
This editorial (http://swtimes.com/opinion/how-we-see-it/editorial-i-49-builds-bridge-future) mentions that former state Rep. Ed Thicksten will head up the "I-49 Build the Bridge" campaign and that he apparently has a track record of success in obtaining funding for major highway projects
This article (http://www.thecitywire.com/node/33618#.U6tab5RdWSo) includes some photos from today's I-49 dedication in Alma, including one of a "Build the Bridge" banner:
(http://i.imgur.com/OL8Fz7h.jpg)

This January 8, 2015 article (http://swtimes.com/business/transportation-authority-outlines-2015-goals) reports that the Western Arkansas Regional Intermodal Transportation Authority ("RITA") will place a great deal of emphasis on the I-49 Arkansas River crossing in 2015:

Quote
.... the Western Arkansas Regional Intermodal Transportation Authority .... Sebastian County Judge David Hudson ....
Meeting at the Riverpark Events Building in Fort Smith Wednesday, the regional transportation organization made up of local elected officials and private business leaders also agreed to keep “shining a light”  on the need for state and federal assistant [sic? - "assistance"?] with an Arkansas River bridge for Interstate 49 to tie in the 13-mile Fort Smith section of the continental highway.
“Nothing is going to happen until Congress comes up with a multi-year highway bill,”  Hudson pointed out.
RITA, however, met one of its main goals last year by hiring consultants to orchestrate a visit from U.S. Rep. Bill Shuster of Pennsylvania, chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, with U.S. Rep. Steve Womack-R, Rogers to tour I-49 construction in Fort Smith.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on January 09, 2015, 10:28:41 PM
Grzrd, regarding your two posts immediately above:

1.  This is only anecdotal, but I talked with a supervisor working with the crew building the Cty. Rd 34-to-Hwy 72 section who said he's raring to go on the 34-to-MO.-line one.  (If I were getting significant $$$ for it, I would be, too.)

2.  I've always thought of "the 3 Bs" left on Arkansas I-49 (the BV Bypass, the Ark River Bridge, the Big One between FSM-Texarkana) the last one won't happen until the first two do.  But again, now it's foolish to NOT dream of a completed I-49, and it's noteworthy that one of RITA's goals (the Rep. Bud Shuster visit) was accomplished last year with the help of Arkansas Rep. Steve Womack.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on January 12, 2015, 02:54:01 PM
Any news on the Fort Smith section
IDriveArkansas (http://www.idrivearkansas.com/) is still estimating an early 2015 completion date (it will be designated upon completion as Future I-49 and I think as AR 549 instead of US 71):
(http://i.imgur.com/w1qh722.jpg)

IDriveArkansas (http://www.idrivearkansas.com/) is now indicating another delay and projecting a Mid 2015 completion date:

(http://i.imgur.com/Fy0IXSt.png)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: robbones on January 12, 2015, 03:12:56 PM
Maybe if AHTD would start penalizing the contractor for the delays, this section of highway would be open a lot sooner.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on January 13, 2015, 08:30:53 AM
Liquidated damages are hard to prove in court. Almost impossible, actually. Some NWA cities have gone away from using them altogether
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Henry on January 13, 2015, 01:03:59 PM
I just saw an exit list for the missing link on a Wikipedia page for I-49 in AR (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_49_(Arkansas)), and noticed that most of the route traces the existing one for US 71. Does anyone have a map of the more defined alignment between Texarkana and Fort Smith, including the Fort Chaffee section?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on January 13, 2015, 02:13:47 PM
I just saw an exit list for the missing link on a Wikipedia page for I-49 in AR (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_49_(Arkansas)), and noticed that most of the route traces the existing one for US 71. Does anyone have a map of the more defined alignment between Texarkana and Fort Smith, including the Fort Chaffee section?

The map in this post (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3324.msg249672#msg249672), as well as the map in the post's link to the Texarkana thread, should give you a pretty good idea of the alignment and the relationship to US 71.

edit

The complete map mentioned above may be found at page 4/36 of this pdf (http://route.transportation.org/Documents/Arkansas%20AM2013.pdf).
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on January 14, 2015, 07:49:18 PM
In AHTD's January 7, 2015 presentation to the Asphalt Pavement Association (http://www.arkansashighways.com/PowerPoints/2015/010715_SEB_AsphaltPavers.pdf), a Connecting Arkansas Program slide has the final section of the BVB to the state line and the US 71 major interchange to replace the roundabout scheduled for 2015 (page 8/18 of pdf) ....
Assuming this information is accurate, does this mean that AHTD has scratched the interim roundabout project?  Also, has MoDOT given AHTD positive signals about a "go" on their side of the state line?

With forum member AHTD on sabbatical, I had to return to the "old way" of emailing agency AHTD to ask if the information on the slide is accurate.  To make a long story short, the information is technically accurate, but is contingent upon a yet-to-be received "go" from MoDOT and may well roll over into future years:

Quote
Actually those should have been listed as TBD. Originally scheduled for 2014, we have “rolled over”  these projects to 2015 and will continue to do so until Missouri is able to meet us at the state line.
So technically right now they are scheduled for 2015, but no letting date has been set.

I thought it was too good to be true ...............
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on January 15, 2015, 02:08:54 AM
http://www.4029tv.com/news/multiplevehicle-crash-backs-up-interstate-49-in-rogers/30711474

Another death on I-49 in Northwest Arkansas.  Why does AHTD refuse to put roadway lighting in?  This may have prevented this, and helped emergency responders.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on January 15, 2015, 08:02:28 PM
http://www.4029tv.com/news/multiplevehicle-crash-backs-up-interstate-49-in-rogers/30711474

Another death on I-49 in Northwest Arkansas.  Why does AHTD refuse to put roadway lighting in?  This may have prevented this, and helped emergency responders.

Money?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on January 16, 2015, 02:46:40 AM
http://www.4029tv.com/news/multiplevehicle-crash-backs-up-interstate-49-in-rogers/30711474

Another death on I-49 in Northwest Arkansas.  Why does AHTD refuse to put roadway lighting in?  This may have prevented this, and helped emergency responders.

Money?


No, it's their antiquated policy.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: NE2 on January 23, 2015, 08:51:54 AM
Holy shit. Some Wikipediot copied the major intersections from US 71 into the I-49 exit list.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on January 23, 2015, 09:27:56 AM
Holy shit. Some Wikipediot copied the major intersections from US 71 into the I-49 exit list.

Not the sharpest knife in the drawer, is he? I see several things that are messed-up, but I don't have the time to update or change things
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: NE2 on January 23, 2015, 09:55:36 AM
Holy shit. Some Wikipediot copied the major intersections from US 71 into the I-49 exit list.

Not the sharpest knife in the drawer, is he? I see several things that are messed-up, but I don't have the time to update or change things
No need; I noticed it while I was doing an overhaul.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on January 24, 2015, 01:05:05 AM
http://5newsonline.com/2015/01/23/arkansas-highway-officials-investigate-recent-wrong-way-crashes-on-i-49/

I've only seen those reflectors at the Don Tyson & I-49 interchange.  I've seen portions of highways (US 71 in Bella Vista and US 62 in Rogers) that have reflectors put in, and they don't last.  The Pleasant Grove interchange and Sunset interchange do not have any reflectors that would deter wrong way drivers.

US 62 in Rogers east of I-49 did them and it looks like they gave up, because it was only a partial stretch on one side of the road for a short section.

I know exactly how the wrong way crash happened at the Pleasant Grove exit.  It's designed different, and there's no medians on the west side of it.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: ARMOURERERIC on January 24, 2015, 03:01:36 AM
Just checked out GSV for Ft Smith, it shows the Ft Chaffee Crossing complete and open.  Is that correct?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: NE2 on January 24, 2015, 05:31:22 AM
Just checked out GSV for Ft Smith, it shows the Ft Chaffee Crossing complete and open.  Is that correct?
Link? The street view I'm seeing is from April-May 2014, with it still under construction.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on January 25, 2015, 06:43:36 PM
Just checked out GSV for Ft Smith, it shows the Ft Chaffee Crossing complete and open.  Is that correct?
Link? The street view I'm seeing is from April-May 2014, with it still under construction.

Still under construction, but supposed to open this Summer.  As of December 2014, the shoulders have yet to be paved.

(https://fbcdn-sphotos-g-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xfp1/v/t1.0-9/10906258_10152952477503624_8170825883789654605_n.jpg?oh=45c615eb094da577b420f6714f9ab504&oe=555DB4C5&__gda__=1431912608_a4391cd37c00665e686049103a2e3399)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on January 28, 2015, 09:06:26 PM
In his January 28 presentation to the Arkansas State Highway Commission (http://www.arkansashighways.com/PowerPoints/2015/012815_Commission%20Meeting%20Powerpoint.pdf), AHTD Director Scott Bennett included four photos of recent Bella Vista Bypass construction (pages 42-45/59 of pdf).  Here is a snip of one of the photos:

(http://i.imgur.com/b9vimTD.jpg)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on January 30, 2015, 01:51:12 AM
In his January 28 presentation to the Arkansas State Highway Commission (http://www.arkansashighways.com/PowerPoints/2015/012815_Commission%20Meeting%20Powerpoint.pdf), AHTD Director Scott Bennett included four photos of recent Bella Vista Bypass construction (pages 42-45/59 of pdf).  Here is a snip of one of the photos:

(http://i.imgur.com/b9vimTD.jpg)
LOL... Yeah, we get a single-lane construction of a future Interstate. Not to mention that this will cost more in the end to construct it to a full Interstate.  And now AHTD wants to widen I-630 in Little Rock.  Not needed... Little Rock has other traffic issues.     I'm sorry, but Dick Trammel has done nothing for NWA. 
[/quote]
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on January 30, 2015, 10:10:09 AM
In his January 28 presentation to the Arkansas State Highway Commission (http://www.arkansashighways.com/PowerPoints/2015/012815_Commission%20Meeting%20Powerpoint.pdf), AHTD Director Scott Bennett included four photos of recent Bella Vista Bypass construction (pages 42-45/59 of pdf).  Here is a snip of one of the photos:

(http://i.imgur.com/b9vimTD.jpg)
LOL... Yeah, we get a single-lane construction of a future Interstate. Not to mention that this will cost more in the end to construct it to a full Interstate.  And now AHTD wants to widen I-630 in Little Rock.  Not needed... Little Rock has other traffic issues.     I'm sorry, but Dick Trammel has done nothing for NWA. 

Having seen him at the I-49 "dedication" near Alma, he is basically a fast-talking, slick car salesman, IMO.  Or your typical politician.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on January 31, 2015, 04:07:54 PM
FWIW, the unofficial combined population of the Northwest Arkansas and Fort Smith areas as of this Monday, 2/2/15: 804,000.

I'll probably get laughed at for this but...sometimes I wonder why backers of the I-49 corridor don't call it "The Two-in-One Highway".  (Perhap too many "CAPS" there, but... :spin: ) .  There are likely to be few if any new major interstate corridors in the future (though I like the idea of a Denver-to-D/FW one, another thread), but this highway, when completed, will open up essentially not one but TWO North American overland shipping lanes.  The more I think of the potential of this, the more amazed I become.

(Frankly, I can't get too mad at Dick Trammel above, because at least he's trying to help do SOMETHING in an area where A) 30 years ago (when I first moved to Arkansas) there was virtually no true interstate highway between Kansas City and Shreveport, and; B) where an interstate highway between Texarkana, Houston, and south Texas/Mexico was barely even a dream.)

(http://i.imgur.com/DuNOAKU.png)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: NE2 on January 31, 2015, 04:45:21 PM
Which "overland shipping lanes" will it open? Kansas City to Houston, Lerado[sic], and the Rio Grande Valley? There's this road called I-35, as well as US 69 in Oklahoma. Kansas City to New Orleans? Going via Springfield and Jonesboro is shorter.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: yakra on January 31, 2015, 05:22:08 PM
I-20 is "cross continental" now too, huh?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on January 31, 2015, 05:32:51 PM
Which "overland shipping lanes" will it open? Kansas City to Houston, Lerado[sic], and the Rio Grande Valley? There's this road called I-35, as well as US 69 in Oklahoma. Kansas City to New Orleans? Going via Springfield and Jonesboro is shorter.

Not bad.  As far as Kansas City to Memphis, are you talking I-49 to I-44 to Springfield, then Jonesboro?  Even when they finally make the Payneway area interstate-quality that's a LOT of at-grade crossings on that route.  Right now, U.S. 71 to Texarkana to 59 (Houston) to the LRGV is slightly longer, but my guess is some of that mileage may go away when the I-49 corridor is finally complete.  Plus, drivers from KC to Houston will go from three major metro areas of traffic congestion (Wichita, OKC, D/FW) to two (NWA/FSM, then Shreveport/Texarkana)...if they're going from Kansas City (via D/FW) to the lower Rio Grande Valley they'll also lose the Austin/San Antonio part of the drive when going I-49/I-69, so that's two more 1,000,000+ person metro areas bypassed right there.  In fact, KC to Brownsville/McAllen/Laredo drivers will go from driving through four million-plus metro areas to two (Houston and NWA/FSM) on the new route.

Seems to me that along will mean there will be a lot of incentive to use this future route.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on January 31, 2015, 06:13:01 PM
Which "overland shipping lanes" will it open? Kansas City to Houston, Lerado[sic], and the Rio Grande Valley? There's this road called I-35, as well as US 69 in Oklahoma. Kansas City to New Orleans? Going via Springfield and Jonesboro is shorter.

Not bad.  As far as Kansas City to Memphis, are you talking I-49 to I-44 to Springfield, then Jonesboro?  Even when they finally make the Payneway area interstate-quality that's a LOT of at-grade crossings on that route.  Right now, U.S. 71 to Texarkana to 59 (Houston) to the LRGV is slightly longer, but my guess is some of that mileage may go away when the I-49 corridor is finally complete.  Plus, drivers from KC to Houston will go from three major metro areas of traffic congestion (Wichita, OKC, D/FW) to two (NWA/FSM, then Shreveport/Texarkana)...if they're going from Kansas City (via D/FW) to the lower Rio Grande Valley they'll also lose the Austin/San Antonio part of the drive when going I-49/I-69, so that's two more 1,000,000+ person metro areas bypassed right there.  In fact, KC to Brownsville/McAllen/Laredo drivers will go from driving through four million-plus metro areas to two (Houston and NWA/FSM) on the new route.

Seems to me that along will mean there will be a lot of incentive to use this future route.

From KC to Memphis? 71 /I-49 to I-40 at Alma, then east on 40 to Memphis. Even if I-49 were complete, you'd be going 2 1/2 -3 hours out of your way to Texarkana
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: NE2 on January 31, 2015, 07:34:37 PM
At-grade intersections are fine. And the correct comparison is upgrading what's already a four-lane expressway vs. building a whole new I-49 in Arkansas.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Scott5114 on January 31, 2015, 08:50:19 PM
I-49 makes enough sense on its own when you look at how it will benefit NWA. This is quickly becoming a major metro area and high-quality links to Shreveport and Joplin will benefit it and the cities it connects to. Especially when you look at the sorts of industry based in NWA: shipping, food processing, retail. These industries benefit from links to high-quality transportation systems.

No need to justify it further, really.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on January 31, 2015, 10:21:04 PM
At-grade intersections are fine. And the correct comparison is upgrading what's already a four-lane expressway vs. building a whole new I-49 in Arkansas.

Not at 50+ MPH they're not.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Anthony_JK on January 31, 2015, 10:38:59 PM
At-grade intersections are fine. And the correct comparison is upgrading what's already a four-lane expressway vs. building a whole new I-49 in Arkansas.

Except that most of US 71 in Arkansas is still 2 lanes, and goes through some of the roughest terrain in Arkansas.

And, if you think that plopping at-grades on a 60-70 mph highway is a good thing, you've never taken a drive down US 90 in South Louisiana before it was upgraded. There is a reason it was called "Blood Alley" for so long.

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: NE2 on January 31, 2015, 11:27:10 PM
At-grade intersections are fine. And the correct comparison is upgrading what's already a four-lane expressway vs. building a whole new I-49 in Arkansas.

Not at 50+ MPH they're not.
With minor roads they are.

Except that most of US 71 in Arkansas is still 2 lanes, and goes through some of the roughest terrain in Arkansas.
That's my point, dude. It's a lot easier to upgrade Kansas City-Memphis (if necessary) than build a whole new Fort Smith-Texarkana.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on January 31, 2015, 11:35:06 PM
I-49 makes enough sense on its own when you look at how it will benefit NWA. This is quickly becoming a major metro area and high-quality links to Shreveport and Joplin will benefit it and the cities it connects to. Especially when you look at the sorts of industry based in NWA: shipping, food processing, retail. These industries benefit from links to high-quality transportation systems.

No need to justify it further, really.

As of Monday's 804,000 rough estimate: NWA/Fort Smith would still be bigger than:

- Boise
- Spokane
- Colorado Springs
- Wichita/Hutchinson
- Des Moines/Ames
- Jackson/Vicksburg
- Shreveport/Texarkana
- Springfield/Branson
- Huntsville/Decatur/Florence
- Mobile/Bay Minette
- Chattanooga/Dalton/Cleveland
- Evansville
- Lexington/Frankfort
- Madison, WI
- Toledo, OH
- Dayton
- Fort Wayne
- Harrisburg/Carlisle/Lebanon, PA
- Syracuse/Auburn, NY

And all of the above have a through interstate which NWA doesn't yet have.  (EDITED: added a few more metro areas I was curious about.)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on February 01, 2015, 02:35:20 AM
http://5newsonline.com/2015/01/31/strategic-plan-unveiled-for-northwest-arkansas-growth/

The guy pretty much said nothing, but I looked up the plans... They are prioritizing a corridor west of I-49 in NWA!  One can only hope!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Tomahawkin on February 01, 2015, 02:52:07 PM
I did a research paper 7 years ago for a Transportation/Logistics class that I had at the Univ. of Arkansas in how building Interstate 49 would benefit the Walmart, JB Hunt and Tyson Corporations and my teacher (Don Betchel) thought I was crazy...I mentioned that Upgrades were going to be needed to I-540 (Making it 8 lanes through from Fayetteville-Rogers with interstate lighting) to make it work, especially for Razorback game-day traffic. Not to mention those small towns from Ft Smith to Texarkana would benefit from having truck stops. It would boost their local revenues
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Scott5114 on February 01, 2015, 08:18:09 PM
At-grade intersections are fine. And the correct comparison is upgrading what's already a four-lane expressway vs. building a whole new I-49 in Arkansas.

Not at 50+ MPH they're not.
With minor roads they are.

Except that most of US 71 in Arkansas is still 2 lanes, and goes through some of the roughest terrain in Arkansas.
That's my point, dude. It's a lot easier to upgrade Kansas City-Memphis (if necessary) than build a whole new Fort Smith-Texarkana.
Except upgrading that expressway does fuckall for either Texarkana or Ft Smith.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: NE2 on February 01, 2015, 08:36:49 PM
Why should I care about Texarkana and Fort Smith? What have they done for me?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Scott5114 on February 01, 2015, 10:37:28 PM
Why should I care about you caring about them? What have you done for me?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: NE2 on February 01, 2015, 11:24:26 PM
I've enlightened you about the coolness of pooing.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on February 02, 2015, 02:04:02 AM
I did a research paper 7 years ago for a Transportation/Logistics class that I had at the Univ. of Arkansas in how building Interstate 49 would benefit the Walmart, JB Hunt and Tyson Corporations and my teacher (Don Betchel) thought I was crazy...I mentioned that Upgrades were going to be needed to I-540 (Making it 8 lanes through from Fayetteville-Rogers with interstate lighting) to make it work, especially for Razorback game-day traffic. Not to mention those small towns from Ft Smith to Texarkana would benefit from having truck stops. It would boost their local revenues

https://www.arkansashighways.com/planning_research/statewide_planning/Studies/1-11-105%20I-540%20Improvement%20Study.pdf

That's the Improvement Study from 2006.  And you were totally right.

I'm trying to get AHTD to change their roadway lighting policy, because it is antiquated and puts public safety at risk!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on February 02, 2015, 06:22:02 AM
I-630 has needed widening for at least 20 years. It's a parking lot at rush hour.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on February 02, 2015, 10:22:20 AM
Where are the extra lanes going to go? no room to the inside and large retaining walls to the outside
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on February 02, 2015, 12:03:20 PM
Where are the extra lanes going to go? no room to the inside and large retaining walls to the outside
Blow up the hillside like they did with Big Rock?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on February 04, 2015, 09:03:52 PM
A slide in AHTD's February 3, 2015 presentation to the Springdale Chamber of Commerce (http://www.arkansashighways.com/PowerPoints/2015/020315_Lorie_SpringdaleChamber.pdf) provides a good status update for I-49 projects in NWA (page 49/52 of pdf):

(http://i.imgur.com/wlw1awR.jpg)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: NE2 on February 04, 2015, 10:32:00 PM
Interesting fact that I recently relearned: US 71's original route followed 72 and 59 through Hiwasse and Gravette.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on February 04, 2015, 11:44:00 PM
Interesting fact that I recently relearned: US 71's original route followed 72 and 59 through Hiwasse and Gravette.

Common knowledge.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: codyg1985 on February 05, 2015, 07:54:50 AM
I didn't realize that so much of I-49 through NWA actually had a timetable for being widened, which i assume means that funding is available to make it happen. I thought it was just going to be peace-meal stuff around Fayetteville.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on February 06, 2015, 08:01:41 AM
1/2 cent sales tax accelerated many projects in Ark that were sitting on a shelf waiting for money
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on February 06, 2015, 09:53:43 AM
1/2 cent sales tax accelerated many projects in Ark that were sitting on a shelf waiting for money

But several have also been out on the back burner, such as paving AR 220 north of Lee Creek
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: AHTD on February 06, 2015, 12:50:33 PM
I did a research paper 7 years ago for a Transportation/Logistics class that I had at the Univ. of Arkansas in how building Interstate 49 would benefit the Walmart, JB Hunt and Tyson Corporations and my teacher (Don Betchel) thought I was crazy...I mentioned that Upgrades were going to be needed to I-540 (Making it 8 lanes through from Fayetteville-Rogers with interstate lighting) to make it work, especially for Razorback game-day traffic. Not to mention those small towns from Ft Smith to Texarkana would benefit from having truck stops. It would boost their local revenues

https://www.arkansashighways.com/planning_research/statewide_planning/Studies/1-11-105%20I-540%20Improvement%20Study.pdf

That's the Improvement Study from 2006.  And you were totally right.

I'm trying to get AHTD to change their roadway lighting policy, because it is antiquated and puts public safety at risk!


The city of Conway seems to be taking advantage of our lighting policy:

http://thecabin.net/news/local/2015-02-05/replacing-i-40-lights-led-18m-project#.VNT6VmB0zDc

I-40 from Conway to North Little Rock is in the process of being widened from two lanes to three. Most of this work has been completed and is open to traffic in the Conway area.

Similarly, we are in the process of widening I-49 in Northwest Arkansas to three lanes. Perhaps communities up and down that corridor will follow Conway's lead...


Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: robbones on February 07, 2015, 07:48:18 PM


I did a research paper 7 years ago for a Transportation/Logistics class that I had at the Univ. of Arkansas in how building Interstate 49 would benefit the Walmart, JB Hunt and Tyson Corporations and my teacher (Don Betchel) thought I was crazy...I mentioned that Upgrades were going to be needed to I-540 (Making it 8 lanes through from Fayetteville-Rogers with interstate lighting) to make it work, especially for Razorback game-day traffic. Not to mention those small towns from Ft Smith to Texarkana would benefit from having truck stops. It would boost their local revenues

https://www.arkansashighways.com/planning_research/statewide_planning/Studies/1-11-105%20I-540%20Improvement%20Study.pdf

That's the Improvement Study from 2006.  And you were totally right.

I'm trying to get AHTD to change their roadway lighting policy, because it is antiquated and puts public safety at risk!


The city of Conway seems to be taking advantage of our lighting policy:

http://thecabin.net/news/local/2015-02-05/replacing-i-40-lights-led-18m-project#.VNT6VmB0zDc

I-40 from Conway to North Little Rock is in the process of being widened from two lanes to three. Most of this work has been completed and is open to traffic in the Conway area.

Similarly, we are in the process of widening I-49 in Northwest Arkansas to three lanes. Perhaps communities up and down that corridor will follow Conway's lead...

Look who came out of hibernation
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on February 07, 2015, 09:27:10 PM

I-40 from Conway to North Little Rock is in the process of being widened from two lanes to three. Most of this work has been completed and is open to traffic in the Conway area.

Similarly, we are in the process of widening I-49 in Northwest Arkansas to three lanes. Perhaps communities up and down that corridor will follow Conway's lead...



From what I saw a couple weeks ago, it's all but finished WB but there are a couple sections EB to finish.

Now we just have to get people trained that the Left lane is the fast lane ;)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on February 07, 2015, 09:31:28 PM

I-40 from Conway to North Little Rock is in the process of being widened from two lanes to three. Most of this work has been completed and is open to traffic in the Conway area.

Similarly, we are in the process of widening I-49 in Northwest Arkansas to three lanes. Perhaps communities up and down that corridor will follow Conway's lead...



From what I saw a couple weeks ago, it's all but finished WB but there are a couple sections EB to finish.

Now we just have to get people trained that the Left lane is the fast lane ;)


The left lane is not the "fast" lane. It's a passing lane, and as soon as you're done passing get the fuck over.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on February 08, 2015, 09:25:45 AM

I-40 from Conway to North Little Rock is in the process of being widened from two lanes to three. Most of this work has been completed and is open to traffic in the Conway area.

Similarly, we are in the process of widening I-49 in Northwest Arkansas to three lanes. Perhaps communities up and down that corridor will follow Conway's lead...



From what I saw a couple weeks ago, it's all but finished WB but there are a couple sections EB to finish.

Now we just have to get people trained that the Left lane is the fast lane ;)


The left lane is not the "fast" lane. It's a passing lane, and as soon as you're done passing get the fuck over.
You should come down and drive it.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on February 17, 2015, 01:41:14 AM
I didn't realize that so much of I-49 through NWA actually had a timetable for being widened, which i assume means that funding is available to make it happen. I thought it was just going to be peace-meal stuff around Fayetteville.

Yep... The voters approved the CAP program.  http://www.connectingarkansasprogram.com/corridors/5/i-49-washington-benton-county/#.VOLhPB_F_1E

It's just adding another lane to I-49 between the Central Ave exit in Bentonville and the MLK Jr Blvd exit in Fayetteville.  As soon as they finish that, it's time to add another lane.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on February 17, 2015, 02:09:55 AM

The city of Conway seems to be taking advantage of our lighting policy:

http://thecabin.net/news/local/2015-02-05/replacing-i-40-lights-led-18m-project#.VNT6VmB0zDc

I-40 from Conway to North Little Rock is in the process of being widened from two lanes to three. Most of this work has been completed and is open to traffic in the Conway area.

Similarly, we are in the process of widening I-49 in Northwest Arkansas to three lanes. Perhaps communities up and down that corridor will follow Conway's lead...

AHTD's lighting policy of not installing it, unless a local municipality requests it?  I've tried to talk to Bentonville, Rogers, Lowell, Springdale, and Fayetteville... All municipalities along I-49 in NWA.  We even had a news station ask about it.
It doesn't make any sense for a local municipality to plan and install lighting along an Interstate.  It just doesn't.  It needs to be a state thing.  I cannot think of any DOT in this country that is like that.

If AHTD is serious about their Towards Zero Deaths campaign, this antiquated policy needs to be fixed.  If not, then the Towards Zero Deaths campaign is just fluff.

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on February 18, 2015, 06:03:46 PM
Looked thru the plans for the Lowell exit today. That will become a pretty busy exit in the next 10 years I would bet

Can't wait for the 6-lanes to be finished. It is so nice thru there
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on February 19, 2015, 12:44:39 AM
Looked thru the plans for the Lowell exit today. That will become a pretty busy exit in the next 10 years I would bet

Can't wait for the 6-lanes to be finished. It is so nice thru there
The Lowell exit is already a busy interchange at rush hour, if you're not familiar with it.  Can you post the plans for that interchange?
And, I have had so many "near-misses" where I-49 goes from 3 lanes to 2 lanes between Monroe and Wagon Wheel Road.  I know AHTD planned that widening to coordinate with the Springdale US 412 Bypass. 



Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on February 19, 2015, 10:40:14 AM
Interesting fact that I recently relearned: US 71's original route followed 72 and 59 through Hiwasse and Gravette.

Close:

Original 71 (1926) followed current AR 102 to Centerton, north on Bus 102, THEN along current 72 and 59.

It was changed later (1930?) to follow Central Ave (modern 72) out of Bentonville.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: NE2 on February 19, 2015, 10:56:01 AM
Original 71 (1926) followed current AR 102 to Centerton, north on Bus 102, THEN along current 72 and 59.

It was changed later (1930?) to follow Central Ave (modern 72) out of Bentonville.
I don't think so. The 1926 official (and all later) clearly shows it going straight west from Rogers and then north to Bentonville, with the railroad on the direct diagonal. The 1925 (revised 1935) county map shows no erasures here. Now it did use A Street (later US 71C) right into downtown Bentonville, and there are other potential old alignments.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on February 19, 2015, 11:40:33 AM
Original 71 (1926) followed current AR 102 to Centerton, north on Bus 102, THEN along current 72 and 59.

It was changed later (1930?) to follow Central Ave (modern 72) out of Bentonville.
I don't think so. The 1926 official (and all later) clearly shows it going straight west from Rogers and then north to Bentonville, with the railroad on the direct diagonal. The 1925 (revised 1935) county map shows no erasures here. Now it did use A Street (later US 71C) right into downtown Bentonville, and there are other potential old alignments.
Yes, I know about A Street.

I will have to check my files, which are currently buried unless our friends at AHTD can enlighten us.

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on February 19, 2015, 06:43:55 PM
Looked thru the plans for the Lowell exit today. That will become a pretty busy exit in the next 10 years I would bet

Can't wait for the 6-lanes to be finished. It is so nice thru there
The Lowell exit is already a busy interchange at rush hour, if you're not familiar with it.  Can you post the plans for that interchange?
And, I have had so many "near-misses" where I-49 goes from 3 lanes to 2 lanes between Monroe and Wagon Wheel Road.  I know AHTD planned that widening to coordinate with the Springdale US 412 Bypass.


All plans for current projects are available on AHTDs website
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on February 19, 2015, 11:33:43 PM
All plans for current projects are available on AHTDs website
Are you talking about arkansashighways.com or iDriveArkansas.com?
I want to see actual plans, not just a description... an engineering schematic, if you will.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on February 20, 2015, 12:08:29 AM
AHTD, if you can answer this...

Can you tell me what will happen with the Walnut/Walton interchange (Exit 85 on I-49)?  I know a SPUI was considered.

What are the plans for Exit 86?  It's apparent that this interchanges' traffic signals are based on a timer.  It's awful... and hands down one of the most congested interchanges in NWA.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on February 20, 2015, 05:31:59 PM
All plans for current projects are available on AHTDs website
Are you talking about arkansashighways.com or iDriveArkansas.com?
I want to see actual plans, not just a description... an engineering schematic, if you will.

Currently bid projects are here

http://www.arkansashighways.com/ProgCon/General/construction_plans_include.aspx

currently out for bid are here

http://www.arkansashighways.com/ProgCon/General/JOBS_include.aspx

There are more plans there than you can shake a stick at. Literally thousands of pages...everything going on anywhere in Arkansas
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on February 21, 2015, 01:31:34 AM
All plans for current projects are available on AHTDs website
Are you talking about arkansashighways.com or iDriveArkansas.com?
I want to see actual plans, not just a description... an engineering schematic, if you will.

Currently bid projects are here

http://www.arkansashighways.com/ProgCon/General/construction_plans_include.aspx

currently out for bid are here

http://www.arkansashighways.com/ProgCon/General/JOBS_include.aspx

There are more plans there than you can shake a stick at. Literally thousands of pages...everything going on anywhere in Arkansas

First of all, thank you for those links.  I love it.  This is the problem with AHTD's website... It's so unorganized!
The average citizen wants to know the basics of a project...

For me, I just want to know about the plans for Exit 86 on I-49 in NWA.  I want to go to AHTD's website and see the plans.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Anthony_JK on February 21, 2015, 04:52:36 AM
Sure wish LADOTD's website was as "unorganized" as AHTD's. You have to hire Indiana Jones to locate a construction/engineering plan there.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on February 22, 2015, 11:57:10 AM
Here is a post about a 2015 highway bill, maybe congress can get there act together and pass a good one. We need one to help Ar. LA, and Mo. get more jobs going to finish I 49.  http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2015/01/28/roy-blunt-highway-funding-congress/22479423/
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on February 25, 2015, 02:05:33 AM
Sure wish LADOTD's website was as "unorganized" as AHTD's. You have to hire Indiana Jones to locate a construction/engineering plan there.
LaDOTD's website is miles ahead of AHTD's website.  LaDOT has a Facebook, YouTube and Twitter. 

Edit: AHTD has a Twitter!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: NE2 on February 25, 2015, 06:12:16 AM
LaDOTD's website is miles ahead of AHTD's website.  LaDOT has a Facebook, YouTube and Twitter. 
What does their presence on other websites have to do with their own website?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Anthony_JK on February 25, 2015, 12:29:23 PM
Sure wish LADOTD's website was as "unorganized" as AHTD's. You have to hire Indiana Jones to locate a construction/engineering plan there.
LaDOTD's website is miles ahead of AHTD's website.  LaDOT has a Facebook, YouTube and Twitter. 

Edit: AHTD has a Twitter!

I know all about LADOTD's Facebook, Twitter and YT pages...my problem is with their website, and the lack of any real access to any general construction plan or study.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: cenlaroads on February 26, 2015, 05:37:17 PM

I know all about LADOTD's Facebook, Twitter and YT pages...my problem is with their website, and the lack of any real access to any general construction plan or study.

Agreed.  You can barely find information even about current construction, unless it is a major project with its own page.  Do you remember the map you could click on to see current construction by parish?  I emailed DOTD to ask what had happened to it, and they said that they were deciding how best to "rebuild" that page and would probably have IT write a new software application.  This was over 3 months ago.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bassoon1986 on February 27, 2015, 10:10:17 AM

I know all about LADOTD's Facebook, Twitter and YT pages...my problem is with their website, and the lack of any real access to any general construction plan or study.

Agreed.  You can barely find information even about current construction, unless it is a major project with its own page.  Do you remember the map you could click on to see current construction by parish?  I emailed DOTD to ask what had happened to it, and they said that they were deciding how best to "rebuild" that page and would probably have IT write a new software application.  This was over 3 months ago.

Also, is there anywhere on LA DOTD's website showing an updated list of State Highways? The list we have on AAroads is great but is getting outdated as more LA 12xx roads appear, and more are getting discontinued. I've heard that we can go by the parish maps now but even still they miss out a lot on the tiny spur routes and there's no mileage shown. Is there a list at the building itself in Baton Rouge?

I wonder, too, whether we can find or put together DOTD news articles and updates as new highways are added/discontinued. We've had discussions and I think even shown DOTD wrong posted signs compared to their news release for the old LA 10 number change when the Audubon bridge was opened near New Roads.



Fixed quote. (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=4000.0) - rmf67
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: cenlaroads on February 27, 2015, 03:12:19 PM
To my knowledge, there is no such list on the DOTD website.  The maps provide the only route information on the site.  Alex said (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=6943.msg160331#msg160331) that he had received the 2003 route log on AARoads by emailing LADOTD, so I'm sure that an updated list could be obtained.  As far as I know, only the highways numbered in the range 1255-1263 and LA 1138-1 have been added since that log was created, but a number of routes have been decommissioned.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: apjung on March 06, 2015, 09:41:53 PM
Google Maps now has updated aerials of a completed I-49 on the Arkansas/Louisiana border.
http://goo.gl/maps/p63Rz
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on March 23, 2015, 06:38:15 PM
This article (http://www.nwaonline.com/news/2014/jul/18/planners-told-interstate-49-bella-vista/) reports that the Bella Vista Bypass would be southwest Missouri's top priority if Missouri voters approve the transportation sales tax and that Arkansas Highway Commissioner Dick Trammel is strongly hinting that Arkansas would then be able to come up with the extra $50 million to complete the Arkansas section of the BVB as a four-lane facility

As recently posted in the I-49 Coming to Missouri thread (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3239.msg2052503#msg2052503), Missouri indicates that, if Congress enacts a long-term transportation reauthorization, completion of its section of the Bella Vista Bypass is a "critical project" that would be addressed at some time during the term of the reauthorization. Arkansas does not list construction of the currently unfunded additional two lanes of the BVB as one of its "critical projects", but I suspect that AHTD has to wait for Missouri to officially "green light" its section before it can identify construction of the additional two lanes as "critical".  Given Trammel's comment in the above quote, I think that there is a good chance that they will scrounge up the additional $50 million and build the BVB as a four-lane facility if MoDOT proceeds with its section during the term of a long-term reauthorization.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on March 24, 2015, 01:23:51 AM
First the Bypass.  Then the Bridge.  Then the Big one.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on March 29, 2015, 06:41:16 PM
This article (http://www.nwaonline.com/news/2014/jul/18/planners-told-interstate-49-bella-vista/) reports that the Bella Vista Bypass would be southwest Missouri's top priority if Missouri voters approve the transportation sales tax and that Arkansas Highway Commissioner Dick Trammel is strongly hinting that Arkansas would then be able to come up with the extra $50 million to complete the Arkansas section of the BVB as a four-lane facility
Given Trammel's comment in the above quote, I think that there is a good chance that they will scrounge up the additional $50 million and build the BVB as a four-lane facility if MoDOT proceeds with its section during the term of a long-term reauthorization.

In this article (http://www.arkansasonline.com/news/2015/mar/29/northwest-arkansas-experiencing-road-bu/?f=news-arkansas), Trammel expresses hope that work on the Bella Vista Bypass from County 34 to the Missouri state line could begin in mid-2016:

Quote
Northwest Arkansas is in the middle of a road building boom to ease congestion on the region's crowded highway system.
"I tell everybody when you see orange barrels, you know it's going to get better. They're not there because it's going to get worse," said Dick Trammel of Rogers, Arkansas Highway Commission chairman ....
"If you look at the I-49 corridor, you'll see that it's quite the jigsaw puzzle of funding mechanisms to get this corridor widened to three lanes all the way from Fayetteville up to Bentonville where the Bella Vista bypass is going to be, which is the ultimate goal," said Danny Straessle, a spokesman for the Arkansas Highway and Transportation Department ....
"The traffic projections for that corridor are such that in order to increase the capacity and reduce congestion, we're going to three lanes in each direction. That's not just origin or destination traffic, it also includes projections for through traffic that comes from Missouri when the Bella Vista bypass is completed
and Missouri is able to meet us at the state line," Straessle said ....
The Bella Vista bypass construction is under way. Two lanes are planned initially, but right of way is being acquired for four lanes. The first section, around Hiwasse, was built using federal highway money. Sales tax money will pay for most of the remainder of the $100 million project.
A four-mile section between Benton County 34 and the Missouri line is on hold until Missouri finds the money to meet at the state line. Trammel said Missouri is looking at ways to raise the money, and he's hopeful it will be ready to finish its portion by the time the bypass is connected at I-49 in Bentonville. The new interchange has not been put out for bid, but the eastern most, six-mile section between I-49 and Arkansas 72 is expected to be completed in mid-2016.

However, this time, Trammel does not mention the possibility of going ahead and building the Bella Vista Bypass as a four-lane facility.  That said, having traffic go from six lanes to two lanes could get pretty ugly ...
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on March 30, 2015, 08:39:43 AM
From today's NWA area paper (and it's maddening because it's right next, literally, to a story about growth in Springdale's Elm Springs area, directly on NWA's I-49).

Quote

Bella Vista Bypass Not a Priority as Missouri Searches for Highway Money
Missouri officials look for funds to tie in to Bella Vista highway


Missouri highway officials are looking for money for roads but even if their latest proposal is successful, finishing the Bella Vista bypass doesn't appear to be on the state's list of priority projects, regional planners were told Wednesday.

"It doesn't look like there'll be enough money to do that," Andrew Seiler with the Missouri Department of Transportation told regional planners. "It will likely be pushed back."

Seiler's comment came in response to a question from Arkansas Highway Commission Chairman Dick Trammel about highway priorities in the region. Trammel said he was "deeply concerned" about getting the connection finished in a timely manner.

"I can't be critical if it's a financial problem because we're having those ourselves," Trammel said Friday. "But if it's a priority problem, I just hope they can see the expenditure and what we're doing, and then when they get in a position to they will include the Bella Vista bypass in their priorities because it's important to Missouri and Arkansas."

The Bella Vista bypass is being built as a two lane, divided highway initially but is expected to eventually be four lanes in each direction. It will be part of Interstate 49 when complete. The project has been a priority in Northwest Arkansas for years. Money to build Arkansas' side became available when voters approved Issue 1, a 10-year, half-percent sales tax for new construction of highways in 2012.

http://www.nwaonline.com/news/2015/mar/30/bella-vista-bypass-not-a-priority-as-mi/

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: intelati49 on March 30, 2015, 09:02:32 AM
From today's NWA area paper (and it's maddening because it's right next, literally, to a story about growth in Springdale's Elm Springs area, directly on NWA's I-49).

Quote

Bella Vista Bypass Not a Priority as Missouri Searches for Highway Money
Missouri officials look for funds to tie in to Bella Vista highway

Now, to be fair. It's kind of hard to justify building a new terrain road when you can't maintain your existing network.

Then again, I wish they would have built it in 2012 when they had the chance.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on April 08, 2015, 08:30:55 PM
IDriveArkansas (http://www.idrivearkansas.com/) is now indicating another delay and projecting a Mid 2015 completion date

This TV video (http://5newsonline.com/2015/04/08/future-i-49-construction-nearing-completion-in-sebastian-county/) has some footage of the construction of Future I-49 from Greenwood to Barling and projects that the project should wrap up by mid-July:

Quote
After some weather delays, construction on future Interstate 49 from Greenwood to Barling is almost done. The $98 million project is just a small fragment of an interstate that will one day run from Northwest Arkansas to Louisiana.
“Right now the concrete pavement is down, so that’s the driving surface,”  Chad Adams, district engineer with the Arkansas State Highway and Transportation Department said. “The contractors are working on putting gravel down for the shoulders. They’ve actually starting placing asphalt on some of the shoulders on the south end of the project.”
Adams said the construction project got underway about seven years ago. Once the 5.5 mile stretch is complete, the drive from Greenwood to Highway 22 in the Barling and Fort Chaffee area will be a lot quicker ....
“For now the funding is just to complete this section,”  Adams said. “There’s another section to be built between here and across the Arkansas River and to tie into 49 and the Alma area.”
The project is expected to wrap up by mid-July.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: robbones on April 08, 2015, 11:10:55 PM
It's going to take a lot of fill dirt to make a road bed high enough to prevent the road from flooding in the "Bottoms" of Crawford County
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on April 13, 2015, 08:00:31 AM
It's going to take a lot of fill dirt to make a road bed high enough to prevent the road from flooding in the "Bottoms" of Crawford County

Well, unless they've used it up, there was a lot of fill taken from Howard Hill Rd where the hillside had to be scooped out to lower the grade on 49.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on April 13, 2015, 01:55:49 PM
That fill may not be suitable
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on May 11, 2015, 08:29:28 PM
I'm living in metro Springfield, MO now.  This morning on KWTO-AM there was a state senator on who was discussing that this would be a contentious few final weeks in that body up in Jefferson City.  He also said that, while he was normally against new taxes he was thinking that Missouri is reaching a point where it has to consider that, especially given the federal uncertainty that AHTD speaks of in another post.

His words were (paraphrased by very little): "If we're telling people, 'Hey, we're in the middle of the country...2/3 of America is easily accessible from Missouri', then we really need to be investing more in our highways now."  Frankly, he could have been talking directly about the Missouri-side Bella Vista bypass with that statement given that this highway will be Missouri's quickest interstate to Texas with its 2nd-largest-state-population in America.  He probably had it as well as other things in mind.

Wish I'd taken notes but I heard this when my radio alarm went off.  Doesn't matter...as said before, we're (Arkansas and Missouri) at the point where it's now very foolish NOT to be thinking of a completed I-49.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on May 14, 2015, 03:34:48 PM
as said before, we're (Arkansas and Missouri) at the point where it's now very foolish NOT to be thinking of a completed I-49.

Granted, it's only a small step toward a completed I-49 (and more specifically a completed Bella Vista Bypass), but this May 14, 2015 AHTD presentation to the Fayetteville Commerce District (http://www.arkansashighways.com/PowerPoints/2015/051415_Trammel_FayettevilleChamber.pdf) indicates that the section of the BVB from Hwy. 72 to Co. Rd. 34 should be completed in June (p. 11/38 of pdf):

(http://i.imgur.com/WHWvoBZ.png)

Maybe Missouri will figure out a way to get their section done in the not-too-distant future.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on May 14, 2015, 07:03:18 PM
Why are they building the least useful parts of the highway first? It looks like the part from I-49 to Hiwasee would be the most useful.

Are they still going to build that stupid temporary roundabout?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on May 14, 2015, 08:38:32 PM
Why are they building the least useful parts of the highway first? It looks like the part from I-49 to Hiwasee would be the most useful.


They are working on it. It appears the "blowing up the rocks" portion is about done at Bentonville, but I've been too busy to get any more photos.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on May 29, 2015, 11:57:40 AM
Article in today's Fort Smith paper about the I-49 stretch in Greenwood/Fort Smith/Barling opening "hopefully" in July, and the further expected boom in growth there:

Quote
As the opening of a 6.5-mile stretch of Interstate 49 through Chaffee Crossing draws closer, the trust’s boss expects to field a growing number of land offers for medical-related clinics and retail.

The state will hold a ribbon-cutting ceremony for the highway in July “hopefully,”  Fort Chaffee Redevelopment Authority Executive Director Ivy Owen said.

“That news is out there and people know it’s going to happen,”  he said. “The people who have been waiting and holding back to make offers are now coming out of the woodwork to make offers on smaller, specialized pieces of property like medical clinics and physician’s offices, that sort of thing.”

The FCRA, formed in 1997, oversees redevelopment of land released by the U.S. Army from Fort Chaffee as part of a Base Realignment and Closure downsizing. Of the original 6,000 acres located in both Fort Smith and Barling, the FCRA has about 2,800 left to sell, Owen said. The remaining land is worth between $25 million-$27 million.

I-49 represents 1,700 miles of interstate highway between New Orleans and Winnipeg, Canada, with about 315 miles within Arkansas. A dedication ceremony was held a year ago when the U.S. Department of Transportation officially designating Interstate 540 from Alma north to the Missouri border as Interstate 49.

“It will just be a monumental accomplishment to get that done,”  Owen said

- See more at: http://swtimes.com/news/chaffee-crossing-boss-braces-boom#sthash.Q5pWYKyp.dpuf

http://swtimes.com/news/chaffee-crossing-boss-braces-boom

I believe him.  Arkansas is now big enough that a second med school was merited (similar population states like Iowa and slightly larger Oklahoma each have at least two, where Arkansas only had one) and it's being built now, rain permitting.  :-D  ArcBest transportation is thriving, too, and it's moving out there.  Fort Smith has always been much more industrial-based in its economy vs. Northwest Arkansas, but I think there will be a smaller though profound "NWA effect" as this interstate grows.

Just wait until it's completed (though we may be dead by then)...
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Avalanchez71 on May 29, 2015, 01:32:37 PM
What about the retirees that moved over there to get a mountain vista and now you are trying to put a highway on top of that view.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Wayward Memphian on May 29, 2015, 03:12:14 PM
Article in today's Fort Smith paper about the I-49 stretch in Greenwood/Fort Smith/Barling opening "hopefully" in July, and the further expected boom in growth there:

Quote
As the opening of a 6.5-mile stretch of Interstate 49 through Chaffee Crossing draws closer, the trust’s boss expects to field a growing number of land offers for medical-related clinics and retail.

The state will hold a ribbon-cutting ceremony for the highway in July “hopefully,”  Fort Chaffee Redevelopment Authority Executive Director Ivy Owen said.

“That news is out there and people know it’s going to happen,”  he said. “The people who have been waiting and holding back to make offers are now coming out of the woodwork to make offers on smaller, specialized pieces of property like medical clinics and physician’s offices, that sort of thing.”

The FCRA, formed in 1997, oversees redevelopment of land released by the U.S. Army from Fort Chaffee as part of a Base Realignment and Closure downsizing. Of the original 6,000 acres located in both Fort Smith and Barling, the FCRA has about 2,800 left to sell, Owen said. The remaining land is worth between $25 million-$27 million.

I-49 represents 1,700 miles of interstate highway between New Orleans and Winnipeg, Canada, with about 315 miles within Arkansas. A dedication ceremony was held a year ago when the U.S. Department of Transportation officially designating Interstate 540 from Alma north to the Missouri border as Interstate 49.

“It will just be a monumental accomplishment to get that done,”  Owen said

- See more at: http://swtimes.com/news/chaffee-crossing-boss-braces-boom#sthash.Q5pWYKyp.dpuf

http://swtimes.com/news/chaffee-crossing-boss-braces-boom

I believe him.  Arkansas is now big enough that a second med school was merited (similar population states like Iowa and slightly larger Oklahoma each have at least two, where Arkansas only had one) and it's being built now, rain permitting.  :-D  ArcBest transportation is thriving, too, and it's moving out there.  Fort Smith has always been much more industrial-based in its economy vs. Northwest Arkansas, but I think there will be a smaller though profound "NWA effect" as this interstate grows.

Just wait until it's completed (though we may be dead by then)...

Ft. Smith screams auto. assembly plant. In turn, that would feed supplier based growth in the region.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Anthony_JK on May 29, 2015, 04:43:21 PM

Quote
I-49 represents 1,700 miles of interstate highway between New Orleans and Winnipeg, Canada [...]

Really?? I-49 South, the segment of I-49 between Texarkana and Chaffee's Crossing, the BVB, and Bruce Watkins Drive have been built or converted?? And, I-29 is now converted to I-49? Or...are they converting I-35 north of Kansas City to "I-49E"??

I know, not the point of the article itself....but such glaring misjournalism deserves to be called out.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: The Ghostbuster on May 29, 2015, 04:57:15 PM
Have the exits on old 540 been renumbered yet?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on May 29, 2015, 05:00:09 PM
What about the retirees that moved over there to get a mountain vista and now you are trying to put a highway on top of that view.

They shouldn't have bought a house near a freeway corridor.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on May 29, 2015, 05:05:42 PM
Article in today's Fort Smith paper about the I-49 stretch in Greenwood/Fort Smith/Barling opening "hopefully" in July, and the further expected boom in growth there:

Quote
As the opening of a 6.5-mile stretch of Interstate 49 through Chaffee Crossing draws closer, the trust’s boss expects to field a growing number of land offers for medical-related clinics and retail.

The state will hold a ribbon-cutting ceremony for the highway in July “hopefully,”  Fort Chaffee Redevelopment Authority Executive Director Ivy Owen said.

“That news is out there and people know it’s going to happen,”  he said. “The people who have been waiting and holding back to make offers are now coming out of the woodwork to make offers on smaller, specialized pieces of property like medical clinics and physician’s offices, that sort of thing.”

The FCRA, formed in 1997, oversees redevelopment of land released by the U.S. Army from Fort Chaffee as part of a Base Realignment and Closure downsizing. Of the original 6,000 acres located in both Fort Smith and Barling, the FCRA has about 2,800 left to sell, Owen said. The remaining land is worth between $25 million-$27 million.

I-49 represents 1,700 miles of interstate highway between New Orleans and Winnipeg, Canada, with about 315 miles within Arkansas. A dedication ceremony was held a year ago when the U.S. Department of Transportation officially designating Interstate 540 from Alma north to the Missouri border as Interstate 49.

“It will just be a monumental accomplishment to get that done,”  Owen said

- See more at: http://swtimes.com/news/chaffee-crossing-boss-braces-boom#sthash.Q5pWYKyp.dpuf

http://swtimes.com/news/chaffee-crossing-boss-braces-boom

I believe him.  Arkansas is now big enough that a second med school was merited (similar population states like Iowa and slightly larger Oklahoma each have at least two, where Arkansas only had one) and it's being built now, rain permitting.  :-D  ArcBest transportation is thriving, too, and it's moving out there.  Fort Smith has always been much more industrial-based in its economy vs. Northwest Arkansas, but I think there will be a smaller though profound "NWA effect" as this interstate grows.

Just wait until it's completed (though we may be dead by then)...

Ft. Smith screams auto. assembly plant. In turn, that would feed supplier based growth in the region.

One doesn't ship auto products by barge, but I've thought the same thing, mainly about Van Buren, across the river from FSM on a very key Union Pacific railroad line between the west/midwest/northwest and southeast.  Arkansas would likely be right-to-work, though, so we couldn't have that.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on May 29, 2015, 10:05:12 PM
Arkansas would likely be right-to-work, though, so we couldn't have that.

Likely? Arkansas IS "Right to work"
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Avalanchez71 on May 30, 2015, 07:29:38 PM
I think the term that is used by the AR General Assembly is work-at-will.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: dfwmapper on May 30, 2015, 09:19:19 PM
Right to work and at-will are different concepts. Right to work means that an employee can not be forced to join a union or pay dues as a condition of employment. At-will means that an employer can fire an employee for almost any reason (certain reasons like racial discrimination are illegal of course) or no reason at all.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on May 31, 2015, 10:51:26 AM
Right to work and at-will are different concepts. Right to work means that an employee can not be forced to join a union or pay dues as a condition of employment. At-will means that an employer can fire an employee for almost any reason (certain reasons like racial discrimination are illegal of course) or no reason at all.

I always hear it as "Right to Work", not "at-will".  Wal-Mart uses "Right to work"  to justify terminating anyone at any time (especially if you mention unions).
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: yakra on June 02, 2015, 12:01:21 AM
Quote
uses "Right to work"  to justify terminating anyone at any time
Move along; no doublethink here!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: galador on June 22, 2015, 09:20:12 AM
It looks like (http://swtimes.com/news/i-49-opening-finally-here-fcra-boss-says) there may finally be a date for the opening of the stretch in Chaffee Crossing: July 14.

Quote
“It’s finally here,”  [Ivy Owen, Fort Chaffee Redevelopment Authority executive director] said. “There’s going to be traffic on it in July. We don’t know whether to call it ribbon cutting or dedication, but the fact is on July 14, we’re going to have a ceremony opening that highway.”

...

If the highway opens earlier than July 14, “we’ll just have a dedication ceremony,”  Owen said.

He expects members of the Arkansas State Highway Commission and possibly the governor to attend.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on June 22, 2015, 11:51:14 AM
We are still projecting a fall completion for this project AND have discussed a "ride before you drive" event to give folks a preview of the facility before it opens to traffic. We will be coordinating this with the Ft. Chaffee Redevelopment Authority. More info as it becomes available!
It looks like (http://swtimes.com/news/i-49-opening-finally-here-fcra-boss-says) there may finally be a date for the opening of the stretch in Chaffee Crossing: July 14.

AHTD, is a "ride before you drive" event still a possibility?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on June 22, 2015, 03:56:48 PM
Man!

Due to the twin Red River floods, I'm hearing:

- The U.S. 259 bridge between DeKalb, TX and Idabel, OK is destroyed (I've seen pictures).
- The Hwy 78 bridge above Bonham, TX has a heavily damaged entry. (Pictures are out there of that, too.)
- There may be Arkansas-side damage at the Index (Hwy 71) bridge with the second round of flooding predicted late this week.
- Hwy 8 (Foreman, AR - New Boston, TX) would likely have to close as well...no word on the condition of that bridge.

No one could have predicted the wettest months in Texas and Oklahoma history (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-weather-gang/wp/2015/06/01/record-breaking-may-rainfall-in-texas-and-oklahoma-by-the-numbers/), but it's a pity there isn't a strong I-49 bridge in place now.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on June 22, 2015, 09:49:23 PM
We are still projecting a fall completion for this project AND have discussed a "ride before you drive" event to give folks a preview of the facility before it opens to traffic. We will be coordinating this with the Ft. Chaffee Redevelopment Authority. More info as it becomes available!
It looks like (http://swtimes.com/news/i-49-opening-finally-here-fcra-boss-says) there may finally be a date for the opening of the stretch in Chaffee Crossing: July 14.

AHTD, is a "ride before you drive" event still a possibility?

I would be interested...just need fresh batteries for my camera :)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: rte66man on June 23, 2015, 11:10:27 AM
Man!

Due to the twin Red River floods, I'm hearing:

- The U.S. 259 bridge between DeKalb, TX and Idabel, OK is destroyed (I've seen pictures).
- The Hwy 78 bridge above Bonham, TX has a heavily damaged entry. (Pictures are out there of that, too.)

I couldn't figure out where our local FOX station was referring to when they said the OK78 bridge near Tishomingo.  Looks like they had the wrong segment.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on June 23, 2015, 01:45:21 PM
Man!

Due to the twin Red River floods, I'm hearing:

- The U.S. 259 bridge between DeKalb, TX and Idabel, OK is destroyed (I've seen pictures).
- The Hwy 78 bridge above Bonham, TX has a heavily damaged entry. (Pictures are out there of that, too.)

I couldn't figure out where our local FOX station was referring to when they said the OK78 bridge near Tishomingo.  Looks like they had the wrong segment.

Hwy. 78 Red River bridge north of Bonham, TX:

(https://scontent-ord1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xpf1/v/t1.0-9/10422448_471721349654096_1865090942850243120_n.jpg?oh=9d1a6866694ea57018832e9be41c1fb3&oe=56353F5E)

Bridge over Washita River (south of Tishomingo) which feeds into Lake Texoma, which feeds into the Red, Sunday:

(https://scontent-ord1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xtp1/v/t1.0-9/10557267_932336793474284_2638624576621993516_n.jpg?oh=7f7c207a37a6a916e602868fc723887b&oe=562B6FE0)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on June 23, 2015, 01:48:41 PM
BTW, on a happier note...July 14th, 2015: http://swtimes.com/news/i-49-opening-finally-here-fcra-boss-says
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on June 23, 2015, 02:41:37 PM
See if this link works. Let me know one way or the other.

https://www.facebook.com/michael.manry.33/videos/1434026060254435/
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on June 23, 2015, 08:46:29 PM
See if this link works. Let me know one way or the other.

https://www.facebook.com/michael.manry.33/videos/1434026060254435/

Did go through
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on June 23, 2015, 08:53:56 PM
BTW, on a happier note...July 14th, 2015: http://swtimes.com/news/i-49-opening-finally-here-fcra-boss-says

If there's no pre-drive, I'll be there on the 14th. Who's with me? Than we can do lunch at Miss Anna's  (http://www.missannasontowson.com)  ;)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: iBallasticwolf2 on June 23, 2015, 09:12:17 PM
BTW, on a happier note...July 14th, 2015: http://swtimes.com/news/i-49-opening-finally-here-fcra-boss-says

Look at the comments.  :poke:
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on June 23, 2015, 09:46:10 PM
BTW, on a happier note...July 14th, 2015: http://swtimes.com/news/i-49-opening-finally-here-fcra-boss-says

Look at the comments.  :poke:

Similar comment on the I-49 Facebook  (https://www.facebook.com/pages/Build-I-49/288089113623) page
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: robbones on June 24, 2015, 08:42:38 PM
Have the exits on old 540 been renumbered yet?
Not yet
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on June 25, 2015, 11:29:41 PM
It has been announced that the dedication ceremony for the Barling-Fort Smith segment will be July 14, 2015, 10:00 am at the Hwy. 22 overpass in Barling.

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on June 26, 2015, 07:31:24 PM
U.S. 71 closed for 2 1/2 miles at Index, AR (Red River crossing), AGAIN.

(http://1fbbr13qhcm41ppjbr450rsxt72.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/closdedboith2-822x512.jpg)

http://txktoday.com/news/highway-71-closed-in-both-directions-at-red-river/

If I-49 is ever built between TXK and FSM, I hope lessons can be learned to protect against this happening on that future bridge.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on July 04, 2015, 02:21:51 PM
I saw where the road appears to be now striped now between Hwy 72 (south end) and route 34 (north end, straight west of where Glasgow meets Highlands) on the future Bella Vista Bypass.  Anyone heard when that section is supposed to open?  Thank you in advance.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: iBallasticwolf2 on July 04, 2015, 10:03:48 PM
Hopefully we can get some pictures of the new Bella Vista bypass.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on July 05, 2015, 12:18:23 AM
U.S. 71 closed for 2 1/2 miles at Index, AR (Red River crossing), AGAIN.


Hey Rocky, watch me pull a rabbit out of my hat!
Again?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: rte66man on July 05, 2015, 08:56:09 AM
U.S. 71 closed for 2 1/2 miles at Index, AR (Red River crossing), AGAIN.


Hey Rocky, watch me pull a rabbit out of my hat!
Again?

Nothing up my sleeve, PRESTO! Looks a little wet to me.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on July 06, 2015, 11:39:44 AM
U.S. 71 closed for 2 1/2 miles at Index, AR (Red River crossing), AGAIN.


Hey Rocky, watch me pull a rabbit out of my hat!
Again?

Nothing up my sleeve, PRESTO! Looks a little wet to me.

"I gotta get another HAT", or

"Whoops! Don't know my own strength."

(Or: "Whoops!  We need a new ROAD.")
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on July 11, 2015, 03:36:02 PM
It has been announced that the dedication ceremony for the Barling-Fort Smith segment will be July 14, 2015, 10:00 am at the Hwy. 22 overpass in Barling.

The July 9 AHTD Information Release (http://www.arkansashighways.com/news/2015/NR%2015-226.pdf) confirms that the ribbon cutting ceremony will take place on July 14 at 10:00 a.m., but it still leaves a little room for drama as to when it will open to traffic by stating that it is expected to open on traffic on the 14th, as well:

Quote
WHAT:  Ribbon cutting ceremony for the new location of Highway 549 (Future I-49) across Fort Chaffee near Fort Smith. The road is expected to open to traffic that day.
WHEN:  Tuesday, July 14 at 10:00 am.
WHERE:  The event will take place on the new location of Highway 549 over Highway 22. From just east of the Barling Interchange of Highways 22/59, enter the new on ramp to the event site. Police units will be on site to direct and park vehicles.

Gov. Hutchinson will be among the dignitaries:

Quote
WHO:  Arkansas Governor Asa Hutchinson, Highway Commissioners, AHTD Director, Fort Smith Mayor Sandy Sanders, Barling Mayor Jerry Barling, Sebastian County Judge David Hudston, Chaffee Redevelopment Authority Executive Director Ivy Owen, Fort Smith Area Chamber of Commerce officials, other local officials and business leaders.

Maybe Gov. Hutchinson will give some lip service to building the Arkansas River bridge as the next step.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on July 12, 2015, 08:37:50 AM
It has been announced that the dedication ceremony for the Barling-Fort Smith segment will be July 14, 2015, 10:00 am at the Hwy. 22 overpass in Barling.

The July 9 AHTD Information Release (http://www.arkansashighways.com/news/2015/NR%2015-226.pdf) confirms that the ribbon cutting ceremony will take place on July 14 at 10:00 a.m., but it still leaves a little room for drama as to when it will open to traffic by stating that it is expected to open on traffic on the 14th, as well:

Quote
WHAT:  Ribbon cutting ceremony for the new location of Highway 549 (Future I-49) across Fort Chaffee near Fort Smith. The road is expected to open to traffic that day.
WHEN:  Tuesday, July 14 at 10:00 am.
WHERE:  The event will take place on the new location of Highway 549 over Highway 22. From just east of the Barling Interchange of Highways 22/59, enter the new on ramp to the event site. Police units will be on site to direct and park vehicles.

Gov. Hutchinson will be among the dignitaries:

Quote
WHO:  Arkansas Governor Asa Hutchinson, Highway Commissioners, AHTD Director, Fort Smith Mayor Sandy Sanders, Barling Mayor Jerry Barling, Sebastian County Judge David Hudston, Chaffee Redevelopment Authority Executive Director Ivy Owen, Fort Smith Area Chamber of Commerce officials, other local officials and business leaders.

Maybe Gov. Hutchinson will give some lip service to building the Arkansas River bridge as the next step.

A couple weeks ago, it was hinted that it might open earlier, but the "dedication" would be July 14. As of Friday, the signs are still covered and the road is still unopened.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on July 14, 2015, 12:24:52 PM
Southbound 549 between Barling and  Ft Smith opened just after 10:30. Governor Hutchinson and his entourage were the first to drive the new roadway. Northbound was still closed at 11am and state police were stopping anyone driving around the barricades.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on July 14, 2015, 12:59:21 PM
Southbound 549 between Barling and  Ft Smith opened just after 10:30. Governor Hutchinson and his entourage were the first to drive the new roadway. Northbound was still closed at 11am and state police were stopping anyone driving around the barricades.

Thanks for the report. On to Northbound and then on to the bridge!



I saw where the road appears to be now striped now between Hwy 72 (south end) and route 34 (north end, straight west of where Glasgow meets Highlands) on the future Bella Vista Bypass.  Anyone heard when that section is supposed to open?  Thank you in advance.

AHTD's July 13, 2015 presentation to the Fort Smith Regional Chamber of Commerce (http://www.arkansashighways.com/PowerPoints/2015/071315_Scott_FtSmithChamber.pdf) indicates that the section between Hwy 72 and County Road 34 has been completed (page 15/31 of pdf):

(http://i.imgur.com/rFX4HVt.png)

edit

AHTD recently posted about the opening of this section in another thread (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=16040.msg2080690#msg2080690):

We have opened the next segment of the Bella Vista Bypass.
http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/SH_549_BVB_Signing_Memo.pdf
We'll schedule a ribbon cutting for sometime in August.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Henry on July 14, 2015, 01:53:52 PM
At least there is progress on the BVB, however slow it may come.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: intelati49 on July 14, 2015, 02:12:29 PM
At least there is progress on the BVB, however slow it may come.

Looks like FY 2019 for MO... sigh (http://modot.org/plansandprojects/construction_program/STIP2016-2020/documents/Sec0406SWRural.pdf)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on July 14, 2015, 03:49:34 PM
Thanks, Grzrd and US71.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: DeaconG on July 14, 2015, 07:41:21 PM
At least there is progress on the BVB, however slow it may come.

Looks like FY 2019 for MO... sigh (http://modot.org/plansandprojects/construction_program/STIP2016-2020/documents/Sec0406SWRural.pdf)

They may be able to scrape up some additional funding depending on what Arkansas decides to do on their side, but obviously they aren't in a hurry.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on July 14, 2015, 08:14:21 PM
Northbound is open. Probably just took a while for AHTD to get all the barricades down.

BTW: I noticed a couple ramps at the south end are asphalt, but some are concrete.  Also looks like SB 49 to SB 71 may eventually be a flyover ramp.  AHTD: can you confirm my suspicions?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: intelati49 on July 15, 2015, 04:53:31 AM
At least there is progress on the BVB, however slow it may come.

Looks like FY 2019 for MO... sigh (http://modot.org/plansandprojects/construction_program/STIP2016-2020/documents/Sec0406SWRural.pdf)

They may be able to scrape up some additional funding depending on what Arkansas decides to do on their side, but obviously they aren't in a hurry.

It has turned into "We're waiting for AHTD to make the first move" to "We don't have two pennies to rub together." I would be surprised if it is let in '19 actually.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on July 15, 2015, 09:30:05 AM
One of the articles incorrectly states that AHTD has launched its "build the bridge campaign." This is not correct. That campaign is a local effort.
Our current estimate for this facility is about $350 to $400 million for a 13-mile Interstate facility between I-40 and State Highway 22 with an Arkansas River crossing. This is ballpark at best. We have no engineering into this other than we know the corridor. High level estimates are often ballparked for various presentations, etc. that require planning to provide numbers.
One article incorrectly stated we will soon begin a feasibility study. The person quoted probably just used the wrong term. We will need to complete an EIS and at this time we don't have that programmed.
On to Northbound and then on to the bridge! .... AHTD's July 13, 2015 presentation to the Fort Smith Regional Chamber of Commerce (http://www.arkansashighways.com/PowerPoints/2015/071315_Scott_FtSmithChamber.pdf)
Northbound is open.

This article (http://www.thecitywire.com/node/38162#.VaZaQqRViko) quotes the chairman of the Arkansas Senate’s Revenue and Tax committee that now is the time for "state officials [AHTD?]" to get the engineering and environmental groundwork in place for the Arkansas River bridge:

Quote
Tim Allen, president and CEO of the Fort Smith Regional Chamber of Commerce ....
THE BRIDGE AND COMPLETING I-49

Two sections of I-49 in western Arkansas are without designated funding or engineering work. The shortest is the 15-mile section between the I-40/I-49 interchange near Alma and across the Arkansas River into Barling. That work, according to recent AHTD estimates, will cost in today’s dollars around $350 million. That’s about $23.3 million per mile ....
In an interview after Tuesday’s opening, Allen told The City Wire that “getting over the river is the next target.” He said Fort Smith area leaders have reached out to the Northwest Arkansas Council to help lobby state and federal officials for funding.
“It’s imperative that we get over the river and connect that (Alma interchange with I-49 and I-40) with this. ... We’re engaged in an early effort with the Northwest Arkansas Council and Scott Bennett to move in that direction,”  Allen said.
Sen. Jake Files, R-Fort Smith, and chairman of the Arkansas Senate’s Revenue and Tax committee
, attended Tuesday’s event. He said “collaboration is critical”  with Northwest Arkansas and state and federal officials in order to complete I-49 through western Arkansas.
“Fort Smith has a lot to gain by linking up to Northwest Arkansas, and this would be a specific example where we both see it as mutually beneficial,”  Files said.
He said it is important for state officials to “get as much groundwork in place”  — engineering, route studies, environmental work — so when the highway funding “debacle in Washington”  is resolved, the bridge and other sections of I-49 will be “ready to execute.” He said one reason the section through Chaffee Crossing received stimulus funding was because it was more “shovel ready”  than other projects around the state and nation.

Here is a good visual of the Arkansas River bridge section from AHTD's above-linked presentation to the Fort Smith Chamber of Commerce (p. 10/31 of pdf):

(http://i.imgur.com/BinBtes.jpg)

It may be time to start an EIS for the bridge.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Henry on July 15, 2015, 12:02:59 PM
Wow! I never knew how close it is to the existing I-540.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on July 15, 2015, 03:09:42 PM
Wow! I never knew how close it is to the existing I-540.

Henry, indeed, but that's a bit deceptive.  The distance doesn't look like much, but BOY is there a lot of development now on Rogers Ave. between I-549 and I-49, pretty much all between the River and U.S. 71.  These Chaffee Crossing folks have sold a lot of property, and some of what they've sold (the new ArcBest HQ, the future Osteopathic (and other medical sciences) College, etc.) is very significant.  And that's before any connections to other I-49 routes are built.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: ARMOURERERIC on July 15, 2015, 09:14:47 PM
Why east of Kibler as opposed to a more direct route?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: mwb1848 on July 16, 2015, 11:05:44 AM
Is there a compelling reason why I-540 wasn't integrated into the I-49 corridor? I'm not terribly familiar with the area, but it looks like there is available ROW for upgrades and added capacity. (Frankly, it looks like 540 is over-due for an upgrade.)

The new alignment seems like a redundant approach which won't provide much intra-city connectivity and is already driving sprawl.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: codyg1985 on July 16, 2015, 11:15:30 AM
Is there a compelling reason why I-540 wasn't integrated into the I-49 corridor? I'm not terribly familiar with the area, but it looks like there is available ROW for upgrades and added capacity. (Frankly, it looks like 540 is over-due for an upgrade.)

The new alignment seems like a redundant approach which won't provide much intra-city connectivity and is already driving sprawl.

From what I can tell, I-540 is fairly busy through Fort Smith. It would definitely need widening, and either widening the Arkansas River bridge or building a whole new span would be necessary. It may have also been eliminated in the EIS for some reason, maybe too much of an impact to existing homes where I-49 would have to diverge from I-540.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on July 16, 2015, 11:54:48 AM
Is there a compelling reason why I-540 wasn't integrated into the I-49 corridor? I'm not terribly familiar with the area, but it looks like there is available ROW for upgrades and added capacity. (Frankly, it looks like 540 is over-due for an upgrade.)
The new alignment seems like a redundant approach which won't provide much intra-city connectivity and is already driving sprawl.
From what I can tell, I-540 is fairly busy through Fort Smith. It would definitely need widening, and either widening the Arkansas River bridge or building a whole new span would be necessary. It may have also been eliminated in the EIS for some reason, maybe too much of an impact to existing homes where I-49 would have to diverge from I-540.

From the DeQueen to I-40 Final Environmental Impact Statement ("FEIS") (http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/FEIS_U.S.71_DeQueen-I-40.pdf) regarding a possible I-540 alignment (pp. 97-98/327 of pdf; pp. 2-56, 2-57 of document):

(http://i.imgur.com/9CXFcIb.png)
(http://i.imgur.com/IYZMgSt.png)

Their word: impracticable



the Future I-49 corridor is east of this section of I-540. A map on page 23/36 of the Executive Summary of the US 71 Relocation From Dequeen to I-40 Final Environmental Impact Statement pdf (http://www.aaroads.com/forum_images/southeast/001747_FEIS_Executive_Summary.pdf) shows the location of this section of I-540 relative to the proposed route of Future I-49.  If I interpret the map correctly, it looks like the long-range plan is to build a "spur" from the southern section of I-540 to connect with Future I-49 just south of the current US 71 (which, along with I-40, would create a possible I-x49 loop)
(above quote from Improving I-540 at Fort Smith (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=8430.msg195657#msg195657) thread)
there is a proposed spur off 540 (in the vicinity of Greenwood Rd/AR 45) that will eventually connect to I-49

Here's the map of the proposed I-540 "southern spur" referenced above that would connect to I-49:

(http://i.imgur.com/6I42K0a.jpg)

The above map shows the rejected I-540 alignment that would have connected to the I-49 corridor. I think that, at the time I made the above post, I misinterpreted that alignment as a proposed southern connection of I-540 to the I-49 selected alignment.  If so, were it to displace 36 businesses and 102 houses 17 to 18 years ago, then how many businesses and houses would it displace today? Perhaps some (most?) of the displacements would have resulted from widening the existing I-540; if so (it does say that the displacements are from U.S. 71 to the I-540/ I-40 interchange), maybe a standalone I-540 southern connection to I-49 could be feasible.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on July 17, 2015, 05:42:41 PM
The above map shows the rejected I-540 alignment that would have connected to the I-49 corridor. I think that, at the time I made the above post, I misinterpreted that alignment as a proposed southern connection of I-540 to the I-49 selected alignment.  If so, were it to displace 36 businesses and 102 houses 17 to 18 years ago, then how many businesses and houses would it displace today? Perhaps some (most?) of the displacements would have resulted from widening the existing I-540; if so (it does say that the displacements are from U.S. 71 to the I-540/ I-40 interchange), maybe a standalone I-540 southern connection to I-49 could be feasible.

FWIW I looked at Appendix B of the FEIS - Major Investment Study ("MIS") (pp. 6-67/415 of pdf) (http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/FEIS_U.S.71_DeQueen-I-40_(appendix).pdf) and its conclusions were based on widening I-540 to eight lanes (p. 63 of pdf):

(http://i.imgur.com/uayAGr6.jpg)



Why east of Kibler as opposed to a more direct route?
DeQueen to I-40 Final Environmental Impact Statement ("FEIS") (http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/FEIS_U.S.71_DeQueen-I-40.pdf)

The FEIS indicates that the selected alignment was preferred by the Kibler community, that it would take the fewest number of houses, that it would allow Kibler to have an interchange, and that it would have the least impact on wetlands.

Regarding community input (p. 100/327 of pdf; p. 2-59 of document):

(http://i.imgur.com/8j6s40B.jpg)

From a chart showing the basis for the selected alignment (p. 102/327 of pdf: p. 2-61 of document):

(http://i.imgur.com/S09s75a.jpg)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on July 19, 2015, 10:50:56 AM
Perhaps some (most?) of the displacements would have resulted from widening the existing I-540; if so (it does say that the displacements are from U.S. 71 to the I-540/ I-40 interchange), maybe a standalone I-540 southern connection to I-49 could be feasible.

This article (http://www.nwaonline.com/news/2015/jul/19/road-open-hope-now-is-for-mall-20150719/?news-arkansas), primarily about efforts to build a new mall at the north end of the recently opened AR 549/ Future I-49, also reports that Fort Smith might annex the area around the intersection of US 71 with the south end of AR 549 in order to encourage development (and reap the tax benefits):

Quote
State officials and developers expect the opening of Arkansas 549 -- part of the future Interstate 49 -- to be a catalyst for development along the highway's corridor ....
Larry Webb of Hot Springs has been working with landowners to develop a mall next to the northern tip of the highway at Barling.
He said potential tenants -- including large anchor companies -- liked the location, but the idea was put on hold because no one wanted to commit to the project until there was traffic moving on the highway, he said ....
Webb said Friday that he expects to have mall tenants begin signing up within a month.
"I think now that it's open, you're going to see an explosion of development not just along the interstate, but adjacent to it," Fort Chaffee Redevelopment Authority Director Ivy Owen said ....
Owen said developers and companies have bought land on all four corners of the intersection of Massard Road and Chad Colley Boulevard, major streets at Chaffee Crossing less than a quarter-mile from Arkansas 549.
Now that the highway is open, Owen said he expects the development on those corners to begin. Planned for the intersection are mixed commercial and residential uses, a restaurant and a bank.
"I think that's the kind of land use potentials we're going to see," said Wally Bailey, director of the Development Services Department with the city of Fort Smith.
Bailey was referring to the potential for development at the intersection of Arkansas 549 with U.S. 71 at the southern end of the highway section. He said city leaders are considering beginning the process to annex 875 acres there because of the potential for development.

In a memorandum to city directors last week, Bailey wrote that one of the advantages of annexation would be to extend city services -- water, sewer, police and fire protection -- to developers as they plan new projects.
In the memo, Bailey wrote that most of the property owners in that area favor being annexed into the city. The city has taken no action on annexation, but he wrote that the matter is ripe for action by the board.

If the expected development does take place, then an I-540 southern connection to I-49, already a pipe dream*, would become even more unlikely as ROW costs would undoubtedly steadily increase.

edit

* Appendix B of the FEIS - Major Investment Study ("MIS") (pp. 6-67/415 of pdf) (http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/FEIS_U.S.71_DeQueen-I-40_(appendix).pdf) indicates that the MIS Working Group recommended that an I-540 Action Plan be developed in conjunction with development of the I-49 selected alignment, and that part of the Action Plan should consider the connectivity between I-540 and the High Priority Corridor [I-49 selected alignment] (p. 60/415 of pdf):

(http://i.imgur.com/dlRGlND.jpg)

However, twenty years later, I do not see an indication of such a connection in the December, 2014 Future Fort Smith Comprehensive Plan (http://www.fortsmithar.gov/Planning/files/14_FinalCompPlan.pdf).
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: robbones on July 19, 2015, 11:29:05 AM
Northbound is open. Probably just took a while for AHTD to get all the barricades down.

BTW: I noticed a couple ramps at the south end are asphalt, but some are concrete.  Also looks like SB 49 to SB 71 may eventually be a flyover ramp.  AHTD: can you confirm my suspicions?
I am going to speculate that the asphalt ramps are temporary until the flyover ramps are built. I finally got to drive it.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: AHTD on July 21, 2015, 01:24:12 PM
Thought you all might enjoy reading the signing memo:

http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/SH_549_Signing_Memo.pdf

Enjoy!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: ChoralScholar on July 24, 2015, 02:52:18 AM
Hey guys,

Is there a project map of the Mena bypass somewhere?  I've been searching for it, but coming up empty.  The closest I could find is the map that shows the exit numbers through Polk and Scott counties.

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on July 24, 2015, 05:21:18 PM
DeQueen to I-40 Final Environmental Impact Statement ("FEIS") (http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/FEIS_U.S.71_DeQueen-I-40.pdf)
Is there a project map of the Mena bypass somewhere?

If department AHTD has done some preliminary engineering on the Mena bypass, then I hope forum member AHTD will post the current plans.  Until that time, the FEIS does a good job of showing the route of the selected alignment.

The FEIS sets forth the basis for the Mena-area selected alignment (in particular segments D-E through G-H) in a chart (p. 102/327 of pdf; p. 2-61 of document):

(http://i.imgur.com/QIP7dj6.png)

The FEIS has nine maps that show the selected alignment from DeQueen to I-40 (pp. 83-91 of pdf; Exh. 2-4 of document).  For example, here is a snip of two maps that show segments D-E through F-G of the selected alignment in the Mena area (pp. 85-86 of pdf; Exh. 2-4 of document):

(http://i.imgur.com/YrezASR.png)
(http://i.imgur.com/g4gn3HA.png)

Here is a snip from a table of proposed interchanges for the selected alignment from DeQueen to I-40 (p. 93/327 of pdf; p. 2-52 of document):

(http://i.imgur.com/QBxUdav.png)

Would the "Mena Bypass" be considered the segment from the Hwy. 246 interchange to the County Road 70 interchange?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: KamKam on July 25, 2015, 01:35:52 PM
I will assume that the Mena Bypass would be 2-lane as well?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: rickmastfan67 on July 25, 2015, 07:07:07 PM
I will assume that the Mena Bypass would be 2-lane as well?

I don't think so since the section they opened in the Fort Smith area is 4 lanes (2 each way).  Bella Vista is only 2 lanes because of Missouri dragging their heals to connect to it.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: codyg1985 on July 26, 2015, 03:55:27 PM
I will assume that the Mena Bypass would be 2-lane as well?

I don't think so since the section they opened in the Fort Smith area is 4 lanes (2 each way).  Bella Vista is only 2 lanes because of Missouri dragging their heals to connect to it.

The segment of I-69 current under construction around Monticello as well as the AR 530 corridor are also being built initially as two lanes, so it would not surprise me if any new segments of I-49 are built initially with two lanes just so it gets built.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on July 26, 2015, 06:41:38 PM
I will assume that the Mena Bypass would be 2-lane as well?

I don't think so since the section they opened in the Fort Smith area is 4 lanes (2 each way).  Bella Vista is only 2 lanes because of Missouri dragging their heals to connect to it.

But Arkansas had more money 10 years ago.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on July 26, 2015, 08:32:32 PM
Rumor is that the next section of I-49 between Greenwood and Texarkana will be a bypass of Mena. Has this been confirmed? There would be exits at AR 8 and 88, CR 70, and some sort of interchange where it meets US 71 southwest of Mena. How are the CR 70 and the southwestern interchange going to be configured?
(above quote from I-49 Mena bypass (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=15654.msg2068146#msg2068146) thread)
DeQueen to I-40 Final Environmental Impact Statement ("FEIS") (http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/FEIS_U.S.71_DeQueen-I-40.pdf)

The FEIS indicates that CR 70 would be relocated (in this segment, Line 3 is the selected alignment) (p. 97/327 of pdf; p. 2-56 of document):

(http://i.imgur.com/VNcOVoY.jpg)

Looking at the map, it appears that there would would be a slight relocation of CR 70 to the north (p. 86/327 of pdf; Exh. 2-4 of document):

(http://i.imgur.com/1ecj8tV.jpg)

It looks like the southwestern interchange will involve the construction of a US 71 connector (p. 85/327 of pdf: Exh. 2-4 of document):

(http://i.imgur.com/7dU2Rb5.jpg)

Although comments quoted in this post (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3324.msg2019588;topicseen#msg2019588) from forum member AHTD and I-49 International Coalition President Curt Green strongly hint that Mena is next in line, I have not seen a confirmation from department AHTD.

edit

I just noticed that this November 13, 2014 article (http://www.ktbs.com/story/27379938/i-49-signals-economic-growth-for-texarkana) reinforces Curt Green's comments about Mena's support for I-49:

Quote
The city of Mena has contributed more money per person than any other city in Arkansas to the I-49 coalition.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on July 26, 2015, 09:14:33 PM
Rumor is that the next section of I-49 between Greenwood and Texarkana will be a bypass of Mena. Has this been confirmed? There would be exits at AR 8 and 88, CR 70, and some sort of interchange where it meets US 71 southwest of Mena. How are the CR 70 and the southwestern interchange going to be configured?
(above quote from I-49 Mena bypass (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=15654.msg2068146#msg2068146) thread)
DeQueen to I-40 Final Environmental Impact Statement ("FEIS") (http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/FEIS_U.S.71_DeQueen-I-40.pdf)

The FEIS indicates that CR 70 would be relocated (in this segment, Line 3 is the selected alignment) (p. 97/327 of pdf; p. 2-56 of document):

(http://i.imgur.com/VNcOVoY.jpg)

Looking at the map, it appears that there would would be a slight relocation of CR 70 to the north (p. 86/327 of pdf; Exh. 2-4 of document):

(http://i.imgur.com/1ecj8tV.jpg)

It looks like the southwestern interchange will involve the construction of a US 71 connector (p. 85/327 of pdf: Exh. 2-4 of document):

(http://i.imgur.com/7dU2Rb5.jpg)

Although comments quoted in this post (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3324.msg2019588;topicseen#msg2019588) from forum member AHTD and I-49 International Coalition President Curt Green strongly hint that Mena is next in line, I have not seen a confirmation from department AHTD.

There is an old bridge on CR 70: I hope it is not destroyed. This is old, old US 71 pre-1930

---

No, wait: I'm thinking CR 76E as old 71.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on July 28, 2015, 11:33:37 AM
AHTD has released the 2013 Arkansas Highway map (http://www.arkansashighways.com/planning_research/mapping_graphics/2013%20AR%20State%20Highway%20Map%20-%20State%20Side.pdf)
(above quote from Texarkana (Future I-49, I-69 Spur) (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3321.msg228335#msg228335) thread)
... the projected route of Missouri's section of the Bella Vista Bypass has appeared on the 2013 map (the 2012 map (http://www.arkansashighways.com/planning_research/mapping_graphics/State_Highway_Map_State_Side_2012.PDF) only has the projected route of the Arkansas section of the Bella Vista Bypass):
(http://i.imgur.com/Tb8MeVq.png)
Our 86th edition sports a new look with improved features!
Check it out: http://www.arkansasonline.com/news/2015/jul/27/highway-map-gets-new-look-20150727-1/ (http://www.arkansasonline.com/news/2015/jul/27/highway-map-gets-new-look-20150727-1/)
(bottom quote from 2015-2016 Arkansas State Highway Map Now Available  (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=16080.msg2081957#msg2081957) thread)

The 2015-16 Map (http://www.arkansashighways.com/Trans_Plan_Policy/mapping_graphics/State%20Highway%20Map%20-%20State%20Side%202015-2016.PDF), despite Missouri's financial woes, still has the projected route of Missouri's section of the Bella Vista Bypass, and it contains both the AR 549 and Future I-49 designations for the Bella Vista Bypass and Fort Smith/ Chaffee Crossing sections:

Bella Vista Bypass:
(http://i.imgur.com/HgI6IO5.png)

Fort Smith/ Chaffee Crossing:
(http://i.imgur.com/4FDljNY.png)

Nice to see the Future I-49 designations on the map.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on July 28, 2015, 12:00:44 PM
Those who are on Facebook, the  Build I-49 (https://www.facebook.com/pages/Build-I-49/288089113623/) page has a few construction photos from around Bella Vista and Gravette.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: KamKam on July 28, 2015, 04:23:52 PM
Woah!! The road looks legit!!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: robbones on July 29, 2015, 07:35:59 AM
If NW Arkansas ain't already a mess with all of the construction, they are widening from US 71B (exit 67) to US 412 (exit 72). 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: codyg1985 on July 29, 2015, 07:45:58 AM
If NW Arkansas ain't already a mess with all of the construction, they are widening from US 71B (exit 67) to US 412 (exit 72). 

True but it is badly needed from what I understand. As is the rest of the corridor between Fayetteville and Bentonville.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on August 18, 2015, 01:30:51 PM
AHTD's July 13, 2015 presentation to the Fort Smith Regional Chamber of Commerce (http://www.arkansashighways.com/PowerPoints/2015/071315_Scott_FtSmithChamber.pdf) indicates that the section between Hwy 72 and County Road 34 has been completed (page 15/31 of pdf) .... AHTD recently posted about the opening of this section in another thread (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=16040.msg2080690#msg2080690):
We have opened the next segment of the Bella Vista Bypass.
http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/SH_549_BVB_Signing_Memo.pdf
We'll schedule a ribbon cutting for sometime in August.

This Aug. 18 AHTD Information Release (http://www.arkansashighways.com/news/2015/NR%2015-288.pdf) provides a notification that the ribbon cutting will take place at 10:30 am on Friday, August 21:

Quote
WHEN:   Friday, August 21 at 10:30 am.
WHERE: The event will take place on the northbound lanes of the new section under the northern State Highway 72 overpass.
WHY:     To celebrate the opening of another two-mile section of the ultimate 21-mile Bella Vista Bypass. This $14 million project began in mid-2012 and Kolb Grading was the prime contractor.



This August 12, 2015 AHTD presentation to the Bella Vista Rotary Club (http://www.arkansashighways.com/PowerPoints/2015/081215_BellaVistaRotary.pdf) contains many slides about the Bella Vista Bypass; one thing I find interesting about the slides is the designation associated with 549 (p. 14/41 of pdf):

(http://i.imgur.com/e3pfclG.png)

 X-(
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: cjk374 on August 18, 2015, 08:05:48 PM
So many ribbon-cutting ceremonies...so many miles between them. No way to get to them.  :-(

About "US" 549: Arkansas loves bringing in new US highways, they might as well create US 549.   :-D
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on August 18, 2015, 09:31:46 PM
So many ribbon-cutting ceremonies...so many miles between them. No way to get to them.  :-(

About "US" 549: Arkansas loves bringing in new US highways, they might as well create US 549.   :-D

Missouri had a US 249 for a short time ;)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: codyg1985 on August 19, 2015, 07:10:29 AM
So many ribbon-cutting ceremonies...so many miles between them. No way to get to them.  :-(

About "US" 549: Arkansas loves bringing in new US highways, they might as well create US 549.   :-D

I am surprised that AHTD hasn't petitioned AASHTO for a new US highway somewhere in the state lately.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Henry on August 19, 2015, 12:19:43 PM
I think it's great that the southern half of the BVB is complete with Friday's ribbon-cutting. Now the ball is truly in MO's court to help finish the northern half...
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on August 19, 2015, 12:36:20 PM
I think it's great that the southern half of the BVB is complete with Friday's ribbon-cutting. Now the ball is truly in MO's court to help finish the northern half...

Not quite. It will be about another year before Hiwasse to Bella Vista open.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on August 22, 2015, 01:10:57 PM
This article (http://www.nwaonline.com/news/2014/jul/18/planners-told-interstate-49-bella-vista/) reports that the Bella Vista Bypass would be southwest Missouri's top priority if Missouri voters approve the transportation sales tax and that Arkansas Highway Commissioner Dick Trammel is strongly hinting that Arkansas would then be able to come up with the extra $50 million to complete the Arkansas section of the BVB as a four-lane facility:
Quote
Dick Trammel, Arkansas Highway commissioner, said if Missouri voters approve the tax and the project north of the state line becomes a reality, it could speed up construction of all four lanes on this side of the line. Arkansas needs an estimated $50 million more to finish the bypass as a four-lane divided highway.
"If they get it, maybe we can get our other two lanes," Trammel said.
From today's NWA area paper ...
Quote
Bella Vista Bypass Not a Priority as Missouri Searches for Highway Money
Missouri highway officials are looking for money for roads but even if their latest proposal is successful, finishing the Bella Vista bypass doesn't appear to be on the state's list of priority projects, regional planners were told Wednesday.
"It doesn't look like there'll be enough money to do that," Andrew Seiler with the Missouri Department of Transportation told regional planners. "It will likely be pushed back."
Seiler's comment came in response to a question from Arkansas Highway Commission Chairman Dick Trammel about highway priorities in the region. Trammel said he was "deeply concerned" about getting the connection finished in a timely manner.
"I can't be critical if it's a financial problem because we're having those ourselves," Trammel said Friday. "But if it's a priority problem, I just hope they can see the expenditure and what we're doing, and then when they get in a position to they will include the Bella Vista bypass in their priorities because it's important to Missouri and Arkansas." ....
http://www.nwaonline.com/news/2015/mar/30/bella-vista-bypass-not-a-priority-as-mi/
MoDOT draft STIP released. http://modot.org/plansandprojects/construction_program/STIP2016-2020/index.htm
Looks like Bella Vista Bypass has been pushed back to 2019-2020 year (see Page 11 of attached link)  :banghead:
http://www.modot.org/plansandprojects/construction_program/STIP2016-2020/documents/Sec046aSWRuralPaymentsandProjects.pdf
(bottom quote from I-49 Coming to Missouri (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3239.msg2062676#msg2062676) thread)
This Aug. 18 AHTD Information Release (http://www.arkansashighways.com/news/2015/NR%2015-288.pdf) provides a notification that the ribbon cutting will take place at 10:30 am on Friday, August 21

In this article about the ribbon cutting (http://www.nwaonline.com/news/2015/aug/22/second-section-of-bella-vista-bypass-op/), Commissioner Trammel is quoted as expressing optimism that Missouri will find a way to complete its section and that he hopes to have the extra $50 million needed to make the BVB a four-lane facility by about the time the initial two lanes are completed:

Quote
A few sprinkles from an overcast sky Friday morning didn't faze officials opening the newest section of the Bella Vista Bypass, which will be Interstate 49.
Dick Trammel, Arkansas highway commissioner, and other local dignitaries gathered below the newest Arkansas 74 overpass, just west of Hiwasse, and cut a blue ribbon using a huge pair of scissors. A couple of trucks blew their horns in salute as they passed above. Most of the cars in sight belonged to those attending the event ....
Trammel said voters' approval of a sales tax for highway improvements in 2012 paved the way for where the highway project is now, and he and others are working to find the money to finish the two additional lanes. Trammel said he'd like to have that money in hand by about the time the two lane part of the project is finished.
Trammel said Missouri officials are looking at ways to raise money for highways and he's confident Missouri will find a way to build it's 7-mile section from the state line to I-49 just south of Pineville.

Maybe with a little bit of luck Missouri can find a way to begin construction in 2017.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on August 23, 2015, 12:08:53 AM
Interesting thing about this article you just linked to from today, Grzrd, is that they are anticipating a May 2016 opening for the section under construction now linking to current I-49 at Bentonville.  We shall see, given that this section opened today was supposed to have been finished last October.  Hope the speculation is accurate.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on August 23, 2015, 03:28:59 AM
I saw a few things on Little Rock news stations about this being a new "Bella Vista Bypass" section.  One even said that the ribbon cutting was about the opening of it.  Sorry, it's been open for a while.

That Bella Vista Bypass is a mere 2 lane road.  Yet, AHTD can construct an Interstate standard highway with US 67 up to the northeast.
Dick Trammel has done nothing for this area... and it's really sad.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on August 23, 2015, 10:32:31 AM
Hopefully our congress and house members will pass a long term federal highway bill this fall or it will be a slow go on I 49 for both states.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: cjk374 on August 23, 2015, 10:44:59 AM
Hopefully our congress and house members will pass a long term federal highway bill this fall or it will be a slow go on I 49 for both states.

 :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D
Remember: the opposite of PROgress is CONgress.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on August 23, 2015, 03:37:09 PM
I saw a few things on Little Rock news stations about this being a new "Bella Vista Bypass" section.  One even said that the ribbon cutting was about the opening of it.  Sorry, it's been open for a while.

That Bella Vista Bypass is a mere 2 lane road.  Yet, AHTD can construct an Interstate standard highway with US 67 up to the northeast.
Dick Trammel has done nothing for this area... and it's really sad.

Been open almost a month. One report said the road was open to Bella Vista.  :pan:

IMO, Dick Trammel is more a shameless huckster that a highway commissioner.

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on August 25, 2015, 01:14:11 AM
I have a feeling with a NWA governor in place, the I-49 project will get a kick in the rear end. The former officeholder was the driving force behind prioritizing US 67. There's always a certain amount of governmental inertia with EISes and the bidding process causing lag time.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on August 25, 2015, 08:51:16 AM
I have a feeling with a NWA governor in place, the I-49 project will get a kick in the rear end. The former officeholder was the driving force behind prioritizing US 67. There's always a certain amount of governmental inertia with EISes and the bidding process causing lag time.
As soon as Asa finishes building more prisons
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on August 27, 2015, 06:28:53 AM
I have a feeling with a NWA governor in place, the I-49 project will get a kick in the rear end. The former officeholder was the driving force behind prioritizing US 67. There's always a certain amount of governmental inertia with EISes and the bidding process causing lag time.
As soon as Asa finishes building more prisons
Yep, pretty much... but at least there is an Interstate ready US 67 and US 63... Both go towards Jonesboro.  I did a bunch of Google street views on the highways, and yeah, I wouldn't be surprised if there was some sort of corruption... There is no traffic.

Yet, the Bella Vista Bypass is just doing just a 2 laner.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on August 29, 2015, 08:51:43 PM
I have a feeling with a NWA governor in place, the I-49 project will get a kick in the rear end. The former officeholder was the driving force behind prioritizing US 67. There's always a certain amount of governmental inertia with EISes and the bidding process causing lag time.
As soon as Asa finishes building more prisons
Yep, pretty much... but at least there is an Interstate ready US 67 and US 63... Both go towards Jonesboro.  I did a bunch of Google street views on the highways, and yeah, I wouldn't be surprised if there was some sort of corruption... There is no traffic.

Yet, the Bella Vista Bypass is just doing just a 2 laner.

Interesting thing is, the Arkansas portion of the Bella Vista bypass is almost entirely (I'm guessing 3/4 to 7/8) in the school district of where Gov. Hutchinson spent much of his time growing up (Gravette).
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: razorback0308 on September 02, 2015, 07:22:14 PM
Any ideas as to when they'll start expanding the bridge at Exit 85?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: noelbotevera on September 02, 2015, 07:26:28 PM
I-49 in AR and MO is like a dice - they don't know which way they'll turn till they add in the spice. When given all the bad stuff, you gotta take a leap of faith and be a gambler. Just take a leap of faith and boil decisions down to luck - that's the way to get I-49 done.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: TravelingBethelite on September 02, 2015, 08:56:55 PM
Building Interstates, and even just roads, is more than just luck. It's all a matter of [very x3] hard work and applying themselves. That, and a lot of bureaucracy & bills to get through. A lot. But once that's taken care of, there's no stoppin' (road) progress(o).  :spin:
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: noelbotevera on September 02, 2015, 09:00:47 PM
Building Interstates, and even just roads, is more than just luck. It's all a matter of [very x3] hard work and applying themselves. That, and a lot of bureaucracy & bills to get through. A lot. But once that's taken care of, there's no stoppin' (road) progress(o).  :spin:
It's luck and time. Luck to get bills signed. Luck to get work done. Luck to even believe that this road can be built. Luck it is even finished early or on time.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on September 02, 2015, 09:06:46 PM
Building Interstates, and even just roads, is more than just luck. It's all a matter of [very x3] hard work and applying themselves. That, and a lot of bureaucracy & bills to get through. A lot. But once that's taken care of, there's no stoppin' (road) progress(o).  :spin:
Bankruptcy :)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: ATLRedSoxFan on September 28, 2015, 10:51:55 PM
Just an observation..Arkansas seems to be kind of hush-hush when it comes to their interstate duplex's. I drove Memphis to Ft.Smith ,AR and coming out of Memphis, I-55 isn't even acknowledged until the split North/West, and it's like, BTW, I-55 next right. Same is true with the I-540 concurrency, on overheads, once again, btw. Now I-49 is signed northbound, but they might as well sign it southbound by Ft. Smith.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on September 28, 2015, 11:03:41 PM
Just an observation..Arkansas seems to be kind of hush-hush when it comes to their interstate duplex's. I drove Memphis to Ft.Smith ,AR and coming out of Memphis, I-55 isn't even acknowledged until the split North/West, and it's like, BTW, I-55 next right. Same is true with the I-540 concurrency, on overheads, once again, btw. Now I-49 is signed northbound, but they might as well sign it southbound by Ft. Smith.

540 is no longer concurrent with I-40 anyway, though US 71 is concurrent with 40 from Exit 13 to Exit 7, but isn't posted. Nor is it posted along I-540.

Nor is 71 (or US 62) posted with I-49 in NW Arkansas.  AHTD explained this once...something about only the highest priority route is posted (?).


As far as I-49, I am guessing AASHTO won't allow AHTD to post AR 549 as I-49 at Gravette or Barling (it doesn't follow I-540).

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: razorback0308 on October 01, 2015, 04:16:57 PM
When are they going to start the bridge expansion at exit 85? The road expansion is complete on both sides of the bridge.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on October 01, 2015, 04:39:42 PM
When are they going to start the bridge expansion at exit 85?

AHTD's August 12, 2015 presentation to the Bella Vista Rotary Club (http://www.arkansashighways.com/PowerPoints/2015/081215_BellaVistaRotary.pdf) indicates Mid 2016 (p. 10/41 of pdf):

(http://i.imgur.com/JMMmtf8.png)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: robbones on October 15, 2015, 09:48:35 PM
I've drove in Fayetteville the other day and looks like they should have the third lane completed from Wedington Drive (exit 64) to Porter Drive (exit 65) within a few weeks
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: robbones on October 21, 2015, 11:13:40 PM
http://5newsonline.com/2015/10/21/28-miles-of-interstate-49-to-undergo-construction-in-2-4-weeks/

Construction from south of Mountainburg (exit 29) up to Fayetteville

HTC Desire 610

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on October 21, 2015, 11:32:21 PM
http://5newsonline.com/2015/10/21/28-miles-of-interstate-49-to-undergo-construction-in-2-4-weeks/

Construction from south of Mountainburg (exit 29) up to Fayetteville



Not really needed, IMO. I wonder if I-40 will ever be finished?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on October 22, 2015, 05:33:07 PM
Maybe they will work on the shoulders, a lot of the pavement on the shoulders is breaking up.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on October 22, 2015, 09:44:04 PM
One of the articles incorrectly states that AHTD has launched its "build the bridge campaign." This is not correct. That campaign is a local effort.

This article (http://arkansasnews.com/news/arkansas/hutchinson-touts-progress-urges-hard-work-fort-smith) reports that Gov. Hutchinson has tasked his Working Group on Highway Funding to find out a way to finance the I-49 Arkansas River bridge section between Alma and Chaffee Crossing:

Quote
Despite the recent economic growth and progress in the state, Arkansas Gov. Asa Hutchinson says there is more work to be done.
Hutchinson, speaking during Thursday’s annual meeting of the Fort Smith Regional Chamber of Commerce, touted the state’s recent economic accomplishments and his goals to continue that progress ....
Another long-term goal and factor in economic development in the state is improving transportation, and Hutchinson said he has tasked his newly established Working Group on Highway Funding to hash out a number of issues, including how to secure funding to build a 13-mile stretch of Interstate 49 south of Alma that will connect at Chaffee Crossing, including a new bridge across the Arkansas River.
“We have to figure a way to make that move forward quicker than what we are doing right now,”  Hutchinson said
, as he was met with applause from the crowd of about 1,000 in attendance. “We have to get that done to benefit western Arkansas.”

Maybe the effort to build the bridge will proceed from the local level and the gubernatorial level to the AHTD level in the the not-too-distant future.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Scott5114 on October 23, 2015, 01:47:24 AM
Building Interstates, and even just roads, is more than just luck. It's all a matter of [very x3] hard work and applying themselves. That, and a lot of bureaucracy & bills to get through. A lot. But once that's taken care of, there's no stoppin' (road) progress(o).  :spin:
It's luck and time. Luck to get bills signed. Luck to get work done. Luck to even believe that this road can be built. Luck it is even finished early or on time.

It's not luck, it's politics. It would be a very bad legislator that left things like this up to chance.

Here's what happens behind the scenes. Let's say you and I are both legislators in the Oklahoma House of Representatives. I am the chairman of the Transportation Committee and therefore have a lot of power in determining what projects the DOT will build. You are a representative from the city of Lawton and want to have an Interstate 644 built in Lawton.

I have the ability to help your project, so it would be a good idea for you to get me to support your project. So you need to convince me somehow. This can take many forms: you can visit me and tell me why Lawton needs a new interstate, you can help support my re-election campaign somehow, you can write a bill that funds both Interstate 644 and an Interstate 935 in Norman, where I am from and therefore will probably like a lot. Once you get my support, then we get the bill out of committee and now we have to convince the Speaker of the House to bring it to a floor vote. And then we have to get votes for the bill. This repeats over and over until we are convincing the Governor to sign the bill.

How successful we are will depend on how persuadable people are at each step, if we have anything we can offer them to secure their support, and so on. This will be affected by things like how much money the government has to spend and if there is something more important happening that will be seen as a higher priority. If the Governor is concentrating on, say, improving the school system, they might oppose expensive freeway projects that would take money away from that.

It's not just blind chance. It takes a lot of work that most people don't even know is going on.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on October 23, 2015, 02:23:04 PM

It's not luck, it's politics. It would be a very bad legislator that left things like this up to chance.

John Paul Hammerschmidt pushed a lot of pork to get 49 built north of Alma.  Prissy Hickerson did the same for the Texarkana Loop.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Wayward Memphian on October 24, 2015, 09:07:47 AM
I've drove in Fayetteville the other day and looks like they should have the third lane completed from Wedington Drive (exit 64) to Porter Drive (exit 65) within a few weeks

Here's a description of what is increasing becoming nearly continously backups somewhere on I-49 in Benton and Washington Counties. Traffic backs up.from the first light where it ends in Bella Vista to the Ark 72/Pea Ridge exit regularly.  Any on ramp causes a backup as the amount feeding into I-49 basically forces everyone to merge left the Fayetteville curve and 112 exit is a daily nighmare. A side effect is happening, more and more, folks in Fayetteville are using the recently widened Crossover as a quasi freeway to go north and then cut across via Don Tyson. Traffic isn't insane yet but it's going to get there. Houses are continuing to go up along Ark 16 to Elkins, Ark 45 to Goshen and areas north. They need to be planning an extension of the US412 bypass south of where it reconnects with the existing road and get those corridors on paper for planning purposes. We are at 550,000 now, with 800,000 easily possible in 15 years and we are still in  reactionary mode to pre recession growth. Even with the growth of Benton Co. Fayetteville is still adding more residents than anyone. I know from driving 49 enough to know when the Bella Vista Bypass is done and connected with Missouri the already increasing amount of thru traffic will explode. I'm continously seeing Kansas plates using it to connect to I-40.  One stop at Cabelas in Rogers and glancing at plates there shows this as well. I can't imagine what it would be like if it actually was already connected to Texarkana.

Sadly I'm seeing the first blunder of the current widening construction on I-49 up here. They should at least be doing the bridge rebuilds wide enough for 4 lanes even if three is all the road bed is getting at the moment. I liken it to them doing it right between Conway and NLR on I-40 and actually rebuilding the bridges to handle three when the actual widening was still a decade off.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on October 26, 2015, 01:29:54 AM
Quote from: Scott5114
I have the ability to help your project, so it would be a good idea for you to get me to support your project. So you need to convince me somehow. This can take many forms: you can visit me and tell me why Lawton needs a new interstate, you can help support my re-election campaign somehow, you can write a bill that funds both Interstate 644 and an Interstate 935 in Norman, where I am from and therefore will probably like a lot. Once you get my support, then we get the bill out of committee and now we have to convince the Speaker of the House to bring it to a floor vote. And then we have to get votes for the bill. This repeats over and over until we are convincing the Governor to sign the bill.

That's a good description of the political process. Another big part of that is if the representative from a certain area has enough clout to make that project dream come true. Southwest Oklahoma unfortunately is one of the least politically powerful areas of the state.

Lawton could certainly use a couple key highway improvements, such as upgrading Rogers Lane into a full fledged Interstate spur. All the ROW needed for such an upgrade is available (for now) on the North side of the highway. The old Artillery Village neighborhood on Fort Sill that used to border Rogers Lane on the other side of the sound barrier was demolished. That housing was replaced by new housing units a little farther north into the post. Rogers Lane is already treated like an Interstate by most of the people who drive on it. ODOT at least fixed the very dangerous interchanges at Fort Sill Blvd and Sheridan Road (removing some at grade left turns across the main lanes of Rogers Lane).

Rogers Lane has a lot of traffic on it, but it will soon have even more. Carmike is opening a new 13-screen multiplex, including an IMAX-branded premium screen in a couple weeks. That new complex is next to Rogers Lane near 67th Street. Other businesses are expected to open around it over the next year. More businesses are going into the new shopping center on 82nd Street. A lot of people already use Rogers Lane to bypass heavy traffic on Cache Road (or what some locals call "Crash Road").

I think some really serious car accidents that get a lot of media coverage would have to happen before any politicians in other parts of the state would bother even thinking about pushing legislation to upgrade Rogers Lane. I think they would fight such a project otherwise.

The very least thing ODOT and politicians in Oklahoma could do is preserve future freeway corridors. A complete Kilpatrick Turnpike loop around metro OKC was possible 15-20 years ago when the Northern section was under construction. But the short sighted people in power couldn't be bothered to copy the method used in Texas to secure corridors: build a divided street or highway with a wide median -or at least secure enough ROW. Nope. I think it's a miracle Oklahoma has any freeway exits with Texas style U-turns.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: rte66man on October 31, 2015, 05:31:32 PM
Quote from: Scott5114
I have the ability to help your project, so it would be a good idea for you to get me to support your project. So you need to convince me somehow. This can take many forms: you can visit me and tell me why Lawton needs a new interstate, you can help support my re-election campaign somehow, you can write a bill that funds both Interstate 644 and an Interstate 935 in Norman, where I am from and therefore will probably like a lot. Once you get my support, then we get the bill out of committee and now we have to convince the Speaker of the House to bring it to a floor vote. And then we have to get votes for the bill. This repeats over and over until we are convincing the Governor to sign the bill.

That's a good description of the political process. Another big part of that is if the representative from a certain area has enough clout to make that project dream come true. Southwest Oklahoma unfortunately is one of the least politically powerful areas of the state.


20 years ago that was the exact opposite.  With Loyd Benson as the Speaker, US183 was 4-laned from Snyder to Frederick.  Why?  Guess where Benson lives.  He was also responsible for 183 between Snyder and Clinton being "upgraded".  Another useless project as OK6 (appx 15 miles west) was already scheduled to be 4-laned from Altus to Elk City, mostly because of the AFB in Altus.  If he hadn't wasted so much money on 183, OK6 would have been done 10 years ago.  Same goes for MANY non-transportation projects (Hackberry Flats, Frederick Pioneer Musem, ad nauseum).  Benson was one the the biggest pork kings in the 90's.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on November 03, 2015, 10:11:03 AM

Here's a description of what is increasing becoming nearly continously backups somewhere on I-49 in Benton and Washington Counties. Traffic backs up.from the first light where it ends in Bella Vista to the Ark 72/Pea Ridge exit regularly.  Any on ramp causes a backup as the amount feeding into I-49 basically forces everyone to merge left the Fayetteville curve and 112 exit is a daily nighmare. A side effect is happening, more and more, folks in Fayetteville are using the recently widened Crossover as a quasi freeway to go north and then cut across via Don Tyson. Traffic isn't insane yet but it's going to get there. Houses are continuing to go up along Ark 16 to Elkins, Ark 45 to Goshen and areas north. They need to be planning an extension of the US412 bypass south of where it reconnects with the existing road and get those corridors on paper for planning purposes. We are at 550,000 now, with 800,000 easily possible in 15 years and we are still in  reactionary mode to pre recession growth. Even with the growth of Benton Co. Fayetteville is still adding more residents than anyone. I know from driving 49 enough to know when the Bella Vista Bypass is done and connected with Missouri the already increasing amount of thru traffic will explode. I'm continously seeing Kansas plates using it to connect to I-40.  One stop at Cabelas in Rogers and glancing at plates there shows this as well. I can't imagine what it would be like if it actually was already connected to Texarkana.

Sadly I'm seeing the first blunder of the current widening construction on I-49 up here. They should at least be doing the bridge rebuilds wide enough for 4 lanes even if three is all the road bed is getting at the moment. I liken it to them doing it right between Conway and NLR on I-40 and actually rebuilding the bridges to handle three when the actual widening was still a decade off.

I wonder if anyone has really thought through what volume of traffic a corridor like this will take through northwest Arkansas, which seems almost in the middle of this "Minnie-Winnie-New-Hou hourglass"?  (NOT COMPLAINING ABOUT IT...just thinking with wisdom guided by experience.)

(http://i.imgur.com/DuNOAKU.png)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Henry on November 03, 2015, 10:36:46 AM
I wonder if anyone has really thought through what volume of traffic a corridor like this will take through northwest Arkansas, which seems almost in the middle of this "Minnie-Winnie-New-Hou hourglass"?  (NOT COMPLAINING ABOUT IT...just thinking with wisdom guided by experience.)

(http://i.imgur.com/DuNOAKU.png)
Well, time will tell...not to mention that you also have that "LA Det-lanta fork" stuck through it!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: The Ghostbuster on November 03, 2015, 04:44:38 PM
Are any more sections of Interstate 49 between Interstate 30 and Interstate 40 slated for construction in the near future?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Wayward Memphian on November 03, 2015, 05:29:14 PM
Are any more sections of Interstate 49 between Interstate 30 and Interstate 40 slated for construction in the near future?

After the Bella Vista section is done the next thing will be the Alma to Ft. Chaffee section and that will involve a  bridge over the Arkansas River and elevated road bed in the flood plain. We might see that done in a decade to decade and half. I figure a Mena bypass would be the next step.

Like I've said, If someone crafted a tax/bond proposal that addressed new roads only with federal fund matching and each area saw some action like major sections of I-69, I-49, and US 412 across the top of the state connecting Jonesboro to NWA with a 4 lane divided and it would pass.  I'm likely completely wrong but gosh it's a pain to navigate Arkansas. Take my nephew for example, lives in Springdale but goes to Quachita Baptist in Arkadelphia. The easiest and quickest way is to go to LR via 49 and 40 and then down 30. Completely insane and yet it is the way it is. Just like Fayetteville to Jonesboro, you go all  the way down on 49 and 40 and then cut across between Conway and Beebe on US64 to US67 and back up.  I could be wrong but an increase in the gas tax could actually save me money on reduced milage from common point to points I drive in the state many times over.

There's a little section of land  of land south of Memphis where both sides of Mississippi are Arkansas'. Hell, I'd be fine with a spur off I-40 near the intermodal facility west of West Memphis that would be a toll road/bridge that would connect with the current terminus of I-69 that would connect it with the new I-69 loop and I-55 and I-22 without going through congested Memphis. I guarantee you the most resistance to it would be because of cost or feasibility though those arguments would be made by funding from the Southland folks that would hate to see a direct route to the heart of the casinos in Tunica. That's why it would never happen.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on November 04, 2015, 10:59:44 AM
I wonder if anyone has really thought through what volume of traffic a corridor like this will take through northwest Arkansas, which seems almost in the middle of this "Minnie-Winnie-New-Hou hourglass"?  (NOT COMPLAINING ABOUT IT...just thinking with wisdom guided by experience.)

(http://i.imgur.com/DuNOAKU.png)
Well, time will tell...not to mention that you also have that "LA Det-lanta fork" stuck through it!

Heh, too true.  But there are other ways from Winnipeg, Houston, etc. to Los Angeles, Atlanta, etc.  The I-49 corridor will link the busiest ports in America (those on the coast from the Houston Area to the New Orleans area) to the busiest port on the Great Lakes (Duluth/Superior).  I know the problem with studies is that researchers can often make them say anything they want, but I'd love to see some honest traffic projections on a completed I-49 and I-69 (Texas from Texarkana/Shreveport to Houston to Laredo/McAllen/Brownsville).  Like Wayward Memphian said, the traffic backups in rush hour for Bella Vista are getting worse and predictable, and much of that is out-of-state bound.  The completed corridor may help keep traffic moving but with only two lanes on either side...

(BTW, may have said it here before, but west Bella Vista has heretofore been the "quiet" side of town where more of the retirees have settled, but I predict that far east BV, toward Pea Ridge with only a couple of two-lane roads heading east, will see an explosion of development when the BV Bypass is someday complete...with all the traffic I suspect will traverse that road west BV will see some "character change".)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on November 04, 2015, 12:54:41 PM
Quote from: rte66man
20 years ago that was the exact opposite.  With Loyd Benson as the Speaker, US183 was 4-laned from Snyder to Frederick.  Why?  Guess where Benson lives.  He was also responsible for 183 between Snyder and Clinton being "upgraded".  Another useless project as OK6 (appx 15 miles west) was already scheduled to be 4-laned from Altus to Elk City, mostly because of the AFB in Altus.  If he hadn't wasted so much money on 183, OK6 would have been done 10 years ago.  Same goes for MANY non-transportation projects (Hackberry Flats, Frederick Pioneer Musem, ad nauseum).  Benson was one the the biggest pork kings in the 90's.

Here's the really funny thing. That four lane project on US-183 was a downgrade from what they really wanted: two turnpikes serving very few people. One running parallel with US-183 from Snyder to Clinton and another going from Duncan to Davis. I remember hearing one sales pitch for the Clinton to Snyder turnpike being the start of a Mexico to Canada corridor to bypass all the busy I-35 traffic. The problem with that pitch: that corridor wouldn't direct traffic to any major destinations. Ultimately the road has to go somewhere.

Looking at the "big picture" view of the entire Interstate highway system, the most logical turnpike to build in Oklahoma would be Oklahoma City to Woodward. Then, with cooperation from Kansas, Colorado and the federal government, that diagonal route could be extended towards Denver. It's basically an equivalent of I-44 between OKC and St. Louis, but going to Denver instead. It's currently a huge, very obvious hole in the Interstate system. Tying this back into the I-49 discussion, if this kind of diagonal Interstate route already existed it would be good if it was a Denver to Texarkana route, going through Oklahoma City. That would actually be a better Ports to Plains Corridor, but very little of it would be in Texas.

Anyway, some roads to get built as pork barrel projects while other more logical parts of the system go un-built or not built properly.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Wayward Memphian on November 04, 2015, 12:59:07 PM
Yep, they are in the process of widening I-49 from Fayetteville to Bentonville yet building a key future component too small. Common sense would seem to be to build it at three lanes per side now or at the very minimum make the bridges and supporting structures wide enough for three lanes lime they should be doing on the current widening for 4 lanes.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Rothman on November 04, 2015, 01:21:01 PM

Heh, too true.  But there are other ways from Winnipeg, Houston, etc. to Los Angeles, Atlanta, etc.  The I-49 corridor will link the busiest ports in America (those on the coast from the Houston Area to the New Orleans area) to the busiest port on the Great Lakes (Duluth/Superior). 


Pfft.  Duluth/Superior's port traffic (most of which is intra-Great Lakes) has basically plateaued, as far as I'm aware.  Back when I lived there, I was with a group that lobbied for the renovation of the Soo Locks and I'm not sure if that was even done after I left (hopefully, by now).  Given the limitations of the Welland Canal, you're not going to be seeing PANAMAX ships come in there any time soon (not that they could even accommodate them with the current port facilities, anyway).  If there was any true demand for traffic between the two ports, you would have seen measures taken long ago -- the real heyday of the Twin Ports was decades ago.

Also, given the lack of traffic in the Twin Ports to the point where it feels overbuilt as is infrastructure-wise, calling it a traffic generator or attractor is a real stretch.

Nice place to visit in the summer, though, as long as you're headed up the North Shore. :D
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on November 04, 2015, 11:49:47 PM

Heh, too true.  But there are other ways from Winnipeg, Houston, etc. to Los Angeles, Atlanta, etc.  The I-49 corridor will link the busiest ports in America (those on the coast from the Houston Area to the New Orleans area) to the busiest port on the Great Lakes (Duluth/Superior). 


Pfft.  Duluth/Superior's port traffic (most of which is intra-Great Lakes) has basically plateaued, as far as I'm aware.  Back when I lived there, I was with a group that lobbied for the renovation of the Soo Locks and I'm not sure if that was even done after I left (hopefully, by now).  Given the limitations of the Welland Canal, you're not going to be seeing PANAMAX ships come in there any time soon (not that they could even accommodate them with the current port facilities, anyway).  If there was any true demand for traffic between the two ports, you would have seen measures taken long ago -- the real heyday of the Twin Ports was decades ago.

Also, given the lack of traffic in the Twin Ports to the point where it feels overbuilt as is infrastructure-wise, calling it a traffic generator or attractor is a real stretch.

Nice place to visit in the summer, though, as long as you're headed up the North Shore. :D

I stand corrected.  Thanks, Rothman, for the information.

The biggest city in central Canada (Winnipeg) and the biggest cities in five American states (Minn/St. P, Des Moines, Fargo, Sioux Falls, Omaha) + Kansas City (which would be Kansas' biggest metro area were it wholly in that state) will make up for it with I-49.  ;-)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on November 10, 2015, 12:02:11 PM
Saw the 60% plans for AHTD Job BB0414,

Some comments on the signage plans:

(http://i1273.photobucket.com/albums/y405/porkerface/signs_zpsrnv5vd2n.png)

1. Surely Little Rock as a control city for southbound I-49 is a mistake. All the rest of the signs show Fort Smith shown.
2. Shouldn't it just be "Fulbright Expy"?

(http://i1273.photobucket.com/albums/y405/porkerface/signs2_zpsih8t14gq.png)

3. I hate using Joplin Mo as a control city. No one on that road is going to Joplin, they are going to Bentonville. There is only 20k VPD northbound at the state line. There are 39k north of Exit 88 and 80k prior to the Hwy 12 exit. Bentonville is the clear choice here

Otherwise, looks good. Can't wait for the project to begin, so that it can get constructed and that interchange won't be absolutely terrible
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on November 10, 2015, 02:08:03 PM
Saw the 60% plans for AHTD Job BB0414,


So 112 and Bus 71 are going A-B exits instead of individual numbers?  112 is Exit 66, 71B is currently 67. I think 71B should be TO 71B, like the new flyover is TO 49

Using Fulbright Expressway for 71B seems silly. Why not use Springdale (as is posted where Fulbright intersects College Ave)?

I'm glad to see 71 co-signed with 49, but wish they would post US 62, as well.

Using Little Rock as a control on 49 does seem a bit off: use Fort Smith or (shudder) Texarkana

I have no major complaints about using Joplin

FWIW, Fort Smith is used as a control on I-49 south of Joplin.

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on November 10, 2015, 03:24:25 PM
Quote
I think 71B should be TO 71B,

Technically the Fulbright Expy is also Highway 71B per the route and section map, probably a holdover from before I-540. I agree though

https://www.arkansashighways.com/Maps/Counties/County%20RAS/RAS%20Maps%20PDF/mwash_ras.pdf (https://www.arkansashighways.com/Maps/Counties/County%20RAS/RAS%20Maps%20PDF/mwash_ras.pdf)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: noelbotevera on November 10, 2015, 07:48:19 PM
I think the reason why Little Rock is the control city is that it's still the end of I-49 until you hit the next segment near the Missouri state line.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on November 10, 2015, 07:51:44 PM
Quote
I think 71B should be TO 71B,

Technically the Fulbright Expy is also Highway 71B per the route and section map, probably a holdover from before I-540. I agree though


Yes. It's part of the original Fayetteville Bypass. I think on paper it was 471 Spur at one time. I often call it 71 BS ;)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: NE2 on November 10, 2015, 10:30:02 PM
I think the reason why Little Rock is the control city is that it's still the end of I-49 until you hit the next segment near the Missouri state line.
Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and to remove all doubt.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Scott5114 on November 12, 2015, 10:18:09 PM
I wonder why they're including "Mo" after "Joplin". Not as if there's going to be a big confusion with Joplin, AR, is there? And all of the signs for I-44 out of Tulsa already say "Joplin", no "Mo".

But then again nobody in Oklahoma City seems to know where Joplin is when it comes up in conversation, so maybe it is needed. Who knows.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on November 12, 2015, 10:32:54 PM
I wonder why they're including "Mo" after "Joplin". Not as if there's going to be a big confusion with Joplin, AR, is there? And all of the signs for I-44 out of Tulsa already say "Joplin", no "Mo".

But then again nobody in Oklahoma City seems to know where Joplin is when it comes up in conversation, so maybe it is needed. Who knows.

The I-49 BGS's at Joplin say Fort Smith without saying AR or Ark, though a couple of the  exits south of there have Fort Smith AR
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: rte66man on November 13, 2015, 04:00:59 PM
I wonder why they're including "Mo" after "Joplin". Not as if there's going to be a big confusion with Joplin, AR, is there? And all of the signs for I-44 out of Tulsa already say "Joplin", no "Mo".

But then again nobody in Oklahoma City seems to know where Joplin is when it comes up in conversation, so maybe it is needed. Who knows.

This is the second thread I've seen you post this comment.  I'm not debating the accuracy, just why Joplin?  The same can be said for most any small/medium city in the region. Ask any OKC resident where Longview, TX or Emporia, KS is and they probably couldn't tell you even though both (like Joplin) are located on major interstates.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on November 13, 2015, 07:12:20 PM

This is the second thread I've seen you post this comment.  I'm not debating the accuracy, just why Joplin? 


Because it joins I-44 at Joplin?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Scott5114 on November 14, 2015, 08:06:08 PM
I used to go to school in Springfield and traveled back to OKC a lot. Joplin was a useful waypoint in between, being the only major thing between Springfield and Tulsa. But if someone asked where along the road I was and I said Joplin, they would invariably ask "Where's that?" Which I always found surprising, since I had always had a vague idea of where it was.

On the other hand, if I mentioned Miami, which is smaller, but on the OK side of the line, they knew exactly where I was. Go figure.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on November 16, 2015, 10:10:47 AM
Joplin isn't exactly one of those blink and you miss it cities, although not too much of it is built across I-44 or I-49. The city is big enough to have quite a few different chain businesses there. Heck, there is a Chipotle in Joplin and we don't even have one of those in Lawton yet (and Lawton is about double Joplin's size in population).

As to people in Oklahoma not knowing of Joplin or where it's located I would have to say those Okies must have been living in a cave for a few years. Joplin was huge in the news and received a national outpouring of sympathy after that EF-5 tornado struck there.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: roadman65 on November 16, 2015, 10:30:15 AM
What I find interesting is the fact that Fort Smith is used as control city for I-49 (US 71) south of Joplin, but in Arkansas they use their own they use this:
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.4782209,-94.2489508,3a,75y,50.14h,72.87t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s8aIIzB20PC-JkOLbQNdgnw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1

Joplin means nothing to them either.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on November 16, 2015, 01:29:38 PM
What I find interesting is the fact that Fort Smith is used as control city for I-49 (US 71) south of Joplin, but in Arkansas they use their own they use this:
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.4782209,-94.2489508,3a,75y,50.14h,72.87t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s8aIIzB20PC-JkOLbQNdgnw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1

Joplin means nothing to them either.

That's a modified I-540 sign. The shields were replaced, but not the signs themselves. 540 originally ended in Fayetteville, but was later extended to Bentonville.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: rte66man on November 19, 2015, 10:23:03 PM

This is the second thread I've seen you post this comment.  I'm not debating the accuracy, just why Joplin? 


Because it joins I-44 at Joplin?


I should have deleted the first part of the quote because the second part was what I was commenting on.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: mvak36 on December 05, 2015, 12:34:38 PM
Now that there is a highway bill in place, are there any new parts of I-49 that might get constructed in the next 5 years? Like maybe the Mena bypass, etc.,
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on December 05, 2015, 09:51:36 PM
I would like to see Bella Vista Bypass finished and From I 40 to the new section in Barling finished first. I think those 2 projects would would help promote I 49 getting finished.

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on December 05, 2015, 10:51:43 PM
Now that there is a highway bill in place, are there any new parts of I-49 that might get constructed in the next 5 years? Like maybe the Mena bypass, etc.,

Nothing that I have seen. Then again, the bill is over 1000 pages and I've yet to find copy on-line.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: mvak36 on December 06, 2015, 12:33:38 AM
Now that there is a highway bill in place, are there any new parts of I-49 that might get constructed in the next 5 years? Like maybe the Mena bypass, etc.,

Nothing that I have seen. Then again, the bill is over 1000 pages and I've yet to find copy on-line.

This thread had a draft of the bill before it got passed: https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=16970.msg2110067#msg2110067

I'm confused though. Does it have to be in the bill in order for any construction to happen? I was thinking that AHTD would just have to request the federal share of the project cost once it starts (or before) construction.

I probably misunderstood what you were saying.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on December 06, 2015, 11:48:53 AM
I hope when Gov. Hutchinson decides on extra State funding next month that AHTD will start working on the design phase of the I 49 Arkansas Bridge project. Then maybe Missouri will find some funding for the Bella Vista Bypass next year.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: mvak36 on December 06, 2015, 12:04:35 PM
Are there any other sections between Alma and Texarkana that have already been designed and are ready for construction? Will they have to do environmental studies on any sections also?

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: andy3175 on December 08, 2015, 01:10:21 AM
Now that there is a highway bill in place, are there any new parts of I-49 that might get constructed in the next 5 years? Like maybe the Mena bypass, etc.,

Nothing that I have seen. Then again, the bill is over 1000 pages and I've yet to find copy on-line.


Here is the compromise version (House/Senate) that was signed by the President on Friday. Happy reading!

http://transportation.house.gov/uploadedfiles/fastact_xml.pdf

http://transportation.house.gov/uploadedfiles/house_senate_big_4.pdf

http://www.commerce.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/pressreleases?ID=31E4942D-A775-459F-9137-EC0F5560CBDF
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on January 21, 2016, 04:34:33 PM
I have an AHTD Crawford County map from 1969 (?) that showed a proposed extension of I-540 heading north,  so it was in some semblance of "planning" for years. It just took John Paul Hammerschmidt and lots of earmarks to make it happen.
AHTD's July 13, 2015 presentation to the Fort Smith Regional Chamber of Commerce (http://www.arkansashighways.com/PowerPoints/2015/071315_Scott_FtSmithChamber.pdf)
Here is a good visual of the Arkansas River bridge section from AHTD's above-linked presentation to the Fort Smith Chamber of Commerce (p. 10/31 of pdf):
(http://i.imgur.com/BinBtes.jpg)

This article (http://swtimes.com/news/womack-outlines-project-funding-idea-van-buren-stop) reports on U.S. Representative Steve Womack's recent visit to Van Buren, during which he recalled the glory days of John Paul Hammerschmidt and opined that earmarks (this time subject to a line item veto) should return to Congress for big projects such as a "slackwater harbor" in the Van Buren area and, apparently, the I-49 Arkansas River bridge ("that bridge" - he may have been referring to Alaska's infamous "Bridge to Nowhere", but the comment also seems applicable to the I-49 bridge):

Quote
The famous “Bridge to Nowhere”  in Ketchikan, Alaska, did actually lead somewhere – the start of a ban on budget appropriation “earmarks”  for specific projects, and a more slippery slope for major transportation projects like those targeted by the Western Arkansas Regional Intermodal Transportation Authority.
Speaking to the authority on Wednesday at the Van Buren Public Library, U.S. Rep. Steve Womack of Rogers said the regional group’s long-running efforts to create a “slackwater harbor”  for container ships in the Van Buren area and its prerequisite 12-foot deep channel from the Mississippi River, are hard to make happen without the old way of doing things.
Womack is proposing a new way of doing things, based on three components that include more transparency with a cost-benefit analysis, public entity request and having budgetary requests formerly known as earmarks subject to line item veto ....
“My ability to make a case for building that bridge has basically been taken away from me by House rules,”  Womack said. “You cannot do an earmark for a project like that. … This is not like it used to be during the John Paul (Hammerschmidt) years
, even the Tim and Asa (Hutchinson) and John Boozman years. … We cannot set aside money in appropriations for specific things in specific districts.”  ....
Womack, who has said lawmakers essentially shot themselves in the foot with the ban, theorized Wednesday it also has led to an even more “divided government.”
“That was the grease that kept Congress pretty well together for all those many years, so I think in history, you can go back to the earmark ban and say that’s when the Congress became perhaps hopelessly divided, even on the Republican side,”  Womack said.
In addition to hearing from Womack on Wednesday, the 12-member RITA group restated its objectives, with the No. 1 goal remaining “continue to support a regional intermodal port,”  followed by “continue to promote I-49 development,” and “find additional financial assistance for funding RITA."



Arkansas Governor Asa Hutchinson proposes using state budget  surplus  (http://www.arktimes.com/ArkansasBlog/archives/2016/01/19/governor-pay-for-roads-with-surplus-and-general-revenue-while-boosting-highway-dept-oversight) to pay for fixing the roads
(above quote from Arkansas to Use Budget Surplus to Fix Roads (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=17296.msg2120875#msg2120875) thread)

While Rep. Womack is touting the return of earmarks as a mechanism to make progress on I-49 and other big projects, the Governor's Working Group on Highway Funding Short-Term Recommendation (http://ee-governor-2015.ark.org/images/uploads/HFWG_FINAL_Short-Term_Recommendation_.pdf) also acknowledges mid-term target, long-term target, and ultimate needs funding goals for highways. The timetable for Ultimate Needs is "ten years in the future" and includes the completion of I-49 as one of the needs (pp. 4-5/15 of pdf; pp. 3-4 of document):

(http://i.imgur.com/EsKSl23.png)
....
(http://i.imgur.com/fgCu5jc.png)

A slide from the January 20, 2016 AHTD presentation to the Arkansas State Highway Commission (http://www.arkansashighways.com/PowerPoints/2016/012016_AHC_Meeting.pdf) provides a concise summary of the different goals (p. 19/104 of pdf):

(http://i.imgur.com/e5ZcOHf.png)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on January 23, 2016, 02:07:38 AM
Ah, so AHTD only needs a mere $1.68B annually. That's only 35% of our ENTIRE STATE's BUDGET!!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: robbones on January 23, 2016, 08:00:17 AM
Anyone know why they are replacing all of the guardrails north of Mountainburg

HTC Desire 610

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on January 23, 2016, 09:25:49 AM
This article (http://swtimes.com/news/womack-outlines-project-funding-idea-van-buren-stop) reports on U.S. Representative Steve Womack's recent visit to Van Buren, during which he recalled the glory days of John Paul Hammerschmidt and opined that earmarks (this time subject to a line item veto) should return to Congress for big projects such as a "slackwater harbor" in the Van Buren area and, apparently, the I-49 Arkansas River bridge ("that bridge" - he may have been referring to Alaska's infamous "Bridge to Nowhere", but the comment also seems applicable to the I-49 bridge)

This article (http://pressargus.com/news/womack-lauds-highway-plan.html) clarifies Rep. Womack's remarks about "that bridge" by reporting that he told the RITA meeting that the I-49 bridge "will be built":

Quote
Congressman Steve Womack ....
also told the RITA board the Interstate 49 bridge over the Arkansas River in Crawford County will be built.
“The question will be is it going to cost X number of dollars today or multiple X number of dollars down the road,”  he said.
One of the four goals for 2016 adopted Wednesday by the RITA board is to continue to stress the importance of the section of I-49 at Alma to Fort Chaffee Crossing and the river bridge.

Other goals are to continue the support of a regional intermodal port, additional financial assistance for RITA funding and the support of all modes of transportation.
RITA was formed in 2009 by the cities of Fort Smith and Van Buren and the counties of Crawford and Sebastian to plan and provide for and to develop initiatives and projects important to this region’s economic development future and particularly improvements that support the movement of the region’s goods and freight.
RITA is governed by a 12-member board.

It's interesting how this article does not mention Rep. Womack's thoughts about bringing back earmarks.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on January 23, 2016, 10:04:39 AM
This article (http://swtimes.com/news/womack-outlines-project-funding-idea-van-buren-stop) reports on U.S. Representative Steve Womack's recent visit to Van Buren, during which he recalled the glory days of John Paul Hammerschmidt and opined that earmarks (this time subject to a line item veto) should return to Congress for big projects such as a "slackwater harbor" in the Van Buren area and, apparently, the I-49 Arkansas River bridge ("that bridge" - he may have been referring to Alaska's infamous "Bridge to Nowhere", but the comment also seems applicable to the I-49 bridge)

This article (http://pressargus.com/news/womack-lauds-highway-plan.html) clarifies Rep. Womack's remarks about "that bridge" by reporting that he told the RITA meeting that the I-49 bridge "will be built":

Quote
Congressman Steve Womack ....
also told the RITA board the Interstate 49 bridge over the Arkansas River in Crawford County will be built.
“The question will be is it going to cost X number of dollars today or multiple X number of dollars down the road,”  he said.
One of the four goals for 2016 adopted Wednesday by the RITA board is to continue to stress the importance of the section of I-49 at Alma to Fort Chaffee Crossing and the river bridge.

Other goals are to continue the support of a regional intermodal port, additional financial assistance for RITA funding and the support of all modes of transportation.
RITA was formed in 2009 by the cities of Fort Smith and Van Buren and the counties of Crawford and Sebastian to plan and provide for and to develop initiatives and projects important to this region’s economic development future and particularly improvements that support the movement of the region’s goods and freight.
RITA is governed by a 12-member board.

It's interesting how this article does not mention Rep. Womack's thoughts about bringing back earmarks.

Based upon my observations, Mr Womack and Dr Boozeman would approve anything that helps their corporate masters, but not necessarily the general public.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on January 23, 2016, 11:25:51 AM
Ah, so AHTD only needs a mere $1.68B annually. That's only 35% of our ENTIRE STATE's BUDGET!!
And Governor Hutchinson seems to want to "borrow" from other state service budgets to pay for it.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on January 23, 2016, 12:11:41 PM
This article (http://swtimes.com/news/womack-outlines-project-funding-idea-van-buren-stop) reports on U.S. Representative Steve Womack's recent visit to Van Buren, during which he recalled the glory days of John Paul Hammerschmidt and opined that earmarks (this time subject to a line item veto) should return to Congress for big projects such as a "slackwater harbor" in the Van Buren area and, apparently, the I-49 Arkansas River bridge ("that bridge" - he may have been referring to Alaska's infamous "Bridge to Nowhere", but the comment also seems applicable to the I-49 bridge)

This article (http://pressargus.com/news/womack-lauds-highway-plan.html) clarifies Rep. Womack's remarks about "that bridge" by reporting that he told the RITA meeting that the I-49 bridge "will be built":

Quote
Congressman Steve Womack ....
also told the RITA board the Interstate 49 bridge over the Arkansas River in Crawford County will be built.
“The question will be is it going to cost X number of dollars today or multiple X number of dollars down the road,”  he said.
One of the four goals for 2016 adopted Wednesday by the RITA board is to continue to stress the importance of the section of I-49 at Alma to Fort Chaffee Crossing and the river bridge.

Other goals are to continue the support of a regional intermodal port, additional financial assistance for RITA funding and the support of all modes of transportation.
RITA was formed in 2009 by the cities of Fort Smith and Van Buren and the counties of Crawford and Sebastian to plan and provide for and to develop initiatives and projects important to this region’s economic development future and particularly improvements that support the movement of the region’s goods and freight.
RITA is governed by a 12-member board.

It's interesting how this article does not mention Rep. Womack's thoughts about bringing back earmarks.

Based upon my observations, Mr Womack and Dr Boozeman would approve anything that helps their corporate masters, but not necessarily the general public.

?

A completed I-49 (and in the short term, "that bridge" being finished along with the BV bypass) could be a HUGE benefit to the general public...
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on January 23, 2016, 12:37:30 PM
This article (http://swtimes.com/news/womack-outlines-project-funding-idea-van-buren-stop) reports on U.S. Representative Steve Womack's recent visit to Van Buren, during which he recalled the glory days of John Paul Hammerschmidt and opined that earmarks (this time subject to a line item veto) should return to Congress for big projects such as a "slackwater harbor" in the Van Buren area and, apparently, the I-49 Arkansas River bridge ("that bridge" - he may have been referring to Alaska's infamous "Bridge to Nowhere", but the comment also seems applicable to the I-49 bridge)

This article (http://pressargus.com/news/womack-lauds-highway-plan.html) clarifies Rep. Womack's remarks about "that bridge" by reporting that he told the RITA meeting that the I-49 bridge "will be built":

Quote
Congressman Steve Womack ....
also told the RITA board the Interstate 49 bridge over the Arkansas River in Crawford County will be built.
“The question will be is it going to cost X number of dollars today or multiple X number of dollars down the road,”  he said.
One of the four goals for 2016 adopted Wednesday by the RITA board is to continue to stress the importance of the section of I-49 at Alma to Fort Chaffee Crossing and the river bridge.

Other goals are to continue the support of a regional intermodal port, additional financial assistance for RITA funding and the support of all modes of transportation.
RITA was formed in 2009 by the cities of Fort Smith and Van Buren and the counties of Crawford and Sebastian to plan and provide for and to develop initiatives and projects important to this region’s economic development future and particularly improvements that support the movement of the region’s goods and freight.
RITA is governed by a 12-member board.

It's interesting how this article does not mention Rep. Womack's thoughts about bringing back earmarks.

Based upon my observations, Mr Womack and Dr Boozeman would approve anything that helps their corporate masters, but not necessarily the general public.

?

A completed I-49 (and in the short term, "that bridge" being finished along with the BV bypass) could be a HUGE benefit to the general public...

Womack and Boozeman oppose veterans benefits, but have no problem voting for tax breaks for their corporate owners. I don't see the bridge getting done without greasing a few palms.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on January 28, 2016, 11:37:00 AM
This article (http://www.nwaonline.com/news/2014/jul/18/planners-told-interstate-49-bella-vista/) reports that the Bella Vista Bypass would be southwest Missouri's top priority if Missouri voters approve the transportation sales tax and that Arkansas Highway Commissioner Dick Trammel is strongly hinting that Arkansas would then be able to come up with the extra $50 million to complete the Arkansas section of the BVB as a four-lane facility:
Quote
Dick Trammel, Arkansas Highway commissioner, said if Missouri voters approve the tax and the project north of the state line becomes a reality, it could speed up construction of all four lanes on this side of the line. Arkansas needs an estimated $50 million more to finish the bypass as a four-lane divided highway.
"If they get it, maybe we can get our other two lanes," Trammel said.
In this article about the ribbon cutting (http://www.nwaonline.com/news/2015/aug/22/second-section-of-bella-vista-bypass-op/), Commissioner Trammel is quoted as expressing optimism that Missouri will find a way to complete its section and that he hopes to have the extra $50 million needed to make the BVB a four-lane facility by about the time the initial two lanes are completed:
Quote
A few sprinkles from an overcast sky Friday morning didn't faze officials opening the newest section of the Bella Vista Bypass, which will be Interstate 49.
Dick Trammel, Arkansas highway commissioner, and other local dignitaries gathered below the newest Arkansas 74 overpass, just west of Hiwasse, and cut a blue ribbon using a huge pair of scissors. A couple of trucks blew their horns in salute as they passed above. Most of the cars in sight belonged to those attending the event ....
Trammel said voters' approval of a sales tax for highway improvements in 2012 paved the way for where the highway project is now, and he and others are working to find the money to finish the two additional lanes. Trammel said he'd like to have that money in hand by about the time the two lane part of the project is finished.
Trammel said Missouri officials are looking at ways to raise money for highways and he's confident Missouri will find a way to build it's 7-mile section from the state line to I-49 just south of Pineville.
This article (http://www.semissourian.com/story/2266718.html) reports that MoDOT has received some unexpected good news about its funding situation that will allow it to lift a moratorium on adding new projects to its five-year plan .... If new projects can be added to the five-year plan, then I wonder if the Bella Vista Bypass can be moved up a few years in the plan (from the current projected 2020 Award Date ...).
(bottom quote from I-49 Coming to Missouri (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3239.msg2119308#msg2119308) thread)

This article (http://www.nwaonline.com/news/2016/jan/28/money-identified-to-finish-major-road-p/?news) reports that the extra $50 million needed to convert the Bella Vista Bypass ("BVB") in Arkansas from two lanes to four lanes is identified in an initial version of the Arkansas 2016-2020 draft STIP, as well as another $50 million for the completion of the widening of NWA's Interstate 49 to six lanes in both directions :

Quote
State highway officials have identified money in an initial draft version of a new five-year transportation plan to finish work on three major Northwest Arkansas traffic corridors and start work on a fourth, Arkansas Highway Commission Chairman Dick Trammel told regional planners Wednesday.
The statewide Transportation Improvement Plan includes completing the widening of Interstate 49 to six lanes in both directions; finishing four lanes of the Bella Vista Bypass to the Missouri state line ....
The 2016 to 2020 plan identifies some $50 million for the Bella Vista Bypass, $50 million for I-49 ....
Trammel said timing on finishing the Bella Vista Bypass to the state line will be dependent on how quickly Missouri moves to finish its section.
But, Trammel said, "It's in the plans."
While the plan has not been finalized, it does signal the direction the highway department wants to go, Trammel said. Several public input sessions are expected before the plan is formally adopted ....

Maybe Arkansas and Missouri will be able to complete the BVB sooner rather than later ....

It's not too late to lobby for other I-49 projects (Mena bypass, preliminary engineering on the Arkansas River bridge ...) to be included in the STIP ......................
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: mvak36 on January 28, 2016, 02:51:47 PM
Is the I-49 widening from Bella Vista to Fayetteville? Or are they gonna be widening all the way to I-40?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Wayward Memphian on January 28, 2016, 03:16:32 PM
Is the I-49 widening from Bella Vista to Fayetteville? Or are they gonna be widening all the way to I-40?

Just to Fayetteville.This Morning wrecks on both sides, complete cluster.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: galador on January 28, 2016, 06:21:12 PM
It's not too late to lobby for other I-49 projects (Mena bypass, preliminary engineering on the Arkansas River bridge ...) to be included in the STIP ......................

It looks like (part of) your wish came true, http://swtimes.com/news/i-49-bridge-engineering-makes-state-draft-plan :

Quote
A request to fund over $27 million in preliminary engineering for a future Interstate 49 bridge over the Arkansas River from Alma to Barling is included in the draft 2016-2020 State Transportation Improvement Plan.

...

According to the latest project listing, a sort of wish list for highway projects, the preliminary engineering cost for the I-49 bridge is estimated at $27.4. The bridge construction has a preliminary estimation of about $128.5 million. With other costs, including right-of-way utility costs at $25.5 million, the bridge project is expected to be over $235.4 million.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on January 28, 2016, 09:30:58 PM
AHTD's July 13, 2015 presentation to the Fort Smith Regional Chamber of Commerce (http://www.arkansashighways.com/PowerPoints/2015/071315_Scott_FtSmithChamber.pdf)
This article (http://www.thecitywire.com/node/38162#.VaZaQqRViko) quotes the chairman of the Arkansas Senate’s Revenue and Tax committee that now is the time for "state officials [AHTD?]" to get the engineering and environmental groundwork in place for the Arkansas River bridge ....
Here is a good visual of the Arkansas River bridge section from AHTD's above-linked presentation to the Fort Smith Chamber of Commerce (p. 10/31 of pdf):
(http://i.imgur.com/BinBtes.jpg)
http://swtimes.com/news/i-49-bridge-engineering-makes-state-draft-plan :
Quote
A request to fund over $27 million in preliminary engineering for a future Interstate 49 bridge over the Arkansas River from Alma to Barling is included in the draft 2016-2020 State Transportation Improvement Plan.
...
According to the latest project listing, a sort of wish list for highway projects, the preliminary engineering cost for the I-49 bridge is estimated at $27.4. The bridge construction has a preliminary estimation of about $128.5 million. With other costs, including right-of-way utility costs at $25.5 million, the bridge project is expected to be over $235.4 million.

The article linked by galador also reports that the 13.81 miles of road necessary to connect the bridge to AR 22 and I-40 is estimated to cost another $235.4 million:

Quote
Relocation of U.S. 71 at Arkansas 22 northbound is part of the bridge project and also estimated to run about $182.5 million for 13.81 miles of road. With engineering and right-of-way utility costs that is expected to be another $235.4 million total, according to the project listing.

I'm trying to figure out how the estimated $470.8 million construction estimate ($235.4 million + $235.4 million) squares with AHTD's $350 million construction estimate in the above-quoted slide from the July 13, 2015 presentation. Reporting error?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: jbnv on January 29, 2016, 10:45:18 AM
How does it cost $27 million to engineer a bridge? Not actually build it but study the area and design it?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Rothman on January 29, 2016, 11:51:29 AM
How does it cost $27 million to engineer a bridge? Not actually build it but study the area and design it?

Pretty routine up here for it to cost that much for large, complex bridges.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Scott5114 on January 29, 2016, 01:27:23 PM
There is quite a lot of math involved and the people who know how to do it won't work cheap.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: jbnv on January 29, 2016, 01:56:30 PM
There is quite a lot of math involved and the people who know how to do it won't work cheap.
Pretty routine up here for it to cost that much for large, complex bridges.

Assuming a salary of $100,000 for a civil engineer with several years of experience, that's 270 man-years of work. I know that bridges don't architect themselves, but that just seems like a very large number for one bridge over a few miles.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on January 29, 2016, 09:43:35 PM
A story I found that could impact construction of an I-49 bridge north of Texarkana (and of course, every Red River bridge south of Denison Dam.)

http://heralddemocrat.com/news/local/red-river-valley-association-sets-sights-ports-texoma
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Revive 755 on January 29, 2016, 10:17:17 PM
How does it cost $27 million to engineer a bridge? Not actually build it but study the area and design it?

As others have mentioned, you have the costs for the engineers who stamp the plans.  But you also have the techs who do the CADD work, soil borings (which probably cost a lot if one is needed in the river), maybe rock cores, utility coordination, permitting (Army Corps, various state permits, Coast Guard for certain waterways), and coordination with all the other government agencies.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MaxConcrete on January 30, 2016, 10:46:12 AM
A story I found that could impact construction of an I-49 bridge north of Texarkana (and of course, every Red River bridge south of Denison Dam.)

http://heralddemocrat.com/news/local/red-river-valley-association-sets-sights-ports-texoma

From article

Quote
Currently the project itself is estimated at $1 billion, and Brontoli said it could end up costing more, once supplies and equipment are taken into account and all the studies are performed

A navigation project is going to cost much, much more than $1 billion. Probabably more like $5-10 billion.

The article didn't mention how many locks are needed, but every one is expensive. Major civil engineering projects are expensive. For example, the planned Lower Bois D'arc reservoir in the watershed costs around $1 billion. For another example, a spillway project in California costs $900 million.
http://www.dallasnews.com/news/state/headlines/20151107-disappearing-texas-new-reservoir-could-wash-away-fannin-county-farming-way-of-life.ece (http://www.dallasnews.com/news/state/headlines/20151107-disappearing-texas-new-reservoir-could-wash-away-fannin-county-farming-way-of-life.ece)
http://www.enr.com/articles/38722-cofferdam-leak-not-expected-to-delay-folsom-dam-project (http://www.enr.com/articles/38722-cofferdam-leak-not-expected-to-delay-folsom-dam-project)

All bridges need to be raised and meet navigation standards with a span around 300 feet. As a practical matter, many bridges will need to be entirely rebuilt. I count ten bridges between Shreveport and Denison, and I'm thinking a minimum of $50 million per bridge and possibly up to $100 million each. So that's at least $500 million.

A lot of excavation will be needed to straighten the channel, and that's expensive. There will be plenty of land acquisition as dams flood adjacent property.

This idea sounds similar to the plans to make the Trinity River navigable, which were canceled in the 1970s due to cost and environmental impact.
http://dfwfreeways.com/images/book/ChDallasFreeways/06_dallas_freeways-336.jpg (http://dfwfreeways.com/images/book/ChDallasFreeways/06_dallas_freeways-336.jpg)
http://dfwfreeways.com/images/book/ChDallasFreeways/06_dallas_freeways-337.jpg (http://dfwfreeways.com/images/book/ChDallasFreeways/06_dallas_freeways-337.jpg)
 
So I'm not expecting this project to proceed much beyond discussion and a preliminary study.
 
 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: SquonkHunter on January 30, 2016, 11:52:12 AM
God, not another canal proposal for North Texas.  :rolleyes:  When will people ever get it thru their heads that in order to have functional canals with locks, you need WATER to fill it. Anyone who ever lived in the area for very long would realize that maybe one year in ten you would have sufficient rainfall at the head of the basin to keep such a canal operating. The rest of the time it would be a constant struggle to keep enough water upstream to operate the canal and during prolonged droughts there would be NO water coming into the system. Dallas finally got over their obsession with a Trinity River canal in the 1970s after wasting 60 years on it. Work with what you have and quit wasting resources on something that will never be economically viabable. Air, roads and rail. That is what built North Texas and that is what they should concentrate on. I was born and raised there and saw it all for over 40 years.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on January 30, 2016, 12:48:25 PM
How does it cost $27 million to engineer a bridge? Not actually build it but study the area and design it?

Rule of thumb is 10% of construction cost for engineering. If it is $235M construction cost, $27M seems fair.

For a project of this magnitude, you are talking about several senior engineers working on the project for long time, several junior engineers dedicated to it for years, survey, geotech, environmental, Indiana bat surveys, USACE permit, ADEQ SWPPP, wetlands, coordination with FHWA, tons of other permits, redesign (probably several times), utility relocatiton, utility coordination, hundreds of meetings with AHTD, and property acquisition. Then you have to design the bridge, so you need dedicated bridge people on that. And all the other bridges that cross all the other drainages throughout the area.

Plus you have to pay the engineering company to keep the lights on, print things, admin staff, CAD licenses, travel time, survey vans, survey equipment, PK nails, management's bonuses, etc.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: txstateends on January 30, 2016, 02:06:18 PM
But, if such a waterway plan were viable, and greenlighted, wouldn't that be more reason to move quicker on the unbuilt parts of I-49?
(plus, give proponents more reason to back a northward extension of the I-45 designation?)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on January 30, 2016, 09:52:23 PM
I think the 27 million  must be including the 13.81 miles of road between I 40 and Hwy 22 at Barling also. I can understand that but not a bridge only. Excuses of utility's, environmental, permits and other does not make sense for a bridge only.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on January 30, 2016, 10:59:38 PM
Discussion about flood plain and Arkansas River Bridge in Sept. 9 Times Record Online (http://www.swtimes.com/news/article_6553403c-bc23-11df-8998-001cc4c002e0.html):
Quote
Alma Mayor John Ballentine believes the Alma portion is likely to be the last leg of the still-unfunded highway completed because of the costly bridge that must span the Arkansas River.
Ballentine reckons the structure will cost $400 million, but that number is a shape-shifter, changing based on who is speaking and what the cost includes.
Ken O’Donnell, until recently the director of the Bi-State Metropolitan Planning Organization, said the stated cost is a bit lower – $280 million to $320 million. That’s starting with the $100 million for the bridge span itself, then adding approaches, ramps and the other things needed to make it accessible.
Because the route approaching the bridge travels through the Kibler bottoms, a flood plain, it might require building a berm or putting the roadway on supports as it extends to the bridge.
O’Donnell said costs for the highway on-grade are computed on a linear foot basis. If the roadway is elevated, the cost must be computed on a square-foot basis. The cost of a multilane interstate bridge spanning the Arkansas River “jumps off the page at you,”  he said.
How does it cost $27 million to engineer a bridge? Not actually build it but study the area and design it?
As others have mentioned, you have the costs for the engineers who stamp the plans.  But you also have the techs who do the CADD work, soil borings (which probably cost a lot if one is needed in the river), maybe rock cores, utility coordination, permitting (Army Corps, various state permits, Coast Guard for certain waterways), and coordination with all the other government agencies.

I'll add my guess that the Kibler bottoms present a layer of complexity that may have driven up the preliminary engineering cost; as a non-engineer, I assume that potential approach spans and/or berms are engineered at the same time as the bridge span itself.

As a rough point of comparison, compare the estimated cost of the Arkansas and Mississippi approach spans to the I-69 Mississippi River bridge to the estimated cost of the bridge span itself (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3524.msg308313#msg308313); I assume considerable engineering effort went into the development of the two approach spans:

(http://i.imgur.com/NUocyLq.png)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on January 31, 2016, 06:45:00 PM
Why does the I-49 bridge over the Arkansas River have to cost a quarter billion dollars? The bridge doesn't have to run 200 feet above the river like bridges over ship channels. Are they proposing some kind of gradiose, flamboyant design? I don't get it. There is at least four other highway bridges in the Fort Smith area and none of those bridges look like they're worth $250 million.

This isn't a gigantic river crossing. The river is about a quarter mile across at the proposed bridge location. The river may have barge traffic, but barges don't need radically high bridge clearance levels.

The Dallas High Five stack interchange in North Dallas cost about $250 million. That was a huge project with a bunch of pretty long overpasses. I-49 across the Arkansas River can be just one or two bridges, depending on the configuration.

If an ordinary highway crossing over a river is going to cost in the hundreds of millions of dollars then this nation is quickly getting to or going way past the point where it can build any big construction projects. It's as if we really want to price ourselves back to using dirt roads again.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MaxConcrete on January 31, 2016, 08:43:29 PM
Why does the I-49 bridge over the Arkansas River have to cost a quarter billion dollars?
The Dallas High Five stack interchange in North Dallas cost about $250 million.

$250 million seems reasonable for this kind of crossing. Vertical clearance will need to be in the 52 to 75 foot range (I don't know what the standard is for that waterway, Intracoastal waterway at Galveston is around 75 feet), and the main span is usually around 350 feet.

The High Five contract was awarded around 2000. There has been a lot of inflation since then and today it would cost much more. The Galveston Causeway rebuild with a 350-foot main span with 75 foot clearance was awarded in 2003 and cost $136 million. It would also cost much more today.
http://aspirebridge.com/magazine/2009Summer/i-45_galveston_sum09.pdf (http://aspirebridge.com/magazine/2009Summer/i-45_galveston_sum09.pdf)

Bridge crossings with ocean clearance (minimum 175 feet) will generally cost around $1 billion. The planned Houston Ship Channel bridge with 8 lanes is right at $1 billion, and the Corpus Christi bridge is around $900 million (don't quote me on that number).

I'm frequently surprised at the high cost of relatively simple highway projects in Texas, and there has surely been inflation even in low-cost areas such as Arkansas. I'm thinking that highway project costs have increased everywhere, and we just have to get used to it.
 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: triplemultiplex on January 31, 2016, 09:41:42 PM
A story I found that could impact construction of an I-49 bridge north of Texarkana (and of course, every Red River bridge south of Denison Dam.)

http://heralddemocrat.com/news/local/red-river-valley-association-sets-sights-ports-texoma

Good God what a silly idea!  The Corps of Engineers already pisses away billions of dollars keeping waterways commercially navigable that are virtually unused.
Like the Missouri upstream from Omaha or the Arkansas River beyond Little Rock.  It's a struggle to keep the Red River

And these dredging and channelizing activities are ecologically detrimental.  Low gradient rivers have a tendency to meander widely in their valleys over time an build a series of sediment bars and deep holes.  This variety of depth and current proves the best habitat for fish and other wildlife.

When a river is not of sufficient volume to float barges over these normal depth gradients, they must be dredged at great expense, ruining the habitat only to have the river fill them in again in just a few seasons starting the whole process over again.  If we as a society are going to put that kind of time and money into keeping that river navigable, there had better be enough shipping traffic to justify the expense.  The value of the cargo shipped should blow away the cost of dredging.  That standard is not met in too many places.

The last thing this country needs is for the Corps to waste billions fucking up another river.  Here's hoping this proposal dies a quick death.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on February 01, 2016, 10:08:18 AM
Quote from: MaxConcrete
$250 million seems reasonable for this kind of crossing. Vertical clearance will need to be in the 52 to 75 foot range (I don't know what the standard is for that waterway, Intracoastal waterway at Galveston is around 75 feet), and the main span is usually around 350 feet.

I don't know the standards for barge traffic, but other bridges in the Fort Smith area and elsewhere along the Arkansas River in that region don't appear to be that high.

Quote from: MaxConcrete
I'm frequently surprised at the high cost of relatively simple highway projects in Texas, and there has surely been inflation even in low-cost areas such as Arkansas. I'm thinking that highway project costs have increased everywhere, and we just have to get used to it.

The problem is this insane cost inflation is unsustainable. That is a mathematical fact.

Road building costs are probably now at least 4 to 6 times higher than they were the last time the federal gasoline tax was raised. Compare this to the $4.25 minimum wage in the early 1990s to the minimum wage now: $7.25. Most Americans have not seen their incomes rise at anywhere near as fast as the profane inflation levels of health care costs, college tuitition costs and infrastructure costs.

Companies who build roads and think this kind of trend of out of control costs can continue are completely out of touch with reality. If the trend continues our system for building and maintaining infrastructure will collapse. It's certainly going to happen since several other sectors who compete for taxpayer money have their own perverse inflation bubbles that need to be exploded. American citizens have only so much income and taxes they can give for all this stuff.

I find it pretty alarming this country is losing its ability to build big things. The outrageous costs are one thing. Then there's all the legal entanglements that drain away years or even decades for just a single highway project to get built. One would think with all the technological advancement that has taken place in the past 30 years some of that would translate into road projects getting built faster, more efficiently and even with (gasp) some cost savings through gains in efficiency. From my perspective that sure doesn't look like it is happening.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on February 01, 2016, 11:05:40 AM
From my perspective, roads are being built higher in cost, but cheaper in quality. Plus there seems to be a lot of waste & repetition (2 people digging ditches, 4 people "supervising").  Parts of I-40 that were resurfaced in the last year or two seem to already be developing problems.

Arkansas' governor wants to fix the roads using budget surpluses and "borrowing" from other services (education). At the same time, he wants to give large tax breaks to corporations. If that doesn't work, he may raise taxes (the state is already trying to pinch small business into coughing up more money)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: yakra on February 01, 2016, 11:14:55 AM
Why does the I-49 bridge over the Arkansas River have to cost a quarter billion dollars?
The Dallas High Five stack interchange in North Dallas cost about $250 million.

$250 million seems reasonable for this kind of crossing. Vertical clearance will need to be in the 52 to 75 foot range (I don't know what the standard is for that waterway, Intracoastal waterway at Galveston is around 75 feet), and the main span is usually around 350 feet.

The High Five contract was awarded around 2000. There has been a lot of inflation since then and today it would cost much more. The Galveston Causeway rebuild with a 350-foot main span with 75 foot clearance was awarded in 2003 and cost $136 million. It would also cost much more today.
http://aspirebridge.com/magazine/2009Summer/i-45_galveston_sum09.pdf (http://aspirebridge.com/magazine/2009Summer/i-45_galveston_sum09.pdf)

Sagadahoc Bridge, in Maine:
Total length    2,972 feet (906 m)
Width    69 feet (21 m)
Height    75 feet (23 m)
Longest span    420 feet (128 m)
Clearance below    75 feet (23 m)
Cost    $46.6 million
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: noelbotevera on February 01, 2016, 11:17:23 AM
Why does the I-49 bridge over the Arkansas River have to cost a quarter billion dollars?
The Dallas High Five stack interchange in North Dallas cost about $250 million.

$250 million seems reasonable for this kind of crossing. Vertical clearance will need to be in the 52 to 75 foot range (I don't know what the standard is for that waterway, Intracoastal waterway at Galveston is around 75 feet), and the main span is usually around 350 feet.

The High Five contract was awarded around 2000. There has been a lot of inflation since then and today it would cost much more. The Galveston Causeway rebuild with a 350-foot main span with 75 foot clearance was awarded in 2003 and cost $136 million. It would also cost much more today.
http://aspirebridge.com/magazine/2009Summer/i-45_galveston_sum09.pdf (http://aspirebridge.com/magazine/2009Summer/i-45_galveston_sum09.pdf)

Sagadahoc Bridge, in Maine:
Total length    2,972 feet (906 m)
Width    69 feet (21 m)
Height    75 feet (23 m)
Longest span    420 feet (128 m)
Clearance below    75 feet (23 m)
Cost    $46.6 million
Does it have any aesthetic detailing? If not, then it's in the wrong place here if the bridge plans to have that kind of detailing.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: codyg1985 on February 04, 2016, 07:50:16 AM
Why does the I-49 bridge over the Arkansas River have to cost a quarter billion dollars?
The Dallas High Five stack interchange in North Dallas cost about $250 million.

$250 million seems reasonable for this kind of crossing. Vertical clearance will need to be in the 52 to 75 foot range (I don't know what the standard is for that waterway, Intracoastal waterway at Galveston is around 75 feet), and the main span is usually around 350 feet.

The High Five contract was awarded around 2000. There has been a lot of inflation since then and today it would cost much more. The Galveston Causeway rebuild with a 350-foot main span with 75 foot clearance was awarded in 2003 and cost $136 million. It would also cost much more today.
http://aspirebridge.com/magazine/2009Summer/i-45_galveston_sum09.pdf (http://aspirebridge.com/magazine/2009Summer/i-45_galveston_sum09.pdf)

Sagadahoc Bridge, in Maine:
Total length    2,972 feet (906 m)
Width    69 feet (21 m)
Height    75 feet (23 m)
Longest span    420 feet (128 m)
Clearance below    75 feet (23 m)
Cost    $46.6 million

That was opened in 2000. Plus, isn't that a two-lane bridge?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: yakra on February 04, 2016, 10:23:24 AM
Four-lane.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: noelbotevera on February 04, 2016, 05:58:29 PM
Four-lane.
Is it a freeway?


Besides, they might decide to add some aesthetics to the bridge. Either plant 100 flowers or plant a million of them, if the price tag is that high.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: yakra on February 05, 2016, 11:45:59 AM
Four-lane.
Is it a freeway?
No, undivided, single carriageway.

But still though, double the price tag and it's still a long way off from the Galveston Causeway example from 2003 posted upthread. THAT much of a price difference is what I'm trying to wrap my head around.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: rte66man on February 07, 2016, 04:14:11 PM
Four-lane.
Is it a freeway?
No, undivided, single carriageway.

But still though, double the price tag and it's still a long way off from the Galveston Causeway example from 2003 posted upthread. THAT much of a price difference is what I'm trying to wrap my head around.

It depends on the definition of "bridge".  How much of the approach is included?  Is it in a floodplain?  What kind of land (commercial, agricultural) is involved for the approaches? 

Here is the Maine bridge:
https://goo.gl/maps/yQGWLfXQzQS2

And here is the site of the proposed I49 bridge:
https://goo.gl/maps/frwtxSJPc372

I suspect there weren't any approached included in the cost while the I49 bridge is going to need a LOT of approach work to get across the flood plain to the north of the river.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: yakra on February 08, 2016, 12:35:49 AM
Aa, sou!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on February 08, 2016, 09:47:19 AM
The area is prone to flooding and floods often.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on February 10, 2016, 02:12:13 AM
Four-lane.
Is it a freeway?
No, undivided, single carriageway.

But still though, double the price tag and it's still a long way off from the Galveston Causeway example from 2003 posted upthread. THAT much of a price difference is what I'm trying to wrap my head around.

It depends on the definition of "bridge".  How much of the approach is included?  Is it in a floodplain?  What kind of land (commercial, agricultural) is involved for the approaches? 

Here is the Maine bridge:
https://goo.gl/maps/yQGWLfXQzQS2

And here is the site of the proposed I49 bridge:
https://goo.gl/maps/frwtxSJPc372

I suspect there weren't any approached included in the cost while the I49 bridge is going to need a LOT of approach work to get across the flood plain to the north of the river.

Yes, the flood plain is very clear with all the oxbow formations you can see with aerial view, although those certainly predate the lock and dam system. Still, looks like about a two-mile elevated northern approach.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: apjung on February 14, 2016, 11:17:47 AM
Is there a way to cut the cost of building the Arkansas River bridge by incorporating the Hwy 59 bridge as the Southbound span and build a parallel 2 lane Northbound span?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: codyg1985 on February 14, 2016, 07:23:49 PM
Since AR 59 crosses a dam, I wonder if there is some sort of concern with routing an interstate highway over a dam? Or maybe it isn't legal?

The homes in the area may also make ROW acquisition more expensive.

Not a bad thought, though.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on February 21, 2016, 04:55:09 PM
AHTD builds all interstate bridges to 500 yr flood elevations also. Something  to consider
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: abqtraveler on February 22, 2016, 01:09:04 PM
AHTD builds all interstate bridges to 500 yr flood elevations also. Something  to consider

That would end up being quite a long bridge over the Arkansas River in the area of Fort Smith.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Wayward Memphian on February 22, 2016, 02:49:01 PM
AHTD builds all interstate bridges to 500 yr flood elevations also. Something  to consider

That would end up being quite a long bridge over the Arkansas River in the area of Fort Smith.

It'll be elevated roadway till the actual river crossing
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: rte66man on February 22, 2016, 04:39:41 PM
AHTD builds all interstate bridges to 500 yr flood elevations also. Something  to consider

That would end up being quite a long bridge over the Arkansas River in the area of Fort Smith.

It'll be elevated roadway till the actual river crossing

I would hope not.  That would create a "dam" that would funnel all the runoff down to the bridge.  I would hope they would use I40 in West Memphis as a model.  Plenty of places for flood waters to pass through without undermining the roadway.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: abqtraveler on February 22, 2016, 04:59:00 PM
AHTD builds all interstate bridges to 500 yr flood elevations also. Something  to consider

That would end up being quite a long bridge over the Arkansas River in the area of Fort Smith.

It'll be elevated roadway till the actual river crossing

I would hope not.  That would create a "dam" that would funnel all the runoff down to the bridge.  I would hope they would use I40 in West Memphis as a model.  Plenty of places for flood waters to pass through without undermining the roadway.

So why again did Arkansas decide to build a new alignment and new bridge for I-49 around Fort Smith rather than following US-71 and then tying into I-540 on the south side of Fort Smith?  That would seem like a more logical (and less costly solution) than building a new terrain route and bridge.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on February 22, 2016, 05:11:54 PM
So why again did Arkansas decide to build a new alignment and new bridge for I-49 around Fort Smith rather than following US-71 and then tying into I-540 on the south side of Fort Smith?  That would seem like a more logical (and less costly solution) than building a new terrain route and bridge.

The official conclusion was that doing so would have been impracticable:

https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3324.msg2079077#msg2079077

This post contains a bit more information about the I-540 option:

https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3324.msg2079426;topicseen#msg2079426
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on February 22, 2016, 06:25:18 PM
AHTD builds all interstate bridges to 500 yr flood elevations also. Something  to consider

That would end up being quite a long bridge over the Arkansas River in the area of Fort Smith.

Have you seen the bridges on I-49 north of Alma? :-o

(moving along...)

Don't forget I-540 was planned to extend to Fayetteville nearly 50 years ago, BEFORE anyone thought of I-49. A combination of money and environmental impact kept from being built at the time.

I-540 is also proposed to eventually be rerouted to I-49, brancing off somewhere near Exit 10 (Old Greenwood Rd)

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Wayward Memphian on February 23, 2016, 04:18:05 PM
AHTD builds all interstate bridges to 500 yr flood elevations also. Something  to consider

That would end up being quite a long bridge over the Arkansas River in the area of Fort Smith.

It'll be elevated roadway till the actual river crossing

I would hope not.  That would create a "dam" that would funnel all the runoff down to the bridge.  I would hope they would use I40 in West Memphis as a model.  Plenty of places for flood waters to pass through without undermining the roadway.

It would have some viaducts, it's much like the approaches to the two bridges at Memphis.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on March 02, 2016, 10:56:50 AM
the Governor's Working Group on Highway Funding Short-Term Recommendation (http://ee-governor-2015.ark.org/images/uploads/HFWG_FINAL_Short-Term_Recommendation_.pdf) also acknowledges mid-term target, long-term target, and ultimate needs funding goals for highways. The timetable for Ultimate Needs is "ten years in the future" and includes the completion of I-49 as one of the needs (pp. 4-5/15 of pdf; pp. 3-4 of document)

This article (http://arkansasnews.com/news/arkansas/mothballed-mitsubishi-plant-purchased-pennsylvania-manufacturer), primarily about a Pennsylvania company buying an old Mitsubishi warehouse in Fort Smith, includes an interesting comment from Gov. Hutchinson.  In regard to I-49, instead of commenting on the need to build the I-49 Arkansas River bridge on the northern side of Fort Smith, he commented on the need to finish I-49 south of Fort Smith:

Quote
The push to complete Interstate 49 through Fort Smith was also mentioned by the governor who described Fort Smith as “perfectly located”  for business.
“It points to the need for a new highway program in the state, and Fort Smith is ground zero for that, needing to complete I-49 going south that will help us in the transportation network,”  Hutchinson said. “With the new federal highway bill, it gives us an opportunity to increase funding from Arkansas. We’ve presented a highway plan that will allow new investments in highway structure without raising taxes, and we need everyone’s support for that because it will bring even more jobs to the river valley.”

Gov. Hutchinson's comment surprised me because current plans for the Chaffee Crossing to Red River section of I-49 seem to have that work at least a decade away.  That said, might we see work on the Mena bypass in a few years?



I sometimes forget that AHTD is currently making significant expenditures on I-49 by uppgrading the "old I-540" through NWA. This slide from a February 19 presentation to the Rogers Chamber of Commerce (http://www.arkansashighways.com/PowerPoints/2016/021916_SEB%20Rogers_CoC.pdf) provides a good summary of past, present, and scheduled work on I-49 in Benton and Washington counties (p. 4/31 of pdf):

(http://i.imgur.com/JLba9js.png)

Not glamorous progress, but progress nonetheless.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Wayward Memphian on March 02, 2016, 04:22:58 PM
the Governor's Working Group on Highway Funding Short-Term Recommendation (http://ee-governor-2015.ark.org/images/uploads/HFWG_FINAL_Short-Term_Recommendation_.pdf) also acknowledges mid-term target, long-term target, and ultimate needs funding goals for highways. The timetable for Ultimate Needs is "ten years in the future" and includes the completion of I-49 as one of the needs (pp. 4-5/15 of pdf; pp. 3-4 of document)

This article (http://arkansasnews.com/news/arkansas/mothballed-mitsubishi-plant-purchased-pennsylvania-manufacturer), primarily about a Pennsylvania company buying an old Mitsubishi warehouse in Fort Smith, includes an interesting comment from Gov. Hutchinson.  In regard to I-49, instead of commenting on the need to build the I-49 Arkansas River bridge on the northern side of Fort Smith, he commented on the need to finish I-49 south of Fort Smith:

Quote
The push to complete Interstate 49 through Fort Smith was also mentioned by the governor who described Fort Smith as “perfectly located”  for business.
“It points to the need for a new highway program in the state, and Fort Smith is ground zero for that, needing to complete I-49 going south that will help us in the transportation network,”  Hutchinson said. “With the new federal highway bill, it gives us an opportunity to increase funding from Arkansas. We’ve presented a highway plan that will allow new investments in highway structure without raising taxes, and we need everyone’s support for that because it will bring even more jobs to the river valley.”

Gov. Hutchinson's comment surprised me because current plans for the Chaffee Crossing to Red River section of I-49 seem to have that work at least a decade away.  That said, might we see work on the Mena bypass in a few years?



I sometimes forget that AHTD is currently making significant expenditures on I-49 by uppgrading the "old I-540" through NWA. This slide from a February 19 presentation to the Rogers Chamber of Commerce (http://www.arkansashighways.com/PowerPoints/2016/021916_SEB%20Rogers_CoC.pdf) provides a good summary of past, present, and scheduled work on I-49 in Benton and Washington counties (p. 4/31 of pdf):

(http://i.imgur.com/JLba9js.png)

Not glamorous progress, but progress nonetheless.

Fayetteville/NWA got bumped up to #3 on the US News and World Report 2016 Best Places to Live List. The boom isn't slowing down, but I-49 needs done to Texarkana ASAP.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: JON30 on March 04, 2016, 11:18:16 AM
So what is the cost comparison of the portion of I-49 from Texarkana to Fort Smith vs the "Bridge" from Barling to Alma?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: robbones on March 14, 2016, 09:01:31 AM
Just an update on the construction between Mountainburg and Fayetteville (MM 28-61): All of the guardrails have been replaced and they're replacing bad spots in the road.

 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on March 14, 2016, 10:40:49 AM
Just an update on the construction between Mountainburg and Fayetteville (MM 28-61): All of the guardrails have been replaced and they're replacing bad spots in the road.



I was up there about a month ago and it looked like they were putting in cable barriers south of the tunnel.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: robbones on March 14, 2016, 11:07:26 AM
Just an update on the construction between Mountainburg and Fayetteville (MM 28-61): All of the guardrails have been replaced and they're replacing bad spots in the road.



I was up there about a month ago and it looked like they were putting in cable barriers south of the tunnel.
Did you notice the new sign north of Chester? Apparently
US 71 is now AR 71


Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on March 14, 2016, 01:28:23 PM
Just an update on the construction between Mountainburg and Fayetteville (MM 28-61): All of the guardrails have been replaced and they're replacing bad spots in the road.



I was up there about a month ago and it looked like they were putting in cable barriers south of the tunnel.
Did you notice the new sign north of Chester? Apparently
US 71 is now AR 71


I'll have to go look. I need to check the road below Artists Point anyway to see if it has fully washed out yet.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: KamKam on March 14, 2016, 11:46:11 PM
Yes it was AR 71 instead U.S 71 it was hilarious lol
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on March 15, 2016, 12:10:13 AM
Yes it was AR 71 instead U.S 71 it was hilarious lol


MoDOT had MO 71 near Jane about 15 years ago. I've also seen AR 371 (long since corrected). Oh, and exit signs for US 471 ;)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on March 15, 2016, 08:09:45 PM
Yes it was AR 71 instead U.S 71 it was hilarious lol

And only one direction (SB). Major PIA to pull over to get a shot
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: robbones on March 16, 2016, 01:08:48 PM
Yes it was AR 71 instead U.S 71 it was hilarious lol

And only one direction (SB). Major PIA to pull over to get a shot
Right lane is open if you want a photo op.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on March 16, 2016, 02:22:19 PM
Yes it was AR 71 instead U.S 71 it was hilarious lol

And only one direction (SB). Major PIA to pull over to get a shot
Right lane is open if you want a photo op.
was closed off yesterday. had to pull over and wait for a chance to cross the barrels

SGH-I337

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on March 21, 2016, 10:18:08 PM
AHTD STIP for 2016-2020  has I49 job - I40 to HWY 22 ( Arkansas River) Preliminary Engineering to let bid in 2017. I didn't see any other new construction work for I 49 other than the already planned Widening  to 6 lanes from Fayetteville to Bentonville
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: I-39 on March 22, 2016, 04:54:47 PM
At this rate, I-49 will never get done.............  :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Seriously, how in the heck are they going to fund and construct that huge middle section between Fort Smith and Texarkana? Are they even moving forward with any sections in that area (construction-wise)?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on March 22, 2016, 05:09:39 PM
This article (http://www.nwaonline.com/news/2016/jan/28/money-identified-to-finish-major-road-p/?news) reports that the extra $50 million needed to convert the Bella Vista Bypass ("BVB") in Arkansas from two lanes to four lanes is identified in an initial version of the Arkansas 2016-2020 draft STIP
AHTD STIP for 2016-2020  has I49 job - I40 to HWY 22 ( Arkansas River) Preliminary Engineering to let bid in 2017. I didn't see any other new construction work for I 49 other than the already planned Widening  to 6 lanes from Fayetteville to Bentonville

AHTD's 2016-2020 Draft STIP (http://www.arkansashighways.com/stip/2016-2020/STIP_report_2016-2020_b.pdf) identifies the remaining Bella Vista Bypass projects, including the $50 million to convert the BVB from two lanes to four lanes, as AR 549 projects (p. 95/351 of pdf; p. 79 of document):

(http://i.imgur.com/LtElyfo.png)
....
(http://i.imgur.com/JUbN3qB.png)

Time to wait for Missouri's STIP (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3239.msg2119308#msg2119308).



Seriously, how in the heck are they going to fund and construct that huge middle section between Fort Smith and Texarkana? Are they even moving forward with any sections in that area (construction-wise)?

I did not see any US 71 projects in the Draft STIP that appear to be I-49 upgrades.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on March 22, 2016, 05:49:53 PM
At this rate, I-49 will never get done.............  :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Seriously, how in the heck are they going to fund and construct that huge middle section between Fort Smith and Texarkana? Are they even moving forward with any sections in that area (construction-wise)?

Governor Hutchinson wants to take money from the state's "rainy day fund" to improve highways (and construct I-49) and improve education... right after he rewards his corporate sponsors who got him elected.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on March 22, 2016, 08:08:28 PM
At this rate, I-49 will never get done.............  :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Seriously, how in the heck are they going to fund and construct that huge middle section between Fort Smith and Texarkana? Are they even moving forward with any sections in that area (construction-wise)?

It's literally dozens of projects on a wish list.  How fast do you expect progress?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: I-39 on March 22, 2016, 09:01:50 PM
At this rate, I-49 will never get done.............  :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Seriously, how in the heck are they going to fund and construct that huge middle section between Fort Smith and Texarkana? Are they even moving forward with any sections in that area (construction-wise)?

It's literally dozens of projects on a wish list.  How fast do you expect progress?

This has been on the planning docket for many years, and building it has been the equivalent of pulling teeth. To be fair, that can be said for any major road project like this, but the longer they wait, the more difficult it will be to build, as costs will go up. It would be nice if they could get going one of these years.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on March 22, 2016, 09:22:33 PM
Yes, the finishing of Bella Vista Bypass is only if Missouri comes up with the money to do there part. There is 2 money items from the Federal Highway Department that could help if Missouri and Arkansas apply for them. A Tiger Grant for 2016 and a Fright Projects Grant that would help finish the Bella Vista Bypass, Hope they are smart enough to apply.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on March 22, 2016, 09:31:09 PM
At this rate, I-49 will never get done.............  :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Seriously, how in the heck are they going to fund and construct that huge middle section between Fort Smith and Texarkana? Are they even moving forward with any sections in that area (construction-wise)?

It's literally dozens of projects on a wish list.  How fast do you expect progress?

FWIW, I-540 north of Van Buren was proposed since the mid 1960's (and a totally different alignment)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Wayward Memphian on March 22, 2016, 11:53:27 PM
At this rate, I-49 will never get done.............  :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Seriously, how in the heck are they going to fund and construct that huge middle section between Fort Smith and Texarkana? Are they even moving forward with any sections in that area (construction-wise)?

It's literally dozens of projects on a wish list.  How fast do you expect progress?

This has been on the planning docket for many years, and building it has been the equivalent of pulling teeth. To be fair, that can be said for any major road project like this, but the longer they wait, the more difficult it will be to build, as costs will go up. It would be nice if they could get going one of these years.

Only way it happens quicker is if Arkansas builds it as a toll road north and south of Mena to the tune of about 10 bucks each way, 5 for each segment.

I'd be fine with it, the locals could always use a then near abandoned old US 71.

Add one across the north of the State as well.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on March 23, 2016, 05:56:41 PM
At this rate, I-49 will never get done.............  :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Seriously, how in the heck are they going to fund and construct that huge middle section between Fort Smith and Texarkana? Are they even moving forward with any sections in that area (construction-wise)?

It's literally dozens of projects on a wish list.  How fast do you expect progress?

They are already building I-49 in the form of the Bella Vista bypass. Finishing that was a dream not that long ago

Change comes incrementally. We don't even currently get all of our federal funds
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on April 13, 2016, 03:29:04 PM
Rumor is that the next section of I-49 between Greenwood and Texarkana will be a bypass of Mena. Has this been confirmed? There would be exits at AR 8 and 88, CR 70, and some sort of interchange where it meets US 71 southwest of Mena. How are the CR 70 and the southwestern interchange going to be configured?
(above quote from I-49 Mena bypass (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=15654.msg2068146#msg2068146) thread)
AHTD's 2016-2020 Draft STIP (http://www.arkansashighways.com/stip/2016-2020/STIP_report_2016-2020_b.pdf) ....
Seriously, how in the heck are they going to fund and construct that huge middle section between Fort Smith and Texarkana? Are they even moving forward with any sections in that area (construction-wise)?
I did not see any US 71 projects in the Draft STIP that appear to be I-49 upgrades.

This March 30 article (http://www.menastar.com/news/article_a1a8e59a-f6b6-11e5-9a78-2b3ab323fa17.html) reports on Arkansas Highway Commissioner Dick Trammel's March 24 presentation to the Mena Rotary Club (http://www.arkansashighways.com/PowerPoints/2016/032416_DT_Mena_Rotary.pdf); however, the article only reports on Commissioner Trammel's discussion of AHTD's funding challenges and is silent regarding I-49. That said, the presentation does include one I-49 slide (p. 19/28 of pdf), but it only indicates that the section of I-49 from Chaffee Crossing to Texarkana is "proposed" and does not hint at any activity in the Mena area or anywhere else between Chaffee Crossing and Texarkana:

(http://i.imgur.com/wxuRKJ8.png)

Commissioner Trammel presumably made some comments in relation to this slide, but it seems unlikely that he hinted Mena might be next in line for some I-49 construction.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on April 21, 2016, 12:49:30 AM
I'm kind of a Google Earth junkie. So I just noticed Google put down some new satellite imagery showing progress of the Belle Vista Bypass. Imagery is dated March 4, 2016.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on April 21, 2016, 01:04:30 AM
I'm kind of a Google Earth junkie. So I just noticed Google put down some new satellite imagery showing progress of the Belle Vista Bypass. Imagery is dated March 4, 2016.
Right now, they're working south from Hiwasse. I need to go check progress.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Henry on April 21, 2016, 10:55:29 AM
It really doesn't make any sense for an Interstate to have two broken sections in the same state, so finishing I-49 is an absolute must. AR needs to stop dragging their feet and take advantage of the situation ASAP!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: NE2 on April 21, 2016, 11:24:07 AM
AR needs to stop dragging their feet and take advantage of the situation ASAP!
What situation is that? Is there special federal funding to take advantage of?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on April 21, 2016, 11:59:41 AM
AR needs to stop dragging their feet and take advantage of the situation ASAP!
What situation is that? Is there special federal funding to take advantage of?

Our governor wants to increase highway spending, but seems to be using "not Obamacare" as a bargaining chip. Still, we'd need a hefty sum of money to complete things.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on April 21, 2016, 11:49:49 PM
"Not Obamacare" is an intelligence-insulting fake bargaining chip. That only assumes everyone has an IQ of only 45. Gotta love trailer trash, reality TV style politics.

The unfinished I-49 can be approached in a number of difference ways. I think the Belle Vista Bypass will be finished within the next several years if not sooner. Missouri's state government is really embarrassing itself with all the foot dragging on this project. I don't even understand the justification for such a thing. Both Arkansas and Missouri are Republican controlled states. Can't they agree on finishing a highway project, or do they consider all super-highway projects Socialism? I don't know. Maybe I need help understanding this very stupid situation.

The Alma to Barling gap with I-49 is a pretty expensive problem to solve. It's a judgment call on whether to build up funding for this project or try to build other far less expensive I-49 projects farther South.

Arkansas can try to push I-49 Northward from Texarkana, up to Ashdown and farther North to towns like DeQueen, Mena and Waldron located along the future I-49 corridor. One complication with this is the current rule (is it really a rule?) that any signed Interstate segment must be connected to the rest of the Interstate highway system. For Arkansas this is a pretty bad problem. You have the Arkansas River crossing at Fort Smith as one expensive problem. Then there's the tiny Texas segment of I-49 by Texarkana and who knows when Texas will ever get around to building that? It would actually be more productive if the Interstate bypasses or through-fares of DeQueen, Mena and Waldron could be built and signed as I-49 with the existing US-71 corridor bearing "To I-49" trail blazers in the interim. In the early days of the Interstate Highway System this was the reality. There were many disconnected segments of both major and minor Interstate highways. When I was just a little kid I could recall unfinished gaps of I-10 in Texas or other unfinished Interstates in other areas. But they all got signed as Interstates. It was more politically expedient for the final route number to be installed when possible. Now the standards are far more difficult. But the same need still exists.

I think I-49 will get finished a LOT faster if any completed segments in Southern Arkansas are allowed to be signed as I-49 even if those segments don't connect to the rest of the Interstate System.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: J N Winkler on April 22, 2016, 11:18:48 AM
One complication with this is the current rule (is it really a rule?) that any signed Interstate segment must be connected to the rest of the Interstate highway system.

Wasn't that rule dropped several years ago with the intent to allow Interstate signing for completed freeway segments that already met Interstate standards?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on April 22, 2016, 01:29:24 PM
They obviously made a big exception with I-2, I-69E and I-69C in South Texas. But other completed parts of I-69C and I-69E in South Texas, such as the completed 4.5 mile segment of I-69C in Falfurrias, are unsigned. As far as I know those segments won't get signed as Interstates until they are connected with either the main South Texas segments or connected to the North with the rest of the Interstate system.

There are plans in Arkansas to build bypasses around Mena, Waldron and DeQueen in the not too distant future. It may be an even longer time before those bypasses are connected with the I-49 main route. My thinking is if those bypasses get signed as segments of I-49 they will pose as a much more obvious reminder to anyone that the route is not yet finished.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on April 22, 2016, 01:40:55 PM
One complication with this is the current rule (is it really a rule?) that any signed Interstate segment must be connected to the rest of the Interstate highway system.
Wasn't that rule dropped several years ago with the intent to allow Interstate signing for completed freeway segments that already met Interstate standards

Going by previous discussion of this topic during the period of time when MAP-21 was enacted (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=7067.msg157937#msg157937), I believe the conclusion was that FHWA has the discretion to determine whether a disconnected segment of a non-I-69/non-I-11 interstate would be a "logical addition" to the interstate system (even if it were not "connected" to the interstate system). Since that discussion, I-22 signage has been approved for both Alabama and Mississippi, even though neither the I-65 connection nor the I-269 connection has been completed. With ongoing, albeit slow, construction progress on the I-22/ I-65 interchange, a near-term connection to the interstate system is assured to the point that the current I-22 could be considered a "logical addition".

My guess is that FHWA would not deem a disconnected segment of I-49 between Chaffee Crossing and Texarkana as a "logical addition" to the interstate system until the Arkansas River Bridge and/or the Red River Bridge is under construction and FHWA could be certain of a connection to the interstate system in a reasonable period of time.  Just my guess.



AR needs to stop dragging their feet and take advantage of the situation ASAP!
What situation is that? Is there special federal funding to take advantage of?

I don't know if Henry was referring to this funding opportunity, but AHTD has a FASTLANE Grants page (http://www.arkansashighways.com/FastLane/fastlane.aspx) on its website describing a new federal funding opportunity.  AHTD submitted an I-49 Grant Application (http://www.arkansashighways.com/FastLane/I49/FASTLANE%20%20I-49%20PROJECT%202016%20FINAL.pdf)* on April 14 that would accelerate progress on six currently scheduled projects for improvements to I-49/ "old" I-540 in NWA.

* Is AHTD's inclusion of a non-neutered "Arkansas" shield on the front page of the application tantamount to taunting?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: mvak36 on April 22, 2016, 01:58:19 PM
What is the likelihood that all 3 of their grants are approved? I'm just curious because I'm guessing that other states have also applied for these grants too. It'd be nice if they can get all 3.

Also, when do these grants get released?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: apjung on April 24, 2016, 03:27:00 PM
The section at the LA/AR border is finally on Google Street View but currently only Northbound.
https://goo.gl/maps/ebu5zMapCbE2
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: uozzim on May 11, 2016, 05:37:26 PM
MoDOT has $20 Million in the draft STIP (released today) for 2019-2020 construction to fill the gap:

http://www.modot.org/plansandprojects/construction_program/STIP2017-2021/documents/Sec0406SouthwestRural.pdf (link corrected)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: codyg1985 on May 11, 2016, 06:39:05 PM
MoDOT has $20 Million in the draft STIP (released today) for 2019-2020 construction to fill the gap:

http://www.modot.org/plansandprojects/construction_program/STIP2017-2021/documents/Sec0407Southeast.pdf

That's for SE Missouri.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: mvak36 on May 11, 2016, 06:43:08 PM
MoDOT has $20 Million in the draft STIP (released today) for 2019-2020 construction to fill the gap:

http://www.modot.org/plansandprojects/construction_program/STIP2017-2021/documents/Sec0407Southeast.pdf

That's for SE Missouri.

Here is SW Missouri's: http://www.modot.org/plansandprojects/construction_program/STIP2017-2021/documents/Sec0406SouthwestRural.pdf
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on May 11, 2016, 10:40:11 PM
For those not in the area, they have recently closed down the inner lanes near the Lowell exit to construct the US 412 bypass overpasses

It's frustrating to see all this pavement grinding to obliterate lane markers, temporary stripes put down, those obliterated, etc. Makes our roads look terrible
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on May 14, 2016, 04:28:31 PM
Google Street View has posted July 2015 imagery of SB I-49 at AR 151 (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.3921027,-94.0150821,3a,75y,208.27h,101.39t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sOJO_eGWacQiy_qC3aPJ4YQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1):
(http://i.imgur.com/b9Y9tPp.jpg)
Alas, the exit sign for I-49 to exit onto itself can still be seen in the distance.
(above quote from Texarkana (Future I-49, I-69 Spur) (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3321.msg2091578#msg2091578) thread)

Looking rearward at the same signage from NB I-49 leaving the interchange in January 2016 Google Street View imagery (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.3919478,-94.0148704,3a,60y,235.97h,89.9t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sdB3TLwh_lp8hVatmSVA6DA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) still shows no exit number tab on the "TO US 59" BGS and that the standalone exit sign remains:

(http://i.imgur.com/Pq5u3kJ.jpg)

However, January 2016 Google Street View imagery (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.3818643,-94.0144855,3a,75y,341.88h,88.03t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sVFoH8V3yVO_qju-_-jgUJQ!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo1.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DVFoH8V3yVO_qju-_-jgUJQ%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dsearch.TACTILE.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D392%26h%3D106%26yaw%3D92.78109%26pitch%3D0!7i13312!8i6656) from NB I-49 approaching the same interchange shows that exit number tabs have been installed on these two BGSes:

(http://i.imgur.com/f4cqMbW.jpg)

Assuming that AHTD has since completed the signage installation on the other BGS and throughout Miller County, we can now turn our focus to the I-49/ former I-540 upgrade, the Bella Vista Bypass, the Arkansas River bridge, the section from Chaffee Crossing to the Red River bridge..........



Here is the proposed logging of the entire I-49 corridor in Arkansas (and Texas).
http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49-Proposed-Mileage.pdf (http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49-Proposed-Mileage.pdf)
Proposed exit numbering from the Louisiana State Line (through Texas) and to the Polk County, Arkansas line:
http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49_Exits_1.pdf (http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49_Exits_1.pdf)
Proposed exit numbering from the Polk County line to the Ft. Chaffee area:
http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49_Exits_2.pdf (http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49_Exits_2.pdf)
Proposed exit numbering from the Ft. Chaffee area to the Missouri State Line:
http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49_Exits_3.pdf (http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49_Exits_3.pdf)
Please understand this is all PROPOSED and is subject to a tweak every now and then.
(above quote from Texarkana (Future I-49, I-69 Spur) (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3321.msg293262;topicseen#msg293262) thread)

............... as well as the 5.36 miles in Texas.

Here is a snip from the logging that shows the mileage in Texas:

(http://i.imgur.com/GSGkTdg.jpg)

Here is a snip showing the proposed Texas exits:

(http://i.imgur.com/Pq42PmS.jpg)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: The Ghostbuster on May 16, 2016, 04:39:14 PM
Now if they would just renumber the exits on old 540.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on May 16, 2016, 08:57:25 PM
Now if they would just renumber the exits on old 540.
Probably when they get more of 49 built (though 549 at Ft Smith has I-49 exit numbers)

(https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/756/21757660872_c85c99354b_d.jpg)

(https://c2.staticflickr.com/6/5772/21757660632_09e5d3322b_d.jpg)

(https://c2.staticflickr.com/6/5734/21581338770_12ae00c980_d.jpg)

(https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/566/21148308753_1fb5e8345f_d.jpg)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: I-39 on May 16, 2016, 09:06:31 PM
What is the hold up on building I-49 north from Texarkana to Ashdown and further north (other than funding)?

And exactly why is I-49 being routed through Texas anyway?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: dfwmapper on May 16, 2016, 10:23:35 PM
What is the hold up on building I-49 north from Texarkana to Ashdown and further north (other than funding)?
Other than funding? Also funding.
Quote
And exactly why is I-49 being routed through Texas anyway?
I believe it's due to problems with the floodplain and river crossing on the Arkansas side. Much more logical crossing on the Texas side.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on May 17, 2016, 12:44:24 AM
It wouldn't surprise me if Texas held off building its short portion of I-49 until all of I-69 and I-369 in Texas was completed. I hope they don't do that since it might take 20 or more years, but I kind of expect TX DOT to take that approach.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on May 17, 2016, 07:36:45 AM
What is the hold up on building I-49 north from Texarkana to Ashdown and further north (other than funding)?

They build bypasses around the cities first, then connect the bypasses
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: jbnv on May 17, 2016, 10:55:33 AM
It wouldn't surprise me if Texas held off building its short portion of I-49 until all of I-69 and I-369 in Texas was completed. I hope they don't do that since it might take 20 or more years, but I kind of expect TX DOT to take that approach.

Texas is building what they think will benefit them the most. From my offhand view, I don't see much direct benefit to Texas of the I-49 corridor through western Arkansas. On the other hand, they clearly want at least one (and the more the better) connections to the Mississippi River, the Midwest and the Northeast.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on May 17, 2016, 01:49:53 PM
One benefit Texas would get with a completed I-49 and Texas' portion I-69 is a direct link between the growing cities in NW Arkansas and port cities like Houston, Corpus Christi and Brownsville. I think commercial traffic will increase on both I-49 and I-69 in this region. The Panama Canal expansion opens later this Summer and could put quite a bit more traffic into Gulf Coast port cities.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: jbnv on May 17, 2016, 01:57:28 PM
What would Texas get from NW Arkansas and Kansas City that they would not otherwise get from the I-69 corridor?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on May 17, 2016, 03:34:47 PM
I-69 doesn't go through Northwest Arkansas or Kansas City. I-49 has to connect into the I-69 system (I-369) to complete such a link.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: jbnv on May 17, 2016, 03:47:51 PM
What would Texas get from NW Arkansas and Kansas City that they would not otherwise get from the I-69 corridor?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: codyg1985 on May 17, 2016, 07:32:55 PM
Maybe Arkansas would be willing to pay for I-49 through Texas? Or pay for some of it?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on May 17, 2016, 08:05:32 PM
Maybe Arkansas would be willing to pay for I-49 through Texas? Or pay for some of it?
With what? Chickens? ;)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on May 17, 2016, 08:41:51 PM
I just noticed some info relevant to this thread in a Dec. 6, 2009 article US71 recently posted in the "I-49 in AR (Fort Smith, Bella Vista)" thread:
Quote
The only work that has been done between Texarkana and Alma are environmental-impact studies on two separate sections.
The Texarkana to De Queen section is a 36-mile leg that will have an additional 16 miles in Texas and include a new bridge over the Red River, an expense that will be shared equally between Arkansas and Texas. Total cost is expected to reach $536 million.
(http://www.allbusiness.com/government/government-bodies-offices-regional-local/13536201-1.html)
(above quote from Texarkana (Future I-49, I-69 Spur) (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3321.msg76274#msg76274) thread)
Maybe Arkansas would be willing to pay for I-49 through Texas? Or pay for some of it?
With what? Chickens? ;)

Unfortunately, the link provided by US71 regarding the Red River bridge has gone cold; however, the quote from the article indicates that, as of late 2009, Texas planned on paying half the cost of the bridge. I assume that means Texas planned on paying for its section of I-49 at that time, also. Given TxDOT's renewed efforts regarding the I-69 system since that time, I suspect I-49 is waaaaaay down TxDOT's list of priorities.



What is the hold up on building I-49 north from Texarkana to Ashdown and further north (other than funding)?
They build bypasses around the cities first, then connect the bypasses

At any rate, AHTD will prioritize building bypasses first. Speaking of bypasses,this April 11 aticle (http://www.texarkanagazette.com/news/texarkana-region/story/2016/apr/11/bowie-county-reports-53-million-surplus/420685/) reports that a study may begin in the near future to relocate the I-369/I-30 interchange, probably to accomodate an I-369 West Loop.  I assume (hope?) that the study would also consider a feasible corridor for the Northwest Loop and a connection to I-49.* Then, they would have a battle to find the funding to build the Loop. At any rate, Texarkana and TxDOT would probably want to build the Loop before even thinking about I-49 and the Texas half of the Red River bridge.

I don't think either agency will have the money for the Texas section of I-49 for a long time.

edit *

The September 17, 2014 Final Texarkana Urban Transportation Study ("TUTS") 2015-2040 Metropolitan Transportation Plan ("MTP") (http://texarkanampo.com/documents/Tuts/TUTS%202040%20Plan.pdf) contains some information about an envisioned new terrain I-369 routing and an I-369 connection to I-49.  In discussing the results of April 24, 2014 stakeholder meetings, the following comments were noted about roadway capacity (p. 62/126 of pdf; p. 55 of document):

(http://i.imgur.com/RY8dlKM.png)

At least some folks in Texarkana are thinking about extending I-49 to the proposed Exit 44 connection to the Northwest Loop.  That would be a beginning .......... and a good near-term opportunity for a "Texas" I-49 shield.  :bigass:
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Sykotyk on May 17, 2016, 09:13:28 PM
One thing with Texas is image. If Arkansas were to build I-49 further north from the state line but dumped everyone onto US71 for a few minutes before the current northern end of I-49, I think that would look bad on Texas for not building it.

The problem, then, is Arkansas even ever coming up with the money to build their portion. Which seems farfetched.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on June 28, 2016, 02:01:53 PM
(http://beta.fortune.com/assets/img/interactive_image.png?resize=)

http://beta.fortune.com/fortune500/visualizations/?iid=recirc_f500landing-zone1

I know this is more "interesting fact" than anything else (especially in road-building) but...one could call a finished Interstate link from NWA through Fort Smith, Texarkana and Sulphur Springs to D/FW the "Trillion-dollar Corridor", not because that (hopefully not, anyway) will be the cost to build it, but because it links the metro areas containing the 2 largest companies in the Fortune 500, with 6-7 companies accounting for $1 trillion in revenue between them.

(One, obviously, could call the mainly-Oklahoman route between Siloam Springs, Muskogee, McAlester and Sherman/Denison the same thing, but this route would be all-interstate, and would be exclusively between the two states which seem to have an intertwined modern history. Still amazing that there's so much corporate money in this area now vs. being exclusively on either coast or the industrial midwest.)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on July 03, 2016, 09:25:09 PM
This June 27 article (http://txktoday.com/news/area-chambers-meet-to-discuss-interstate-49/) reports that representatives from three Arkansas cities met recently to discuss the next steps for I-49, Texarkana, Fort Smith, and Mena. 
They agreed that initial focus should be on finishing the Arkansas River bridge, and then the initiation of acquiring rights of way  for the furtherance of I-49 in Arkansas:

Quote
Delegations from the Texarkana USA Chamber of Commerce, Mena/Polk County Chamber of Commerce, and the Fort Smith Regional Chamber of Commerce met to discuss the final stages of completion of Interstate 49 from Texarkana to Fort Smith ....
The Chambers met to discuss the next stages to complete the highway ....
The productive meeting resulted in a common agreement to encourage forward actions on the project. Focus is on the Interstate — 49 bridge over the Arkansas River at Fort Smith and the initiation of acquiring right of ways to further the highway through Arkansas.

Although it is still too early to tell, it appears that Mena might have the inside track for the next section of I-49.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on July 04, 2016, 07:40:43 PM
It seems to me like DeQueen would be a higher priority. It's a slightly bigger population than Mena and has more traffic with four US highways converging (59, 70, 71, 371). Plus lots of trucks due to the chicken industry.

I guess the difference is Mena is getting its act together and DeQueen hasn't.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: RBBrittain on July 11, 2016, 02:14:11 PM
It seems to me like DeQueen would be a higher priority. It's a slightly bigger population than Mena and has more traffic with four US highways converging (59, 70, 71, 371). Plus lots of trucks due to the chicken industry.

I guess the difference is Mena is getting its act together and DeQueen hasn't.
The Mena area has three US highways (59, 71, 270) and is closer to Fort Smith. I believe it would also be easier to build as a bypass, since earlier I-49 environmental studies suggest it will largely follow the existing 71/270 "S-curve" route north of Mena; unless it's entirely north of 59/70/71, a De Queen bypass might have to go to southern Sevier County to reach 59/71 again. (Not to mention racial politics possibly affecting the cities' political pull; De Queen has a far larger Hispanic population than mostly lily-white Mena.)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on August 16, 2016, 06:21:30 PM
Not highway news, but BOY is it Arkansas I-49 related.

Walmart CEO Doug McMillon was quoted yesterday as saying that Northwest Arkansas is now projected to have over 1 million people in 15 years.  Here's a link to the post where the math is done; that translates to an average of 91 new people per day in NWA moving in over the next decade-and-one-half. (https://www.urbanplanet.org/forums/topic/116237-nwa-growth/?do=findComment&comment=1421293)

(And I'm wondering whether that takes into account any further completion of I-49, at least the Bella Vista Bypass and the Arkansas River Bridge.  Regardless, given this is essentially the middle of the I-49 corridor between Kansas City and Texarkana/Shreveport, it will someday have a big effect and CAUSE a big effect if it comes to pass).

Quote
At last week’s Children’s Hospital fundraising gala in Northwest Arkansas, Wal-Mart CEO Doug McMillon said the region is on pace to grow to more than 1 million residents over the next 15 years.

“If that is really the pace of growth, we will have to accelerate our plan for expansion,”  Doderer said. “The building we’re designing is easily expandable. We’re actually building it such that we can grow, we can build without disrupting services that are open.”

http://talkbusiness.net/2016/08/arkansas-childrens-ceo-says-nw-arkansas-poised-for-more-growth-shares-plans-for-additional-state-reach/
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on August 17, 2016, 07:45:15 PM
Not highway news, but BOY is it Arkansas I-49 related.

Walmart CEO Doug McMillon was quoted yesterday as saying that Northwest Arkansas is now projected to have over 1 million people in 15 years.  Here's a link to the post where the math is done; that translates to an average of 91 new people per day in NWA moving in over the next decade-and-one-half. (https://www.urbanplanet.org/forums/topic/116237-nwa-growth/?do=findComment&comment=1421293)

(And I'm wondering whether that takes into account any further completion of I-49, at least the Bella Vista Bypass and the Arkansas River Bridge.  Regardless, given this is essentially the middle of the I-49 corridor between Kansas City and Texarkana/Shreveport, it will someday have a big effect and CAUSE a big effect if it comes to pass).

Quote
At last week’s Children’s Hospital fundraising gala in Northwest Arkansas, Wal-Mart CEO Doug McMillon said the region is on pace to grow to more than 1 million residents over the next 15 years.

“If that is really the pace of growth, we will have to accelerate our plan for expansion,”  Doderer said. “The building we’re designing is easily expandable. We’re actually building it such that we can grow, we can build without disrupting services that are open.”

http://talkbusiness.net/2016/08/arkansas-childrens-ceo-says-nw-arkansas-poised-for-more-growth-shares-plans-for-additional-state-reach/

Wal-Mart built XNA (with help from Tyson and JB Hunt). Maybe they should invest in 49?  Heck, they are getting their own exit already, so spend a little more. My 2 pfennigs worth.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Tomahawkin on August 17, 2016, 09:02:11 PM
I agree. I started the speculation of the I49 (New Orleans to Canada) when the slow legalisation dragged their feet on the Bella vista bypass. That could have been tolled because of the snow birds who use 49 to southern cities in Texas and the gulf coast. Also a few truck stops and development in cities between Ft. Smith and Texarkana could boost revenues in some of those small towns which sorely need it...IMO, just speculation...
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Tomahawkin on August 17, 2016, 09:03:41 PM
That post probably should have went to the toll road page. But it correlates with I-49
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: jbnv on August 17, 2016, 09:11:42 PM
Does Arkansas even have any toll highways?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on August 17, 2016, 09:14:46 PM
Quote from: US71
Wal-Mart built XNA (with help from Tyson and JB Hunt). Maybe they should invest in 49?  Heck, they are getting their own exit already, so spend a little more. My 2 pfennigs worth.

Walmart won't bother to invest in proper staffing and security levels at their stores. They just sap local police department resources for that. More taxpayer money goes to fund public assistance for many of their employees. With that being said, I would be absolutely shocked if Walmart contributed any money at all to fund I-49 construction. NFL team owners will be paying for their new billion dollar stadiums entirely with their own money before that happens.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on August 17, 2016, 09:18:57 PM
Does Arkansas even have any toll highways?
There is a proposed private toll road connecting XNA to the US 412 Bypass, but that is still a few years away. Otherwise, no.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on August 17, 2016, 09:38:05 PM
http://www.swtimes.com/news/20160814/population-projections-show-greenwood-booming
 This article show's what kind of snails pace I 49 project is going. Something needs to speed it up.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Tomahawkin on August 17, 2016, 09:41:55 PM
Oh wow. I did not know how slow its going. I left the NWA area in 09 and I thought things were progressing slow then. I wonder why hasn't the AHDT poster commented on this as well as my toll roads in Arkansas post???
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on August 18, 2016, 12:59:05 AM
http://www.swtimes.com/news/20160814/population-projections-show-greenwood-booming
 This article show's what kind of snails pace I 49 project is going. Something needs to speed it up.

The population of Crawford county is projected to shrink by 2040. Old people?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on August 18, 2016, 02:51:39 AM
Not highway news, but BOY is it Arkansas I-49 related.

Walmart CEO Doug McMillon was quoted yesterday as saying that Northwest Arkansas is now projected to have over 1 million people in 15 years.  Here's a link to the post where the math is done; that translates to an average of 91 new people per day in NWA moving in over the next decade-and-one-half. (https://www.urbanplanet.org/forums/topic/116237-nwa-growth/?do=findComment&comment=1421293)

(And I'm wondering whether that takes into account any further completion of I-49, at least the Bella Vista Bypass and the Arkansas River Bridge.  Regardless, given this is essentially the middle of the I-49 corridor between Kansas City and Texarkana/Shreveport, it will someday have a big effect and CAUSE a big effect if it comes to pass).

Quote
At last week’s Children’s Hospital fundraising gala in Northwest Arkansas, Wal-Mart CEO Doug McMillon said the region is on pace to grow to more than 1 million residents over the next 15 years.

“If that is really the pace of growth, we will have to accelerate our plan for expansion,”  Doderer said. “The building we’re designing is easily expandable. We’re actually building it such that we can grow, we can build without disrupting services that are open.”

http://talkbusiness.net/2016/08/arkansas-childrens-ceo-says-nw-arkansas-poised-for-more-growth-shares-plans-for-additional-state-reach/

Wal-Mart built XNA (with help from Tyson and JB Hunt). Maybe they should invest in 49?  Heck, they are getting their own exit already, so spend a little more. My 2 pfennigs worth.

I agree.

The article posted by Gordon, plus the McMillon quote I added above, would put metro NWA/FSM at a population of over 1,400,000 by 2040.  That's bigger than metro Memphis is now.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on August 18, 2016, 01:45:53 PM
From a businessman friend in Fort Smith:

Quote
When I-49 is complete, Fort Smith will explode. It will be at the corner of I-40 and I-49, in the center of the U.S. With access to rail and river, the proximity to major trucking lines (ABF, C. R. England, J. B. Hunt, USA Trucking, Jones Truck Lines etc.) it will be, perhaps, the single largest drop and ship hub (not attached to a sea or ocean) in the country. It will be central most drop point for shipped items arriving in the gulf ports for distribution east, west, and north.

I read a study several months ago that predicted that, after the completion of I-49, the River Valley will be one on the 5 fastest growing areas in the country, with a return of it's strong manufacturing base to take advantage of it's, now enhanced, ability to ship North, South, East, and West.

According to a couple of friends of mine on the FS Board of Directors and the Fort Chaffee Redevelopment Authority, east and south of Fort Smith is being gobbled up in huge chunks by investors in anticipation of the growth that will be facilitated by the completion of I-49.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on August 18, 2016, 02:52:17 PM
Even if/when I-49 is completed there will be bigger rail & road hubs in the Central US than Fort Smith. For rail, Kansas City and Amarillo both dwarf anything in Fort Smith. Oklahoma City and Kansas City are important Interstate highway hubs.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on August 18, 2016, 05:12:15 PM
Even if/when I-49 is completed there will be bigger rail & road hubs in the Central US than Fort Smith. For rail, Kansas City and Amarillo both dwarf anything in Fort Smith. Oklahoma City and Kansas City are important Interstate highway hubs.

Could be (depending upon what happens with the Kansas City Southern railroad in metro Fort Smith).  Yet there aren't about 6-7 largest-cities-in-their-state almost straight north of Oklahoma City as there are Fort Smith, and the latter city is closer to more of the busiest gulf ports than is OKC (admittedly with 3 interstates to FSM's 2).

What's interesting is that if one looks at current numbers of a combined Northwest Arkansas/Fort Smith population vs. those projected by Doug McMillon and the Fort Smith Southwest Times-Record, NWA/FSM is about 3/5 there right now... :wow:
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on August 18, 2016, 06:37:28 PM
With Fort Chaffee being decommissioned, there is lots of land available cheap (one reason why 549 was built in that area). Almost all the land surrounding the Huckabee Nature Center has been bought by housing developers. There is a private college under construction, plus a church nearby. There is a new fire station on Massard Rd, about half a mile from 549.
The only services right now is a Casey's General Store on AR 22 just west of the new highway. It would not surprise me if Love's or another truck stop has already purchased land and is simply waiting for 549 to be extended.
AR 255 is proposed to be rerouted through Ft Chaffee as well, instead along the edge as it is now.

Let me know when you're in the area and I'll show you around ;)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on August 18, 2016, 07:04:14 PM
With Fort Chaffee being decommissioned, there is lots of land available cheap (one reason why 549 was built in that area). Almost all the land surrounding the Huckabee Nature Center has been bought by housing developers. There is a private college under construction, plus a church nearby. There is a new fire station on Massard Rd, about half a mile from 549.
The only services right now is a Casey's General Store on AR 22 just west of the new highway. It would not surprise me if Love's or another truck stop has already purchased land and is simply waiting for 549 to be extended.
AR 255 is proposed to be rerouted through Ft Chaffee as well, instead along the edge as it is now.

Let me know when you're in the area and I'll show you around ;)

^TY.   :D  Every other state bordering Arkansas (including those with a smaller population) has both a dental and a veterinary school, but the Natural State doesn't (yet).  That private college may be about to change that, and it's time, with the state having two separate in-border metro areas that are approaching the 1 million person mark.  And as you said, future I-49 is nearly at their doorstep.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: galador on August 18, 2016, 09:46:01 PM
With Fort Chaffee being decommissioned, there is lots of land available cheap (one reason why 549 was built in that area). Almost all the land surrounding the Huckabee Nature Center has been bought by housing developers. There is a private college under construction, plus a church nearby. There is a new fire station on Massard Rd, about half a mile from 549.
The only services right now is a Casey's General Store on AR 22 just west of the new highway. It would not surprise me if Love's or another truck stop has already purchased land and is simply waiting for 549 to be extended.
AR 255 is proposed to be rerouted through Ft Chaffee as well, instead along the edge as it is now.

Let me know when you're in the area and I'll show you around ;)

ARCOM (the new Osteopathic college) is having an open house (https://www.facebook.com/events/633060450182354/) for their new campus this Sunday (21st).

^TY.   :D  Every other state bordering Arkansas (including those with a smaller population) has both a dental and a veterinary school, but the Natural State doesn't (yet).  That private college may be about to change that, and it's time, with the state having two separate in-border metro areas that are approaching the 1 million person mark.  And as you said, future I-49 is nearly at their doorstep.

I don't think there's an Optometry program, either, but I think I read somewhere that UCA was doing some preliminary research on the feasibility.


There was an interesting comment by Ivy Owens (FCRA director) about the I-49 bridge in Talk Business today (http://talkbusiness.net/2016/08/fcra-approves-high-volume-of-extensions-with-once-promised-large-shopping-center-project-in-limbo/):

Quote
Owen offered updates on the I-49 bridge and the relocation of Highway 255 to Frontier Road as well as the widening of Frontier to five lanes. Concerning the I-49 bridge over the Arkansas River, Owen said engineering on the estimated $350 million project has been approved.

The Highway Department has a policy that once they start the engineering on a project, they will complete it within 10 years, so some of the people in this room will be driving on that bridge in 10 years, and we couldn’t have said that three or four years ago,”  Owen revealed to the Board. “It’s still at the top of the Governor’s priority list to get that done. That’s one thing that spearheaded this along, and our Highway Commissioner has been right on top of it.”
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on August 19, 2016, 02:34:54 AM
With Fort Chaffee being decommissioned, there is lots of land available cheap (one reason why 549 was built in that area). Almost all the land surrounding the Huckabee Nature Center has been bought by housing developers. There is a private college under construction, plus a church nearby. There is a new fire station on Massard Rd, about half a mile from 549.
The only services right now is a Casey's General Store on AR 22 just west of the new highway. It would not surprise me if Love's or another truck stop has already purchased land and is simply waiting for 549 to be extended.
AR 255 is proposed to be rerouted through Ft Chaffee as well, instead along the edge as it is now.

Let me know when you're in the area and I'll show you around ;)

ARCOM (the new Osteopathic college) is having an open house (https://www.facebook.com/events/633060450182354/) for their new campus this Sunday (21st).

^TY.   :D  Every other state bordering Arkansas (including those with a smaller population) has both a dental and a veterinary school, but the Natural State doesn't (yet).  That private college may be about to change that, and it's time, with the state having two separate in-border metro areas that are approaching the 1 million person mark.  And as you said, future I-49 is nearly at their doorstep.

I don't think there's an Optometry program, either, but I think I read somewhere that UCA was doing some preliminary research on the feasibility.


There was an interesting comment by Ivy Owens (FCRA director) about the I-49 bridge in Talk Business today (http://talkbusiness.net/2016/08/fcra-approves-high-volume-of-extensions-with-once-promised-large-shopping-center-project-in-limbo/):

Quote
Owen offered updates on the I-49 bridge and the relocation of Highway 255 to Frontier Road as well as the widening of Frontier to five lanes. Concerning the I-49 bridge over the Arkansas River, Owen said engineering on the estimated $350 million project has been approved.

The Highway Department has a policy that once they start the engineering on a project, they will complete it within 10 years, so some of the people in this room will be driving on that bridge in 10 years, and we couldn’t have said that three or four years ago,”
Owen revealed to the Board. “It’s still at the top of the Governor’s priority list to get that done. That’s one thing that spearheaded this along, and our Highway Commissioner has been right on top of it.”

ANOTHER great find from this week!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: mvak36 on August 19, 2016, 11:12:55 PM
That's great news. Maybe they should start on some of the bypasses of Mena, DeQueen, etc.,
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on August 20, 2016, 07:03:10 PM
Arkansas College of Osteopathic Medicine (at Fort Chaffee) held its ribbon cutting this morning.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: robbones on September 02, 2016, 09:05:07 PM
http://5newsonline.com/2016/08/30/ahtd-releases-details-of-i-49fulbright-expressway-interchange-widening/

This is long overdue

LG-H634

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on September 02, 2016, 09:16:01 PM
http://5newsonline.com/2016/08/30/ahtd-releases-details-of-i-49fulbright-expressway-interchange-widening/

This is long overdue

LG-H634


IMO, the current interchange should not have been built the way it was.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: robbones on September 02, 2016, 09:18:09 PM
http://5newsonline.com/2016/08/30/ahtd-releases-details-of-i-49fulbright-expressway-interchange-widening/

This is long overdue

LG-H634


IMO, the current interchange should not have been built the way it was.
This was done what 30 or so years ago

LG-H634

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on September 02, 2016, 09:24:33 PM
http://5newsonline.com/2016/08/30/ahtd-releases-details-of-i-49fulbright-expressway-interchange-widening/

This is long overdue

LG-H634


IMO, the current interchange should not have been built the way it was.
This was done what 30 or so years ago

LG-H634


Circa 1983

I still think they could have done something different.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on September 02, 2016, 10:50:53 PM
http://5newsonline.com/2016/08/30/ahtd-releases-details-of-i-49fulbright-expressway-interchange-widening/

This is long overdue

LG-H634


IMO, the current interchange should not have been built the way it was.
Having driven it several times, it's quite obvious that the current through lanes were built well before the northern extension as a stand-alone US 71 Fayetteville bypass facility.  The northern extension was merely "tacked-on" in a way that would least disrupt the bypass traffic -- and would simplify the funneling of NB traffic directly to the original US 71 commercial strip -- likely for localized economic benefit.  The northern extension freeway was likely originally seen as a similar bypass of the towns to the north (Springdale, Bentonville, etc.) rather than part of a through route -- at least until the I-540 designation was posted in the '90's.  And until now, it was likely thought of as adequate if not optimal.  I guess the increased regional population and subsequent increased traffic finally caught up with the design!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Wayward Memphian on September 03, 2016, 08:21:31 PM
I'm just glad I live in the east side of Fayettenam and I can just go up 265 to Don Tyson and over to I-49 and advice what will be a massive cluster till that interchange is complete.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: robbones on September 03, 2016, 10:51:54 PM
Won't be surprised if 265 becomes jammed once they start working on the interchange

LG-H634

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Tomahawkin on September 03, 2016, 11:40:29 PM
I thought that interchange needed a makeover when I was there in 03-09. Its about time. My only beef is that they should make I-49, 4 lanes in each direction to 1) handle game day traffic and 2) plan for the future residents moving to the area. Arkansas has a bad habit of just trying to solve current traffic issues instead of doing that and planning for future growth.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on September 03, 2016, 11:42:44 PM
Won't be surprised if 265 becomes jammed once they start working on the interchange

You know it will
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on September 04, 2016, 08:57:19 PM
Update on the Bella Vista Bypass and the Arkansas 112 Bypass.  Seems to me that there will have to be some warning signs saying "This is NOT a through road to Missouri right now"...  However, I think it's very possible many of us will see both the Bella Vista bypass and the Arkansas River bridge both on I-49 in our lifetime, and that will put ever more pressure to finish the Greenwood-Texarkana section. :

Quote

Work is ongoing from Interstate 49 in north Bentonville, including a large roundabout and other interchange improvements. The road will be part of I-49 when completed. Base and concrete paving are in place from Arkansas 72 on the west to past Pumpkin Hollow Road, going east.

"Realistically, we're looking at right after the first of the year before we'll actually be opening the roundabout and sending traffic down the new bypass," Archer said. "There's going to be a lot of the work that will be completed, but once you complete that bulk work, there's a lot of cleanup, there's a lot of shoulder gravel to put on, you have to pave the shoulders with asphalt."

...

Getting the road connected back to I-49 in Missouri still requires Arkansas building a 2.5-mile section to the state line and Missouri building a section from the state line to just south of Pineville.

Darin Hamelink, area engineer for the Missouri Department of Transportation, told regional planners earlier this year $20 million is budgeted in 2020 for construction of the 4.81-mile project, but another $30 million is needed to finish the road.

All right of way has been acquired, Hamelink said. He said the environmental impact statement needs to be done. Preliminary design work is completed, but $3 million must be allocated to finish the plans, he said.


Missouri officials, at one time, said they had money in hand to go ahead with the project when Arkansas was ready. Arkansas wasn't ready at that point and Missouri switched the money to other projects. Hamelink said Missouri is now dealing with a shortage of highway money.

"I don't think we'll ever see construction quit on the Bella Vista Bypass until it's four lanes and finished," said Dick Trammel, chairman of the Arkansas Highway Commission. "It's not a road to nowhere. The part that's finished and open, it's being used pretty heavily."

http://www.nwaonline.com/news/2016/sep/04/officials-happy-with-progress-of-two-no/
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: NE2 on September 04, 2016, 09:14:08 PM
Why would people think it's a through road to Missouri? It'll be accessed via a roundabout off the main highway, right?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on September 04, 2016, 09:46:54 PM
Why would people think it's a through road to Missouri? It'll be accessed via a roundabout off the main highway, right?

(1) Likely be AR 549
(2) There are already "Freeway Ends" signs on 49 approaching 71.
(3) I wouldn't be surprised to see the new road signed "local traffic only"
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Wayward Memphian on September 04, 2016, 10:52:46 PM
Won't be surprised if 265 becomes jammed once they start working on the interchange

LG-H634

The lack of a decent east west corridor will negate that a bit. 112 will be worn out though. Folks will be cutting through  western residential areas get to it.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Tomahawkin on September 05, 2016, 12:44:27 AM
I saw the 2017 rand mcnally atlas today and it showed interstate construction to the southwest of the wagon wheel road exit? Is this where the are planning the Bella vista bypass (southern leg)?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on September 05, 2016, 10:31:32 AM
I saw the 2017 rand mcnally atlas today and it showed interstate construction to the southwest of the wagon wheel road exit? Is this where the are planning the Bella vista bypass (southern leg)?

I think that's actually part of the road to the XNA airport.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: capt.ron on September 05, 2016, 12:48:05 PM
I thought that interchange needed a makeover when I was there in 03-09. Its about time. My only beef is that they should make I-49, 4 lanes in each direction to 1) handle game day traffic and 2) plan for the future residents moving to the area. Arkansas has a bad habit of just trying to solve current traffic issues instead of doing that and planning for future growth.
They have always had a "reactive" vs "proactive" approach to road building. No need to change that, I guess! ;)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Tomahawkin on September 05, 2016, 12:49:00 PM
Oh OK. Fill me in? I have not heard any word of this on here? I'm guessing its going to be a 4 lane spur parkway?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Tomahawkin on September 05, 2016, 12:52:54 PM
@capt.Ron. I agree. Its always a reactive approach. I'm not surprised that AHTD has ignored any questions of widening areas of 49 and other roads in the area to deal with game day traffic. Getting caught in that mess b!ows
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on September 06, 2016, 10:14:59 PM
Though the I-49 bridge (and a completed I-49) is still a ways off, and though Effingham, IL might want to disagree, Alma, AR has a new slogan: "Crossroads of America".  When the I-49/Texas I-69 hourglass corridor is complete, they may be right (alongside fellow I-49 interstate junction cities Kansas City, Joplin and Shreveport/Texarkana, of course):

Quote
With the loss of the spinach cannery, Alma dropped the title of "Spinach Capital of the World" in favor "Crossroads of America.”  Greene said it’s an apt description since the gateway to the future Interstate 49 bridge is set to begin at Alma and Interstate 40 lies just to the north of the city. Incorporated in 1872, the city of Alma also was a crossroads for the area with travelers finding it as a junction when they “came down out of the mountains,”  Greene said.

http://www.swtimes.com/news/20160906/alma-being-reshaped-by-arkansas-162-relocation-project


Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: aboges26 on September 07, 2016, 03:11:39 AM
Oh OK. Fill me in? I have not heard any word of this on here? I'm guessing its going to be a 4 lane spur parkway?

I believe you are referring to the first segment of the US 412 bypass of Springdale.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on September 07, 2016, 11:33:19 AM
Quote
Though the I-49 bridge (and a completed I-49) is still a ways off, and though Effingham, IL might want to disagree, Alma, AR has a new slogan: "Crossroads of America".  When the I-49/Texas I-69 hourglass corridor is complete, they may be right (alongside fellow I-49 interstate junction cities Kansas City, Joplin and Shreveport/Texarkana, of course)

Kansas City and Oklahoma City both have legit claims on being the middle cross-roads point of America's highway network. Alma does not. Neither does Effingham for that matter.

I-69 in Arkansas, if it ever gets built (which is highly doubtful), will at best only be used as a local/regional traffic route thanks to the route being so awfully crooked and time/distance wasting. From the Texas border to Indianapolis I-69 is pretty comical looking compared to so many other far straighter, far faster Interstate routes in the middle of the country. It's a clear illustration of just how much America sucks doing big things like highway projects now. We're sure great at lawyering though.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: The Ghostbuster on September 07, 2016, 07:58:44 PM
When are they going to renumber the exits on the segment of Interstate 49 that used to be Interstate 540?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: KamKam on September 08, 2016, 06:15:06 PM
Good Question
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on September 08, 2016, 07:53:24 PM
They'll wait until they build the bridge and connect the Barling segment, which uses the new I-49 mileage.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on September 12, 2016, 11:54:19 AM
They'll wait until they build the bridge and connect the Barling segment, which uses the new I-49 mileage.

That is what I'm thinking, as well.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: yakra on September 15, 2016, 01:18:30 PM
And then, there's...
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/64/2002_IN_Proof.png)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on September 15, 2016, 04:15:03 PM
Rumor is that the next section of I-49 between Greenwood and Texarkana will be a bypass of Mena. Has this been confirmed? There would be exits at AR 8 and 88, CR 70, and some sort of interchange where it meets US 71 southwest of Mena. How are the CR 70 and the southwestern interchange going to be configured?
(above quote from I-49 Mena bypass (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=15654.msg2068146#msg2068146) thread)
This June 27 article (http://txktoday.com/news/area-chambers-meet-to-discuss-interstate-49/) reports that representatives from three Arkansas cities met recently to discuss the next steps for I-49, Texarkana, Fort Smith, and Mena. 
They agreed that initial focus should be on finishing the Arkansas River bridge, and then the initiation of acquiring rights of way  for the furtherance of I-49 in Arkansas

Sort of reading tea leaves, but a Mena state representative says build the I-49 Arkansas River bridge first, then the rest of I-49 will follow. Which means that a Mena bypass will not happen soon.  This article (http://www.menastar.com/news/article_61898226-7aaf-11e6-8306-abbf5e6da35d.html) reports:

Quote
Arkansas State Representative Marcus E. Richmond spoke at the Mena Lions Club on Friday where he talked on Medicaid issues and Interstate 49. He represents District 21, including parts of Polk, Scott, Perry, Garland, Yell, Crawford and Sebastian counties ....
Richmond also discussed the next step that he believes needs to be taken in order to complete the long-awaited I-49 and the benefits it could bring to the district. "The next big step is finishing the bridge there at Alma across the Arkansas River," Richmond said. "Once that's done there are very few excuses to keep postponing the competition of Interstate 49."
Richmond said he is in favor of legislation that would incentivize businesses to bring and keep local employment in his district and acknowledged some people will be concerned I-49 will change the community. "I don't think it will have that much of an impact on who we are, but what it may do is be that large artery that allows businesses that are already here to expand and hire more people," he said. "In my opinion it would encourage new industries and maybe some of the smaller businesses to start up and expand as well. It would have beneficial economic impact on our area."
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: KamKam on September 15, 2016, 07:35:37 PM
They'll wait until they build the bridge and connect the Barling segment, which uses the new I-49 mileage.
That makes Sense since AR 22 Exit # is 193 and U.S. 71 Exit is 187 on AR 549 (Future I-49)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on September 15, 2016, 08:12:05 PM
1. On the 18th of August, Chaffee Crossing's Ivy Owen says the AHTD has started its engineering studies of the I-49 bridge and never does such a study without intending to finish the project within 10 years.
2. On September 4th, Dick Trammell says he doesn't believe construction on the Bella Vista Bypass will stop until its "finished and four-laned", and we get newspaper confirmation that Missouri is slated to start their section of that I-49 in 2020. Then yesterday:
3. State Rep. Marcus Richmond told the Mena Lions' Club: "The next big step is finishing the bridge there at Alma across the Arkansas River,...Once that's done there are very few excuses to keep postponing the competition of Interstate 49."  (Thanks, Grzrd.)

Talk is cheap, but BOY is there a lot of talk about Arkansas I-49 now within the space of less than a month.  It is truly foolish now NOT to think about finishing that road.  I guess we've reached the point where "reasons" start to become "excuses", per Rep. Richmond.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: intelati49 on September 17, 2016, 02:00:34 PM
1. On the 18th of August, Chaffee Crossing's Ivy Owen says the AHTD has started its engineering studies of the I-49 bridge and never does such a study without intending to finish the project within 10 years.
2. On September 4th, Dick Trammell says he doesn't believe construction on the Bella Vista Bypass will stop until its "finished and four-laned", and we get newspaper confirmation that Missouri is slated to start their section of that I-49 in 2020. Then yesterday:
3. State Rep. Marcus Richmond told the Mena Lions' Club: "The next big step is finishing the bridge there at Alma across the Arkansas River,...Once that's done there are very few excuses to keep postponing the competition of Interstate 49."  (Thanks, Grzrd.)

Talk is cheap, but BOY is there a lot of talk about Arkansas I-49 now within the space of less than a month.  It is truly foolish now NOT to think about finishing that road.  I guess we've reached the point where "reasons" start to become "excuses", per Rep. Richmond.

As a Missourian who have taken US71 many many times.

:banghead: :banghead: :banghead:
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on September 17, 2016, 02:06:01 PM
1. On the 18th of August, Chaffee Crossing's Ivy Owen says the AHTD has started its engineering studies of the I-49 bridge and never does such a study without intending to finish the project within 10 years.
2. On September 4th, Dick Trammell says he doesn't believe construction on the Bella Vista Bypass will stop until its "finished and four-laned", and we get newspaper confirmation that Missouri is slated to start their section of that I-49 in 2020. Then yesterday:
3. State Rep. Marcus Richmond told the Mena Lions' Club: "The next big step is finishing the bridge there at Alma across the Arkansas River,...Once that's done there are very few excuses to keep postponing the competition of Interstate 49."  (Thanks, Grzrd.)

Talk is cheap, but BOY is there a lot of talk about Arkansas I-49 now within the space of less than a month.  It is truly foolish now NOT to think about finishing that road.  I guess we've reached the point where "reasons" start to become "excuses", per Rep. Richmond.

Dick Trammel talks a lot like a cheerleader crossed with a slick politician.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on September 19, 2016, 06:07:05 PM
Should be noted that Richmond represents the area where the bridge will be built, as well as Mena and all points in between, so an all-of-the-above approach benefits him the most.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on September 20, 2016, 12:42:57 PM
There was an interesting comment by Ivy Owens (FCRA director) about the I-49 bridge in Talk Business today (http://talkbusiness.net/2016/08/fcra-approves-high-volume-of-extensions-with-once-promised-large-shopping-center-project-in-limbo/):
Quote
Owen offered updates on the I-49 bridge and the relocation of Highway 255 to Frontier Road as well as the widening of Frontier to five lanes. Concerning the I-49 bridge over the Arkansas River, Owen said engineering on the estimated $350 million project has been approved.
The Highway Department has a policy that once they start the engineering on a project, they will complete it within 10 years, so some of the people in this room will be driving on that bridge in 10 years, and we couldn’t have said that three or four years ago,”  Owen revealed to the Board. “It’s still at the top of the Governor’s priority list to get that done. That’s one thing that spearheaded this along, and our Highway Commissioner has been right on top of it.”

I can't remember if this has been mentioned, but this article (http://www.arkansasonline.com/news/2016/sep/19/state-weighs-tolls-to-build-i-49-route-/#/) reports that AHTD is studying whether to toll the thirteen-mile Arkansas River bridge section of I-49:

Quote
The Arkansas Highway and Transportation Department is commissioning a study on the feasibility of not only using tolls to help build a new section of Interstate 49 in western Arkansas, but also to have someone else operate and maintain the tollway.
The Arkansas Highway Commission last week approved an order to solicit consultants to study using tolls and a public-private partnership to complete a 13-mile section of I-49 from Interstate 40, where I-49 ends now, south to Arkansas 22 in Barling.

If built as envisioned, it would be the first example of a public-private partnership on a roadway project in Arkansas, state highway officials said.
"The thought, if the money part works out, is that a private entity would design, build, operate and maintain the facility until it is paid for and can become a 'free' route," Scott Bennett, the department director, said last week. "Many times, with facilities such as this, there is a shortfall between the revenue generated from tolls and what is needed to build the facility.
"From this standpoint, it could actually be a design-build-finance-operate-maintain project. Part of the study should also evaluate the costs and benefits of operations and maintenance by a third party versus operations and maintenance by the department." ....
The estimated price tag of the 13.7-mile segment between Barling and Alma is $380 million. The estimate includes $110 million for a new bridge over the Arkansas River.
The bridge cannot be built without connecting I-49 between Alma and Barling.
"You've got to connect the bridge on either side to make it usable," Bennett told the commission last week.
Bennett briefed local leaders about a month ago on the possibility of looking at tolls to build the new segment ....
The consultant will have to reassess the environmental impact statement for the project because it is outdated. The Federal Highway Administration approved it in 1997.
The consultant also will develop a "conceptual and preliminary design for more accurate cost estimating ... explore tolling as a feasible funding option and ... determine if the project is a candidate for the design/build/maintain project delivery method," state highway officials said.
From the time it takes to hire the consultant to completion of all aspects of the study, it could take two years, Bennett said.
"We need some design to know actually how much it is going to cost," Bennett said. "And this is one from the standpoint of public-private partnerships. You have tolling and the possibility of having ... design build-finance-operate-maintain. This could be a possibility.
"But we won't know unless we have the numbers, so what we're saying is we'll carve out a little of that $10 million for the tolling study so we'll know whether it's viable as a public-private partnership. A lot of that will tell us whether it's viable as a design-build project also."
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Scott5114 on September 21, 2016, 06:55:54 AM
That would be extremely shunpikable with I-540, wouldn't it?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on September 21, 2016, 10:35:29 AM
Private entity builds and maintains tollway. Like that worked so well for Texas.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on September 21, 2016, 12:48:56 PM
Dick Trammel

NWA's cheerleader

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: mvak36 on September 21, 2016, 01:14:03 PM
That would be extremely shunpikable with I-540, wouldn't it?

Yes it would. That stretch of 540 and the little stretch of 71 is going to see a lot of traffic if that happens lol.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on September 21, 2016, 01:27:16 PM
What the hell kind of bridge are they thinking about building that it takes 2 years just to come up with a design to determine costs (and then presumably wait a few more years to build the thing and meanwhile let price inflation make it even more expensive)?

This isn't the freaking Golden Gate Bridge or some other signature crossing like that. It's just a conventional highway bridge over a river with nothing bigger than small barge traffic on it. It's not like a Disney Princess cruise ship is going to ever come steaming through Fort Smith. There's lots of other conventional bridges crossing barge traveled rivers all over the country. What makes this one bridge such an engineering feat to build? It's not like the Great River Bridge proposed to cross the Mississippi.

45 years ago this nation was putting men on the moon and laying down 1000 miles of Interstate highway per year. Now we can't do squat.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on September 21, 2016, 01:42:01 PM
That would be extremely shunpikable with I-540, wouldn't it?

Yes it would. That stretch of 540 and the little stretch of 71 is going to see a lot of traffic if that happens lol.

No more than it already sees, I imagine
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: codyg1985 on September 21, 2016, 03:18:04 PM
What the hell kind of bridge are they thinking about building that it takes 2 years just to come up with a design to determine costs (and then presumably wait a few more years to build the thing and meanwhile let price inflation make it even more expensive)?

This isn't the freaking Golden Gate Bridge or some other signature crossing like that. It's just a conventional highway bridge over a river with nothing bigger than small barge traffic on it. It's not like a Disney Princess cruise ship is going to ever come steaming through Fort Smith. There's lots of other conventional bridges crossing barge traveled rivers all over the country. What makes this one bridge such an engineering feat to build? It's not like the Great River Bridge proposed to cross the Mississippi.

45 years ago this nation was putting men on the moon and laying down 1000 miles of Interstate highway per year. Now we can't do squat.

It looks like the area around the river at that location looks marshy, so long approach spans may also be required, which would drive the cost of the bridge up.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on September 21, 2016, 06:46:07 PM
They are looking at spending maybe 670 million on I-30 in Little Rock to upgrade it over the Arkansas River but can't find the money to build this one at Fort smith. 1/2 cent sales tax was passed mainly for Little Rock.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on September 21, 2016, 08:05:59 PM

They are looking at spending maybe 670 million on I-30 in Little Rock to upgrade it over the Arkansas River but can't find the money to build this one at Fort smith. 1/2 cent sales tax was passed mainly for Little Rock.

And NW Arkansas, but LR first (like the Broadway Bridge)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on September 22, 2016, 05:33:20 PM
What the hell kind of bridge are they thinking about building that it takes 2 years just to come up with a design to determine costs (and then presumably wait a few more years to build the thing and meanwhile let price inflation make it even more expensive)?

This isn't the freaking Golden Gate Bridge or some other signature crossing like that. It's just a conventional highway bridge over a river with nothing bigger than small barge traffic on it. It's not like a Disney Princess cruise ship is going to ever come steaming through Fort Smith. There's lots of other conventional bridges crossing barge traveled rivers all over the country. What makes this one bridge such an engineering feat to build? It's not like the Great River Bridge proposed to cross the Mississippi.

45 years ago this nation was putting men on the moon and laying down 1000 miles of Interstate highway per year. Now we can't do squat.

It looks like the area around the river at that location looks marshy, so long approach spans may also be required, which would drive the cost of the bridge up.

(Yes, I know it would add to the cost but...with something like this, I partially wish they'd build a smaller version of the majestic bridge between Lake Village and Greenville, MS, and atop it, fly a big American flag on the highest point like that above the Kansas City Southern railway bridge between Vicksburg and Louisiana, just north of I-20.  If you're going to diddle around and build an expensive bridge, build an expensive (memorable) bridge!  :love:  (Imagining how beautiful that sight would look as one comes out of the Boston Mountains above Alma on I-49 and sees the flag-bearing bridge structure in the distance with the Ouachitas beyond, beckoning to south Arkansas, Louisiana, Texas and the Gulf Coast.  :love: ))
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on September 23, 2016, 10:02:06 AM

(Yes, I know it would add to the cost but...with something like this, I partially wish they'd build a smaller version of the majestic bridge between Lake Village and Greenville, MS, and atop it, fly a big American flag on the highest point like that above the Kansas City Southern railway bridge between Vicksburg and Louisiana, just north of I-20.  If you're going to diddle around and build an expensive bridge, build an expensive (memorable) bridge!  :love:  (Imagining how beautiful that sight would look as one comes out of the Boston Mountains above Alma on I-49 and sees the flag-bearing bridge structure in the distance with the Ouachitas beyond, beckoning to south Arkansas, Louisiana, Texas and the Gulf Coast.  :love: ))

I say put a bonnie blue flag on it
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Wayward Memphian on September 23, 2016, 10:26:26 AM

(Yes, I know it would add to the cost but...with something like this, I partially wish they'd build a smaller version of the majestic bridge between Lake Village and Greenville, MS, and atop it, fly a big American flag on the highest point like that above the Kansas City Southern railway bridge between Vicksburg and Louisiana, just north of I-20.  If you're going to diddle around and build an expensive bridge, build an expensive (memorable) bridge!  :love:  (Imagining how beautiful that sight would look as one comes out of the Boston Mountains above Alma on I-49 and sees the flag-bearing bridge structure in the distance with the Ouachitas beyond, beckoning to south Arkansas, Louisiana, Texas and the Gulf Coast.  :love: ))

I say put a bonnie blue flag on it

Some historian would surely get wise.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: LM117 on October 03, 2016, 07:50:35 PM
45 years ago this nation was putting men on the moon and laying down 1000 miles of Interstate highway per year. Now we can't do squat.

Nailed it! :rofl:
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on October 03, 2016, 08:12:21 PM
45 years ago this nation was putting men on the moon and laying down 1000 miles of Interstate highway per year. Now we can't do squat.

Nailed it! :rofl:
No one wants to pay for them, anymore.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: jbnv on October 03, 2016, 08:57:12 PM
45 years ago this nation was putting men on the moon and laying down 1000 miles of Interstate highway per year. Now we can't do squat.

Nailed it! :rofl:
No one wants to pay for them, anymore.

We've accumulated $15 trillion in debt as a nation over the last two presidencies. How much infrastructure could that money have built? What the tarnation did it go to?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Plutonic Panda on October 03, 2016, 09:15:30 PM
Doesn't Hilary Clinton or Donald Trump have some huge spending plan for our infrastructure? It was one of them, but I can't remember which.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on October 03, 2016, 09:22:03 PM
45 years ago this nation was putting men on the moon and laying down 1000 miles of Interstate highway per year. Now we can't do squat.

Nailed it! :rofl:
No one wants to pay for them, anymore.

We've accumulated $15 trillion in debt as a nation over the last two presidencies. How much infrastructure could that money have built? What the tarnation did it go to?
Actually since Reagan.  It all went to corporate tax breaks so companies wouldn't move to China. /sarcasm
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: NE2 on October 04, 2016, 12:19:06 AM
Doesn't Hilary Clinton or Donald Trump have some huge spending plan for our infrastructure? It was one of them, but I can't remember which.
Does a wall count as infrastructure?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: The Ghostbuster on October 04, 2016, 03:09:12 PM
Return to talking about Interstate 49 in Arkansas, and enough about politics!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on October 05, 2016, 12:14:21 AM
Barring a miracle, it will likely be years before it's complete.  My 2pfennigs.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Wayward Memphian on October 26, 2016, 08:59:32 AM
AHTD's plans for the mess that is the Rogers interchange:

(http://talkbusiness.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/I49-71BinterchangeRogersnarrow.jpg)

http://talkbusiness.net/2016/10/ahtd-reveals-plans-for-23-million-rogers-interchange-on-interstate-49/
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: robbones on October 26, 2016, 12:30:25 PM
http://www.nwahomepage.com/news/i-49fulbright-construction-whats-it-for

AHTD gives a deadline of January 3, 2018 and a fine of $200,000 per day for the contractor of it goes beyond then.

LG-H634

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on October 26, 2016, 02:59:08 PM
Didn't Crafton Tull just screw up at Lowell exit? There are blacked out pavement markings everywhere around Dixieland. How did they end up with this project?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on October 26, 2016, 03:11:30 PM
Didn't Crafton Tull just screw up at Lowell exit? There are blacked out pavement markings everywhere around Dixieland. How did they end up with this project?

Lowest bidder?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on October 26, 2016, 04:33:57 PM
Design work is "qualification based" selection
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: razorback0308 on October 27, 2016, 01:40:13 PM
Why aren't there 2 lanes getting on I49 south at exit 78? Is there not enough room with the 412 bypass?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on October 27, 2016, 01:46:26 PM
Why aren't there 2 lanes getting on I49 south at exit 78? Is there not enough room with the 412 bypass?
That interchange has always been a clusterf*ck. I don't think they ever planned it to handle all the traffic it has. Can you imagine a 2-lane backwater highway leading to a "major metropolitan airport"?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on October 28, 2016, 07:44:19 AM
Why aren't there 2 lanes getting on I49 south at exit 78? Is there not enough room with the 412 bypass?

Two lanes merging into two lanes of Interstate? Doesn't sound like a good idea
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: razorback0308 on October 28, 2016, 08:09:17 AM
Why aren't there 2 lanes getting on I49 south at exit 78? Is there not enough room with the 412 bypass?

Two lanes merging into two lanes of Interstate? Doesn't sound like a good idea

You're thinking short term and I'm thinking long term. The third lane will be reopened at some point. Leave the second lane blocked off until I49 has the three lanes opened again. I bet one year from now the JB traffic would be appreciative.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on October 28, 2016, 10:11:52 AM
Why aren't there 2 lanes getting on I49 south at exit 78? Is there not enough room with the 412 bypass?

I've seen it. Two lanes merging onto the highway, becoming one, finally merging into the rest of the highway. I don't see that as possible at 264. I see more a "drop lane" (merge, then exit) from 264 to the 412 Bypass and Byp 412 to 264.

Yet AHTD had an opportunity to do a drop lane with the Tyson Parkway and US 412/Sunset Street, but didn't.
Two lanes merging into two lanes of Interstate? Doesn't sound like a good idea
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: lordsutch on October 28, 2016, 05:21:37 PM
Private entity builds and maintains tollway. Like that worked so well for Texas.

It's actually worked out great for Texas. The people who bought the bonds, not so much.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on October 29, 2016, 02:02:10 AM
AHTD's plans for the mess that is the Rogers interchange:

(http://talkbusiness.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/I49-71BinterchangeRogersnarrow.jpg)

http://talkbusiness.net/2016/10/ahtd-reveals-plans-for-23-million-rogers-interchange-on-interstate-49/

The AHTD is finally, uh, coming into the 21st Century.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: cjk374 on October 29, 2016, 08:15:59 AM
AHTD's plans for the mess that is the Rogers interchange:

(http://talkbusiness.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/I49-71BinterchangeRogersnarrow.jpg)

http://talkbusiness.net/2016/10/ahtd-reveals-plans-for-23-million-rogers-interchange-on-interstate-49/

The AHTD is finally, uh, coming into the 21st Century.

Am I reading this picture right? Do all of those ramps meet above I-49 into one massive holy-shit intersection?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Anthony_JK on October 29, 2016, 08:46:31 AM
AHTD's plans for the mess that is the Rogers interchange:

(http://talkbusiness.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/I49-71BinterchangeRogersnarrow.jpg)

http://talkbusiness.net/2016/10/ahtd-reveals-plans-for-23-million-rogers-interchange-on-interstate-49/

The AHTD is finally, uh, coming into the 21st Century.

Am I reading this picture right? Do all of those ramps meet above I-49 into one massive holy-shit intersection?


In a way, yes...but that's just the left turn movements. This is a classic Single Point Urban Interchange (SPUI).
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: cjk374 on October 29, 2016, 10:13:34 AM
AHTD's plans for the mess that is the Rogers interchange:

(http://talkbusiness.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/I49-71BinterchangeRogersnarrow.jpg)

http://talkbusiness.net/2016/10/ahtd-reveals-plans-for-23-million-rogers-interchange-on-interstate-49/

The AHTD is finally, uh, coming into the 21st Century.

Am I reading this picture right? Do all of those ramps meet above I-49 into one massive holy-shit intersection?


In a way, yes...but that's just the left turn movements. This is a classic Single Point Urban Interchange (SPUI).

Oh ok. This is the first SPUI I have ever seen.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on October 31, 2016, 02:27:13 AM
I navigate a SPUI almost daily (it's a modified one with "Texas U-Turns" at Central and Eldorado in McKinney). Piece of cake.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on November 01, 2016, 02:14:42 AM
I moved out of NWA several months ago.  I loved the area, but I can't say that I miss the traffic and horrible planning, at multiple levels.

This SPUI at the Walton/Walnut exit is great to see, and I approve.  But what AHTD totally messed up is the interchange to the north (Exit 86).  They handed that over to the City of Bentonville, in combination with the new interchange planned shortly to the north of that (8th Street).

Exit 85 (SE 14th St/Hudson Road) will be improved, but they failed with the plans.  I talked with the head guy with the City of Bentonville's Transportation Department when I lived there.  I asked about the plans.  He basically told me that Exit 85 will be like the US 412 exit in Springdale, in terms of turns lanes.  Sigh.  And I viewed the plans.

Exit 85 is very close to the dividing line of Bentonville and Rogers.  And that interchange has insane congestion on both sides of I-49.  I asked him about the problem of the congestion on the east-side of the interchange.  He never responded.  The traffic backing up on the Rogers side is a daily issue.

That new 8th Street interchange is not going to fix anything on the east side of the I-49/Exit 86 interchange.

AHTD, you have failed again.  Why would you give the City of Bentonville total control over the Exit 86 and the new interchange planned to the north?

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on November 01, 2016, 11:28:02 AM

AHTD, you have failed again.  Why would you give the City of Bentonville total control over the Exit 86 and the new interchange planned to the north?


Wal-Mart


Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on November 01, 2016, 04:22:55 PM
Bentonville chipped in millions to get a say in the design

Money talks
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on November 01, 2016, 05:54:58 PM

Money talks

and Wal-Mart is very chatty </sarcasm>
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on November 01, 2016, 08:09:49 PM
M86, who did you talk to in Bville? Mike Churchwell worked for AHTD for 20+ years. Really their mayor drives a lot of what they do
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on November 04, 2016, 11:24:11 AM
Small progress.  This TV video (http://www.nwahomepage.com/news/i-49-drivers-expect-smoother-traffic-on-parts-of-your-commute) reports that third lanes have opened from Johnson Mill Boulevard to Wagon Wheel Road and that the next I-49 project scheduled to be complete is the usable portion of the Bella Vista Bypass:

Quote
Crews have officially moved the orange barrels on an eight mile stretch of I-49 Thursday. This will open up a expanded third lane in both the north and southbound directions. The new lanes start near Johnson Mill Boulevard and extend up to Wagon Wheel Road.
The new lanes were supposed to open Thursday night at 8, but the highway department decided to open them this afternoon instead ....
With the lane expansion complete, now crews are focusing on other I-49 updates. "We'll have several projects that will be completed next year during 2017. The next project that is related to I-49 that is scheduled for completion is in fact the usable portion of the Bella Vista bypass."
The highway department said by 2022, most of the work on I-49 should be complete between Fayetteville and Bella Vista.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on November 06, 2016, 02:31:27 AM
M86, who did you talk to in Bville? Mike Churchwell worked for AHTD for 20+ years. Really their mayor drives a lot of what they do
"Mike Churchwell worked for AHTD for 20+ years".

Hey, he has a street named after him in the east hills of Bentonville!

That explains a lot.  And I've talked to the mayor.  Why is the City of Bentonville designing interchanges on an Interstate, without consulting the city on the east side of I-49? Rogers? Do the math.

The good ol' boy network at AHTD needs to be dismantled and reformed. Just because they've worked for X-number of years, doesn't mean they're competent.

And it's funny how AHTD is a separate thing from the state government.

It sucks that this will be buried under Texas stuff, but it happens!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on November 06, 2016, 01:44:20 PM
Churchwell is a good engineer. He is competent.

Bentonville and Rogers did collaborate on the exit's design. As part of the deal, 3 miles of US 71B in Rogers will become a city street

I'm not sure why you would think they didn't collaborate
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on November 26, 2016, 07:01:51 PM
Churchwell is a good engineer. He is competent.

Bentonville and Rogers did collaborate on the exit's design. As part of the deal, 3 miles of US 71B in Rogers will become a city street

West Walnut, I'm guessing?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: yakra on November 27, 2016, 01:11:42 AM
Will it lose the 71B designation?
Or, can it keep it?
How does city vs state maint work in AR WRT numbered routes?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on November 27, 2016, 09:52:16 AM
Will it lose the 71B designation?
Or, can it keep it?
How does city vs state maint work in AR WRT numbered routes?

There is precedent for AHTD turning highways over to local municipalities.Usually it becomes a city street or county road with no state designation. Bus US 62 in Rogers, AR was turned back to the city several years ago and AR 12 rerouted.

Many times, it's after AHTD improves a highway, AR 112/ SE J St in Bentonville being one example. The street was widened then turned back to the city.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on November 27, 2016, 01:52:01 PM
Will it lose the 71B designation?
Or, can it keep it?
How does city vs state maint work in AR WRT numbered routes?

I bet it will be truncated to some sort of state highway intersection, probably 8th St, and just become city street
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: The Ghostbuster on November 29, 2016, 07:14:47 PM
How big of a priority is Interstate 49 in Arkansas? And other than the Bella Vista Bypass, and the new segment between US 71 and AR 22 east of Fort Smith, are they any official plans to construct the other portions of Interstate 49 anytime in the near future?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on November 29, 2016, 10:45:36 PM
I would say BVB is an extremely high priority, especially the year Dick Trammel is Chairman of the Arkansas State Highway Commission. I would expect work to start on the Arkansas River Bridge within the next 10 years. Anything else will be after that project.

Smart money is on a bypass around Mena being the next major piece to fall into place after those. AHTD builds freeways by bypassing cities then connecting the bypasses with new terrain rural routes between
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on December 22, 2016, 07:59:48 PM
The Arkansas River Bridge project is moving slowly towards maybe happening but as always looking for a way to pay for it. AHTD is asking letters of interest for study.    Notice is hereby given that the Arkansas State Highway and Transportation Department (Department) is
seeking letters of interest from qualified firms for professional services for the 13.7-mile Future Interstate 49
segment between Highway 22 and Interstate 40 in Arkansas.
The required professional services will generally consist of the following tasks:
- Tolling feasibility and financial analyses
- Cost estimation based on a conceptual and preliminary design
- Environmental reassessment
- Recommendation for viable project delivery methods
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on December 23, 2016, 05:52:08 PM
Know how you can pay for this project and every other project the state could dream of? Become the first Southern state to legalize recreational cannabis and tax it.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on December 23, 2016, 06:16:10 PM
Know how you can pay for this project and every other project the state could dream of? Become the first Southern state to legalize recreational cannabis and tax it.

Also quit giving tax breaks to wealthy corporations that move to China or Mexico (Whirlpool, anyone?)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: wdcrft63 on December 23, 2016, 06:33:50 PM
Know how you can pay for this project and every other project the state could dream of? Become the first Southern state to legalize recreational cannabis and tax it.
North Carolina is building a statewide network of interstate highways. The money comes from the gas tax, which is 13.45¢ higher in NC than in Arkansas (according to http://taxfoundation.org/blog/state-gasoline-tax-rates-2016). I'm not arguing that Arkansas should do that; it's a decision for Arkansas folks to make. But it is possible to build roads if voters really want to have them.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on December 23, 2016, 09:14:54 PM
Know how you can pay for this project and every other project the state could dream of? Become the first Southern state to legalize recreational cannabis and tax it.
North Carolina is building a statewide network of interstate highways. The money comes from the gas tax, which is 13.45¢ higher in NC than in Arkansas (according to http://taxfoundation.org/blog/state-gasoline-tax-rates-2016). I'm not arguing that Arkansas should do that; it's a decision for Arkansas folks to make. But it is possible to build roads if voters really want to have them.
Arkansas wants better roads, but wants someone else to pay for them.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on December 24, 2016, 05:12:14 PM
That's just it. Stupid voters think roads just build themselves for free. The voters don't want to pay for anything. They view any tax as way too much tax. They don't ever bother thinking about what it costs to build a road, be it all the high priced materials, the high priced planning, construction, workers comp insurance on all that labor, etc., etc., etc. Far be it for these lazy idiots to bother themselves with details.

So, here in Oklahoma at least, we have a gas tax funding mechanism that hasn't budged since around 1993. I can guarantee a road costs way way more to build now than it did 23 years ago. There's actually a bunch of people who think the gasoline tax should be abolished. I wonder how these selfish morons would feel if their own jobs in the private sector got put under the microscope. How would these selfish morons feel if the "peanut gallery" demanded they get their pay cut in half or even be forced to work for free.

American voters are, on average, not the slightest bit plugged into reality.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US 41 on December 24, 2016, 06:37:04 PM
That's just it. Stupid voters think roads just build themselves for free. The voters don't want to pay for anything. They view any tax as way too much tax. They don't ever bother thinking about what it costs to build a road, be it all the high priced materials, the high priced planning, construction, workers comp insurance on all that labor, etc., etc., etc. Far be it for these lazy idiots to bother themselves with details.

So, here in Oklahoma at least, we have a gas tax funding mechanism that hasn't budged since around 1993. I can guarantee a road costs way way more to build now than it did 23 years ago. There's actually a bunch of people who think the gasoline tax should be abolished. I wonder how these selfish morons would feel if their own jobs in the private sector got put under the microscope. How would these selfish morons feel if the "peanut gallery" demanded they get their pay cut in half or even be forced to work for free.

American voters are, on average, not the slightest bit plugged into reality.

Actually I don't think people have a problem with paying taxes. They just get sick of their money being "wasted". If the gas tax actually went back to the roads rather than in some general fund, then I don't think people would be complaining (as much).
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on December 24, 2016, 07:13:00 PM
That's just it. Stupid voters think roads just build themselves for free. The voters don't want to pay for anything. They view any tax as way too much tax. They don't ever bother thinking about what it costs to build a road, be it all the high priced materials, the high priced planning, construction, workers comp insurance on all that labor, etc., etc., etc. Far be it for these lazy idiots to bother themselves with details.

So, here in Oklahoma at least, we have a gas tax funding mechanism that hasn't budged since around 1993. I can guarantee a road costs way way more to build now than it did 23 years ago. There's actually a bunch of people who think the gasoline tax should be abolished. I wonder how these selfish morons would feel if their own jobs in the private sector got put under the microscope. How would these selfish morons feel if the "peanut gallery" demanded they get their pay cut in half or even be forced to work for free.

American voters are, on average, not the slightest bit plugged into reality.

Actually I don't think people have a problem with paying taxes. They just get sick of their money being "wasted". If the gas tax actually went back to the roads rather than in some general fund, then I don't think people would be complaining (as much).

Little Rock and NWA get the bulk of highway revenue while the rest of the state suffers and the governor refuses to raise taxes to fix the roads.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: jbnv on December 24, 2016, 11:32:00 PM
Little Rock and NWA get the bulk of highway revenue while the rest of the state suffers and the governor refuses to raise taxes to fix the roads.

It's the governor's job to set taxes? In my state, the legislative branch does that. But maybe Arkansas is different.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on December 24, 2016, 11:41:15 PM
Little Rock and NWA get the bulk of highway revenue while the rest of the state suffers and the governor refuses to raise taxes to fix the roads.

It's the governor's job to set taxes? In my state, the legislative branch does that. But maybe Arkansas is different.

Highway revenues goes to the general fund. The entire state budget is set by the General Assembly. A gas tax increase wouldn't 100% go to AHTD unless it was a different mechanism
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US 41 on December 25, 2016, 09:10:17 AM
Little Rock and NWA get the bulk of highway revenue while the rest of the state suffers and the governor refuses to raise taxes to fix the roads.

It's the governor's job to set taxes? In my state, the legislative branch does that. But maybe Arkansas is different.

Highway revenues goes to the general fund. The entire state budget is set by the General Assembly. A gas tax increase wouldn't 100% go to AHTD unless it was a different mechanism

My point exactly. Raising the gas tax almost does nothing for roads. Most of the money will just get spent elsewhere.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: compdude787 on December 25, 2016, 01:42:27 PM
Little Rock and NWA get the bulk of highway revenue while the rest of the state suffers and the governor refuses to raise taxes to fix the roads.

It's the governor's job to set taxes? In my state, the legislative branch does that. But maybe Arkansas is different.

Highway revenues goes to the general fund. The entire state budget is set by the General Assembly. A gas tax increase wouldn't 100% go to AHTD unless it was a different mechanism

My point exactly. Raising the gas tax almost does nothing for roads. Most of the money will just get spent elsewhere.

Well, that's really dumb. Most states don't have the gas tax go into the general fund. In Washington, the gas tax only funds the DOT.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on December 25, 2016, 02:45:15 PM
Little Rock and NWA get the bulk of highway revenue while the rest of the state suffers and the governor refuses to raise taxes to fix the roads.

It's the governor's job to set taxes? In my state, the legislative branch does that. But maybe Arkansas is different.

Highway revenues goes to the general fund. The entire state budget is set by the General Assembly. A gas tax increase wouldn't 100% go to AHTD unless it was a different mechanism

My point exactly. Raising the gas tax almost does nothing for roads. Most of the money will just get spent elsewhere.

Well, that's really dumb. Most states don't have the gas tax go into the general fund. In Washington, the gas tax only funds the DOT.

This is Arkansas: everyone wants a piece of the pie, especially Wal-Mart
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on December 25, 2016, 05:15:25 PM
Little Rock and NWA get the bulk of highway revenue while the rest of the state suffers and the governor refuses to raise taxes to fix the roads.

It's the governor's job to set taxes? In my state, the legislative branch does that. But maybe Arkansas is different.

Highway revenues goes to the general fund. The entire state budget is set by the General Assembly. A gas tax increase wouldn't 100% go to AHTD unless it was a different mechanism

My point exactly. Raising the gas tax almost does nothing for roads. Most of the money will just get spent elsewhere.

Well, that's really dumb. Most states don't have the gas tax go into the general fund. In Washington, the gas tax only funds the DOT.

This is Arkansas: everyone wants a piece of the pie, especially Wal-Mart

Which brings us full circle to a point I made in another thread: has anyone in the Wal-Mart organization or even the Walton family expressed any interest in the completion of I-49 (first, in reference to the missing Bella Vista link into MO, and, second, Ft. Smith to Texarkana)?  Or do they not see any benefit to themselves from either or both of these projects?  If anyone more in tune with attitudes at Wal-Mart HQ, or manifestations of any previous transportation policy-related activities on their part, please speak up!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on December 25, 2016, 05:29:36 PM

Which brings us full circle to a point I made in another thread: has anyone in the Wal-Mart organization or even the Walton family expressed any interest in the completion of I-49 (first, in reference to the missing Bella Vista link into MO, and, second, Ft. Smith to Texarkana)?  Or do they not see any benefit to themselves from either or both of these projects?  If anyone more in tune with attitudes at Wal-Mart HQ, or manifestations of any previous transportation policy-related activities on their part, please speak up!

I've not heard much in Public, but the original I-540/I-49 corridor up the mountain was built with Wal-Mart in mind (per Bobby Hopper).

Wal-Mart also persuaded AHTD to build them their own exit on I-49.

Then there's the regional cargo airport.

So I am sure Wal-Mart is pushing, but not much is being said in public.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on December 25, 2016, 05:45:40 PM
Besides, Walmart has distribution centers scattered hither and yon. I don't think I-49 makes much of a difference to them one way or another. They became a mega-giant while US 71 was the main route to the world, after all.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on December 25, 2016, 05:54:03 PM
Besides, Walmart has distribution centers scattered hither and yon. I don't think I-49 makes much of a difference to them one way or another. They became a mega-giant while US 71 was the main route to the world, after all.

As did Tyson and JB Hunt
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: wdcrft63 on December 25, 2016, 06:10:05 PM
Little Rock and NWA get the bulk of highway revenue while the rest of the state suffers and the governor refuses to raise taxes to fix the roads.

It's the governor's job to set taxes? In my state, the legislative branch does that. But maybe Arkansas is different.

Highway revenues goes to the general fund. The entire state budget is set by the General Assembly. A gas tax increase wouldn't 100% go to AHTD unless it was a different mechanism

My point exactly. Raising the gas tax almost does nothing for roads. Most of the money will just get spent elsewhere.

Well, that's really dumb. Most states don't have the gas tax go into the general fund. In Washington, the gas tax only funds the DOT.
Interesting discussion. A couple of additional comments about the NC gas tax:
(1) NCDOT maintains the secondary roads in all counties, so it's responsible for all the roads outside city limits. This is one reason the NC gas tax is fairly high, but it's also one reason why localities and legislators (usually) don't want to see it cut: it would cut road maintenance in everyone's district.
(2) The legislature fights all the time over how to allocate the funds (rural vs. urban, freeways vs. primary highways vs. secondary highways).
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: codyg1985 on December 25, 2016, 07:33:04 PM
Little Rock and NWA get the bulk of highway revenue while the rest of the state suffers and the governor refuses to raise taxes to fix the roads.

It's the governor's job to set taxes? In my state, the legislative branch does that. But maybe Arkansas is different.

Highway revenues goes to the general fund. The entire state budget is set by the General Assembly. A gas tax increase wouldn't 100% go to AHTD unless it was a different mechanism

My point exactly. Raising the gas tax almost does nothing for roads. Most of the money will just get spent elsewhere.

Well, that's really dumb. Most states don't have the gas tax go into the general fund. In Washington, the gas tax only funds the DOT.

In Alabama the revenue goes into the general fund.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on December 26, 2016, 09:27:50 AM
Little Rock and NWA get the bulk of highway revenue while the rest of the state suffers and the governor refuses to raise taxes to fix the roads.

It's the governor's job to set taxes? In my state, the legislative branch does that. But maybe Arkansas is different.

Highway revenues goes to the general fund. The entire state budget is set by the General Assembly. A gas tax increase wouldn't 100% go to AHTD unless it was a different mechanism

My point exactly. Raising the gas tax almost does nothing for roads. Most of the money will just get spent elsewhere.

Well, that's really dumb. Most states don't have the gas tax go into the general fund. In Washington, the gas tax only funds the DOT.

That said, that's how it is. And it won't be changing any time soon. A certain percent of the gas tax is earmarked to fund the Department of Finance and Administration, Dept of Human Services (iirc, or a similar agency), and other non-revenue state agencies. This means a few penny increase will bloat these agencies' budgets unless the mechanism is changed. Also, the variation in fuel usage (ie decreasing per mile driven) impacts several agencies, not just AHTD. Arkansas voters did authorize a 10 year sales tax increase in 2011 for highways though

Arkansas did realize this wisdom for airports. The airport fuel tax and user fees are entirely dedicated to aviation.

Arkansas has a long, complex, and confusing history with its highways. Honestly we are lucky we haven't had any major scandals
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on December 27, 2016, 08:09:13 AM
Besides, Walmart has distribution centers scattered hither and yon. I don't think I-49 makes much of a difference to them one way or another. They became a mega-giant while US 71 was the main route to the world, after all.

As did Tyson and JB Hunt

We've seen, tragically, a lot of abandoned (and pulled up, and often forgotten) railroads.  How many abandoned interstates are there?

You all are right in that WM, Tyson and JBH didn't need I-49 to become successful.  But a completed I-49 Arkansas (along with a finished I-69 Texas) won't make them or NWA any weaker, I reckon.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on December 27, 2016, 11:23:46 AM
In light of just how expensive and difficult it has become to build roads (much less even maintain them) I can't imagine a more stupid thing than allowing gas tax revenue to go into a state's general fund.

If infrastructure costs keep creeping up and up like they've been doing and we see no reality check from lawmakers on properly funding roads via fuel taxes then that will force the funding to come from other methods, namely a whole lot more toll gates. And not just on super highways either. Years from now I can see various towns and cities putting up their own toll tag readers on their busiest intersections and spreading it from there.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: dfwmapper on December 30, 2016, 10:51:08 PM
Years from now I can see various towns and cities putting up their own toll tag readers on their busiest intersections and spreading it from there.
I would imagine that if that started to happen, voters would follow Texas's lead and outlaw it. In Texas, tolls are only permitted newly-constructed capacity. Any existing free lanes must remain free, with tolls only applying to new express lanes inside existing freeways, new freeways inside existing surface highways (which become continuous frontage roads), or new ramps bypassing stoplight-controlled intersections.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on December 31, 2016, 12:32:06 AM
Something has to give. It's painfully obvious voters don't want any gasoline tax increases. They don't want toll gates erected either. Nevertheless simple math won't ever care what anyone wants. Math is just math. Voters have to pay for this stuff somehow. None of it is free.

The price on so many things in life keeps getting higher, be it cars, housing, cable, etc. Road building costs keep rising higher and higher and higher. Yet the voters are living in some kind of fantasy world where they think a 23 year old level of gas tax is way more than enough to pay for all these infrastructure projects. They flippantly assume government employees and policy makers are just wasting their tax money if they can't figure out a way to pay for this stuff. The situation is just as stupid as expecting a minimum wage employee at McDonald's to afford a 3,000 square foot house and $60,000 SUV.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Rick Powell on December 31, 2016, 02:33:41 AM
In light of just how expensive and difficult it has become to build roads (much less even maintain them) I can't imagine a more stupid thing than allowing gas tax revenue to go into a state's general fund.

IL, which had a dedicated road fund, often had annual budgets that siphoned off funds for non-transportation purposes. The voters actually amended the state constitution to prevent diversions in the future with approximately a 4 to 1 favorable vote this past November. It seems desperate to have to enshrine transportation taxes in the state constitution, but that's the level of frustration we are experiencing now.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: cjk374 on December 31, 2016, 09:25:49 AM
http://www.nola.com/politics

Louisiana has a highway trust fund. It was established...& voter approved...in the 80s under then-governor Buddy Roemer. Apparently it has been raided many times to fund the state police.

Note: not sure how old this article is. At least 14 months or more.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on December 31, 2016, 02:35:30 PM
Even if a state can manage to cordon off its gas tax funds via language in the constitution the old math problem still remains. Basically my earlier analogy about the McDonald's employee's paycheck is such that he was being mugged on the way home after work for his money by other government gangs. Now the employee actually has his entire minimum wage paycheck to use to attempt funding an extravagant life style.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on January 13, 2017, 12:43:36 PM
This Commentary (http://www.nwaonline.com/news/2017/jan/12/ted-talley-a-vital-connection-20170112/) is interesting, not because it advocates finishing I-49 in Arkansas, but because it includes the following observations: (1) Dick Trammel, a big booster of I-49 in NWA, doesn't display the boosterism to say that I-49 will be finished during (presumably a person in his sixties) a lifetime, there is no one on the Highway Board from southwestern Arkansas, and he looks forward to the growth it could bring in and around Mena:

Quote
Hardly a day passes without an updated status in this newspaper about Interstate 49 road work in Northwest Arkansas. Laid end to end, the column inches devoted to the roadway over recent years might well stretch from here to Shreveport, a critical, long-term connecting point between Kansas City and New Orleans for the highway. Sadly a paper ribbon would not a highway make.
At a Bentonville concert some months ago, Arkansas State Highway Commission Chairman Dick Trammel attended, as did I. During intermission I buttonholed him and humbly asked if Interstate 49 from Fort Smith to Texarkana (and on to Shreveport and world seaports beyond) might be completed in my lifetime.
His eyes softened. He responded quietly and apologetically: No.

That's a pity. Not for me and my ilk -- numerous Gulf Coast expatriates God has blessed with relocations to this Ozarks Shangri-La reached, as in epic lore, through a mountain niche passageway. Former Louisianans can deal with the inconvenience of driving deeply south now and again. We know rewards await at the end of a trek down two-laned U.S. 71 or 65: Mother's shrimp Creole. sister's oyster turkey dressing, and, in season, satsumas picked fresh from a neighbor's backyard trees.
No,the pity is for the communities in the western third of Arkansas between Fort Smith and Texarkana. Their basic link to the world is old U.S. 71, of similar curvy quality as our formerly solitary link to Interstate 40 via 71. That drive was scenic back in the day, except when the scenery became the back of a Wal-Mart semi groaning its way through hairpins to the Bentonville distribution center. Similarly, south of Fort Smith on U.S. 71, the road trip game is still estimating board feet on the logging truck you're stuck behind as it lumbers down to the paper mill in Ashdown. Lest I be tagged as a snarky city dude making fun of a rural highway, my concern is these communities are disconnected from Northwest Arkansas' tachometer-red-lining economic engine. And for the sake of our third of the state over here by Oklahoma, and for the sake of the state in general, this transportation need should be addressed sooner than later.
Just look at what completing an interstate highway has done for southwest Missouri. As U.S. 71 was upgraded section by section from Kansas City to Joplin and Pineville, new businesses began opening: a gas station here, a motel there and a dollar store over there. And for those fearing the McDonald County/Missouri Ozarks ambiance that inspired TV's Beverly Hillbillies might be endangered, it's still there, not far from the concrete ribbon's progress. The same could be said one day for stretches near Mena in the Ouachitas.

I am befuddled. Why the lack of priority placed on this? It's an important piece of highway directly linking the state's second-largest city, Fort Smith, to its fifth-largest city, Texarkana. OK, that's if you also include the slightly larger Texas-side population of the split city -- but I'm talking business markets here, not provincialism. And speaking of provincialism, it's curious that among the current Arkansas highway board members, there is no representation from the state's southwest quadrant, the part that would gain most from expanding U.S. 71 to four lanes of interstate down there.I'm neither a civil engineer nor a public sector finance expert. But there's something wrong with this 21st century picture, illustrated by recalling a famous highway project early in the last century. If infamous Louisiana Gov. Huey Long could complete most of the 156 miles of Airline Highway connecting Baton Rouge and New Orleans through the muck, marshland and depths of the Great Depression, should we not expect similar results on terra firma across the 156 miles between Greenwood and Ogden?Take heart, dear local readers, as you play dodge'em cars through orange traffic barrels and temporary lane changes on Interstate 49, awaiting your turn at the temporary Bella Vista traffic carousel. We prosperous ones already have our brass ring, receiving a gracious plenty of highway project dollars. Not so Arkansans two hours to our south. No matter. Someday soon our rush hour will be reduced by 10 minutes or so.
Yet I have hope. My parents and grandparents have all lived within putting distance of 100 years old. If my genes provide likewise, then just maybe I'll last long enough so my Baton Rouge granddaughter will have an easy drive up here for Papa Ted's funeral.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: jbnv on January 13, 2017, 05:56:11 PM
Quote
If infamous Louisiana Gov. Huey Long could complete most of the 156 miles of Airline Highway connecting Baton Rouge and New Orleans through the muck, marshland and depths of the Great Depression, should we not expect similar results on terra firma across the 156 miles between Greenwood and Ogden?

Airline Highway is only 116 miles in total length. Much of that length is not through muck or marshland. And that "terra firma" is rather mountainous, with lots of really-hard rocks that will have to be broken and moved.  :pan:
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Anthony_JK on January 13, 2017, 08:53:30 PM
Quote
If infamous Louisiana Gov. Huey Long could complete most of the 156 miles of Airline Highway connecting Baton Rouge and New Orleans through the muck, marshland and depths of the Great Depression, should we not expect similar results on terra firma across the 156 miles between Greenwood and Ogden?

Airline Highway is only 116 miles in total length. Much of that length is not through muck or marshland. And that "terra firma" is rather mountainous, with lots of really-hard rocks that will have to be broken and moved.  :pan:

Wouldn't a better analogy be Interstate 10 between BTR and NOLA?? That had to be elevated through some swampland and the Morganza Spillway, right?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: jbnv on January 14, 2017, 12:42:27 PM
Wouldn't a better analogy be Interstate 10 between BTR and NOLA?? That had to be elevated through some swampland and the Morganza Spillway, right?

Given the choice of building freeways through swamps or through mountains, I'd take the swamps. I would think that sinking pilings into swampy muck would be easier than blasting and moving solid rock.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on January 14, 2017, 04:03:42 PM
I'm not so sure building really long bridges is easier than blasting through mountainside rock these days. The prices of concrete, steel, etc. has made bridge building ridiculously expensive in the United States. 20 or 30 years ago building a new Interstate crossing over the Arkansas River in Fort Smith would not have been a big deal at all. Now it's a project weighing upwards of half a billion dollars. If I-10 had to be re-built between New Orleans and Baton Rouge or between Baton Rouge and Lake Charles those long bridges could easily cost billions of dollars. It's like the taxpayers are writing a blank check to construction companies and materials suppliers these days.
 :rolleyes:
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on January 14, 2017, 08:56:42 PM
I'm not so sure building really long bridges is easier than blasting through mountainside rock these days. The prices of concrete, steel, etc. has made bridge building ridiculously expensive in the United States. 20 or 30 years ago building a new Interstate crossing over the Arkansas River in Fort Smith would not have been a big deal at all. Now it's a project weighing upwards of half a billion dollars. If I-10 had to be re-built between New Orleans and Baton Rouge or between Baton Rouge and Lake Charles those long bridges could easily cost billions of dollars. It's like the taxpayers are writing a blank check to construction companies and materials suppliers these days.
 :rolleyes:

BUT, they don't want to pay more in taxes to cover it.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on January 14, 2017, 09:06:14 PM
Out of control construction cost inflation and no one wanting any tax hikes whatsoever equals a whole lot of infrastructure not even getting maintained much less hardly anything new being built.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on January 27, 2017, 12:05:17 AM
Just need a grant to keep I 49 in NWA moving towards completion
Bella Vista bypass a priority for Missouri
By Ron Wood
Posted: January 26, 2017 at 1:08 a.m.
231
SPRINGDALE -- Missouri Department of Transportation officials said finishing a missing portion of the Bella Vista Bypass is their top priority -- they just need $32.2 million to do the four-lane section between Pineville, Mo., and the state line.

Tim Conklin with the Northwest Arkansas Regional Planning Commission and Dick Trammel, Arkansas Highway Commission chairman, met with Missouri officials Friday in Springfield, Mo., to discuss projects, Conklin said.

"It's the number one priority for MODOT Southwest District," he said.

Missouri has acquired the right of way, done an environmental study, designed the road and has about $18.4 million set aside for the $50.8 million project, Conklin told regional planners Wednesday. It needs $32.3 million more for demolition of structures in the right of way, moving utilities and construction.

Missouri officials, in a summary of the project, note the environmental study may require an update and could take up to a year.

Missouri making progress on its end is important because Arkansas expects to open the two-lane portion of the Bella Vista Bypass between Bentonville and Benton County 34 north of Hiwasse this spring, Trammel said.

"I think you'll enjoy those two lanes when they open in April," he said.

Arkansas has bought right of way between the current end of the road and 2.3 miles away at the state line for $26 million and has the money to do two lanes along that stretch, Trammel said.

"When we passed our half-cent sales tax for highways, we were sure when we got there, they'd get there," Trammel said. "The minute they start their four lanes, we'll start ours."

The last part of the project in Arkansas consists of interchange improvements at I-49 and U.S. 71 in Bentonville, where the Bella Vista Bypass heads west. That work is planned for 2020 and expected to cost $43.1 million.

Completion of the Bella Vista Bypass to interstate standards would fill the last gap on I-49 between Fort Smith and Kansas City, Mo.

Conklin said the second priority for Missouri Transportation Southwest officials is improving intersections on U.S. 71 on the north side of the state line in McDonald County.

NW News on 01/26/2017
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Henry on January 27, 2017, 10:02:47 AM
About time they finished the thing across the border! The Ft. Smith-Texarkana section is going to be an even bigger challenge, given the wooded landscape that gives environmentalists reason to oppose it, but hopefully it will be completed eventually.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on January 27, 2017, 12:08:48 PM
The Alma to Barling segment in the Fort Smith Area across the Arkansas River is the biggest stumbling block to hurdle. I'm not sure why that segment has to cost nearly half a billion dollars. They're not sending giant cargo ships and super tankers up the river through there. I'm under the impression the state of Arkansas wants to build that segment of I-49 before it has any other parts of the Texarkana to Fort Smith route built.

Bypasses around Mena and Waldron are planned, but they're probably going to go nowhere until the Fort Smith I-49 projects are finished.

I think Arkansas will be probably see hell freeze over before Texas ever builds its little segment of I-49. IMHO, they need to revise the path of I-49 in the Red River area. Keep all of it in Arkansas, that way it can at least have some hope of ever being completed. There is plenty of undeveloped space just east of the existing US-59 bridge over the Red River.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: codyg1985 on January 27, 2017, 12:41:54 PM
The Alma to Barling segment in the Fort Smith Area across the Arkansas River is the biggest stumbling block to hurdle. I'm not sure why that segment has to cost nearly half a billion dollars. They're not sending giant cargo ships and super tankers up the river through there. I'm under the impression the state of Arkansas wants to build that segment of I-49 before it has any other parts of the Texarkana to Fort Smith route built.

I am guessing it isn't just the bridge over the Arkansas River but also the amount of wetlands and flood plans that the route will need to pass through.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: The Ghostbuster on January 27, 2017, 05:28:59 PM
I assume the Missouri section will also be built as a two-lane facility on a four-lane alignment, right?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on January 28, 2017, 12:55:40 AM
I'm under the impression Missouri will wait until they have funding to do the entire Interstate job down the Arkansas border all at once. I don't think they're going to piece-meal it.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on January 28, 2017, 07:55:55 PM
That is what they have made statements on that it is cheaper to do it all in one construction project. Now when the section from Hwy 71 to Hwy 72 is finished sometime this year does that mean AHTD will not do anymore work on the bypass until Missouri starts there section. So if Missouri doesn't come up with extra money the work on Bella Vista bypass will stop until 2020. That is when they have it scheduled. Then Arkansas has to finish there last section and still have to build additional 2 lanes to make it Interstate standard. Some way the 2 states need to get a fast lane grant to finish this.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on January 29, 2017, 02:36:12 AM
I think Arkansas was just trying to save a little money. They have already been building the most costly parts of their portion of the Belle Vista bypass -namely the exit bridges and ramps, securing the overall right of way and completing a bunch of the grading work. If Missouri can get its act together and finally start building its portion of I-49 down to the Arkansas border I have no doubt Arkansas will get that second carriageway built pretty fast.

On the other hand, when one considers the crazy rate of price inflation with construction materials Arkansas might have saved more money in the long term by building all four lanes of the Belle Vista bypass at once. It might have done more to light a fire under the butts of the policy makers in Missouri as well.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on January 29, 2017, 10:29:36 AM
Building all 4 lanes of it with zero matching progress in Missouri would've been a huge risk. There really were zero signs of progress from the Missouri side for quite a few years now
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: codyg1985 on January 30, 2017, 07:43:22 AM
That is what they have made statements on that it is cheaper to do it all in one construction project. Now when the section from Hwy 71 to Hwy 72 is finished sometime this year does that mean AHTD will not do anymore work on the bypass until Missouri starts there section. So if Missouri doesn't come up with extra money the work on Bella Vista bypass will stop until 2020. That is when they have it scheduled. Then Arkansas has to finish there last section and still have to build additional 2 lanes to make it Interstate standard. Some way the 2 states need to get a fast lane grant to finish this.

From what I understand AHTD will not proceed with building to the state line until MoDOT can come up with the money to finish its portion.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on January 30, 2017, 05:51:20 PM
That is what they have made statements on that it is cheaper to do it all in one construction project. Now when the section from Hwy 71 to Hwy 72 is finished sometime this year does that mean AHTD will not do anymore work on the bypass until Missouri starts there section. So if Missouri doesn't come up with extra money the work on Bella Vista bypass will stop until 2020. That is when they have it scheduled. Then Arkansas has to finish there last section and still have to build additional 2 lanes to make it Interstate standard. Some way the 2 states need to get a fast lane grant to finish this.

From what I understand AHTD will not proceed with building to the state line until MoDOT can come up with the money to finish its portion.

They will also not 4-Lane 49 until Missouri starts construction.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on January 31, 2017, 12:40:07 AM
Missouri's set to start their (finishing) side of I-49 in 2020.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on March 01, 2017, 12:57:43 AM
Scott Bennett's "Wish list" for Governor Hutchinson and President Trump: the I-69 Mississippi River Bridge and the I-49 Arkansas River Bridge:  http://www.arkansasbusiness.com/article/115718/fort-smith-great-river-bridges-comprise-arkansas-wish-list
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on March 01, 2017, 01:13:54 AM
Scott Bennett's "Wish list" for Governor Hutchinson and President Trump: the I-69 Mississippi River Bridge and the I-49 Arkansas River Bridge:  http://www.arkansasbusiness.com/article/115718/fort-smith-great-river-bridges-comprise-arkansas-wish-list

If just one of those -- preferably the I-49 crossing -- actually comes to fruition in the next 5 years it'll be nothing short of miraculous!  While this particular administration is proving adept at giving lip service to infrastructure issues, trying to pry actual funding for projects is likely to be problematic, given the short shrift for domestic outlays that has been proclaimed.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: GreenLanternCorps on March 01, 2017, 07:15:57 AM
I'm a little surprised they have not done more design and prep work on the I-49 bridge.  They just built the Southern approach to it and it is the less expensive of the two bridges.

It seems like it would be the easier sell to get federal funding.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Henry on March 01, 2017, 09:41:43 AM
I'm a little surprised they have not done more design and prep work on the I-49 bridge.  The just built the Southern approach to itand it is the less expensive of the two bridges.

It seems like it would be the easier sell to get federal funding.
Not to mention it would jump-start completing the link between Texarkana and Ft. Smith!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: The Ghostbuster on March 01, 2017, 04:19:32 PM
Does anyone think Bennett will get his wish granted for those Interstate river bridges?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: codyg1985 on March 02, 2017, 07:21:10 AM
Does anyone think Bennett will get his wish granted for those Interstate river bridges?

I imagine it depends on how shovel ready both projects are. I certainly hope that the I-49 bridge has a higher priority. I would imagine that would be first, followed by then I-69 bridge.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on March 02, 2017, 12:56:12 PM
I think the I-49 bridge over the Arkansas River into Fort Chaffee will have a far more immediate positive impact to the regional economy than the Great River Bridge over the Mississippi. Various towns around the Fort Smith area would have more efficient access to the growing Northwest Arkansas region.

The I-49 bridge over the Arkansas River is arguably the most difficult, costly part of the I-49 segment between Fort Smith and Texarkana. Right now it's a road block to further I-49 development. Getting that hurdle out of the way would improve the prospects of getting I-49 bypasses around Mansfield, Waldron, Mena, DeQueen and Ashdown funded and built. Then the rest of the corridor could be fleshed out over time.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on March 02, 2017, 08:03:08 PM
I agree, I-49 was priority before I-69 and Louisiana is working on I-49 south and I don't see them really interested in I-69 also Texas is working on the south end of I-69 . So if Arkansas works on I-49 until those states get serious we need to work I-49. not enough money to do both interstates at the time. Bennett needs to quit thinking about Santa Claus.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Henry on March 03, 2017, 09:30:13 AM
I agree, I-49 was priority before I-69 and Louisiana is working on I-49 south and I don't see them really interested in I-69 also Texas is working on the south end of I-69 . So if Arkansas works on I-49 until those states get serious we need to work I-49. not enough money to do both interstates at the time. Bennett needs to quit thinking about Santa Claus.
By all means, I-49 must be completed first before I-69 can get worked on.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on March 04, 2017, 02:17:59 AM
I agree, I-49 was priority before I-69 and Louisiana is working on I-49 south and I don't see them really interested in I-69 also Texas is working on the south end of I-69 . So if Arkansas works on I-49 until those states get serious we need to work I-49. not enough money to do both interstates at the time. Bennett needs to quit thinking about Santa Claus.
By all means, I-49 must be completed first before I-69 can get worked on.

Since the Monticello I-69 bypass is well under way (albeit as an initial 2-lane facility on a 4-lane ROW), and the intersecting AR 530 N-S connector, which gets its federal financing share via its inclusion in the HPC 18 portfolio, is likewise well on its way toward completion in a similar fashion, it could be safely said that the "nose is through the door" in regards to the AR mileage of I-69.  However, both of those projects could be characterized as in-state local-impact SIU's.  The 530 corridor was an "add-on" to the original HPC 18 description; added to procure federal funding for a long-sought high-speed connector from Little Rock and Pine Bluff to the "downstate" area -- the presence of the multistate I-69 corridor was simply a useful mechanism to get that job done!  And since the N-S funding ended at the I-69 corridor near Monticello (and didn't include anything south of there), that E-W nascent facility could be said to be, at least for the time being, a dispersal/collection system for AR 530.  It's notable that Bennett & company seem to have concentrated their I-69 proposal efforts on the section from Monticello eastward to the planned foot of the Great River Bridge; west of Monticello is where the corridor veers southwest toward the state line -- and the Shreveport area.   Since LA doesn't seem to be in any hurry to finalize I-69 plans outside their own Shreveport SE loop "SIU", it's more than likely that AR is focusing their attention on taking care of corridor segments that address local needs rather than seek cooperation from LA on the I-69 segment crossing the state line.  Until the time that LA makes the completion of I-69 a priority, it's unlikely that AR will pay much if any attention to anything SW of the present Monticello project -- and what's being planned east of that project will likely retain its 2-lane initial characteristics.  With any I-69-related work maintaining this limited scope, it is certainly likely that I-49 will be well along the way to completion before any portion of I-69 within the state even looks like a full-blown Interstate.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: jbnv on March 04, 2017, 10:22:42 AM
Since LA doesn't seem to be in any hurry to finalize I-69 plans outside their own Shreveport SE loop "SIU", it's more than likely that AR is focusing their attention on taking care of corridor segments that address local needs rather than seek cooperation from LA on the I-69 segment crossing the state line.  Until the time that LA makes the completion of I-69 a priority, it's unlikely that AR will pay much if any attention to anything SW of the present Monticello project -- and what's being planned east of that project will likely retain its 2-lane initial characteristics.  With any I-69-related work maintaining this limited scope, it is certainly likely that I-49 will be well along the way to completion before any portion of I-69 within the state even looks like a full-blown Interstate.

I-69 is far down Louisiana's priority list. After I-49, we have upgrading the I-10/12 corridor and fixing the I-10 cluster in Baton Rouge. People are talking about I-14, which would connect Fort Polk and Alexandria to Texas. I-d even put upgrading the US 165 corridor on that list since that's a cross-state corridor that serves three of the state's metro areas. The only way that I see I-69 being a priority for Louisiana is if Texas and Arkansas move forward. And Texas has little incentive to bring I-69 to Logansport.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on March 04, 2017, 02:49:22 PM
Texas has little incentive to bring I-69 to Logansport.

Too true.  Texas interests would seemingly be more than satisfied if I-69 were to essentially terminate around Tenaha and its traffic segue onto I-369 north to Marshall and Texarkana.  Houston-Shreveport traffic could just then head east on I-20 to their destination -- all while keeping traffic within Texas and presumably dropping $$ at TX truck stops and convenience stores.  They don't call them SIU's for nothing! 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on March 05, 2017, 03:06:55 PM
Speaking of Arkansas I-49, from today's ArDemGaz, NWA edition:

Highway department to show Wedington, I-49 plans Thursday (http://www.nwaonline.com/news/2017/mar/05/highway-department-to-show-wedington-i-/?latest)

(http://media.arkansasonline.com/img/photos/2016/07/05/104915804_AN-HIGHWAY-PLANS-003_CMYK_t598.jpg?b7052f07a6139e7088ebc43100469802b2560d37)

(I-49 in Springdale looking north toward Don Tyson Parkway.  A potential EIGHT lane interstate?  No wonder 2 of the 3 Fort Smith/NWA stations have moved their main ops from FSM to NWA...now just watch what happens to FSM when I-49 is completed...)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on March 05, 2017, 10:20:19 PM

(I-49 in Springdale looking north toward Don Tyson Parkway.  A potential EIGHT lane interstate?  No wonder 2 of the 3 Fort Smith/NWA stations have moved their main ops from FSM to NWA...now just watch what happens to FSM when I-49 is completed...)

I've seen plans for an 8-lane interstate: it would likely require several businesses having to move, though Econo Lodge & Quality Inn would be no great loss, IMO.
 
Right now, 8-Lanes aren't needed since most drivers don't know how to use the far left lane. Knowing AHTD though, they will wait until it's urgent to widen the road again.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Tomahawkin on March 06, 2017, 12:10:28 AM
I said it 10 years ago, I 540/49 Should Have been 4 lanes both ways because of game day traffic , and even student traffic. Not to mention the area was getting crazy growth (In 2003-09 when I lived there) from students from Texas and the people who relocate from other areas of the country. I advocated 3 regular lanes and a HOV lane from Fayetteville to Bella Vista. They also need interstate lighting and Electronic/Commercial Billboards that you see in the city...
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Henry on March 06, 2017, 10:13:45 AM
Well, at least that's a start!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on March 06, 2017, 11:12:23 AM
I said it 10 years ago, I 540/49 Should Have been 4 lanes both ways because of game day traffic , and even student traffic. Not to mention the area was getting crazy growth (In 2003-09 when I lived there) from students from Texas and the people who relocate from other areas of the country. I advocated 3 regular lanes and a HOV lane from Fayetteville to Bella Vista. They also need interstate lighting and Electronic/Commercial Billboards that you see in the city...

I hate electronic billboards, especially at night.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on March 07, 2017, 12:51:33 AM
LED-based billboards are not bad for either daytime or nighttime viewing if they are configured properly and used properly. Both of those are gigantic IF's.

I design permanent signs and even a fair amount of billboard structures and ads that go on those structures. Many clients simply don't know what the hell they're doing when they want to run an ad on a billboard. They treat it like a phone book ad, cluttering the display with all sorts of information that will be instantly forgotten. The main purpose of billboard ads is to just reinforce brand identity. That's all. Make the message clean and simple as possible and it will be very effective. Most clients don't want to do that. They insist on loading the ad with phone numbers no one can write down while driving or numerical addresses no one can write down while driving. They want as much information on the board as possible even though the boards have only so many RGB LED pixel clusters available to resolve detail. Billboards are commonly 30' X 10' or 48' X 14'. That's huge. But when you're driving 60mph or 70mph that huge display suddenly becomes really freaking tiny and objects on the display will be legible for only a brief amount of time. The whole ad must be viewed in a glance. If the ad can't be viewed in an instant then the ad just plain SUCKS. And that pretty much sums it up for 90% of billboard ads. Most of them just plain SUCK.

The configuration side of it is even more of a boneheaded problem. Biggest issue: they don't install a solar cell that can automatically adjust the LED billboard between daytime and nighttime brightness. During bright sunlight hours the board needs to be running near 100% brightness. You only need a fraction of that at night. There's nothing like driving up on a LED-based billboard at night that is set to daytime brightness levels. It's like Close Encounters of the Third Kind come to life!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Tomahawkin on March 07, 2017, 09:29:40 PM
Random thought. Did they address the 412 interchange in Springdale? That area was hell when I lived there 12 years ago
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Henry on March 08, 2017, 09:15:24 AM
If there's one advantage to LED billboards, it's that they can show multiple ads at once, something that traditional billboards can't do.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on March 08, 2017, 06:05:37 PM
LED billboards can have a play list of many ads. Here in Oklahoma most of the boards have hold times of 8 seconds before switching to the next ad. Some towns, like Edmond, demand a 30 second hold time on any variable message sign. That sucks. Too long a message hold time ruins much of the value of having the LED display in the first place.

Some cities and town just ban these LED signs and billboards outright, which reminds me of some towns banning the use of neon in signs. I still love neon signs, especially big outdoor signs loaded up with it. These days with widespread gentrification the trend seems to be banning as many signs as possible and then going nuts with the landscaping along side the streets. The problem with making a commercial/retail district look like a gated country club community it can make it really difficult for customers to find a store or restaurant. Then businesses lose business over that crap. All the trees and bushes along the medians and edges of a street along with Draconian sign limitations make it very easy to drive past any intended point of interest. Relying on the smart phone GPS is not a great fall-back for various reasons. To me a city doesn't look like a city without some cool looking signs.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on March 08, 2017, 07:59:07 PM
LED billboards can have a play list of many ads. Here in Oklahoma most of the boards have hold times of 8 seconds before switching to the next ad. Some towns, like Edmond, demand a 30 second hold time on any variable message sign. That sucks. Too long a message hold time ruins much of the value of having the LED display in the first place.

Some cities and town just ban these LED signs and billboards outright, which reminds me of some towns banning the use of neon in signs. I still love neon signs, especially big outdoor signs loaded up with it. These days with widespread gentrification the trend seems to be banning as many signs as possible and then going nuts with the landscaping along side the streets. The problem with making a commercial/retail district look like a gated country club community it can make it really difficult for customers to find a store or restaurant. Then businesses lose business over that crap. All the trees and bushes along the medians and edges of a street along with Draconian sign limitations make it very easy to drive past any intended point of interest. Relying on the smart phone GPS is not a great fall-back for various reasons. To me a city doesn't look like a city without some cool looking signs.

Billboards are banned in Fayetteville and the 49-71 scenic loop (except Mountainburg)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: mvak36 on March 08, 2017, 08:32:27 PM
I am definitely in favor of lighting on the interstates in Arkansas. I hated driving at night there last time I went. I'm indifferent about billboards. I figure that's more of a municipality by municipality decision.


iPhone
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Henry on March 09, 2017, 09:54:20 AM
I am definitely in favor of lighting on the interstates in Arkansas. I hated driving at night there last time I went. I'm indifferent about billboards. I figure that's more of a municipality by municipality decision.


iPhone
At least put up high-masts at the interchanges, then work from there.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on March 11, 2017, 03:36:15 AM
Former Arkansas resident.

AHTD is very anti-roadway lighting. I never understood it, and fought against it.  Their policy is to let the local municipalities decide that, even in metro areas.  If it's an Interstate, why would a local town have jurisdiction?

It's funny, because I found a lot of discrepancies.  Take a look at Little Rock, and their Interstate system.  I remember reading the most Interstate miles per capita for a metro.

I hope AHTD is better... They were a disaster when I lived there, but were making progress.  They need to fix their lighting policy.





Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on March 11, 2017, 10:58:34 AM
Former Arkansas resident.

AHTD is very anti-roadway lighting. I never understood it, and fought against it.  Their policy is to let the local municipalities decide that, even in metro areas.  If it's an Interstate, why would a local town have jurisdiction?

It's funny, because I found a lot of discrepancies.  Take a look at Little Rock, and their Interstate system.  I remember reading the most Interstate miles per capita for a metro.

I hope AHTD is better... They were a disaster when I lived there, but were making progress.  They need to fix their lighting policy.




AHTD never seems to have much money, except for special projects like the Broadway Bridge, Little Rock and NWA get a lot attention, but everything else basically rots.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on March 11, 2017, 04:19:46 PM
Maybe the lack of lighting is about trying to save money on electricity bills.

Saving money on electricity bills was one theory I had about a situation here in Lawton at the complex I-44 interchange with Cache Road and 2nd Street. There are 11 high rise light towers in that interchange. The lamps in those towers are unique in that they put out white colored light instead of the usual amber colored light. This is the only freeway interchange I can think of that has lamps like that. Anyway, for the past few years the lights in several of those towers were turned off and burned out lamps in the other towers weren't replaced. I figured ODOT was pinching pennies. Just over the past couple or so weeks ODOT maintenance crews serviced the towers, bringing the dark ones back online one by one. There's still a tower or two with a lamp out here or there, but the lighting in that interchange is far brighter at night than it has been in years.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: codyg1985 on March 11, 2017, 07:14:01 PM
Maybe the lack of lighting is about trying to save money on electricity bills.

Saving money on electricity bills was one theory I had about a situation here in Lawton at the complex I-44 interchange with Cache Road and 2nd Street. There are 11 high rise light towers in that interchange. The lamps in those towers are unique in that they put out white colored light instead of the usual amber colored light. This is the only freeway interchange I can think of that has lamps like that. Anyway, for the past few years the lights in several of those towers were turned off and burned out lamps in the other towers weren't replaced. I figured ODOT was pinching pennies. Just over the past couple or so weeks ODOT maintenance crews serviced the towers, bringing the dark ones back online one by one. There's still a tower or two with a lamp out here or there, but the lighting in that interchange is far brighter at night than it has been in years.

Those brighter white lights may have been LED lights.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Scott5114 on March 12, 2017, 04:14:12 AM
Maybe the lack of lighting is about trying to save money on electricity bills.

Saving money on electricity bills was one theory I had about a situation here in Lawton at the complex I-44 interchange with Cache Road and 2nd Street. There are 11 high rise light towers in that interchange. The lamps in those towers are unique in that they put out white colored light instead of the usual amber colored light. This is the only freeway interchange I can think of that has lamps like that. Anyway, for the past few years the lights in several of those towers were turned off and burned out lamps in the other towers weren't replaced. I figured ODOT was pinching pennies. Just over the past couple or so weeks ODOT maintenance crews serviced the towers, bringing the dark ones back online one by one. There's still a tower or two with a lamp out here or there, but the lighting in that interchange is far brighter at night than it has been in years.

I'm not sure if it's the same in Lawton, but in Oklahoma City, the responsibility for maintaining freeway lighting is with...OG&E for some reason!! ODOT doesn't actually look for burned-out lights. I don't know if OG&E does, either, but they do accept reports from customers.

Talk about a weird policy.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: codyg1985 on March 12, 2017, 09:47:32 AM
Maybe the lack of lighting is about trying to save money on electricity bills.

Saving money on electricity bills was one theory I had about a situation here in Lawton at the complex I-44 interchange with Cache Road and 2nd Street. There are 11 high rise light towers in that interchange. The lamps in those towers are unique in that they put out white colored light instead of the usual amber colored light. This is the only freeway interchange I can think of that has lamps like that. Anyway, for the past few years the lights in several of those towers were turned off and burned out lamps in the other towers weren't replaced. I figured ODOT was pinching pennies. Just over the past couple or so weeks ODOT maintenance crews serviced the towers, bringing the dark ones back online one by one. There's still a tower or two with a lamp out here or there, but the lighting in that interchange is far brighter at night than it has been in years.

I'm not sure if it's the same in Lawton, but in Oklahoma City, the responsibility for maintaining freeway lighting is with...OG&E for some reason!! ODOT doesn't actually look for burned-out lights. I don't know if OG&E does, either, but they do accept reports from customers.

Talk about a weird policy.

In Alabama, I can think of two examples where municipalities or power companies are responsible for light maintenance. Here in Huntsville it is Huntsville Utilities. in Birmingham it is they city of Birmingham.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on March 12, 2017, 11:57:48 PM
Quote from: codyg1985
Those brighter white lights may have been LED lights.

I'm doubting it. The lamps in these particular high rise light towers have been white the whole time I've lived in the Lawton area, more than 20 years, which is well ahead of the advent of high intensity LED use in outdoor lighting, jumbotrons, etc.

Quote from: Scott5114
I'm not sure if it's the same in Lawton, but in Oklahoma City, the responsibility for maintaining freeway lighting is with...OG&E for some reason!! ODOT doesn't actually look for burned-out lights. I don't know if OG&E does, either, but they do accept reports from customers.

AEP/PSO run the power grid in the Lawton area. I could be wrong, but I'm almost certain the pickup trucks I saw parked by these towers when they were doing the maintenance work were ODOT trucks. I don't know who is getting the light bill for those towers. I would think the state would be paying for it since I-44 ROW is technically not city property. But then again ODOT wants the City of Lawton to pony up $600,000 to install a functional sidewalk on one of the old Gore Blvd bridges crossing I-44 (roughly half a $1.3 million estimate for the job). That's to help prevent more pedestrian deaths from people trying to jay-walk across the I-44 main lanes rather than use the bridges where no sidewalks are currently present. I wonder how much money the City of Norman is throwing in for its $20 million+ SPUI interchanges on I-35. So, with all that said, I guess it wouldn't surprise me if the City of Lawton was paying the light bill for those high rise towers on I-44 property.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Henry on March 13, 2017, 10:16:08 AM
Quote from: codyg1985
Those brighter white lights may have been LED lights.

I'm doubting it. The lamps in these particular high rise light towers have been white the whole time I've lived in the Lawton area, more than 20 years, which is well ahead of the advent of high intensity LED use in outdoor lighting, jumbotrons, etc.
So in all lilkelihood, they're metal halide lights? Of course, high-pressure sodium lights are the amber-colored ones.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on March 15, 2017, 12:45:14 PM
This TV video (http://5newsonline.com/2017/03/14/arkansas-house-resolution-pushes-for-future-i-49-completion/) reports that the Arkansas House of Representatives has passed a resolution that the completion of I-49 is important enough for the federal government to provide funding, with the $500 million Arkansas River bridge perhaps being a first priority:

Quote
The 14-mile stretch of bridge that would go from Barling to Alma over the Arkansas River is projected to cost $500 million, according to the Arkansas Highway and Transportation Department.
“Anything that the federal government can do to speed this process along I'm all in favor of,”  Owen said
....
Federal funding is exactly what the authors of HR 1018 are encouraging. They also want to bring attention back to the project, which Owen said needs to be a priority.
“When this is completed, there's not going to be any stopping expansion of Fort Smith, I can tell you that, and even the rest of Sebastian County,”  he said.
The expansion from Fort Chaffee to Texarkana is estimated to cost about $2.5 billion, according to the AHTD.

The text of the resolution is linked in the article:

Quote
10 NOW THEREFORE,
11 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OF THE NINETY-FIRST GENERAL
12 ASSEMBLY OF THE STATE OF ARKANSAS:
13
14 THAT the House of Representatives recognize the need for expansion of
15 the United States Route 49 north-south corridor and encourage the United
16 States Government to fund a project to provide accessibility to and create
17 economic prosperity for the Arkansas communities extending along the
18 corridor.
19
20 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT upon adoption of this resolution, an appropriate
21 copy shall be provided to the Arkansas congressional delegation by the Chief
22 Clerk of the House of Representatives
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: NE2 on March 15, 2017, 12:53:43 PM
For the record, the preamble makes it clear that they mean I-49, not US 49 (which is also in Arkansas).
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: The Ghostbuster on March 15, 2017, 05:28:22 PM
Interstate 49 and US 49 are on opposite sides of the state, so any confusion should be minimal.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on March 15, 2017, 06:46:23 PM
Interstate 49 and US 49 are on opposite sides of the state, so any confusion should be minimal.
In theory. Still, naming them correctly would ensure no confusion.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: NE2 on March 15, 2017, 06:51:55 PM
You're replying to a bot.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on March 15, 2017, 09:34:36 PM
One thing would help is having the engineering done on this project. President Trump said the other day that his infrastructure projects that he wants to do later this year is for them to be ready for construction immediately and not be 2 years before they actually start hiring people like they did on the stimulus jobs a while back. AHTD needs to get off there butt and get it ready or we will lose out on that help. I 49 needs to be a priority for them and maybe the governor can help on that.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Scott5114 on March 15, 2017, 11:02:45 PM
One thing would help is having the engineering done on this project. President Trump said the other day that his infrastructure projects that he wants to do later this year is for them to be ready for construction immediately and not be 2 years before they actually start hiring people like they did on the stimulus jobs a while back. AHTD needs to get off there butt and get it ready or we will lose out on that help. I 49 needs to be a priority for them and maybe the governor can help on that.

Of course, that presupposes the infrastructure plan will be funded. Even among the Republicans there are a lot of skeptics, so it's possible it will see the same fracturing of support that the healthcare bill is seeing.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: TheArkansasRoadgeek on March 15, 2017, 11:30:50 PM
AHTD has way to much shit on their plate! What they need to do is take a step back and think about their life choices, because clearly, the people in position now aren't doing so well with Arkansas' transportation "Hey guys I got 53 million the other day, let's go build an Interstate" "Oh, guys lets expand I-30 in Little Rock!" -- Meanwhile, US 71 is turning to dust....

Great job AHTD! I haven't heard anything yet on District 4's plans for US 71 renovations in Sebastian County (it needs it!), but I will wait!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on March 20, 2017, 11:33:23 PM
AHTD has way to much shit on their plate! What they need to do is take a step back and think about their life choices, because clearly, the people in position now aren't doing so well with Arkansas' transportation "Hey guys I got 53 million the other day, let's go build an Interstate" "Oh, guys lets expand I-30 in Little Rock!" -- Meanwhile, US 71 is turning to dust....

Great job AHTD! I haven't heard anything yet on District 4's plans for US 71 renovations in Sebastian County (it needs it!), but I will wait!

Take a look below Artists' Point: there are giant cracks and gaps in the pavement, but all they do is (attempt to) patch them
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on April 24, 2017, 02:43:21 PM
I can't remember if this has been mentioned, but this article (http://www.arkansasonline.com/news/2016/sep/19/state-weighs-tolls-to-build-i-49-route-/#/) reports that AHTD is studying whether to toll the thirteen-mile Arkansas River bridge section of I-49:
Quote
The Arkansas Highway and Transportation Department is commissioning a study on the feasibility of not only using tolls to help build a new section of Interstate 49 in western Arkansas, but also to have someone else operate and maintain the tollway.
The Arkansas Highway Commission last week approved an order to solicit consultants to study using tolls and a public-private partnership to complete a 13-mile section of I-49 from Interstate 40, where I-49 ends now, south to Arkansas 22 in Barling.
....
it could actually be a design-build-finance-operate-maintain project. Part of the study should also evaluate the costs and benefits of operations and maintenance by a third party versus operations and maintenance by the department." ....
The estimated price tag of the 13.7-mile segment between Barling and Alma is $380 million. The estimate includes $110 million for a new bridge over the Arkansas River. ....
The consultant will have to reassess the environmental impact statement for the project because it is outdated. The Federal Highway Administration approved it in 1997.
The consultant also will develop a "conceptual and preliminary design for more accurate cost estimating ... explore tolling as a feasible funding option and ... determine if the project is a candidate for the design/build/maintain project delivery method," state highway officials said.
From the time it takes to hire the consultant to completion of all aspects of the study, it could take two years, Bennett said.

This slide from AHTD's presentation on the Future of Fort Smith (http://www.arkansashighways.com/PowerPoints/2017/20170417%20CA%20-%20Future%20FtSmith.pdf) concisely summarizes what should be produced by the end of the study (p. 31/35 of pdf). I am particularly interested in the coceptual design:

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/gallery/1615_24_04_17_2_30_03.png)



Scott Bennett's "Wish list" for Governor Hutchinson and President Trump: the I-69 Mississippi River Bridge and the I-49 Arkansas River Bridge:  http://www.arkansasbusiness.com/article/115718/fort-smith-great-river-bridges-comprise-arkansas-wish-list

It still looks like they are about 1.5 years away from finishing the conceptual design. No telling how long the final design will take. Sure, the Trump infrastructure plan is a long shot, But it would be nice if this project would have a chance.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: TheArkansasRoadgeek on April 24, 2017, 03:30:37 PM
I can't remember if this has been mentioned, but this article (http://www.arkansasonline.com/news/2016/sep/19/state-weighs-tolls-to-build-i-49-route-/#/) reports that AHTD is studying whether to toll the thirteen-mile Arkansas River bridge section of I-49:
Quote
The Arkansas Highway and Transportation Department is commissioning a study on the feasibility of not only using tolls to help build a new section of Interstate 49 in western Arkansas, but also to have someone else operate and maintain the tollway.
The Arkansas Highway Commission last week approved an order to solicit consultants to study using tolls and a public-private partnership to complete a 13-mile section of I-49 from Interstate 40, where I-49 ends now, south to Arkansas 22 in Barling.
....
it could actually be a design-build-finance-operate-maintain project. Part of the study should also evaluate the costs and benefits of operations and maintenance by a third party versus operations and maintenance by the department." ....
The estimated price tag of the 13.7-mile segment between Barling and Alma is $380 million. The estimate includes $110 million for a new bridge over the Arkansas River. ....
The consultant will have to reassess the environmental impact statement for the project because it is outdated. The Federal Highway Administration approved it in 1997.
The consultant also will develop a "conceptual and preliminary design for more accurate cost estimating ... explore tolling as a feasible funding option and ... determine if the project is a candidate for the design/build/maintain project delivery method," state highway officials said.
From the time it takes to hire the consultant to completion of all aspects of the study, it could take two years, Bennett said.

This slide from AHTD's presentation on the Future of Fort Smith (http://www.arkansashighways.com/PowerPoints/2017/20170417%20CA%20-%20Future%20FtSmith.pdf) concisely summarizes what should be produced by the end of the study (p. 31/35 of pdf). I am particularly interested in the coceptual design:

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/gallery/1615_24_04_17_2_30_03.png)



Scott Bennett's "Wish list" for Governor Hutchinson and President Trump: the I-69 Mississippi River Bridge and the I-49 Arkansas River Bridge:  http://www.arkansasbusiness.com/article/115718/fort-smith-great-river-bridges-comprise-arkansas-wish-list

It still looks like they are about 1.5 years away from finishing the conceptual design. No telling how long the final design will take. Sure, the Trump infrastructure plan is a long shot, But it would be nice if this project would have a chance.

Well, his Wall budget is going to have to come from somewhere, so no telling where the funds are going to come from and what other thing will be on the verge of collapse in our shit economy.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on April 26, 2017, 01:23:59 PM
Scott Bennett's "Wish list" for Governor Hutchinson and President Trump: the I-69 Mississippi River Bridge and the I-49 Arkansas River Bridge:  http://www.arkansasbusiness.com/article/115718/fort-smith-great-river-bridges-comprise-arkansas-wish-list
It still looks like they are about 1.5 years away from finishing the conceptual design. No telling how long the final design will take. Sure, the Trump infrastructure plan is a long shot, But it would be nice if this project would have a chance.

This MSNBC TV video (http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/city-counting-trump-spend-big-infrastructure-n751326) has Fort Smith and Chaffee Crossing officials wanting the Trump infrastructure plan to build a large part of I-49:

Quote
Fort Smith holds a Gallup poll distinction most cities want desperately to avoid – its residents reported the lowest well-being of anywhere in the United States, in part due to 12,000 manufacturing jobs lost here since 1999. Locals say the most devastating closure was the shutdown of the iconic Whirlpool factory, which at its peak employed 4,500 people ....
But local boosters are looking to one infrastructure project in particular to provide a massive jolt to Fort Smith's economy: the completion of Interstate 49, which when finished would stretch from New Orleans to Canada.
"We're ready for them to start moving dirt," says Ivy Owen, who leads a multi-state coalition pushing to complete the project.
Today, Fort Smith is home to an unconnected six-mile stretch of highway funded in part by President Obama's stimulus bill that opened in 2015. It is flanked by new development and green road signs proclaiming it "Future Interstate 49," but on both sides, it dead-ends.
For around $3 billion, the government could complete Interstate 49 in Arkansas and create an uninterrupted 1,700 mile trade corridor that runs right through Fort Smith, something supporters say would transform the city's fortunes.
In a chopper flying over the lonely six-mile stretch of the highway, Owen said he believes Trump can get it done.
"Mr. President, you campaigned on jobs. Finishing this highway will produce jobs."

The first problem is that Scott Bennett did not include finishing I-49 in his "wish list". That said, I've thought that he should have at the very least included some I-49 bypasses (Mena, Waldron, etc.) in case the Arkansas River bridge would not be ready for construction in time.  I wonder if it's too late for him to amend his list?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on April 26, 2017, 02:46:34 PM
President Trump said on the news he wanted infrastructure projects to ready to put people to work within 3 months when they get a bill passed to spend money. Looks like Scott Bennett has I-49 on his back burner. Same thing happened when Stimulus bill passed. Bella Vista bypass was not ready for construction so they could only use 2 million for utility relocation. This Time Governor Hutchinson Asked for the bridge project get started on design and engineering work or there wouldn't be nothing at all ready. That is called dropping the ball for a priority road that needs to be built. He could ask Missouri to ask jointly for money to finish Bella Vista Bypass to 4 lanes. 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: TheArkansasRoadgeek on April 26, 2017, 04:37:33 PM
President Trump said on the news he wanted infrastructure projects to ready to put people to work within 3 months when they get a bill passed to spend money. Looks like Scott Bennett has I-49 on his back burner. Same thing happened when Stimulus bill passed. Bella Vista bypass was not ready for construction so they could only use 2 million for utility relocation. This Time Governor Hutchinson Asked for the bridge project get started on design and engineering work or there wouldn't be nothing at all ready. That is called dropping the ball for a priority road that needs to be built. He could ask Missouri to ask jointly for money to finish Bella Vista Bypass to 4 lanes.

He will soon realize what he wants is probably not going to be able to happen within his first 100 days. 3 months seens a bit unrealistic, considering the shape our economy is already in.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: TheArkansasRoadgeek on April 26, 2017, 04:46:12 PM

(I-49 in Springdale looking north toward Don Tyson Parkway.  A potential EIGHT lane interstate?  No wonder 2 of the 3 Fort Smith/NWA stations have moved their main ops from FSM to NWA...now just watch what happens to FSM when I-49 is completed...)

I've seen plans for an 8-lane interstate: it would likely require several businesses having to move, though Econo Lodge & Quality Inn would be no great loss, IMO.
 
Right now, 8-Lanes aren't needed since most drivers don't know how to use the far left lane. Knowing AHTD though, they will wait until it's urgent to widen the road again.

The great thing about AHTD is that they future-proof Arkansas' Interstates by alotting ample room for future expansion. Way to go! But, why are they purposing 8? We don't have any city population big enough for 8 (We are CA or L. A.).
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on April 26, 2017, 06:01:00 PM
President Trump said on the news he wanted infrastructure projects to ready to put people to work within 3 months when they get a bill passed to spend money.

In AHTD's April 26 Presentation to the Arkansas Higway Commission (http://www.arkansashighways.com/PowerPoints/2017/20170426%20AHC%20Meeting.pdf), They appear well aware of the 90 day limit (p. 8/132 of pdf):

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/gallery/1615_26_04_17_5_42_35.jpeg)

That said, they have a 2022 letting date for the Arkansas River bridge (p. 9/132 of pdf):

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/gallery/1615_26_04_17_5_56_52.jpeg)

I suppose that, with the plan supposedly being ten years, they can get away with the 2022 date.  They do have the Bella Vista Bypass being ready to go in late 2017.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on April 27, 2017, 08:07:24 AM
The southern terminus of the Bella Vista Bypass (http://www.nwaonline.com/news/2017/apr/27/ribbon-cutting-set-to-open-bella-vista-/) will be dedicated May 10.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on May 10, 2017, 05:15:30 PM
The southern leg of the Bella Vista Bypass from AR 72 near Hiwasse to US 71 at Bella Vista was dedicated just before Noon today, but is NOT open to traffic. AHTD Director Scott Bennett says it will likely open "sometime next week" after the striping is done and signs erected.

Former director Bobby Hopper was in attendance, but did not speak.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: csw on May 11, 2017, 10:17:22 PM
What's up with the hot wheels slide in that presentation? I know I would love to see loop-de-loop MOT...

Unrelated to the previous few posts, I'd like to say that although I always love to see new interstates, I hope they can connect I-49 from Louisiana to NW Arkansas without tearing up too much of the Ouachita Natl Forest. I visited about a year and half ago and I would consider that area (west central AR, incl. Hot Springs) to be one of my favorite "hidden gems" that I've experienced. I would almost compare it to the Smokies, with better weather.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Revive 755 on May 11, 2017, 10:28:54 PM
Regarding the linked presentation, I certainly hope many of the items on Slide 10/127 get implemented or at least somewhat streamlined.  The bat tree clearing restrictions are getting ridiculous - I don't know what it is in Arkansas, but IIRC it was April 1 to September 30 for Illinois.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: TheArkansasRoadgeek on May 11, 2017, 10:59:47 PM
What's up with the hot wheels slide in that presentation? I know I would love to see loop-de-loop MOT...

Unrelated to the previous few posts, I'd like to say that although I always love to see new interstates, I hope they can connect I-49 from Louisiana to NW Arkansas without tearing up too much of the Ouachita Natl Forest. I visited about a year and half ago and I would consider that area (west central AR, incl. Hot Springs) to be one of my favorite "hidden gems" that I've experienced. I would almost compare it to the Smokies, with better weather.

Yeah, same here with I-49. Only if District 4 gets off their asses and finishs the section in Fort Smith! It has been just that, a segment for a long time now!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on May 11, 2017, 11:05:18 PM
What's up with the hot wheels slide in that presentation? I know I would love to see loop-de-loop MOT...

Unrelated to the previous few posts, I'd like to say that although I always love to see new interstates, I hope they can connect I-49 from Louisiana to NW Arkansas without tearing up too much of the Ouachita Natl Forest. I visited about a year and half ago and I would consider that area (west central AR, incl. Hot Springs) to be one of my favorite "hidden gems" that I've experienced. I would almost compare it to the Smokies, with better weather.

Yeah, same here with I-49. Only if District 4 gets off their asses and finish the section in Fort Smith! It has been just that, a segment for a long time now!
They won't do anything without a bridge over the Arkansas River. They discussed that yesterday at the ribbon cutting
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: TheArkansasRoadgeek on May 11, 2017, 11:23:39 PM
WHAT THE FUCK?! They could at least get the Masard Rd. and others complete in Fort Smith and then they could quite litterally cross the bridge once they get there. Wow, just wow. I don't understand, like logically they is work still to be done whether there's a bridge built or not! I am sure you understand this too, US71.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on May 11, 2017, 11:31:07 PM
WHAT THE FUCK?! They could at least get the Masard Rd. and others complete in Fort Smith and then they could quite litterally cross the bridge once they get there. Wow, just wow. I don't understand, like logically they is work still to be done whether there's a bridge built or not! I am sure you understand this too, US71.

???
There is an open interchange at Massard Rd as well as Roberts Rd, so I'm not sure I follow you.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: TheArkansasRoadgeek on May 11, 2017, 11:58:43 PM
WHAT THE FUCK?! They could at least get the Masard Rd. and others complete in Fort Smith and then they could quite litterally cross the bridge once they get there. Wow, just wow. I don't understand, like logically they is work still to be done whether there's a bridge built or not! I am sure you understand this too, US71.

???
There is an open interchange at Massard Rd as well as Roberts Rd, so I'm not sure I follow you.

Google Maps is not quite up-to-date, but in regards to just finishing the US 71 interchange at White Bluff and futher up, they could just complete the land portion and then worry about the bridge.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on May 12, 2017, 12:06:09 AM
WHAT THE FUCK?! They could at least get the Masard Rd. and others complete in Fort Smith and then they could quite litterally cross the bridge once they get there. Wow, just wow. I don't understand, like logically they is work still to be done whether there's a bridge built or not! I am sure you understand this too, US71.

???
There is an open interchange at Massard Rd as well as Roberts Rd, so I'm not sure I follow you.

Google Maps is not quite up-to-date, but in regards to just finishing the US 71 interchange at White Bluff and futher up, they could just complete the land portion and then worry about the bridge.

I think I understand what you mean, but there's no where to go north of AR 22 until a bridge is built.I'm sure the intersecting county roads will simply be grade separated.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: TheArkansasRoadgeek on May 12, 2017, 10:22:35 AM
WHAT THE FUCK?! They could at least get the Masard Rd. and others complete in Fort Smith and then they could quite litterally cross the bridge once they get there. Wow, just wow. I don't understand, like logically they is work still to be done whether there's a bridge built or not! I am sure you understand this too, US71.

???
There is an open interchange at Massard Rd as well as Roberts Rd, so I'm not sure I follow you.

Google Maps is not quite up-to-date, but in regards to just finishing the US 71 interchange at White Bluff and futher up, they could just complete the land portion and then worry about the bridge.

I think I understand what you mean, but there's no where to go north of AR 22 until a bridge is built.I'm sure the intersecting county roads will simply be grade separated.

You gotta love the county roads of Arkansas! For example, in Greenwood there is a road (I forget the first one, something ridge), then rounding a bend Gate Nine Rd, but also it switches very aburptly to something else at the sametime.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on May 18, 2017, 11:02:09 AM
With the latest section of Bella Vista Bypass open for traffic it looks like any new sections of I-49 for construction is put on hold until 2021. Widening I-49 is on going in NWA area. I don't see any fast lane projects on Missouri's Department of Transportation. Does anybody know if they are asking for fast lane projects.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on May 18, 2017, 11:04:24 AM
With the latest section of Bella Vista Bypass open for traffic it looks like any new sections of I-49 for construction is put on hold until 2021. Widening I-49 is on going in NWA area. I don't see any fast lane projects on Missouri's Department of Transportation. Does anybody know if they are asking for fast lane projects.

None for 49 that I have seen.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on June 01, 2017, 01:14:09 PM
Who is doing the engineering work for the section I 49 between I 40 and Barling which includes the Arkansas river bridge? Never saw anything on AHTD except when they were asking for Firms of interest.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on June 09, 2017, 11:44:05 AM
AHTD (soon to be ARDOT) apparently announced to the Arkansas Highway Commission (http://www.arkansashighways.com/PowerPoints/2017/20170607%20AHC%20Meeting%20slides.pdf) that it will submit a joint application with MoDOT to finally complete the Bella Vista Bypass during the next round of FASTLANE and/or TIGER grant applications (p. 22/148 of pdf):

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/gallery/1615_09_06_17_11_40_02.png)

Maybe they'll get it.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: I-39 on June 09, 2017, 01:20:26 PM
AHTD (soon to be ARDOT) apparently announced to the Arkansas Highway Commission (http://www.arkansashighways.com/PowerPoints/2017/20170607%20AHC%20Meeting%20slides.pdf) that it will submit a joint application with MoDOT to finally complete the Bella Vista Bypass during the next round of FASTLANE and/or TIGER grant applications (p. 22/148 of pdf):

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/gallery/1615_09_06_17_11_40_02.png)

Maybe they'll get it.

I don't see why they shouldn't. This is a key project and has been delayed way too long. Basically, its just a matter of a few miles of four lane freeway and widening the existing two lane segments to four. It shouldn't require too much money.

They need to get this done so Arkansas can turn their attention to the Fort Smith-Texarkana portion of I-49.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on June 09, 2017, 03:00:36 PM
Earlier today President Trump gave a news conference about his $1 trillion infrastructure plan. One key part of his speech: complaining how regulations and bureaucracy have suffocated development of things like roads. He mentioned an 18 mile long highway project in Maryland that has taken at least 20 years of red tape struggle before the project could move forward. In the past this nation has built big things relatively fast (he mentioned the Hoover Dam and Empire State Building as two notable examples). The first 40,000 miles of the Interstate highway system were built relatively fast. Today, building a single freeway (such as the I-49 or I-69 projects) is taking decades. The resulting roads that finally get built are twisty, inefficiently crooked corridors. That really goes for the I-69 segments from Arkansas to Indiana.

I don't know how much luck President Trump and the GOP will have at greatly streamlining the regulatory process of planning and building highways. One thing is certain: the current system is absolutely terrible. The current system does only seem to exist to give lawyers and bureaucrats something to do. The more they hold up a highway project the more they get paid. It's all billable hours, you know.

So, perhaps with some luck, the I-49 projects like the Belle Vista bypass could get put on the fast track if they suddenly get some political winds blowing at their back. AR DOT needs to get FASTLANE and TIGER grant applications filed for the I-49 Arkansas River crossing at Fort Smith while they're at it.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on June 10, 2017, 09:06:53 AM
Earlier today President Trump gave a news conference about his $1 trillion infrastructure plan. One key part of his speech: complaining how regulations and bureaucracy have suffocated development of things like roads. He mentioned an 18 mile long highway project in Maryland that has taken at least 20 years of red tape struggle before the project could move forward. In the past this nation has built big things relatively fast (he mentioned the Hoover Dam and Empire State Building as two notable examples). The first 40,000 miles of the Interstate highway system were built relatively fast. Today, building a single freeway (such as the I-49 or I-69 projects) is taking decades. The resulting roads that finally get built are twisty, inefficiently crooked corridors. That really goes for the I-69 segments from Arkansas to Indiana.

I don't know how much luck President Trump and the GOP will have at greatly streamlining the regulatory process of planning and building highways. One thing is certain: the current system is absolutely terrible. The current system does only seem to exist to give lawyers and bureaucrats something to do. The more they hold up a highway project the more they get paid. It's all billable hours, you know.

So, perhaps with some luck, the I-49 projects like the Bella Vista bypass could get put on the fast track if they suddenly get some political winds blowing at their back. AR DOT needs to get FASTLANE and TIGER grant applications filed for the I-49 Arkansas River crossing at Fort Smith while they're at it.

There's never enough money to do it right, but plenty of money to do it over (at least in Arkansas) ;)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: TheArkansasRoadgeek on June 10, 2017, 05:10:41 PM
Earlier today President Trump gave a news conference about his $1 trillion infrastructure plan. One key part of his speech: complaining how regulations and bureaucracy have suffocated development of things like roads. He mentioned an 18 mile long highway project in Maryland that has taken at least 20 years of red tape struggle before the project could move forward. In the past this nation has built big things relatively fast (he mentioned the Hoover Dam and Empire State Building as two notable examples). The first 40,000 miles of the Interstate highway system were built relatively fast. Today, building a single freeway (such as the I-49 or I-69 projects) is taking decades. The resulting roads that finally get built are twisty, inefficiently crooked corridors. That really goes for the I-69 segments from Arkansas to Indiana.

I don't know how much luck President Trump and the GOP will have at greatly streamlining the regulatory process of planning and building highways. One thing is certain: the current system is absolutely terrible. The current system does only seem to exist to give lawyers and bureaucrats something to do. The more they hold up a highway project the more they get paid. It's all billable hours, you know.

So, perhaps with some luck, the I-49 projects like the Bella Vista bypass could get put on the fast track if they suddenly get some political winds blowing at their back. AR DOT needs to get FASTLANE and TIGER grant applications filed for the I-49 Arkansas River crossing at Fort Smith while they're at it.

There's never enough money to do it right, but plenty of money to do it over (at least in Arkansas) ;)

That's the way it seems!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: JJBers on June 10, 2017, 05:12:31 PM
Earlier today President Trump gave a news conference about his $1 trillion infrastructure plan. One key part of his speech: complaining how regulations and bureaucracy have suffocated development of things like roads. He mentioned an 18 mile long highway project in Maryland that has taken at least 20 years of red tape struggle before the project could move forward. In the past this nation has built big things relatively fast (he mentioned the Hoover Dam and Empire State Building as two notable examples). The first 40,000 miles of the Interstate highway system were built relatively fast. Today, building a single freeway (such as the I-49 or I-69 projects) is taking decades. The resulting roads that finally get built are twisty, inefficiently crooked corridors. That really goes for the I-69 segments from Arkansas to Indiana.

I don't know how much luck President Trump and the GOP will have at greatly streamlining the regulatory process of planning and building highways. One thing is certain: the current system is absolutely terrible. The current system does only seem to exist to give lawyers and bureaucrats something to do. The more they hold up a highway project the more they get paid. It's all billable hours, you know.

So, perhaps with some luck, the I-49 projects like the Bella Vista bypass could get put on the fast track if they suddenly get some political winds blowing at their back. AR DOT needs to get FASTLANE and TIGER grant applications filed for the I-49 Arkansas River crossing at Fort Smith while they're at it.

There's never enough money to do it right, but plenty of money to do it over (at least in Arkansas) ;)

That's the way it seems!
Well, in Connecticut, we don't even have enough money to do it over again. :(
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on August 16, 2017, 10:53:41 AM
AHTD (soon to be ARDOT) apparently announced to the Arkansas Highway Commission (http://www.arkansashighways.com/PowerPoints/2017/20170607%20AHC%20Meeting%20slides.pdf) that it will submit a joint application with MoDOT to finally complete the Bella Vista Bypass during the next round of FASTLANE and/or TIGER grant applications (p. 22/148 of pdf):
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/gallery/1615_09_06_17_11_40_02.png)

In ARDOT's July 26, 2017 presentation to the Arkansas State Highway Commission (http://www.arkansashighways.com/PowerPoints/2017/20170726%20AHC%20Meeting.pdf), they informed the Commission that they will submit the joint application for the Bella Vista Bypass as an INFRA grant application (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=20590.msg2239213#msg2239213) by the November 2 deadline (pp. 25-26/85 of pdf):

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/gallery/1615_16_08_17_10_27_35.png)

Also, for the November 15 letting, ARDOT is tentatively planning to add the other two lanes to the majority of the Bella Vista Bypass (http://www.arkansashighways.com/ProgCon/General/Next_Three_Lettings.pdf):

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/gallery/1615_16_08_17_10_43_07.png)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/gallery/1615_16_08_17_10_49_48.png)

Slowly, but surely ...............
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: robbones on August 17, 2017, 09:53:01 PM
AHTD (soon to be ARDOT) apparently announced to the Arkansas Highway Commission (http://www.arkansashighways.com/PowerPoints/2017/20170607%20AHC%20Meeting%20slides.pdf) that it will submit a joint application with MoDOT to finally complete the Bella Vista Bypass during the next round of FASTLANE and/or TIGER grant applications (p. 22/148 of pdf):
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/gallery/1615_09_06_17_11_40_02.png)

In ARDOT's July 26, 2017 presentation to the Arkansas State Highway Commission (http://www.arkansashighways.com/PowerPoints/2017/20170726%20AHC%20Meeting.pdf), they informed the Commission that they will submit the joint application for the Bella Vista Bypass as an INFRA grant application (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=20590.msg2239213#msg2239213) by the November 2 deadline (pp. 25-26/85 of pdf):

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/gallery/1615_16_08_17_10_27_35.png)

Also, for the November 15 letting, ARDOT is tentatively planning to add the other two lanes to the majority of the Bella Vista Bypass (http://www.arkansashighways.com/ProgCon/General/Next_Three_Lettings.pdf):

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/gallery/1615_16_08_17_10_43_07.png)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/gallery/1615_16_08_17_10_49_48.png)

Slowly, but surely ...............
On the next page of the PDF, it also States the final 7.1 miles of the Bella Vista Bypass is up for letting as a combination project.

LGL64VL

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on August 21, 2017, 08:21:48 PM
This August 20 article (http://www.swtimes.com/news/20170820/i-49-bridge-toll-feasibility-study-up-in-air) provides an update on progress regarding the I-49 Arkansas River bridge by reporting that negotiations are underway with an engineering firm about the scope of work of the project:

Quote
A toll feasibility study is up in the air for the future Interstate 49 bridge over the Arkansas River with extensions connecting Arkansas 22 to Interstate 40 at Alma.
Following approval last year of $10 million in I-49 project development, the Arkansas Department of Transportation solicited bids for a consultant to conduct an I-49 toll feasibility study. They are currently in a negotiation phase, according to ArDOT District 4 Construction Engineer Jason Hughey.
ArDOT selected HNTB on June 23 to conduct the “I-49 Alternative Delivery Study.”  The negotiations are over the scope of work and process has been “fluid,”  ArDOT Public Information Officer Danny Straessle noted in an email. The cost of a toll feasibility study could run between $500,000 and $1 million, according to ArDOT Director Scott Bennett.
Bennett told local county judges and mayors last August at a Western Arkansas Planning and Development meeting that a public-private-partnership, or P3, with tolling could move up the construction timeline for the road extension and bridge by several years.
Bennett told WAPDD representatives in that August 2016 meeting that the total annual budget for ArDOT is about $400 million, with 80 percent going to maintain roads and the rest for capital improvements.
“Without the tolling option or the P3, this project wouldn’t start for at least 5-10 years, with construction start time being at the earliest of 10 years,”  the WAPDD meeting notes from August 2016 state.
A P3 could have a road open in eight years from Highway 22 to I-40, Bennett estimated, with construction starting as early as three years after a toll study showed the feasibility.

A request to fund more than $27 million in preliminary engineering for the future I-49 bridge over the Arkansas River from Alma to Barling was included in the draft 2016-20 State Transportation Improvement Plan
State Rep. Mat Pitsch, R-Fort Smith said by phone Friday the nature of P3s is to make money as soon as possible. He also noted the I-49 corridor project was mentioned by Gov. Asa Hutchinson as one of the top two state projects when asked to present those to President Donald Trump.
“I’ve very anxious to get the I-49 project complete because of the economic development that follows,”  Pitsch said.
He went on to say that if the I-49 bridge and extensions come back with no interest from the Trump Administration’s pledge for a $1 trillion infrastructure improvements, then “by all means”  he is in favor of moving forward with a P3 with tolls.

Pitsch echoed the sentiments of Arkansas Department of Transportation District Engineer Chad Adams.
“The goal and interest is to exhaust every option, because tolling doesn’t sound good to a lot of people,”  Adams said by phone Friday. “With any toll road, to make it work, you need traffic and a reasonable toll.”
By federal law, only new roads can be tolled. ArDOT has tolling authority ....
Finding the money for the I-49 corridor project is the the only thing holding ArDOT from moving forward, Straessle noted in a phone call. Late last week, Trump abandoned plans for an Advisory Council on Infrastructure that was being formed to spend as much as $1 trillion upgrading roads, bridges and other public works.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Henry on August 22, 2017, 09:47:06 AM
Slowly but surely, the corridor is continuing to take shape. With completion of the Bella Vista Bypass further north and the likely construction of the ICC down in Shreveport, it's safe to say that I-49 is making far more progress than I-69 is. (Here's wishing Lafayette and Kansas City would help out more in the process as well.)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: inkyatari on August 22, 2017, 09:57:14 AM
The portion of I-49 from Ft. Smith to Texarkana is going to be the real issue. I don't see that getting done anytime soon.  I-69 and I-49 may end up having large gaps in the middle.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: TheArkansasRoadgeek on August 22, 2017, 03:10:33 PM
The portion of I-49 from Ft. Smith to Texarkana is going to be the real issue. I don't see that getting done anytime soon.  I-69 and I-49 may end up having large gaps in the middle.

This is true.

So, they are considering tolling I-49? It's about time! Whether it's for expedited construction or not, there will be revenue from those who wish to go to KC from other states passing through on the interstate. I still can't wrap my haed around why more people than not are opposed to the idea..... Oh, right, low income rates...
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on August 22, 2017, 03:21:16 PM
The portion of I-49 from Ft. Smith to Texarkana is going to be the real issue. I don't see that getting done anytime soon.  I-69 and I-49 may end up having large gaps in the middle.

This is true.

If I-49 gets done between Texarkana and Fort Smith -- as a non-tolled facility (with the possible exception of the Arkansas River bridge) it'll be the "poster child" for piecemeal/SIU development -- the bridge, completing the Ft. Smith bypass; a bypass of Mena (largest town on route); and possibly a "cutoff" in the De Queen area, bypassing the town and shaving off miles compared to US 71.  Otherwise, the individual projects connecting all of these will be let as funding becomes available.  Don't see them tackling the more mountainous areas around US 270 until the last, since much of that will require building right on top of the existing highway.  Barring a political "squeaky wheel" emanating from that part of the region, it'll be a long, long slog! 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Tomahawkin on August 22, 2017, 07:53:15 PM
I proposed it be a toll route on here long ago because I did a paper in college about it 10 years ago. If this road gets built. It will probably be built in 2-3 year segments like I 22 was built in NW Alabama, but that took 10 years too long to complete, IMO
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on August 22, 2017, 11:35:06 PM
I proposed it be a toll route on here long ago because I did a paper in college about it 10 years ago. If this road gets built. It will probably be built in 2-3 year segments like I 22 was built in NW Alabama, but that took 10 years too long to complete, IMO

The problem with a toll road is the alternatives available for shunpiking -- mainly US 271/59/259 about 25-30 miles west over the state line.  Still think a long-term incremental approach is the one that'll eventually be utilized here -- simply because it won't piss off the local residents as much as a tolled facility would -- particularly one that would subsume rather than parallel US 71 for much of its length. 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on August 23, 2017, 11:28:45 AM
I proposed it be a toll route on here long ago because I did a paper in college about it 10 years ago. If this road gets built. It will probably be built in 2-3 year segments like I 22 was built in NW Alabama, but that took 10 years too long to complete, IMO

The problem with a toll road is the alternatives available for shunpiking -- mainly US 271/59/259 about 25-30 miles west over the state line.  Still think a long-term incremental approach is the one that'll eventually be utilized here -- simply because it won't piss off the local residents as much as a tolled facility would -- particularly one that would subsume rather than parallel US 71 for much of its length. 

I would NOT recommend 271 or 259 for shumpiking. Too winding and steep.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: mvak36 on August 23, 2017, 12:50:26 PM
Just my opinion, but I would be okay with them tolling the bridges since they're going to be more expensive to maintain over the long term.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on August 23, 2017, 04:39:02 PM
I proposed it be a toll route on here long ago because I did a paper in college about it 10 years ago. If this road gets built. It will probably be built in 2-3 year segments like I 22 was built in NW Alabama, but that took 10 years too long to complete, IMO

The problem with a toll road is the alternatives available for shunpiking -- mainly US 271/59/259 about 25-30 miles west over the state line.  Still think a long-term incremental approach is the one that'll eventually be utilized here -- simply because it won't piss off the local residents as much as a tolled facility would -- particularly one that would subsume rather than parallel US 71 for much of its length. 

I would NOT recommend 271 or 259 for shumpiking. Too winding and steep.

The only part of 271 I'd recommend for such purposes would be the short northernmost section from I-540 over to US 59.  I've been on US 259 numerous times (lots of family in Broken Bow/Idabel), and at least to me it's not too bad; with long lines of traffic, present US 71 over the top of the ridgeline is at least as harrowing!  Admittedly, it might not be the optimal route for large volumes of truck traffic, however -- but the part of US 71 south of the 59/270 junction is slated for paralleling rather than subsuming; the old road here would suffice for shunpiking purposes in any case.   I would not recommend US 271 southwest toward Hugo to anyone lacking a masochistic streak, however!

And if anyone opts for US 259 just for the scenery (which is quite nice), please don't speed through Broken Bow or Idabel lest you end up in front of my cousin, who's a county judge down there; and he's certainly not the most lenient!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: I-39 on August 24, 2017, 09:39:34 PM
Slowly but surely, the corridor is continuing to take shape. With completion of the Bella Vista Bypass further north and the likely construction of the ICC down in Shreveport, it's safe to say that I-49 is making far more progress than I-69 is. (Here's wishing Lafayette and Kansas City would help out more in the process as well.)

The Bella Vista bypass is still a ways away from being completed. Missouri hasn't found the money to complete their section yet.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on August 24, 2017, 09:49:58 PM


And if anyone opts for US 259 just for the scenery (which is quite nice), please don't speed through Broken Bow or Idabel lest you end up in front of my cousin, who's a county judge down there; and he's certainly not the most lenient!

I was in Idabel a couple months ago and had no problems. Then again, no one seems to patrol the old city route ;)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on August 25, 2017, 04:03:16 AM


And if anyone opts for US 259 just for the scenery (which is quite nice), please don't speed through Broken Bow or Idabel lest you end up in front of my cousin, who's a county judge down there; and he's certainly not the most lenient!

I was in Idabel a couple months ago and had no problems. Then again, no one seems to patrol the old city route ;)

Not surprising -- McCurtain County (according to that same cousin) has been in pretty dire financial straits for the last couple of decades, since the Broken Bow hardwood mill finally shut down (production moved west to Valliant) and the Tyson plant on 70/259 halfway between the Bow and Idabel had some major layoffs circa 2001 (and the job's haven't returned); in fact, both segments of county law enforcement (sheriff & judicial) merged with neighboring Choctaw County (Hugo) to save money -- which means my cousin has to regularly schlep over to Hugo to preside over proceedings there as well as in Idabel (something he gripes about on a regular basis, at least with his emails!).  And he's got nine more years until retirement!  Thus the cops (city & sheriff) tend not to go out of their way to seek out errant drivers not exhibiting egregious (i.e., drunk/stoned off their ass) behavior lest they too have to traipse 40-odd miles west for court proceedings.  It's not "wild west" territory -- but as a driver you've got to do something really stupid to get nabbed down there these days!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on September 15, 2017, 05:04:12 PM
Is this a big ol' "game changer", or not?  Walmart will, over the next 5-7 years, be building a new hq office in east Bentonville.

http://www.arkansasonline.com/news/2017/sep/15/wal-mart-build-new-headquarters-near-downtown-bent/
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on September 15, 2017, 06:05:31 PM
Is this a big ol' "game changer", or not?  Walmart will, over the next 5-7 years, be building a new hq office in east Bentonville.

http://www.arkansasonline.com/news/2017/sep/15/wal-mart-build-new-headquarters-near-downtown-bent/

They are going to build it near the (M)Alice Palace (aka Crystal Bridges Museum).  Of course they decided this AFTER ARDOT agreed to build them their own exit off I-49.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: TheArkansasRoadgeek on September 15, 2017, 06:24:44 PM
Is this a big ol' "game changer", or not?  Walmart will, over the next 5-7 years, be building a new hq office in east Bentonville.

http://www.arkansasonline.com/news/2017/sep/15/wal-mart-build-new-headquarters-near-downtown-bent/

They are going to build it near the (M)Alice Palace (aka Crystal Bridges Museum).  Of course they decided this AFTER ARDOT agreed to build them their own exit off I-49.
Considering that they are a large corporation, they possibly held a gun to their head for it to be considered.  :hmmm:
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on September 15, 2017, 06:41:21 PM
Is this a big ol' "game changer", or not?  Walmart will, over the next 5-7 years, be building a new hq office in east Bentonville.

http://www.arkansasonline.com/news/2017/sep/15/wal-mart-build-new-headquarters-near-downtown-bent/

They are going to build it near the (M)Alice Palace (aka Crystal Bridges Museum).  Of course they decided this AFTER ARDOT agreed to build them their own exit off I-49.
Considering that they are a large corporation, they possibly held a gun to their head for it to be considered.  :hmmm:

I think they conned the city into paying for part of it.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on September 15, 2017, 06:42:16 PM
The new exit will still be extremely useful. I wouldn't be surprised if ArDOT knew about it
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on September 15, 2017, 10:46:15 PM
The new exit will still be extremely useful. I wouldn't be surprised if ArDOT knew about it

Now if someone can get Wal Mart to loan MO the money to build their portion of the Bella Vista I-49 bypass, their own exit might be something of a bargain (at least in the long run)!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on September 16, 2017, 09:46:04 AM
The new exit will still be extremely useful. I wouldn't be surprised if ArDOT knew about it

Now if someone can get Wal Mart to loan MO the money to build their portion of the Bella Vista I-49 bypass, their own exit might be something of a bargain (at least in the long run)!

Go ask Alice ;)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on September 16, 2017, 10:54:20 AM
The US Transportation Department announced that $500 million was available for 2017 Tiger Grants. Deadline is to submit application is October 16th. Hopefully Arkansas and Missouri will put in their joint application to finish the I49 Bella Vista bypass.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on September 17, 2017, 12:28:46 AM
The new exit will still be extremely useful. I wouldn't be surprised if ArDOT knew about it

Now if someone can get Wal Mart to loan MO the money to build their portion of the Bella Vista I-49 bypass, their own exit might be something of a bargain (at least in the long run)!

Go ask Alice ;)


When logic and proportion have fallen sloppy dead -- then MODOT can ask Wal Mart for $$$. 

Hard to believe Grace Slick turns 78 this year!

The US Transportation Department announced that $500 million was available for 2017 Tiger Grants. Deadline is to submit application is October 16th. Hopefully Arkansas and Missouri will put in their joint application to finish the I49 Bella Vista bypass.

Speaking of which.......maybe it's time for MODOT and ARDOT to cue up Jefferson Starship's Ride the Tiger  -- if nothing else than to remind them to keep their eye on the ball regarding obtaining the required funding!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: GreenLanternCorps on September 17, 2017, 05:22:03 PM
What exactly has been done so far for I-49 from the Texas state line to the US 71 and AR 549 intersection south of Fort Smith?  What plans, if any, exist for this route?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: TheArkansasRoadgeek on September 17, 2017, 08:04:10 PM
What exactly has been done so far for I-49 from the Texas state line to the US 71 and AR 549 intersection south of Fort Smith?  What plans, if any, exist for this route?
There's still a stub in Fort Smith, last I checked.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on September 17, 2017, 08:06:15 PM
What exactly has been done so far for I-49 from the Texas state line to the US 71 and AR 549 intersection south of Fort Smith?  What plans, if any, exist for this route?
There's still a stub in Fort Smith, last I checked.

If you can call 5 miles a "stub" ;)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on September 17, 2017, 09:42:37 PM
I don't think I would even call the nearly 6 mile long freeway strip by Fort Chaffee a "stub" of I-49 since it doesn't connect to I-49 at this point (and probably won't for at least the next several years).

Quote from: GreenLanternCorps
What exactly has been done so far for I-49 from the Texas state line to the US 71 and AR 549 intersection south of Fort Smith?  What plans, if any, exist for this route?

Oh there's plenty of plans. The basic alignment of I-49 between Fort Smith and Texarkana has already been charted, although that alignment could change as efforts are made to acquire the right of way for the highway. Right now there's no funding for any of the segments. The current game plan is first to fill the gap between the I-40/I-49 interchange in Alma to Barling and the existing freeway next to Fort Chaffee. That project will cost $400 million or $500 million and up depending on how long they wait to build that segment. The unfinished Belle Vista Bypass is big priority.

After that it's anyone's guess what segments of I-49 will be built next. Will it simply be extended farther and farther South from Fort Smith in linear fashion (similar to how I-69 is being built in Indiana)? Or will AR DOT choose to build freeway bypasses for Mansfield, Mena, Waldron and Ashdown and then work to fill in the gaps? I would think the latter would be a smarter approach in terms of securing ROW before it gets suffocated and blocked by developers in those towns.

Then there's the issue whether or not to build this section of I-49 as a toll road. It's a difficult choice. The "pro" side of building that part of I-49 as a toll road is the facility might get built much faster. The "con" side of it: a toll road wouldn't be able to cannibalize any of the existing US-71 alignment (which is part of the current plan). US-71 would have to be maintained as a "free" parallel facility. Much of an I-49 toll road would have to be built on a new terrain alignment, which would probably greatly increase costs. This route has to go through some mountainous territory, part of which makes being able to build over US-71 so important. The cost of an expensive, new terrain toll road going through mountains would make it even more critical for the road to attract enough traffic and toll revenue for the road to pay for itself. There would be great potential for lots and lots of shunpiking.

Of course, we're all already familiar with the difficulties of building "free" highways funded (mostly) with fuel taxes. The roads just don't get completed for a very long time. And that's how I-49 between Fort Smith and Texarkana is looking. I think the chances are very slim the road would be built as a toll road. I also think it may be decades (like 30-40 years from now at the earliest) before I-49 is ever finished as a "free" freeway. The United States government would need to have a very radical change of heart in how it regards infrastructure funding (particularly highways) before we ever see big spans of highway get built with any sort of speed ever again. The states don't have the money to fund projects like this all on their own. And the federal grant money that becomes available from time to time almost seems like treating a cancer patient with money for a box of band-aids.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on September 17, 2017, 10:01:30 PM
I've been told by AHTD, they have a preliminary Exit list for I-49 in Arkansas. They werer supposed to send me a copy, but haven't yet.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on September 18, 2017, 10:38:13 AM
What exactly has been done so far for I-49 from the Texas state line to the US 71 and AR 549 intersection south of Fort Smith?  What plans, if any, exist for this route?

Nothing has been done so far. Here is an ARDOT map (http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49_Route_Request.pdf) showing the proposed route.  If you want to dig deeper:

Texarkana to Dequuen FEIS: http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/FEIS_U.S.71_TXK-DeQueen_and_TXK_North_Loop.pdf
Texarkana to DeQuuen FEIS Appendix: http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/FEIS_U.S.71_TXK-DeQueen_and_TXK_North_Loop_(appendix).pdf
DeQueen to I-40 FEIS: http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/FEIS_U.S.71_DeQueen-I-40.pdf
DeQuuen to I-40 FEIS Appendix:http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/FEIS_U.S.71_DeQueen-I-40_(appendix).pdf

Keep in mind that these have some age and might have to be redone.

Here is proposed mileage: http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49-Proposed-Mileage.pdf
Proposed exit numbering from Louisiana to Polk County, Arkansas: http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49-Proposed-Mileage.pdf
Proposed exit numbering From Polk Conty Fort Chaffee area: http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49-Proposed-Mileage.pdf
Proposed exit numbering from Fort Chaffee to Missouri state line: http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49_Exits_3.pdf
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: The Ghostbuster on September 18, 2017, 05:32:21 PM
How much more of future Interstate 49 has to be constructed before they renumber the exits on the portion of Interstate 49 that used to be part of Interstate 540? If I called the shots, those exits would already have been renumbered.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on September 18, 2017, 09:23:36 PM
How much more of future Interstate 49 has to be constructed before they renumber the exits on the portion of Interstate 49 that used to be part of Interstate 540? If I called the shots, those exits would already have been renumbered.

I'm guessing when it is finished.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: GreenLanternCorps on September 18, 2017, 09:49:46 PM
How much more of future Interstate 49 has to be constructed before they renumber the exits on the portion of Interstate 49 that used to be part of Interstate 540? If I called the shots, those exits would already have been renumbered.

I'm not a expert, but probably not until the final mileage is determined between Texarkana and Fort Smith. 

However, AR 549 at Fort Smith does have exit numbers.

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on September 20, 2017, 12:35:21 PM
Under the current approach it will take so many years (or decades) for I-49 to get filled in between Texarkana and Fort Smith that all the highway signs along existing I-49 will go through numerous graphics replacement cycles. The vinyl lettering and diamond grade reflective backgrounds don't have a very long life span.

If the proposed alignment of I-49 between Fort Smith and Texarkana is altered and causes changes to overall mileage and exit numbers then the exit tabs will just have to be swapped or replaced as the need occurs. There's no need to do any of that now. None of us really know the final alignment that will materialize, if it ever materializes. There is still a good chance that segment of highway will never be built.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on September 20, 2017, 02:29:12 PM
Under the current approach it will take so many years (or decades) for I-49 to get filled in between Texarkana and Fort Smith that all the highway signs along existing I-49 will go through numerous graphics replacement cycles. The vinyl lettering and diamond grade reflective backgrounds don't have a very long life span.


Some of the signs have recently been replaced or in the process thereof. Based on what I've observed, as 49 is 6-laned, a lot of the exit signs will  be put on gantries vs simply stuck on the shoulder, as was done along I-540 in Ft Smith a few years ago.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on September 20, 2017, 07:58:35 PM
I proposed it be a toll route on here long ago because I did a paper in college about it 10 years ago. If this road gets built. It will probably be built in 2-3 year segments like I 22 was built in NW Alabama, but that took 10 years too long to complete, IMO

The problem with a toll road is the alternatives available for shunpiking -- mainly US 271/59/259 about 25-30 miles west over the state line.  Still think a long-term incremental approach is the one that'll eventually be utilized here -- simply because it won't piss off the local residents as much as a tolled facility would -- particularly one that would subsume rather than parallel US 71 for much of its length. 

I would NOT recommend 271 or 259 for shumpiking. Too winding and steep.

If I were going to avoid US 71 and 59 from Fort Smith to Nacogdoches, I would take OK 112 from Pocola to Poteau. It is about 6 miles shorter than staying on US 271 and a fairly fast drive. It's a nice smooth 2 lane highway with long straight stretches, albeit choked with traffic. US 271 is 4 lanes but slower. The only slow part of OK 112 is the section through Pocola. US 271 goes through Spiro, Panama and Shady Point which have speed zones. The only town OK 112 goes through is Cameron, and it barely skirts the edge of the town and there is no speed zone there. OK 112 is 65 MPH from the US 59/Bypass 59/271/OK 112 interchange on the north side of Poteau to the south side of Pocola. Panama is a notorious speed trap with no traffic lights but a speed limit of 35. It should have been bypassed decades ago, but it's unlikely that a Panama bypass will be built in any of our lifetimes. Pocola is another notorious speed trap.

As for the rest of the drive, US 59 from Poteau to the Arkansas line is a pretty decent road. It has a speed limit of 65 and the entire stretch can easily be driven at 65 except for a curve south of Hodgen which can be taken at 65 but most drivers will slow to 55 or so unless you get stuck behind a slow truck. There are several passing zones, however, and traffic is usually very light.

As for US 259, there are some sharp curves from US 59/270 to just south of OK 1 and over Kiamichi Mountain but the rest of the route is mostly long sweeping curves that can be taken at high speeds. The worst curve north of Big Cedar is the curve where 259 goes under OK 1. The curves over Kiamichi Mountain are pretty bad, but only for a short stretch. US 259 is a modern 2 lane highway which was built on a mostly new alignment in the '50s and '60s to then modern specifications as opposed to US 71 where they basically paved the old cow paths and the road undulates over every little hill and through every little valley and has many unnecessary curves. It has a well-deserved reputation as a deadly highway.

When I drive from Mena to Fort Smith, I almost always take US 59 to OK 112 to US 271 instead of staying on US 71. Going through Poteau is about 5 miles longer but the speed limit in Oklahoma is 65 while the speed limit in Arkansas is only 55. US 71 is slow and curvy and hilly and is choked with truck traffic. The route through Heavener and (around) Poteau is a better road and has far less traffic than the route through Mansfield and Waldron. It's a no-brainer for me.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on September 20, 2017, 08:07:34 PM
The "pro" side of building that part of I-49 as a toll road is the facility might get built much faster. The "con" side of it: a toll road wouldn't be able to cannibalize any of the existing US-71 alignment (which is part of the current plan).

As far as I know, the only part of I-49 that will lie directly on top of US 71 is the stretch through Foran Gap (part of the US 270 piggyback, this is the stretch northeast of Mena with the big sweeping S curve). There is enough room through Foran Gap to put both lanes of I-49 next to the current US 71-270 alignment if they really want to. The rest of the highway will be new terrain.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on September 20, 2017, 08:12:03 PM
Is there an updated map showing the proposed alignment between Alma and Texarkana?

Is there any updated news on the Mena bypass? I haven't read anything new about it in a while.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on September 28, 2017, 02:07:55 PM
In ARDOT's July 26, 2017 presentation to the Arkansas State Highway Commission (http://www.arkansashighways.com/PowerPoints/2017/20170726%20AHC%20Meeting.pdf), they informed the Commission that they will submit the joint application for the Bella Vista Bypass as an INFRA grant application (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=20590.msg2239213#msg2239213) by the November 2 deadline (pp. 25-26/85 of pdf):
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/gallery/1615_16_08_17_10_27_35.png)

I had wondered why ARDOT's Sept. 6 presentation to the Arkansas State Highway Commission did not include the above joint application for the Bella Vista Bypass among the ARDOT INFRA applications, and I believe that this article (http://www.arkansasonline.com/news/2017/sep/28/nw-planners-to-apply-for-funds-to-help-/) provides the answer: ARDOT is allowing the Northwest Arkansas Regional Planning Commission to submit an application instead:

Quote
The Northwest Arkansas Regional Planning Commission will apply for a federal grant to help cash-strapped Missouri finish its part of Interstate 49 around Bella Vista.
"It's a long shot, but nothing ventured, nothing gained," said Jeff Hawkins, executive director of regional planning. "It's totally within our planning area, both sides of the line."
The Bella Vista bypass is now labeled the Missouri/Arkansas Interstate 49 Connector Project to better denote its regional significance, planners said.

Missouri has acquired the right of way, done an environmental study, designed the road and set aside $18.4 million for the project, regional planners were told. But,Missouri is about $32.4 million short.
Arkansas has money set aside for its remaining portion of the highway.
It is hoped the $32.4 million will come from a federal Department of Transportation grant program known as Infrastructure for Rebuilding America.
The $1.5 billion in discretionary money is earmarked for projects that involve moving freight. The program looks to use local and state money for highways and ports.
The money would be given to Missouri, which would then build the highway.
The federal program is specifically focused on projects in which a local sponsor is significantly invested and is positioned to proceed rapidly to construction, according to a news release.
"It meets the criteria just like it was written for it," Hawkins said of the project.
Planners approved a resolution to apply for the grant Wednesday afternoon. It has the support of the Missouri and Arkansas departments of transportation.
"I think it's a wonderful project. Scott Bennett and I have discussed it, and we support it and I know the commission will support it," Arkansas Highway Commission chairman Dick Trammel said. "What I like about this project is departments came together, municipal units came together -- everybody came together to try to make this possible." ....
Missouri officials earlier this year asked the Northwest Arkansas Regional Planning Commission to amend the region's Transportation Improvement Plan, which includes McDonald County, Mo., and move the project back until at least 2021. The improvement plan is a list of federally funded transportation projects proposed by various communities, transit providers, the commission, and the Arkansas and Missouri transportation departments.
Frank Miller, a planning manager for the Missouri Department of Transportation southwest division, said the department is just trying to maintain the infrastructure it has with the money it has available ....

I think that this is a "cleaner" request since the territory involved is all under one organization's area; it doesn't mean that they will get it, but they are giving it a well-thought out shot.

edit

This TV video (http://www.nwahomepage.com/news/knwa/arkansas-showing-missouri-the-money-for-i-49-project/819881843) provides a good description of the grant application.

Also, there is another article (http://5newsonline.com/2017/09/28/nwa-planners-hope-federal-grant-could-solve-i-49-gap-between-missouri-and-arkansas/) about it:

Quote
Tim Conklin, assistant director for the Northwest Arkansas Regional Planning Commission ....
“It’s a project that is of national significance, not only for Arkansas but for the state of Missouri,”  Conklin said.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: TheArkansasRoadgeek on October 04, 2017, 11:32:13 AM
If this (http://www.arkansashighways.com/news/2017/NR%2017-393.pdf) helps anyone. It's news on AR[US] 62 and AR 102 (I-49 widening)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on October 04, 2017, 11:46:22 AM
If this (http://www.arkansashighways.com/news/2017/NR%2017-393.pdf) helps anyone. It's is news on AR 62 and AR 102 (I-49 widening)

US 62 :)

That whole area is a clusterf*ck right now because they are also building the 8th St interchange.

On a side note,  Exit 88 (AR 72) has been split into two exits northbound.  88A is AR 72 E , 88B is "West East Central Ave".

Southbound, it still appears to be one exit.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: TheArkansasRoadgeek on October 04, 2017, 12:53:29 PM
If this (http://www.arkansashighways.com/news/2017/NR%2017-393.pdf) helps anyone. It's is news on AR 62 and AR 102 (I-49 widening)

US 62 :)

That whole area is a clusterf*ck right now because they are also building the 8th St interchange.

On a side note,  Exit 88 (AR 72) has been split into two exits northbound.  88A is AR 72 E , 88B is "West East Central Ave".

Southbound, it still appears to be one exit.
In my defense, they only stated "HWY 62", so there was confussion. :)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Wayward Memphian on November 06, 2017, 12:40:50 PM
https://talkbusiness.net/2017/11/arkansasmissouri-connector-could-open-in-2022-if-commission-receives-grant/
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on November 06, 2017, 02:38:27 PM
https://talkbusiness.net/2017/11/arkansasmissouri-connector-could-open-in-2022-if-commission-receives-grant/

Hasn't this grant process been in the works for some time now?....and is there a specific date when any announcements about whether the I-49 project would actually receive the grant would be made?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on November 16, 2017, 07:39:54 PM
Wednesday low bid for 090508, Hwy 71 to Co.Rd. 34 on the Bella Vista Bypass was 27,505,530.86 by Kolb Grading. More progress on I 49 of closing the gap between Arkansas and Missouri. Maybe the INFRA grant will come thru sometime in early next year to finish it.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on November 21, 2017, 10:23:51 PM
Hopefully this will help get the INFRA Grant that NWA commission is asking for.                                                                                               ROCK (KFSM) – The state Highway Commission has approved a bid to expand the Bella Vista Bypass between U.S. 71 and Benton County 34, according to a news release.

The commission  on Monday (Nov. 20) awarded a $27.5 million contract to Kolb Grading, LLC to construct 8.8 miles of two additional lanes of Arkansas 549, commonly called the Bella Vista Bypass.

The company, based out of St. Charles, Mo., is expected to begin work in two to four weeks, weather permitting, according to the release.

The Arkansas Department of Transportation expects the project to be finished by late 2019.

The bypass runs west from the roundabout on North Walton Boulevard in Bentonville and passes through portions of Hiwasse and unincorporated Benton County before terminating at Benton County 34.



Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Henry on November 22, 2017, 09:59:15 AM
I'll believe it when I see them working on it. Hopefully, it will be done within the next decade, because wasn't it MO who refused to extend their own portion of the bypass until AR did so for theirs?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on November 22, 2017, 07:52:10 PM
Hopefully this will help get the INFRA Grant that NWA commission is asking for.                                                                                               ROCK (KFSM) – The state Highway Commission has approved a bid to expand the Bella Vista Bypass between U.S. 71 and Benton County 34, according to a news release.

The commission  on Monday (Nov. 20) awarded a $27.5 million contract to Kolb Grading, LLC to construct 8.8 miles of two additional lanes of Arkansas 549, commonly called the Bella Vista Bypass.

The company, based out of St. Charles, Mo., is expected to begin work in two to four weeks, weather permitting, according to the release.

The Arkansas Department of Transportation expects the project to be finished by late 2019.

The bypass runs west from the roundabout on North Walton Boulevard in Bentonville and passes through portions of Hiwasse and unincorporated Benton County before terminating at Benton County 34.

Like him or not, this pretty much jibes with what Dick Trammell said a year or two back...words to the effect of: "From here on out, you'll likely see continuous construction (on the Arkansas side) of the Bella Vista Bypass until it's finished."
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on November 22, 2017, 08:16:57 PM


Like him or not, this pretty much jibes with what Dick Trammell said a year or two back...words to the effect of: "From here on out, you'll likely see continuous construction (on the Arkansas side) of the Bella Vista Bypass until it's finished."

He's going to sprain his arm one of these days patting himself on the back.  </sarcasm>
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on November 23, 2017, 12:39:54 AM


Like him or not, this pretty much jibes with what Dick Trammell said a year or two back...words to the effect of: "From here on out, you'll likely see continuous construction (on the Arkansas side) of the Bella Vista Bypass until it's finished."

He's going to sprain his arm one of these days patting himself on the back.  </sarcasm>

Understood.  As long as what he says comes true in a timely enough fashion, more power to him.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on December 21, 2017, 10:00:03 PM
The rebuild at I-49 and AR 112 appears to almost be finished. Road crews were paving the new Exit 67 A-B ramps off SB 49 today.

67A replaces exit 66 and will be AR 112/ Garland Ave

67B is US 71 B/ Fulbright Expressway.

It's going to be a clusterf*ck until people are used to it.

Traffic turning onto NB 49 from NB 112 now have a separate ramp apart from the mainline 49 that will split into I-49 and 71B.
Mainline 49 will have it's own exit to 71B and the ramps will merge, as will the ramps for NB 49, which will also merge with traffic entering from 71B.

SB 49 will no longer have a direct exit to AR 112, but a separate lane of traffic. 


And remember: there is never enough time or money to do the job right the first time, but plenty of time and money to go back and fix things ;)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: GreenLanternCorps on January 04, 2018, 11:46:16 AM
Ran Across the below article a couple of days ago on a political comment website that I frequent.

Also had to explain to a commenter on how a state could apply tolls to a "Federal" highway...   :rolleyes:


https://www.equipmentworld.com/ark-dot-studies-possible-first-toll-road-for-state/

Ark. DOT studies possible first toll road for state
Don McLoud | December 26, 2017

A future Interstate 49 and whether it will become Arkansas’ first toll road are being considered, with public meetings likely coming in early 2018, reports KFSM news station.

The interstate section being considered would stretch from Barling to Alma over the Arkansas River. The Arkansas Department of Transportation has commissioned a study on charging tolls on the future highway section.

The study is scheduled to be completed next fall, and public meetings are expected at the first of 2018 to get public input on the project, the station reports.

Interstate 49 would eventually stretch from New Orleans to Canada. Portions of the highway have been constructed elsewhere and are being constructed in Arkansas.

The Interstate 49 International Coalition says the highway is about 80 percent complete, with the Arkansas portion between Texarkana and Fort Smith among the remaining pieces to be built. The state is still trying to come up with the $2.5 billion needed for the project.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on January 04, 2018, 05:44:48 PM
Ran Across the below article a couple of days ago on a political comment website that I frequent.

Also had to explain to a commenter on how a state could apply tolls to a "Federal" highway...   :rolleyes:


https://www.equipmentworld.com/ark-dot-studies-possible-first-toll-road-for-state/

Ark. DOT studies possible first toll road for state
Don McLoud | December 26, 2017

A future Interstate 49 and whether it will become Arkansas’ first toll road are being considered, with public meetings likely coming in early 2018, reports KFSM news station.

The interstate section being considered would stretch from Barling to Alma over the Arkansas River. The Arkansas Department of Transportation has commissioned a study on charging tolls on the future highway section.

The study is scheduled to be completed next fall, and public meetings are expected at the first of 2018 to get public input on the project, the station reports.

Interstate 49 would eventually stretch from New Orleans to Canada. Portions of the highway have been constructed elsewhere and are being constructed in Arkansas.

The Interstate 49 International Coalition says the highway is about 80 percent complete, with the Arkansas portion between Texarkana and Fort Smith among the remaining pieces to be built. The state is still trying to come up with the $2.5 billion needed for the project.

So -- are tolls being contemplated for just the planned I-49 Arkansas River bridge or for the entire segment between Ft. Smith and Texarkana?  The article is so vague that this can't be determined given the info provided. 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: kphoger on January 04, 2018, 05:59:25 PM
↑  I didn't think the article was vague.  ↑

Quote from: the article
A future Interstate 49 and whether it will become Arkansas’ first toll road are being considered ... The interstate section being considered would stretch from Barling to Alma over the Arkansas River.

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on January 04, 2018, 09:25:52 PM
↑  I didn't think the article was vague.  ↑

Quote from: the article
A future Interstate 49 and whether it will become Arkansas’ first toll road are being considered ... The interstate section being considered would stretch from Barling to Alma over the Arkansas River.


My 68-year-old eyes must be getting weak -- missed the reference completely (actually, I skimmed the article directly without going to the synopsis provided by greenlanterncorps).  Lunch hour, you know -- trying to do too much in what's really 45 minutes.  Oh well...........In any case, I'm glad the reference is to the bridge alone; I don't think trying to toll the entire length of I-49 south of I-40 would be feasible -- it would be so easy to shunpike via US 271/59 through OK and miss the portion of the route that's expected to directly overlay US 71 (and part of US 270 as well); the remainder through Mena and De Queen could be done on either the old road or nearby state highways.  Probably end up being a fiscal nightmare.  Tolls on the bridge, OTOH, are certainly feasible if kept to a reasonable level (not the $5 per crossing we're used to here in NorCal -- and going up soon, if Caltrans has its way!).  For Arkansas, a buck and a half seems about right.     
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Tomahawkin on January 04, 2018, 11:54:28 PM
Wow! I suggested this in College on a term paper circa 2007 and maybe 49 as a toll road between Ft Smith and Texarkana will come to fruition. Most people who will travel that area from out of state should pay 2 dollars plus, depending on # of axles. Locals should pay .50 cents or exempt depending on mileage and axles. Its moot though. But I'm glad the slow #### dot are finally considering it. The money generated could fund expansion projects in NWA and accelerate I-69
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on January 05, 2018, 11:06:01 AM
I can see I-49 between the South side of Fort Smith and Ashdown being a viable turnpike. But putting up tolls on what will be an unremarkable looking, standard freeway bridge over the Arkansas River just from Alma to Barling? I have doubts such a plan is workable.

I-540 and its free crossing of the Arkansas River is just 5 miles West of the I-49/I-40 interchange in Alma. AR-59 has a free crossing of the Arkansas River very near where the I-49 of the Arkansas River would be built. Locals will have 3 free options to cross the river and avoid using an I-49 toll bridge. Shunpiking would even be an issue with out of town drivers. Right now you can drive up the freeway stub in Barling, use AR-59 to cross the river, connect to I-540 in Van Buren and be on I-40 and I-49 pretty quickly.

Toll rates on an I-49 bridge over the Arkansas River would have to be pretty cheap to discourage shunkpiking. Not just cheap enough to make the toll less expensive than the extra fuel used to bypass the bridge, but cheap enough to make the pain in the ass of stopping at a toll gate not so bad. Having to stop at a toll gate can be enough incentive to drive miles around it (especially if it's a dinky toll gate with few lanes, prone to traffic back-ups). So ARDOT has to figure out just how cheap the toll can be for the bridge to pay for itself. If the figure is high enough to induce shunpiking then they're going to be stuck paying for this bridge with fuel tax revenue or other measures.

If they can reach the right balance of a workable cheap toll price another question remains: what RFID toll tag system will the bridge use? Are we going to have yet another toll road authority and unique toll tag? Last time I checked we're still quite a long way from achieving completely interoperability between just this region's toll tags, much less reaching the goal of nationwide interoperability.

Quote from: Tomahawkin
The money generated could fund expansion projects in NWA and accelerate I-69.

That might be over-estimating the ability of this toll bridge to attract traffic rather than entice it to drive a few miles farther to free crossings. Shunpiking is a big enough threat that ARDOT will be lucky if they can set toll prices just high enough to merely pay for the bridge. In the end I think they're going to be stuck making it a free crossing.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on January 05, 2018, 11:12:55 AM
Wow! I suggested this in College on a term paper circa 2007 and maybe 49 as a toll road between Ft Smith and Texarkana will come to fruition. Most people who will travel that area from out of state should pay 2 dollars plus, depending on # of axles. Locals should pay .50 cents or exempt depending on mileage and axles. Its moot though. But I'm glad the slow #### dot are finally considering it. The money generated could fund expansion projects in NWA and accelerate I-69

ARDOT has a reputation of funding pet projects rather than what is needed, so I don't know if tolls would have much effect in NWA.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: inkyatari on January 05, 2018, 12:41:14 PM

That might be over-estimating the ability of this toll bridge to attract traffic rather than entice it to drive a few miles farther to free crossings. Shunpiking is a big enough threat that ARDOT will be lucky if they can set toll prices just high enough to merely pay for the bridge. In the end I think they're going to be stuck making it a free crossing.

IMHO, the only way to discourage shunpiking is to make the whole Ft. Smith / Texarkana portion a tollway.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on January 05, 2018, 02:02:09 PM
Wow! I suggested this in College on a term paper circa 2007 and maybe 49 as a toll road between Ft Smith and Texarkana will come to fruition. Most people who will travel that area from out of state should pay 2 dollars plus, depending on # of axles. Locals should pay .50 cents or exempt depending on mileage and axles. Its moot though. But I'm glad the slow #### dot are finally considering it. The money generated could fund expansion projects in NWA and accelerate I-69

I don't want "money generated" to fund anything. Once the bridge is paid off, make it free
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on January 05, 2018, 02:10:13 PM
Quote from: inkyatari
IMHO, the only way to discourage shunpiking is to make the whole Ft. Smith / Texarkana portion a tollway.

Yeah, in this case the turnpike would have to start at the I-40/I-49 interchange in Alma and remain as a toll road all the way to Texarkana. That would simplify the situation a great deal. I don't think the toll bridge idea alone is very do-able. One downside of making all of I-49 a toll road South of I-40 is it might stifle any kind of commercial and residential development in the Barling area that might otherwise sprout next to an Interstate with toll-free access. I guess it all depends on what regional planners in Fort Smith and Barling would like to have happen in that area. The exits on that fragment of Interstate quality highway are currently free. Adding tolls to them might piss off some locals. It would cost at least some money to modify those exits.

There are numerous cities (like here in Lawton) where the Interstate passing through has free exits while in the city but turns into a toll road outside of town. I-44 does the same thing in Tulsa. Buffalo is like that with I-90. I would suggest AR DOT do the same thing with I-49 on the East side of Fort Smith if any of it is to become a toll road at all. There is even a question if I-49 between Fort Smith and Texarkana can generate enough traffic and toll revenue to pay for itself rather than use fuel tax revenue.

Quote from: bjrush
I don't want "money generated" to fund anything. Once the bridge is paid off, make it free.

That presumes there is enough revenue coming in from fuel taxes to cover maintenance and any necessary improvements on the bridge once it becomes "free." Here in Oklahoma so many people want the toll gates to be removed from our turnpikes "since they're paid for." But since the state hasn't changed its fuel taxes since 1993 it sure doesn't have the tax revenue to take ownership (and the costs that come with it) of over 600+ miles of toll roads. At least not without bumping up those fuel taxes a good bit.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Tomahawkin on January 05, 2018, 10:34:16 PM
This is cool, I see a lot more people are on board with making this a toll road between Ft Smith and Texarkana? 10 years ago when I lived in Fayetteville, a lot of athletes and students from Dallas, Houston, and NOLA complained about no direct way there as well as the spring breakers who would go to South Padre or Panama city. Its why I looked into it as well as what it would do to the corporations in NWA ( Wal Mart, Tyson, etc). I thought it would be a great research paper. Thanks for everyone who has commented. With that in mind. It would also add money to NWA for school and game day traffic improvements. When I lived out there I was told by many former Californians that area is a destination for them because of the low cost of living, same with a lot of Texans who moved to NWA since 2000. I need opinions on the growth?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on January 07, 2018, 01:13:44 AM
Given the current situation with philosophies on taxes in both the federal government and Arkansas state government, I think hell will freeze over before I-49 gets built between Fort Smith and Texarkana. Not under the current mindset and extremely slow trickle of fuel tax dollars like little farts in the wind from the federal government. If all or significant parts of the Fort Smith to Texarkana segment of I-49 was going to be completed by 2030 or even 2040 that part of I-49 would have to be built as a toll road, likely in some sort of public-private partnership. I see no other way of getting it done quickly. The only way I-49 gets completed as a "free" road and completed within the next 50 years is by sweeping changes in politics over how we regard highway infrastructure.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on January 07, 2018, 01:38:04 AM
Given the current situation with philosophies on taxes in both the federal government and Arkansas state government, I think hell will freeze over before I-49 gets built between Fort Smith and Texarkana. Not under the current mindset and extremely slow trickle of fuel tax dollars little farts in the wind from the federal government. If all or significant parts of the Fort Smith to Texarkana segment of I-49 was going to be completed by 2030 or even 2040 that part of I-49 would have to be built as a toll road, likely in some sort of public-private partnership. I see no other way of getting it done quickly. The only way I-49 gets completed as a "free" road and completed within the next 50 years is by sweeping changes in politics over how we regard highway infrastructure.
I hate to get political here, but Arkansas has a more moderate tradition than other states and I trust they will do the right thing eventually. (Granted, you'll have to hope someone from Mena runs for governor.)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on January 07, 2018, 11:28:35 AM
I think the migration from Texas to NWA is overstated. So I looked at the most recently available Metro to Metro migration data from the US Census Bureau.

26.9% - rural, nonmetro areas in the US (admittedly not very helpful, but I would imagine the primary state here is Arkansas)
7%- Little Rock metro
7%- Asia
4.8%- DFW
4.4%- Fort Smith metro
3%- Tulsa
2.3%- Central America
2.14%- Kansas City
2.13%- Joplin
2%- Los Angeles
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on January 07, 2018, 03:23:45 PM
Given the current situation with philosophies on taxes in both the federal government and Arkansas state government, I think hell will freeze over before I-49 gets built between Fort Smith and Texarkana. Not under the current mindset and extremely slow trickle of fuel tax dollars little farts in the wind from the federal government. If all or significant parts of the Fort Smith to Texarkana segment of I-49 was going to be completed by 2030 or even 2040 that part of I-49 would have to be built as a toll road, likely in some sort of public-private partnership. I see no other way of getting it done quickly. The only way I-49 gets completed as a "free" road and completed within the next 50 years is by sweeping changes in politics over how we regard highway infrastructure.
I hate to get political here, but Arkansas has a more moderate tradition than other states and I trust they will do the right thing eventually. (Granted, you'll have to hope someone from Mena runs for governor.)

HEY BUGO!!   :-D
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on January 09, 2018, 02:19:30 AM
Proposed exit numbering From Polk Conty Fort Chaffee area: http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49-Proposed-Mileage.pdf

There's not going to be an exit at AR 8 near the infamous Mena airport?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: TheArkansasRoadgeek on January 09, 2018, 10:05:51 AM
That presumes there is enough revenue coming in from fuel taxes to cover maintenance and any necessary improvements on the bridge once it becomes "free." Here in Oklahoma so many people want the toll gates to be removed from our turnpikes "since they're paid for." But since the state hasn't changed its fuel taxes since 1993 it sure doesn't have the tax revenue to take ownership (and the costs that come with it) of over 600+ miles of toll roads. At least not without bumping up those fuel taxes a good bit.
It seems Arkansas is always in favor of paying higher gas taxes and then complains about them! :-D
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on January 09, 2018, 11:06:13 AM
That presumes there is enough revenue coming in from fuel taxes to cover maintenance and any necessary improvements on the bridge once it becomes "free." Here in Oklahoma so many people want the toll gates to be removed from our turnpikes "since they're paid for." But since the state hasn't changed its fuel taxes since 1993 it sure doesn't have the tax revenue to take ownership (and the costs that come with it) of over 600+ miles of toll roads. At least not without bumping up those fuel taxes a good bit.
It seems Arkansas is always in favor of paying higher gas taxes and then complains about them! :-D

Usually it's expecting someone else to pay for the roads (truckers, tourists, etc) or to be magically fixed my leprechauns.

As far as exits are concerned, I think ARDOT sent out a diagram a while back showing where all the proposed exits were.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on January 10, 2018, 08:25:33 PM
A better way to shunpike an I-49 toll road would be to exit onto US 71 north between Greenwood and Fort Smith and take it to I-540. Take I-540 to I-40 east back to I-49 north. All 4 lanes divided and only a few traffic lights.

As far as charging locals less than out of towners...no. Just no. That is unfair. If you're going to have a toll road make everybody pay the same fare.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on January 10, 2018, 09:38:00 PM
Proposed exit numbering From Polk Conty Fort Chaffee area: http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49-Proposed-Mileage.pdf
There's not going to be an exit at AR 8 near the infamous Mena airport?

Oops, I posted the wrong link in the above quote. Here is the correct link:

http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/I-49_Exits_2.pdf
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on January 11, 2018, 12:33:44 AM
One of the maps shows an exit at AR 8 and another doesn't. I assume the one without the exit is incorrect because I have read several articles that mentioned an exit near the airport. It would be silly not to have an exit there because it is a fairly major highway and is right next to the "Cocaine Airport".
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Wayward Memphian on January 19, 2018, 03:54:46 PM
I think the migration from Texas to NWA is overstated. So I looked at the most recently available Metro to Metro migration data from the US Census Bureau.

26.9% - rural, nonmetro areas in the US (admittedly not very helpful, but I would imagine the primary state here is Arkansas)
7%- Little Rock metro
7%- Asia
4.8%- DFW
4.4%- Fort Smith metro
3%- Tulsa
2.3%- Central America
2.14%- Kansas City
2.13%- Joplin
2%- Los Angeles

All one has to do is look at the incoming freshmen classes at the U of A to see the Metroplex impact on NWA. Last year the Uof A admitted a record amount of Arkansas kids , yet were outnumbered by Metroplex kids. Couple that with amount of alumni that head to the Metroplex to work/live and there's some numbers that kinda get lost in the shuffle. Hit I-49 from Alma to Fayetteville on a Sun night after a break and get back with me on the amount of Texas tags that you saw. These folks already have toll tags, make two turnpikes between Ft. Skith and Ashdown and one between Mena and Texarkana and hit them twice and join in with OK and North Tx. Keep the immedate Mena area free for locals communting. Everyone I know would gladly pay. They hate the McAlister to Durant segment in Okie. Okie is stupid for not having done it yet.

Once built, I think folks would be shocked how well recwives it would be as the silent majority would wear it out. Same would go for a Turnpike across North Arkansas replacing US412 and tYing into US 67/I-57 and then I-555. It would take pressure off I-40 between LIT and MEM.

I'm at a loss as to why even Southwest Air hasn't got a clue and added DAL from XNA to enter the market.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: rte66man on January 19, 2018, 07:00:28 PM
I think the migration from Texas to NWA is overstated. So I looked at the most recently available Metro to Metro migration data from the US Census Bureau.

26.9% - rural, nonmetro areas in the US (admittedly not very helpful, but I would imagine the primary state here is Arkansas)
7%- Little Rock metro
7%- Asia
4.8%- DFW
4.4%- Fort Smith metro
3%- Tulsa
2.3%- Central America
2.14%- Kansas City
2.13%- Joplin
2%- Los Angeles

All one has to do is look at the incoming freshmen classes at the U of A to see the Metroplex impact on NWA. Last year the Uof A admitted a record amount of Arkansas kids , yet were outnumbered by Metroplex kids. Couple that with amount of alumni that head to the Metroplex to work/live and there's some numbers that kinda get lost in the shuffle. Hit I-49 from Alma to Fayetteville on a Sun night after a break and get back with me on the amount of Texas tags that you saw. These folks already have toll tags, make two turnpikes between Ft. Skith and Ashdown and one between Mena and Texarkana and hit them twice and join in with OK and North Tx. Keep the immedate Mena area free for locals communting. Everyone I know would gladly pay. They hate the McAlister to Durant segment in Okie. Okie is stupid for not having done it yet.

It's because college kids aren't migrating (permanently moving) to NWA. If they stay there after graduation, then they should be counted.

I believe the Rural migrators are mainly from eastern OK where there is a lack of good job opportunities.

There isn't enough room on this page to refute your comment that "OK is stupid for not doing this".  BTW, Okie is considered an insult in some areas.  They don't like the word as it usually is tied back to poor whites who moved to California in the Dust Bowl days and they don't want to be reminded of it.  Think "The Grapes of Wrath". 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Wayward Memphian on January 20, 2018, 08:28:32 PM
I think the migration from Texas to NWA is overstated. So I looked at the most recently available Metro to Metro migration data from the US Census Bureau.

26.9% - rural, nonmetro areas in the US (admittedly not very helpful, but I would imagine the primary state here is Arkansas)
7%- Little Rock metro
7%- Asia
4.8%- DFW
4.4%- Fort Smith metro
3%- Tulsa
2.3%- Central America
2.14%- Kansas City
2.13%- Joplin
2%- Los Angeles

All one has to do is look at the incoming freshmen classes at the U of A to see the Metroplex impact on NWA. Last year the Uof A admitted a record amount of Arkansas kids , yet were outnumbered by Metroplex kids. Couple that with amount of alumni that head to the Metroplex to work/live and there's some numbers that kinda get lost in the shuffle. Hit I-49 from Alma to Fayetteville on a Sun night after a break and get back with me on the amount of Texas tags that you saw. These folks already have toll tags, make two turnpikes between Ft. Skith and Ashdown and one between Mena and Texarkana and hit them twice and join in with OK and North Tx. Keep the immedate Mena area free for locals communting. Everyone I know would gladly pay. They hate the McAlister to Durant segment in Okie. Okie is stupid for not having done it yet.

It's because college kids aren't migrating (permanently moving) to NWA. If they stay there after graduation, then they should be counted.

I believe the Rural migrators are mainly from eastern OK where there is a lack of good job opportunities.

There isn't enough room on this page to refute your comment that "OK is stupid for not doing this".  BTW, Okie is considered an insult in some areas.  They don't like the word as it usually is tied back to poor whites who moved to California in the Dust Bowl days and they don't want to be reminded of it.  Think "The Grapes of Wrath".

Spare this Arkie overy over the sensibilities of Okies.

I think 49 would be totally pointless if 'Okie' finally turnpiked US 67 from McAlister to Durant.


Fixed quoting-us71
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Revive 755 on January 20, 2018, 09:09:58 PM
^ Disagree, as I-49, when combined with I-369 and/or I-69, will provide a way to Houston without going through the Dallas area.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: rte66man on January 20, 2018, 09:17:53 PM

Spare this Arkie overy over the sensibilities of Okies.

I think 49 would be totally pointless if 'Okie' finally turnpiked US 67 from McAlister to Durant.

Overy?

Also, I wasn't aware 67 ran anywhere near Oklahoma
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: yakra on January 20, 2018, 11:27:37 PM
Also, I wasn't aware 67 ran anywhere near Oklahoma
69, probably
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on January 27, 2018, 06:11:14 PM
I think the migration from Texas to NWA is overstated. So I looked at the most recently available Metro to Metro migration data from the US Census Bureau.

26.9% - rural, nonmetro areas in the US (admittedly not very helpful, but I would imagine the primary state here is Arkansas)
7%- Little Rock metro
7%- Asia
4.8%- DFW
4.4%- Fort Smith metro
3%- Tulsa
2.3%- Central America
2.14%- Kansas City
2.13%- Joplin
2%- Los Angeles

All one has to do is look at the incoming freshmen classes at the U of A to see the Metroplex impact on NWA. Last year the Uof A admitted a record amount of Arkansas kids , yet were outnumbered by Metroplex kids. Couple that with amount of alumni that head to the Metroplex to work/live and there's some numbers that kinda get lost in the shuffle. Hit I-49 from Alma to Fayetteville on a Sun night after a break and get back with me on the amount of Texas tags that you saw. These folks already have toll tags, make two turnpikes between Ft. Skith and Ashdown and one between Mena and Texarkana and hit them twice and join in with OK and North Tx. Keep the immedate Mena area free for locals communting. Everyone I know would gladly pay. They hate the McAlister to Durant segment in Okie. Okie is stupid for not having done it yet.

It's because college kids aren't migrating (permanently moving) to NWA. If they stay there after graduation, then they should be counted.

I believe the Rural migrators are mainly from eastern OK where there is a lack of good job opportunities.

There isn't enough room on this page to refute your comment that "OK is stupid for not doing this".  BTW, Okie is considered an insult in some areas.  They don't like the word as it usually is tied back to poor whites who moved to California in the Dust Bowl days and they don't want to be reminded of it.  Think "The Grapes of Wrath".

7%- Asia (Wow, on its own.)

If anything, there are a lot of kids who move (often from the Metroplex) BACK to Northwest Arkansas.  I'd be curious to see statistics on how many NWA HS graduates either stay or return to the area after graduation today vs. as recently as 30-35 years ago.

And NWA is still going to be squarely, geographically in the middle of the hourglass-shaped corridor between Winnipeg/Minneapolis-St.Paul/Houston/New Orleans some day, even though we really have no clue as to the full effect of that (but can make some partially-educated guesses).
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Wayward Memphian on January 30, 2018, 10:49:52 AM
I think the migration from Texas to NWA is overstated. So I looked at the most recently available Metro to Metro migration data from the US Census Bureau.

26.9% - rural, nonmetro areas in the US (admittedly not very helpful, but I would imagine the primary state here is Arkansas)
7%- Little Rock metro
7%- Asia
4.8%- DFW
4.4%- Fort Smith metro
3%- Tulsa
2.3%- Central America
2.14%- Kansas City
2.13%- Joplin
2%- Los Angeles

All one has to do is look at the incoming freshmen classes at the U of A to see the Metroplex impact on NWA. Last year the Uof A admitted a record amount of Arkansas kids , yet were outnumbered by Metroplex kids. Couple that with amount of alumni that head to the Metroplex to work/live and there's some numbers that kinda get lost in the shuffle. Hit I-49 from Alma to Fayetteville on a Sun night after a break and get back with me on the amount of Texas tags that you saw. These folks already have toll tags, make two turnpikes between Ft. Skith and Ashdown and one between Mena and Texarkana and hit them twice and join in with OK and North Tx. Keep the immedate Mena area free for locals communting. Everyone I know would gladly pay. They hate the McAlister to Durant segment in Okie. Okie is stupid for not having done it yet.

It's because college kids aren't migrating (permanently moving) to NWA. If they stay there after graduation, then they should be counted.

I believe the Rural migrators are mainly from eastern OK where there is a lack of good job opportunities.

There isn't enough room on this page to refute your comment that "OK is stupid for not doing this".  BTW, Okie is considered an insult in some areas.  They don't like the word as it usually is tied back to poor whites who moved to California in the Dust Bowl days and they don't want to be reminded of it.  Think "The Grapes of Wrath".

7%- Asia (Wow, on its own.)

If anything, there are a lot of kids who move (often from the Metroplex) BACK to Northwest Arkansas.  I'd be curious to see statistics on how many NWA HS graduates either stay or return to the area after graduation today vs. as recently as 30-35 years ago.

And NWA is still going to be squarely, geographically in the middle of the hourglass-shaped corridor between Winnipeg/Minneapolis-St.Paul/Houston/New Orleans some day, even though we really have no clue as to the full effect of that (but can make some partially-educated guesses).

God help us if this figure is correct. 90,000 housing units in 3 to 5 years? At 3 people per unit, that's 270,000 people on top of the current 550,000. I've been told by a realtor it's increased from 30 to 40 new residents a day in the last year.

https://talkbusiness.net/2018/01/growth-to-continue-during-2018-in-northwest-arkansas-state-human-and-financial-capital-key-to-long-term-growth/
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: TheArkansasRoadgeek on January 30, 2018, 11:03:30 AM
Any bets on what city is going to take Fort Smith's place as '2nd Largest'? I am just surprised people aren't moving out of FS.

Current Pop: 88,133 (https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/fortsmithcityarkansas/PST045216)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on January 30, 2018, 11:30:15 AM
Any bets on what city is going to take Fort Smith's place as '2nd Largest'? I am just surprised people aren't moving out of FS.

Current Pop: 88,133 (https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/fortsmithcityarkansas/PST045216)

They will be soon with Sears, Staples, and Toy R US leaving town, and Sparks Hospitla laying off a lot of staff so they can build new clinics. Don't forget the failed sports complex (that the city will probably not get their money back on because the money went to "charity") and the high water bills because the city waited 10 years to upgrade the sewers and only did so because they were ordered to. Plus Walmart eliminating most of their cashier positions.  But then, we have lots of new minimum wage fast food jobs.

I'm thinking Bentonville or Jonesboro will take over.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Wayward Memphian on January 30, 2018, 11:58:32 AM
Any bets on what city is going to take Fort Smith's place as '2nd Largest'? I am just surprised people aren't moving out of FS.

Current Pop: 88,133 (https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/fortsmithcityarkansas/PST045216)

I'd be shocked if Fayetteville or  Springdale hasn't already. Let's not forget that area immediately outside of Ft. SMitch jas grown, like Greenwood. I'd look at the MSA numbers over the city population.

Speaking of MSA's, let's just say that NWA only gets half of that projection that I posted and added around 150,000 over the next 5 years, that puts NWA at 675,000 in 2022.

Current sizes of our neighbors:

Tulsa's MSA is 981,000, CSA 1,151,000

LittleRock/Conway MSA 724,385

Ft. Smith MSA  290,000

It's looking like NWA is quickly running down Little Rock and if that 90,000 figure plays out, equals or surpasses Little Rock in 5 years and is knocking on Tulsa's door in 10 years. I said all along they should have 8 laned I-49 while they were at it. If they 4 lanes US412 all the way to Harrison and opened up a nice corridor between here and Springfield, I imagine that area would fill in as well.

If they ever made Ft Smith and NWA MSA's into a CSA, It catches Tulsa as quick as Little Rock.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: TheArkansasRoadgeek on January 30, 2018, 01:04:41 PM
Any bets on what city is going to take Fort Smith's place as '2nd Largest'? I am just surprised people aren't moving out of FS.

Current Pop: 88,133 (https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/fortsmithcityarkansas/PST045216)

I'd be shocked if Fayetteville or  Springdale hasn't already. Let's not forget that area immediately outside of Ft. SMitch jas grown, like Greenwood. I'd look at the MSA numbers over the city population.

Speaking of MSA's, let's just say that NWA only gets half of that projection that I posted and added around 150,000 over the next 5 years, that puts NWA at 675,000 in 2022.

Current sizes of our neighbors:

Tulsa's MSA is 981,000, CSA 1,151,000

LittleRock/Conway MSA 724,385

Ft. Smith MSA  290,000

It's looking like NWA is quickly running down Little Rock and if that 90,000 figure plays out, equals or surpasses Little Rock in 5 years and is knocking on Tulsa's door in 10 years. I said all along they should have 8 laned I-49 while they were at it. If they 4 lanes US412 all the way to Harrison and opened up a nice corridor between here and Springfield, I imagine that area would fill in as well.

If they ever made Ft Smith and NWA MSA's into a CSA, It catches Tulsa as quick as Little Rock.
Let's not talk about Greenwood's fail on granting a liquor license...

So, you're saying the MSA's where it's at? Not the city population? I am interested in seeing how significant the decline (or drop) will be -- free fall rates?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on January 30, 2018, 03:01:18 PM
Fayettenam is 83K to Ft Smith's 88K, so looks like that's where growth will be.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: TheArkansasRoadgeek on January 30, 2018, 03:26:50 PM
Also does that number for Little Rock's MSA include NLR? Kind of a nitpick, I know, but I just want to make sure that that number isn't beginning "short changed".

Oh and check this comparison out (https://datausa.io/profile/geo/little-rock-north-little-rock-conway-ar-metro-area/?compare=fort-smith-ar)!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on January 30, 2018, 03:34:46 PM
Also does that number for Little Rock's MSA include NLR? Kind of a nitpick, I know, but I just want to make sure that that number isn't beginning "short changed".

Oh and check this comparison out (https://datausa.io/profile/geo/little-rock-north-little-rock-conway-ar-metro-area/?compare=fort-smith-ar)!

Arkoma and Pocola are in Oklahoma, but are considered part of Fort Smith "Metro", so this page probably isn't good to prove your point
Title: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: TheArkansasRoadgeek on January 30, 2018, 03:38:39 PM
Oh, I was searching for some general data. I can try to get some from the Census Bureau.


Also, the page in question allows for comparison of MSAs

Fort Smith, AR-OK Metro Area (https://datausa.io/profile/geo/fort-smith-ar-ok-metro-area/)

iPhone
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on January 31, 2018, 03:23:23 AM
Fayettenam is 83K to Ft Smith's 88K, so looks like that's where growth will be.

Fayetteville proper, like Fort Smith to a large extent, is landlocked and limited in much further growth. Springdale should pass both in a few years. But I don’t see any one city catching Little Rock anytime soon.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: TheArkansasRoadgeek on January 31, 2018, 11:08:20 AM
Little Rock will slow down eventually. Plus we are wagering on the ”˜2nd Largest’, not which one will beat Little Rock. But, I agree, in regards to the NWA region – it is booming! With the way I-49 is going we may have another big interchange project on our hands.


iPhone
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on January 31, 2018, 11:18:00 AM
I hope ArTOD makes the engineering for the I 49 bridge project at Fort Smith a priority. I think it will help that area enhance more companies to locate. Maybe if they ever get the Infra structure bill passed it may get some help . 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Interstate 69 Fan on January 31, 2018, 11:19:32 AM
I’m betting that It’ll take a LONG time for I-49 to get completed between Ft. Smith & Texarkana, so any population rise would have to be from MO.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on January 31, 2018, 12:41:17 PM
The sooner they get the I-49 segment built between Alma and Barling (including the Arkansas river bridge) the more it will allow Fort Smith to at least have some chance at sharing a little of the growth going on in NWA.

I-49 completed through the Fort Chaffee area would open a good amount of area for new development, especially if the highway can start getting extended South past its current terminus. Fort Smith has a few decent looking areas. Garrison Ave in the downtown district looks alright. But then there's a bunch of other areas, including commercial zones like North 10th Street and Towson Ave which look really run down and cluttered with junk. And I thought certain parts of Lawton looked bad. Those zones look particularly horrible compared to the bustling commercial districts in Springdale and Rogers. New areas of business in the Fort Smith area along the I-49 corridor could eliminate some of the eye-sore crap in other parts of the city over the long term. New businesses and at least some existing businesses could relocate to these new commercial areas and then open up the possibility for the old properties to be revitalized or converted into residential space, green space, etc.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: TheArkansasRoadgeek on January 31, 2018, 01:11:11 PM
The sooner they get the I-49 segment built between Alma and Barling (including the Arkansas river bridge) the more it will allow Fort Smith to at least have some chance at sharing a little of the growth going on in NWA.

I-49 completed through the Fort Chaffee area would open a good amount of area for new development, especially if the highway can start getting extended South past its current terminus. Fort Smith has a few decent looking areas. Garrison Ave in the downtown district looks alright. But then there's a bunch of other areas, including commercial zones like North 10th Street and Towson Ave which look really run down and cluttered with junk. And I thought certain parts of Lawton looked bad. Those zones look particularly horrible compared to the bustling commercial districts in Springdale and Rogers. New areas of business in the Fort Smith area along the I-49 corridor could eliminate some of the eye-sore crap in other parts of the city over the long term. New businesses and at least some existing businesses could relocate to these new commercial areas and then open up the possibility for the old properties to be revitalized or converted into residential space, green space, etc.
Don’t forget Grand Ave! That is another getto of FS...

I feel exactly as if the city has left behind the eastern part of town in favor for the development over in the Chaffee Crossing area. Garrison Av could be better than it is. They have been building lofts on the Avenue, but it’s quite loud at night, so I think that will be a failed venture...


iPhone
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on January 31, 2018, 01:32:18 PM
(Talk Business) Northwest Arkansas waits for federal money for I-49 project supported by officials in 3 states: https://talkbusiness.net/2018/01/northwest-arkansas-waits-for-federal-money-for-i-49-project-supported-by-officials-in-3-states/
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on February 04, 2018, 09:45:58 AM
Fort Smith is the most dysfunctional city in Arkansas. None of these lofty development or redevelopment plans will be coming to fruition.

I-49 through the area is for the benefit of pass through travelers, not for every local to shave 2 minutes off their commute, or for "economic development" of a new strip mall in rural Sebastian County. If that's the goal, divide $500 million cost of the bridge over the 100,000 people living there and mail them a check, contingent upon they remain in the area for 20 years. That would be more effective economic development of Fort Smith than steel and concrete. But that's not the goal.

It's about lowering costs of goods from KC and points north to the Port of New Orleans. That's why it may be subject to federal funds. Because it is a highway of national importance. The further away from this message Arkansas officials get, the more provincial and petty our applications begging for funds will seem to the feds.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on February 04, 2018, 12:16:53 PM
Fort Smith is the most dysfunctional city in Arkansas. None of these lofty development or redevelopment plans will be coming to fruition.


Or darn close. The city ignored sewer problems for over 10 years until the Feds stepped in. Now our water bills have gone way up to pay for repairs.
 
Recycling was dumped in the landfill for almost 2 years because the price went up.

Whirlpool left town after our congressmen gave them a tax break to move to Mexico, leaving behind a polluted stream.

Toys R Us is closing, Sears has closed, K-Mart closed 9 years ago, Staples left town last Fall. Trane is reported to be leaving, as well.

But we have lots of fast food moving in and "shop & robs" ... and a few Indian/Thai restaurants.

Former Mayor Ray Baker used to say "Life's worth living in Ft Smith", but it's not anymore and Mayor Baker has gone to the "great beyond".  It wasn't like this when I moved here 10 years ago, but it is progressively going more and more down the toilet.

-end rant-
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Arkansastravelguy on February 05, 2018, 10:37:00 PM
They couldn’t pay me to live or work in Ft Smith. I’ll stay in Fayetteville, thank you.


iPhone
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on February 05, 2018, 11:10:23 PM
They couldn’t pay me to live or work in Ft Smith. I’ll stay in Fayetteville, thank you.



I shouldn't have left, but my "friends" were in Ft Smith who were suddenly "too busy" after I moved here.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: TheArkansasRoadgeek on February 06, 2018, 10:44:25 AM
They couldn’t pay me to live or work in Ft Smith. I’ll stay in Fayetteville, thank you.



I shouldn't have left, but my "friends" were in Ft Smith who were suddenly "too busy" after I moved here.
YOu should move back... Leave them wondering why you left! :) :-D
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: chays on February 09, 2018, 04:03:50 PM
The rebuild at I-49 and AR 112 appears to almost be finished. Road crews were paving the new Exit 67 A-B ramps off SB 49 today.

67A replaces exit 66 and will be AR 112/ Garland Ave

67B is US 71 B/ Fulbright Expressway.

It's going to be a clusterf*ck until people are used to it.

Traffic turning onto NB 49 from NB 112 now have a separate ramp apart from the mainline 49 that will split into I-49 and 71B.
Mainline 49 will have it's own exit to 71B and the ramps will merge, as will the ramps for NB 49, which will also merge with traffic entering from 71B.

SB 49 will no longer have a direct exit to AR 112, but a separate lane of traffic. 


And remember: there is never enough time or money to do the job right the first time, but plenty of time and money to go back and fix things ;)
Apologies for dredging this old post up, but do you have an independent source for the exit number change information?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: seicer on February 09, 2018, 04:15:23 PM
It was built fine the way it was - decades ago. It looks like on earlier USGS topos that it was two-lanes with a mix of interchanges and intersections - of course, being modified as the area grew and connections were made to the south and north.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on February 09, 2018, 05:41:30 PM
The rebuild at I-49 and AR 112 appears to almost be finished. Road crews were paving the new Exit 67 A-B ramps off SB 49 today.

67A replaces exit 66 and will be AR 112/ Garland Ave

67B is US 71 B/ Fulbright Expressway.

It's going to be a clusterf*ck until people are used to it.

Traffic turning onto NB 49 from NB 112 now have a separate ramp apart from the mainline 49 that will split into I-49 and 71B.
Mainline 49 will have it's own exit to 71B and the ramps will merge, as will the ramps for NB 49, which will also merge with traffic entering from 71B.

SB 49 will no longer have a direct exit to AR 112, but a separate lane of traffic. 


And remember: there is never enough time or money to do the job right the first time, but plenty of time and money to go back and fix things ;)
Apologies for dredging this old post up, but do you have an independent source for the exit number change information?

(https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4677/27820115519_2a1a32fb75_z_d.jpg)
Northbound along 49


(https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4717/39597134351_e099da5172_z_d.jpg)
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4618/39567931162_7b521b1a2a_z_d.jpg)
Southbound

ARDOT also announced the change back in December

ALSO, heading NB off 112, there is a separate ramp for 49/71B that doesn't interfere with through traffic on 49.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on February 09, 2018, 05:59:18 PM
It was built fine the way it was - decades ago. It looks like on earlier USGS topos that it was two-lanes with a mix of interchanges and intersections - of course, being modified as the area grew and connections were made to the south and north.

Correct. It was originally built circa 1970 as a 2-lane with at-grade crossings except US 62.  16/112 Spur was upgraded to an interchange circa 1980 due to too many accidents. Porter Rd was originally just a bridge/grade separation, but was upgraded to an interchange.  By 1990, it was all controlled access...then they started on "new" 71 to Bentonville and really screwed things up.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on April 03, 2018, 04:44:38 PM
ARDOT’s sneak peek of I-49 extension includes toll system

(Fort Smith Southwest Times Record, March 30, 2018)

Quote
An electronic tolling system that doesn’t call for cars to stop and pay is favored over traditional stop-and-pay toll lanes for initial plans of an Interstate 49 extension from Alma to Barling with a bridge over the Arkansas River.

A public input meeting is set to take place from 4-7 p.m. April 26 at Sacred Heart of Mary Church, 1301 Frank St., in Barling. A sneak peek of the plans was offered by the Arkansas Department of Transportation on Thursday. The proposed route stretches from Alma to Barling, bypassing Kibler to the east.

and;

Quote
The proposed I-49 route would cross Arkansas 162 near Hamer Road, then cross Frog Bayou near Waterfront Road before skirting the east side of Kibler at New Town Road, then proceed south and west over Thornhill Street, Westville Road and Gun Club Road before crossing the Arkansas River at Springhill Park into Barling, then connecting with I-549 at Arkansas 22.

About 100 parcels of land are adjacent to the proposed route, Jennifer Halstead of HNTB said. Studies indicate no disruptions with cemeteries, wildlife areas or gas lines, but public comment for the route is sought.

Representatives from both ARDOT and HNTB gave an update on the planning process Thursday at the Janet Huckabee Arkansas River Valley Nature Center in Chaffee Crossing. More than 30 “stakeholders”  in the project – mayors, state representatives, engineers and geologists to name a few – were present at the meeting for the “draft schematic preview”  and information gathering session from local leaders on issues with the proposed route.

Steve Core, Public Works director for Barling, pointed out that a grade elevation would be needed at H Street for access to sewer and gas lines and so as not to impede firefighter crews. Core noted after the meeting that construction of the I-49 extension will be challenging when encountered with the many coal and gas reservoirs in the area.

Terry Carson, president of the Van Buren Chamber of Commerce, told planners that an on-ramp at Arkansas 162 south of Alma may be more beneficial to residents than an on-ramp farther south at Clear Creek Road going into Kibler. It has been 21 years since a study was done that put the on-ramp at Clear Creek Road. The distance from the proposed crossing at Arkansas 162 and the on-ramp at Clear Creek Road is about 1.8 miles.

http://www.swtimes.com/news/20180330/ardots-sneak-peek-of-i-49-extension-includes-toll-system
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on April 06, 2018, 02:43:20 AM
ARDOT’s sneak peek of I-49 extension includes toll system

(Fort Smith Southwest Times Record, March 30, 2018)

Quote
An electronic tolling system that doesn’t call for cars to stop and pay is favored over traditional stop-and-pay toll lanes for initial plans of an Interstate 49 extension from Alma to Barling with a bridge over the Arkansas River.

A public input meeting is set to take place from 4-7 p.m. April 26 at Sacred Heart of Mary Church, 1301 Frank St., in Barling. A sneak peek of the plans was offered by the Arkansas Department of Transportation on Thursday. The proposed route stretches from Alma to Barling, bypassing Kibler to the east.

and;

Quote
The proposed I-49 route would cross Arkansas 162 near Hamer Road, then cross Frog Bayou near Waterfront Road before skirting the east side of Kibler at New Town Road, then proceed south and west over Thornhill Street, Westville Road and Gun Club Road before crossing the Arkansas River at Springhill Park into Barling, then connecting with I-549 at Arkansas 22.

About 100 parcels of land are adjacent to the proposed route, Jennifer Halstead of HNTB said. Studies indicate no disruptions with cemeteries, wildlife areas or gas lines, but public comment for the route is sought.

Representatives from both ARDOT and HNTB gave an update on the planning process Thursday at the Janet Huckabee Arkansas River Valley Nature Center in Chaffee Crossing. More than 30 “stakeholders”  in the project – mayors, state representatives, engineers and geologists to name a few – were present at the meeting for the “draft schematic preview”  and information gathering session from local leaders on issues with the proposed route.

Steve Core, Public Works director for Barling, pointed out that a grade elevation would be needed at H Street for access to sewer and gas lines and so as not to impede firefighter crews. Core noted after the meeting that construction of the I-49 extension will be challenging when encountered with the many coal and gas reservoirs in the area.

Terry Carson, president of the Van Buren Chamber of Commerce, told planners that an on-ramp at Arkansas 162 south of Alma may be more beneficial to residents than an on-ramp farther south at Clear Creek Road going into Kibler. It has been 21 years since a study was done that put the on-ramp at Clear Creek Road. The distance from the proposed crossing at Arkansas 162 and the on-ramp at Clear Creek Road is about 1.8 miles.

http://www.swtimes.com/news/20180330/ardots-sneak-peek-of-i-49-extension-includes-toll-system

IMO, attempting to implement a fully electronic system on a relatively short segment of Interstate 49 -- particularly when the full road when completed between Texarkana and Ft. Smith will be hosting a sizeable number of out-of-state drivers -- is asking for trouble, at least in terms of actually collecting revenues.  Rather than having to chase down sporadic non-local drivers by their plates, it might be beneficial to place a "cash" lane at or near the transponder gantry to collect tolls simply and directly. 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on April 06, 2018, 02:06:20 PM
If only the portion between Barling and Alma is tolled, most knowledgeable drivers will just shunpike it via I-40, I-540 and US 71. US 71 has some lights but it's 4 lanes divided and the distance between I-49 and I-540 isn't that great.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: The Ghostbuster on April 06, 2018, 05:45:02 PM
If electronic tolling helps pay for building Interstate 49 between Interstate 30 and Interstate 40, I say go for it!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Tomahawkin on April 06, 2018, 06:50:17 PM
The tolling of 49 also helps keeping both 40 and 55 properly maintained and could help fund future transportation projects on IH 49 In Fayetteville and points north
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on April 06, 2018, 09:21:10 PM
The tolling of 49 also helps keeping both 40 and 55 properly maintained and could help fund future transportation projects on IH 49 In Fayetteville and points north
If ARDOT is the tolling authority. If not, the only person getting rich is Asa Hutchinson. Like Rick Perry tried a decade ago.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on April 06, 2018, 09:32:58 PM
The tolling of 49 also helps keeping both 40 and 55 properly maintained and could help fund future transportation projects on IH 49 In Fayetteville and points north
If ARDOT is the tolling authority. If not, the only person getting rich is Asa Hutchinson. Like Rick Perry tried a decade ago.

Not as this time, to my knowledge. If they did, everything would be tolled.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: TheArkansasRoadgeek on April 07, 2018, 11:42:50 AM
The tolling of 49 also helps keeping both 40 and 55 properly maintained and could help fund future transportation projects on IH 49 In Fayetteville and points north
If ARDOT is the tolling authority. If not, the only person getting rich is Asa Hutchinson. Like Rick Perry tried a decade ago.
They [ArDOT] have tolling authority.


iPhone
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on April 08, 2018, 05:26:37 PM
The specific situation with the Alma to Barling segment of I-49 just underscores the importance of the US to create a universal toll tag standard. It's only stupid to have all these different, incompatible RFID tag systems.

I would hope that ArDOT would choose something that worked with the kind of system we have here in Oklahoma. My PikePass tag will work on Kansas turnpikes and the Dallas Fort Worth toll roads. I guess we're still waiting on getting compatibility with the TxTag and HCTRA (Houston) toll tag systems.

There just needs to be one kind of standardized RFID tag. It's either that or everything is going to transition to reading license plates and billing via that.

I'm sure there would be some outrage over new sections of I-49 being tolled. But I have to say that's tough toogies to those angry people. There is no such thing as a free road. And our fuel taxes haven't been keeping up at all with the cost inflation of road maintenance and new construction. If we don't want to hike the gasoline taxes at all then installing toll gates is the only alternative. Gotta pay for it one way or the other.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Tomahawkin on April 08, 2018, 06:11:07 PM
Agreed. In Georgia. The peachpass works in Florida and North Carolina. BTW NW Arkansas is full of people from Texas, California and Illinois, as well as people from the Northeast. Toll roads are a reality now. I wish people there who like the old run down 2 lane roads would understand that. The U of A has a huge percentage of people from Texas...
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on April 09, 2018, 12:26:55 AM
What will probably eventually happen is that since the EZ Pass states love hanging onto antiquated technology, when national compatibility is attained there will be a box with both passive and active RFID chips to attach to your windshield.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: TheArkansasRoadgeek on April 12, 2018, 03:21:00 PM
The U of A has a huge percentage of people from Texas...
I find this interesting, because I hear so much shit about Arkansas' colleges and universities. I would think Texas would have more to do and better colleges and universities.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: I-39 on April 12, 2018, 09:26:43 PM
Why not just toll the whole section between Alma and Texarkana to get the dang thing built? I'd be all in favor of that at this point.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: TheArkansasRoadgeek on April 12, 2018, 10:33:08 PM
Why not just toll the whole section between Alma and Texarkana to get the dang thing built? I'd be all in favor of that at this point.
Because as sparker and so many others have stated, "It could be easily shunpiked". I emailed ArDOT's Public Information Office not too long ago, and this is what they said:
Quote from: From: Trenton
Friday, March 09, 2018 4:07 PM
Public Information Office
Institution of Tolls in Arkansas
Hello,

I am contacting ArDOT for information regarding tolling within the state.

I am an avid highway lover and I follow information regarding projects across the state. I live in Fort Smith, and with that, I follow closely the project of I-49 and I know there is a shortage of funds for this project. I have a simple question: Why hasn’t Arkansas — or rather — ArDOT considered tolling heavily traveled corridors of the state? I know there was an intuitive to toll I-40, and potenientally I-630. Why are we not taking advantage of high traffic areas and charging as such? Surely, we would have more money for projects around the state, no? Back to I-49, is this corridor eventually going to get a bridge tolling system for a revenue stream? It’s hard to see such a great state struggle to get some really great projects finished. Did you know that I-49 goes from Louisiana to Canada? We (as I hear it) are the last and unfinished link for the corridor.

Thank you,

Trenton

Quote from:  Danny Straessle - PIO - ArDOT
4/9/2018 11:38 AM
Hi Trenton-

Yes, we have studied tolls in Arkansas, however we have determined that not enough folks would use it to pay for the construction. And right now, we cannot toll an existing interstate highway.

Thank you for contacting us!

- Danny
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on April 13, 2018, 06:11:40 AM
The U of A has a huge percentage of people from Texas...
I find this interesting, because I hear so much shit about Arkansas' colleges and universities. I would think Texas would have more to do and better colleges and universities.
That’s because the two main schools (UT and A&M) limit enrollment to the top 10% of graduating classes and there’s a massive surplus of students in regard to colleges in Texas. The UA recognized this early on and offered in-state tuition to Texas students. (Oklahoma does the same and has a huge Texas contingent too.) I think Texas students may outnumber Arkansas students.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on April 13, 2018, 07:10:13 AM
If memory serves correct, the state legislature would have to rewrite state highway laws to allow tolls.  Only private entities are allowed to build toll facilities (such as XNA)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on April 13, 2018, 07:39:54 AM
Department Seeking Public Input at Meeting for Planning Study on Improving Interstate 49 between State Highway 22 and Interstate 40

SEBASTIAN & CRAWFORD COUNTIES (4-12) — The Arkansas Department of
Transportation (ARDOT) will hold a public involvement meeting in Barling to discuss the
planning study on improving I-49 between State Highway 22 and Interstate 40 in Sebastian
and Crawford Counties.
The public is invited to visit any time during the scheduled hours to view displays, ask
questions and offer comments. The meeting will follow an open house format and will be
held from 4:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m.
Thursday, April 26 — Barling
Sacred Heart of Mary Catholic Church
1301 Frank Street
Barling, AR
For more information, contact the ARDOT’s Public Information Office at 501-569-2000 or
info@ardot.gov.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on April 13, 2018, 07:50:29 AM
Whoever is saying I-49 goes to Canada is incorrect, That is misinformation from the mainstream media too lazy to verify facts. I-49 ends at Kansas City currently at I-470/I-435.  From there, you can take I-29 or I-35 to Canada.  Going south, I-49 is expected to eventually connect to New Orleans via US 90 south of Lafayette, LA.

But Canada? Nope. At least, not in my lifetime.

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Henry on April 13, 2018, 09:32:01 AM
Whoever is saying I-49 goes to Canada is incorrect, That is misinformation from the mainstream media too lazy to verify facts. I-49 ends at Kansas City currently at I-470/I-435.  From there, you can take I-29 or I-35 to Canada.  Going south, I-49 is expected to eventually connect to New Orleans via US 90 south of Lafayette, LA.

But Canada? Nope. At least, not in my lifetime.




And there's really no need to, with the presence of I-29 and I-35 (a major difference is that the former ends at the border, but the latter does not).
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: TheArkansasRoadgeek on April 13, 2018, 10:22:41 AM
Well, I must have either picked it up in a ”˜telephoned’ conversation. My bad (or from reading around).


iPhone
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on April 13, 2018, 11:00:16 AM
Elaine L. Chao, Secretary of Transportation for federal gov. said a couple weeks ago that Tiger grants were first awarded and Infra grants would be let sometime in June. Slow as usual but maybe Northwest Arkansas Group can receive the grant for Missouri finish their part. Then all the concentration will be on I 49 Arkansas River bridge project.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on April 13, 2018, 11:26:38 AM
Whoever is saying I-49 goes to Canada is incorrect, That is misinformation from the mainstream media too lazy to verify facts. I-49 ends at Kansas City currently at I-470/I-435.  From there, you can take I-29 or I-35 to Canada.  Going south, I-49 is expected to eventually connect to New Orleans via US 90 south of Lafayette, LA.

But Canada? Nope. At least, not in my lifetime.

That's been me, and I didn't mean that I-49 goes to Winnipeg, but that it's part of the hourglass-shaped corridor (the "Winnie-Minnie-New-Hou") that looks to be (when completed) central North America's main north-south interstate system of the future.

Forgive me but, was the NWA/Missouri grant application a "Tiger" or an "Infra" (per Gordon's citation of Elaine Chao above)?  I've forgotten...
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: NE2 on April 13, 2018, 12:52:16 PM
That's been me, and I didn't mean that I-49 goes to Winnipeg, but that it's part of the hourglass-shaped corridor (the "Winnie-Minnie-New-Hou") that looks to be (when completed) central North America's main north-south interstate system of the future.
And what's wrong with I-55 and the Avenue of the Saints (from New Orleans to Minneapolis/Winnipeg)? It doesn't pass through the area that the promoters of this new route live in?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on April 13, 2018, 04:40:09 PM
That's been me, and I didn't mean that I-49 goes to Winnipeg, but that it's part of the hourglass-shaped corridor (the "Winnie-Minnie-New-Hou") that looks to be (when completed) central North America's main north-south interstate system of the future.
And what's wrong with I-55 and the Avenue of the Saints (from New Orleans to Minneapolis/Winnipeg)? It doesn't pass through the area that the promoters of this new route live in?

Sounds like the focus of this particular PR flack is centered around Kansas City, the "cinch" point of the so-called "hourglass".  If the focus were the entire state of Missouri, then the AOS/I-55 corridor might get a reference -- but that doesn't seem to be the case, at least from what I've seen & read referring to I-49 publicity efforts.  Obviously, there's a conflation of I-49 with I-29 and, to a lesser degree, I-35 north of KC; this sort of thing is a common occurrence when commercial interests start touting a corridor project (making it seem like it's more comprehensive than it really is).  In this case, the goal seems to be to convince commercial users to funnel onto I-49 from the entire upper Midwest, including the Canadian plains provinces.  If such efforts can translate into increased support from various interests regarding the need to complete the I-49 corridor, then PR efforts will have been valid -- if a bit overarching at times.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on April 13, 2018, 09:07:46 PM
That’s because the two main schools (UT and A&M) limit enrollment to the top 10% of graduating classes and there’s a massive surplus of students in regard to colleges in Texas. The UA recognized this early on and offered in-state tuition to Texas students. (Oklahoma does the same and has a huge Texas contingent too.) I think Texas students may outnumber Arkansas students.

There's a reason they call the University of Oklahoma the "University of Texas at Norman". During most seasons, there are more players for OU from Texas than from any other state, including Oklahoma. In some seasons, over half the players are Texans.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Scott5114 on April 14, 2018, 05:40:45 AM
And there's often as many Texas plates as Oklahoma ones in Norman, too.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: I-39 on April 14, 2018, 11:54:10 AM
Why not just toll the whole section between Alma and Texarkana to get the dang thing built? I'd be all in favor of that at this point.
Because as sparker and so many others have stated, "It could be easily shunpiked". I emailed ArDOT's Public Information Office not too long ago, and this is what they said:
Quote from: From: Trenton
Friday, March 09, 2018 4:07 PM
Public Information Office
Institution of Tolls in Arkansas
Hello,

I am contacting ArDOT for information regarding tolling within the state.

I am an avid highway lover and I follow information regarding projects across the state. I live in Fort Smith, and with that, I follow closely the project of I-49 and I know there is a shortage of funds for this project. I have a simple question: Why hasn’t Arkansas — or rather — ArDOT considered tolling heavily traveled corridors of the state? I know there was an intuitive to toll I-40, and potenientally I-630. Why are we not taking advantage of high traffic areas and charging as such? Surely, we would have more money for projects around the state, no? Back to I-49, is this corridor eventually going to get a bridge tolling system for a revenue stream? It’s hard to see such a great state struggle to get some really great projects finished. Did you know that I-49 goes from Louisiana to Canada? We (as I hear it) are the last and unfinished link for the corridor.

Thank you,

Trenton

Quote from:  Danny Straessle - PIO - ArDOT
4/9/2018 11:38 AM
Hi Trenton-

Yes, we have studied tolls in Arkansas, however we have determined that not enough folks would use it to pay for the construction. And right now, we cannot toll an existing interstate highway.

Thank you for contacting us!

- Danny

That's utterly ridiculous. How in the heck are they going to pay for I-49 between Alma and Texarkana if they can't toll? And how could it be easily shunkpiked. Remember, we are talking about building the entire section here, not just the Arkansas River bridge.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Life in Paradise on April 14, 2018, 12:50:52 PM
Even if the tolls don't pay fully for the road, it will at least pay for part of the cost of the road.  That is going to be one real expensive stretch of road to build.  The nearest mostly freeway stretch is well over a hundred miles in either direction.  That is a lot of extra gas and time that could be saved for all those trucks that would use that route up towards/back from Kansas City and Omaha way.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: TheArkansasRoadgeek on April 14, 2018, 07:32:02 PM
That's utterly ridiculous. How in the heck are they going to pay for I-49 between Alma and Texarkana if they can't toll? And how could it be easily shunkpiked. Remember, we are talking about building the entire section here, not just the Arkansas River bridge.
If I understand correctly, there is US 71 and other highways that (a road-smart motorist) could be utilized to shunpike I-49 tolls.

*I was trying to find a quote for Sparker himself that I had read related to shunpiking tolls... just trying to cite sources
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Life in Paradise on April 14, 2018, 07:46:54 PM
That's utterly ridiculous. How in the heck are they going to pay for I-49 between Alma and Texarkana if they can't toll? And how could it be easily shunkpiked. Remember, we are talking about building the entire section here, not just the Arkansas River bridge.
If I understand correctly, there is US 71 and other highways that (a road-smart motorist) could be utilized to shunpike I-49 tolls.

*I was trying to find a quote for Sparker himself that I had read related to shunpiking tolls... just trying to cite sources
You are correct in that US 71 is there, but you would have to be an expert shunpiker for that since much of those roads are slow winding roads between DeQueen and Mansfield.  No trucker in his right mind is going to choose that over a straight freeway.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: cjk374 on April 14, 2018, 08:39:42 PM
That's utterly ridiculous. How in the heck are they going to pay for I-49 between Alma and Texarkana if they can't toll? And how could it be easily shunkpiked. Remember, we are talking about building the entire section here, not just the Arkansas River bridge.
If I understand correctly, there is US 71 and other highways that (a road-smart motorist) could be utilized to shunpike I-49 tolls.

*I was trying to find a quote for Sparker himself that I had read related to shunpiking tolls... just trying to cite sources
You are correct in that US 71 is there, but you would have to be an expert shunpiker for that since much of those roads are slow winding roads between DeQueen and Mansfield.  No trucker in his right mind is going to choose that over a straight freeway.

Truckers have driven that road for a long time. They know it well. They will save money any way they can.

Car drivers will want to save money even moreso. They will shunpike for sure.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on April 14, 2018, 09:26:37 PM
It's likely that I-49 would have to consume the exiting US-71 highway on those mountainous segments between Texarkana and Fort Smith. I don't know if this is necessarily a hard bound rule, but generally speaking any US highway is not routed onto toll roads. It's that way here in Oklahoma and just about everywhere else in the country. In Texas there are toll roads where the actual US highway is routed onto the frontage roads.

With that being said, if I-49 was built as a toll road between Fort Smith and Texarkana the "free" US-71 route would have to be preserved. Based on the preliminary alignments I've seen it looks like the old US-71 would remain in a lot of places. But it doesn't look that way in the mountainous segments.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on April 14, 2018, 10:48:46 PM
Yeah, the segment of I-49 between Y City and Acorn would probably have to remain free for that reason. But I’d hope whatever toll they adopt would be reasonable. A few years ago, for example, the toll on I-44 between OKC and Tulsa was $4 one way.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Wayward Memphian on April 15, 2018, 12:09:03 PM
The U of A has a huge percentage of people from Texas...
I find this interesting, because I hear so much shit about Arkansas' colleges and universities. I would think Texas would have more to do and better colleges and universities.
That’s because the two main schools (UT and A&M) limit enrollment to the top 10% of graduating classes and there’s a massive surplus of students in regard to colleges in Texas. The UA recognized this early on and offered in-state tuition to Texas students. (Oklahoma does the same and has a huge Texas contingent too.) I think Texas students may outnumber Arkansas students.

You don't have to think it, it's true. The U of A had a record number of incoming in state students in 2017. It was outnumbered  by incoming Texas kids. That's why there's huge increase in Sorority House building. It seems there's way more girls doing this, but that is just my observation.  There's a huge connection between NWA and the Metroplex with it being the largest alumni base outside of Arkansas. Some of these kids have a family connection to Arkansas or the U of A as that was the place many left to find greener pastures. It just so happens NWA is a pretty green pasture these days. I am shocked Southwest Air hasn't got a clue yet and started XNA to Hobby and Love flights

I think they vastly underestimate the usage a Turnpike from Ft. Smith to Texarkana would see and only a subset of locals would shunpike

The traffic count on I-49 between Alma and NWA is steadily increasing. Anyone that drives it knows this and they know there's more and more through traffic that's not local.

The State leg needs to get off it's ass and allow state build toll roads and get Ft. Smith to Texarkana blanking done. The traffic count will soar when it becomes common knowledge that there is a limited access expressway through Western Arkansas. It will support itself with the tolls, I have no doubt. Leave old 71 for the locals and hay haulers that don't want to pay but everyone else would rejoice at going  75mph  down the divided highway that would rival the scenic Alma to Fayetteville stretch whether it's free or tolled . They could  get by with charging 10 bucks each way (5 bucks north of Mena and 5 bucks south) Hell I'd fork over 6 or 7 easily as long as it's all electronic.

It'll work to go across North Arkansas as well. Keep US 412 free from Harrison to Springdale but from Harrison, build a Turnpike to Walnut Ridge. It'll exploded with traffic especially if they extended I-555 to US 67/I-57. Thsee two turnpikes would reduce  lots of pressure on the Little Rock area. I know I'd go across to my trips to NEA and Memphis this way  vs using I-40 between Memphis and Little Rock.

My only concern is that if the did fast track I-49 by using tolls,.they better get ready to upgrade US 270 from Y City to Hot Springs.

My Nephew and some of his group of friends.went to OBU for school. They always drove to Little Rock and then to Arkadelphia. Most everyone do this when going  between NWA and that area of Arkansas. It's like the routing folks take between NWA and NEA by going down and cutting across at Conway to Beebe on US 64 and vice versa.

If they put this on the ballot, to eatablishe a Turnpike system connecting Arkansas corner to corner (US 71, US 412, US 82, US 67) It'll pass. They could even team up with TN and/or Missisipping for a couple of new toll Missississippi River Bridges. I still think the I-69 bridge is redundant considering g the new bridge 30 mile south that could be used for I-69.


Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: TheArkansasRoadgeek on April 15, 2018, 02:30:11 PM
The U of A has a huge percentage of people from Texas...
I find this interesting, because I hear so much shit about Arkansas' colleges and universities. I would think Texas would have more to do and better colleges and universities.
That’s because the two main schools (UT and A&M) limit enrollment to the top 10% of graduating classes and there’s a massive surplus of students in regard to colleges in Texas. The UA recognized this early on and offered in-state tuition to Texas students. (Oklahoma does the same and has a huge Texas contingent too.) I think Texas students may outnumber Arkansas students.

You don't have to think it, it's true. The U of A had a record number on incoming in state students in 2017. It was outnumbered  by incoming Texas kids. That's why there's huge increase in Sorority House Building. It seems there's way more girls doing this  but that is just my observation.  There's a huge connection between NWA and the Metroplex with it being the largest alumni base outside of Arkansas. Some of these kids have a family connection to Arkansas or the U of A as that was the place many left to find greener pastures. It just so happens NWA is a pretty green pasture these days. I am shocked Southwest Air hasn't got a clue yet and started XNA to Hobby and Love flights

I think they vastly underestimate the usage a Turnpike from Ft. Smith to Texarkana would see and only a subset of locals would shunpike

The traffic count on I-49 between Alma and NWA is steadily increasing. Anyone that drives it knows this and they know there's more and more through traffic that's not local.

The State leg needs to get off it's ass and allow state built toll roads and get Ft. Smith to Texarkana blanking done. The traffic count will soar when it becomes common knowledge that it is limited access expressway through Western Arkansas. It will support itself with the tolls, I have no doubt. Leave old 71 for the locals and hay haulers that don't want to pay but everyone else wod rejoice at going  75mph  down the divided highway whether it's free or tolled . They could problem get by with charging 10 bucks each way (5 bucks north of Mena and 5 bucks south) Hell I'd fork over 6 or 7 easily as long as it's all electronic.

It'll work to go across North Arkansas as well. Keep US 412 free from Harrison to Springdale but from Harrison, build a Turnpike to Walnut Ridge. It'll exploded with traffic especially if they extended I-555 to US 67/I-57. Thsee two turnpikes would reduce  lots of pressure on the Little Rock area. I know I'd go across to my trips to NEA and Memphis this way  vs using I-40 between Memphis and Little Rock.

My only concern is that if the did fast track I-49 by using tolls,.they better get ready to upgrade US 270 from Y City to Hot Springs.

My Nephew and some of his group of friends.went to OBU for school. They always drove to Little Rock and then to Arkadelphia. Most everyone do this when going  between NWA and that area of Arkansas. It's like the routing folks take between NWA and NEA by going down and cutting across at Conway to Beebe on US 64 and vice versa.

If they put this on the ballot, to eatablishe a Turnpike system connecting Arkansas corner to corner (US 71, US 412, US 82, US 67) It'll pass. They could even team up with TN and/or Missisipping for a couple of new toll Missississippi River Bridges. I still think the I-69 bridge is redundant considering g the new bridge 30 mile south that could be used for I-69.
Would it help if I asked for an AADT map for I-49? They have been widening I-49 and some surface streets like crazy!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Tomahawkin on April 15, 2018, 04:29:16 PM
WaywardMemphian. That is a damn good point. OT, I 30 through Little Rock is hell due to the lack of planning and sprawl...
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on April 15, 2018, 04:47:26 PM
It's likely that I-49 would have to consume the exiting US-71 highway on those mountainous segments between Texarkana and Fort Smith. I don't know if this is necessarily a hard bound rule, but generally speaking any US highway is not routed onto toll roads. It's that way here in Oklahoma and just about everywhere else in the country. In Texas there are toll roads where the actual US highway is routed onto the frontage roads.

With that being said, if I-49 was built as a toll road between Fort Smith and Texarkana the "free" US-71 route would have to be preserved. Based on the preliminary alignments I've seen it looks like the old US-71 would remain in a lot of places. But it doesn't look that way in the mountainous segments.

No. I-49 will not be built over US 71 except for the section through Foran Gap between "Y" City and Acorn (The backwards "S" in northern Polk County that is visible on maps). In Polk County, for example, I-49 will run east of US 71, several miles east in places. It won't serve towns like Hatfield or Cove directly and US 71 will still be the main way to get to those towns. There will be a long stretch south of Mena through the Ouachita National Forest with no exits and no access. It should be a beautiful drive.

US 71 would be a very poor shunpike. Travel time from Ft Smith to Texarkana would likely be nearly double what travel time would be on I-49. If they toll it, towns like Mena will still get tons of truck traffic, which getting rid of is one of the main reasons for building I-49 in the first place.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on April 15, 2018, 04:49:58 PM
There are tons of Razorback fans in the Dallas area. Some of them grew up in Arkansas but moved to Texas and some of them are native Texans who went to the U of A.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on April 15, 2018, 05:05:46 PM
Here are some maps courtesy of AHTD. The maps aren't 100% accurate as they don't show an exit at AR 8 near the Mena airport. Who knows what other errors they contain, if any. These maps show the proposed exit numbers. They are several years old so some plans might have changed since they were published.

(https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/813/27609302118_6864868344_o.png)

(https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/896/27609305558_21dcdce2e5_o.png)

(https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/886/27609322238_bc4097e76d_o.png)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: TheArkansasRoadgeek on April 15, 2018, 07:12:19 PM
Here are some maps courtesy of AHTD. The maps aren't 100% accurate as they don't show an exit at AR 8 near the Mena airport. Who knows what other errors they contain, if any. These maps show the proposed exit numbers. They are several years old so some plans might have changed since they were published.
[...]
Was there a key for the map? I understand the green and red, but the grey?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on April 15, 2018, 07:55:24 PM
Not that I know of.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on April 15, 2018, 07:56:01 PM
That's utterly ridiculous. How in the heck are they going to pay for I-49 between Alma and Texarkana if they can't toll? And how could it be easily shunkpiked. Remember, we are talking about building the entire section here, not just the Arkansas River bridge.
If I understand correctly, there is US 71 and other highways that (a road-smart motorist) could be utilized to shunpike I-49 tolls.

*I was trying to find a quote for Sparker himself that I had read related to shunpiking tolls... just trying to cite sources

Well, thanks for the cite thought -- but even I can't recall exactly what I said at any given point without slogging through my posts.  But regarding shunpiking -- even if I-49 will sit atop US 71 near Y City, it would be quite simple to just avoid the whole shooting match through this area by using US 59 north into OK and then US 271 back into AR at Fort Smith -- with similar overall mileage, and considerably more benign terrain (this is the route that the KCS RR main line uses to avoid the Ouachita summit along the US 71 alignment).  If not for having to involve OK in the project, that would have been a nice little alternate path for I-49; when going & coming from the north, it's my usual route from the DeQueen, AR/Broken Bow. OK area (where many of my relatives are centered). 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: rickmastfan67 on April 15, 2018, 07:59:18 PM
Here are some maps courtesy of AHTD. The maps aren't 100% accurate as they don't show an exit at AR 8 near the Mena airport. Who knows what other errors they contain, if any. These maps show the proposed exit numbers. They are several years old so some plans might have changed since they were published.
[...]
Was there a key for the map? I understand the green and red, but the grey?

I'm guessing 'state highway expressway'.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on April 15, 2018, 08:04:21 PM
Quote from: bugo
I-49 will not be built over US 71 except for the section through Foran Gap between "Y" City and Acorn (The backwards "S" in northern Polk County that is visible on maps).

Here's one pretty easy, obvious idea: Build I-49 between Fort Smith and Texarkana as two different turnpike segments separated by a "free" segment through the Foran Gap. There's nothing wrong with doing that. And it should be easier to accomplish using electronic tolling. Here in Oklahoma I-44 has 4 different "free" segments (one from the Red River to US-70/Randlett exit, one thru Lawton-Fort Sill, one thru OKC and one thru Tulsa).

IMHO, I think the I-49 corridor would attract a lot of new long distance traffic once the gap between Fort Smith and Texarkana is filled in with completed Interstate. By that time the Bella Vista Bypass would be finished. The I-49 ICC in Shreveport would probably be well on its way to completion too. The connector thru Lafayette might be well under way along with the rest of I-49 South. Either way, a toll road facility could get built many years faster than one funded solely via the trickle of gasoline taxes.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on April 15, 2018, 08:16:27 PM
That's utterly ridiculous. How in the heck are they going to pay for I-49 between Alma and Texarkana if they can't toll? And how could it be easily shunkpiked. Remember, we are talking about building the entire section here, not just the Arkansas River bridge.
If I understand correctly, there is US 71 and other highways that (a road-smart motorist) could be utilized to shunpike I-49 tolls.

*I was trying to find a quote for Sparker himself that I had read related to shunpiking tolls... just trying to cite sources

Well, thanks for the cite thought -- but even I can't recall exactly what I said at any given point without slogging through my posts.  But regarding shunpiking -- even if I-49 will sit atop US 71 near Y City, it would be quite simple to just avoid the whole shooting match through this area by using US 59 north into OK and then US 271 back into AR at Fort Smith -- with similar overall mileage, and considerably more benign terrain (this is the route that the KCS RR main line uses to avoid the Ouachita summit along the US 71 alignment).  If not for having to involve OK in the project, that would have been a nice little alternate path for I-49; when going & coming from the north, it's my usual route from the DeQueen, AR/Broken Bow. OK area (where many of my relatives are centered). 

It's 8 miles longer to go through Poteau but it is a far better route. The traffic counts are far lower (especially truck traffic) and you can legally go 65 in Oklahoma. It also avoids Scott County, where I was once harassed by the sheriff's department when I wasn't doing anything wrong. When going between Mena and Fort Smith, I always go that way.

Of course, the best route through Oklahoma is US 59 to OK 112 to US 271...taking OK 112 saves about 5 1/2 miles over staying on US 271. I'm surprised they haven't rerouted 271 to follow 112 instead of following 59 to 9.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: TheArkansasRoadgeek on April 15, 2018, 11:46:21 PM
Of course, the best route through Oklahoma is US 59 to OK 112 to US 271...taking OK 112 saves about 5 1/2 miles over staying on US 271. I'm surprised they haven't rerouted 271 to follow 112 instead of following 59 to 9.
Geography or (local/national) political reasoning?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on April 16, 2018, 12:51:59 AM
Of course, the best route through Oklahoma is US 59 to OK 112 to US 271...taking OK 112 saves about 5 1/2 miles over staying on US 271. I'm surprised they haven't rerouted 271 to follow 112 instead of following 59 to 9.
Geography or (local/national) political reasoning?

Elaborate.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on April 16, 2018, 01:20:31 AM
What's notable is that the US 59/271 western expressway bypass of Poteau dumps NB traffic directly onto OK 112; US 59/271 is a TOTSO (there's an interchange at that point).  This tends to indicate that ODOT has calculated that a sizeable portion of traffic is heading to or from Ft. Smith; that interchange configuration merely reflects that.  But US 271, combined with US 59 or OK 9, serves two towns, Panama and Spiro, that are bypassed by 112.  There's likely enough local political clout between those towns to keep 271 where it is.  Doesn't look like there's any topographical issues affecting OK 112 either; it more or less traces the Arkansas and Missouri RR line (former SLSF/"Frisco") that extends from the KCS line at Poteau north through Ft. Smith, Fayetteville, and Gateway, AR, and interchanging with the BNSF main line at Monett, MO.  RR's tend to locate the path of least resistance and lay tracks there, and it looks like OK 112 does as well.   
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on April 16, 2018, 01:30:04 AM
If OK 112 is made into an expressway (which needs to happen) there might be a push to realign US 271. Until then, I doubt anything will change.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on April 16, 2018, 06:20:41 PM
I'm not a big fan of Interstate highways hopping back and forth over state lines, which is what would happen if I-49 was routed into Oklahoma via Poteau and US-59 South.

This conceptual I-49 route in Oklahoma would run into a terrain and routing problem just as bad if not worse than the Foran Gap in Arkansas if it went far enough South in Oklahoma. The road could continue South roughly following US-259 from the split with US-59/US-270. But US-259 gets really crooked going over the mountains south of Big Cedar. It's far more crooked than US-71 between Y City and Acorn in Arkansas. The road is steep too. The conceptual I-49 route could avoid that mountain pass by doubling back into Arkansas via US-59/US-270, which would place the I-49 route into Mena. It would parallel the choices taken by an existing railroad corridor. But that would be a pretty stupid looking large bend on the map.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on April 17, 2018, 02:31:23 AM
If an interstate were ever to be built over Kiamichi Mountain (the "crooked" part of US 259) the best bet would be to build a tunnel. The price would be outrageous. I doubt the road over Kiamichi Mountain will ever be significantly improved over what is it now.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Anthony_JK on April 17, 2018, 06:04:24 AM
Here are some maps courtesy of AHTD. The maps aren't 100% accurate as they don't show an exit at AR 8 near the Mena airport. Who knows what other errors they contain, if any. These maps show the proposed exit numbers. They are several years old so some plans might have changed since they were published.
[...]
Was there a key for the map? I understand the green and red, but the grey?

Gray must represent the sections already completed.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Henry on April 17, 2018, 09:53:16 AM
Here are some maps courtesy of AHTD. The maps aren't 100% accurate as they don't show an exit at AR 8 near the Mena airport. Who knows what other errors they contain, if any. These maps show the proposed exit numbers. They are several years old so some plans might have changed since they were published.

(https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/813/27609302118_6864868344_o.png)

(https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/896/27609305558_21dcdce2e5_o.png)

(https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/886/27609322238_bc4097e76d_o.png)
I cross-referenced the above maps with Froggie's exit list of said proposal (http://www.ajfroggie.com/roads/fictional/future/i49la-ar-exits.htm), and saw that some numbers may be off by 1 or 2, but other than that, it follows the same route very accurately.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on April 17, 2018, 11:43:15 AM
While the proposed I-49 route is a little curvy in spots (the Foran Gap in particular) that route is about as good (direct) as it can get without building tunnels. Here in the United States we don't seem to know how to build tunnels anymore without it completely breaking the bank. NWA should count itself lucky they were able to get the Bobby Hopper Tunnel built on I-540 (now I-49) when they did. Today that 1500' tunnel would cost a stupid fortune to build.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on April 17, 2018, 03:41:57 PM
That's been me, and I didn't mean that I-49 goes to Winnipeg, but that it's part of the hourglass-shaped corridor (the "Winnie-Minnie-New-Hou") that looks to be (when completed) central North America's main north-south interstate system of the future.
And what's wrong with I-55 and the Avenue of the Saints (from New Orleans to Minneapolis/Winnipeg)? It doesn't pass through the area that the promoters of this new route live in?

Sounds like the focus of this particular PR flack is centered around Kansas City, the "cinch" point of the so-called "hourglass".  If the focus were the entire state of Missouri, then the AOS/I-55 corridor might get a reference -- but that doesn't seem to be the case, at least from what I've seen & read referring to I-49 publicity efforts.  Obviously, there's a conflation of I-49 with I-29 and, to a lesser degree, I-35 north of KC; this sort of thing is a common occurrence when commercial interests start touting a corridor project (making it seem like it's more comprehensive than it really is).  In this case, the goal seems to be to convince commercial users to funnel onto I-49 from the entire upper Midwest, including the Canadian plains provinces.  If such efforts can translate into increased support from various interests regarding the need to complete the I-49 corridor, then PR efforts will have been valid -- if a bit overarching at times.

Actually, looking on a map, the "hourglass" links the biggest cities of both central Canada and five north central American states plus Kansas (if one considers the KC metro as Kansas' biggest city, which it would be) to the largest cities in Texas and Louisiana (with many of America's busiest ports between them) with ever-growing northwest Arkansas (gaining 32 net people per day, with a population estimated at 540,000 metro, not including adjacent metro Fort Smith) in the middle, not counting whatever Mexico-bound traffic there would be.  It would be the quickest interstate way from the northern cities to Houston and New Orleans were I-49 complete in Arkansas.  Just looking at a map of the U.S. it seems hard to believe this wouldn't be a heavily used corridor.

Forgive me if someone answered (couldn't find it) but is the Bella Vista grant application with Missouri a "Tiger" or an "Infra", if it gets let this year?  Thank you in advance. (EDIT: looked it up and it's an "Infra"...holding out hope...)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on April 17, 2018, 09:21:05 PM
There's a reason why the I-49 corridor was also the first high-priority corridor (HPC #1) to be legislated -- it not only provides a direct connection from the central Gulf Coast to the distribution point of Kansas City but also bisected the singular reasonably populated area in the central part of the country without a N-S Interstate corridor.  And the fact that it feeds (or eventually will) into intersecting diagonal routes (I-30,44) that expand its distributional capabilities to more northeasterly points.  Essentially it fills a longstanding gap in the Interstate network -- one that, but for a twist of fate, should and likely would have been included in the Interstate expansion legislation 50 years ago!   
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: NE2 on April 17, 2018, 10:05:52 PM
It would be the quickest interstate way from the northern cities to Houston and New Orleans were I-49 complete in Arkansas.
Bullshit. Unless the Avenue of the Saints starts getting major traffic problems, you're not going to make better time with 50 more miles via I-49 (to Winnipeg; Minneapolis is 80 miles shorter on the AoTS). And Houston to Winnipeg is laughable. 69/49 is 60 miles longer than the direct route (using US 75 between Topeka and Nebraska City). It's only Houston to Minneapolis where 69/49 is on par, and that's because Oklahoma hasn't upgraded US 69. Turn US 69 into a freeway and it's no contest.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on April 19, 2018, 01:16:31 PM
It would be the quickest interstate way from the northern cities to Houston and New Orleans were I-49 complete in Arkansas.
Bullshit. Unless the Avenue of the Saints starts getting major traffic problems, you're not going to make better time with 50 more miles via I-49 (to Winnipeg; Minneapolis is 80 miles shorter on the AoTS). And Houston to Winnipeg is laughable. 69/49 is 60 miles longer than the direct route (using US 75 between Topeka and Nebraska City). It's only Houston to Minneapolis where 69/49 is on par, and that's because Oklahoma hasn't upgraded US 69. Turn US 69 into a freeway and it's no contest.

Respectfully said, I'm not sure why you're angry enough to use foul language.  If it's shorter, great.  Yet it seems hard to figure just looking at the map here.  A finished I-49 is WAY overdue, and a finished I-69 in Texas will open a lot of possibilities.

(http://cdoovision.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/us-interstate-and-freeway-map-2006-interstate-map.png)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: seicer on April 19, 2018, 01:54:34 PM
I think that while these new projects will offer localized benefits, the thought of them offering inter-regional and inter-national benefits diminishes with each passing year, especially in areas where the highway(s) overlay (or will overlay) on existing routes or will closely align with already established corridors.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on April 19, 2018, 04:01:54 PM
So while we're building all the new highways, what happens to the existing ones?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: TheArkansasRoadgeek on April 19, 2018, 04:07:10 PM
So while we're building all the new highways, what happens to the existing ones?
They decay?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on April 19, 2018, 08:24:39 PM
So while we're building all the new highways, what happens to the existing ones?
They decay?

Right! Because all the money is going to pet projects.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: seicer on April 19, 2018, 08:40:40 PM
Well, coupled with the relative decline of the gas tax compared to inflation; the reluctance or lack of political will to peg the gas tax to inflation; and the reluctance to adopt system-wide tolls on existing facilities to make up for lack of an increase in the gas tax - and this is what you get. Projects that should take far shorter and highways that are in far worse shape.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on April 20, 2018, 12:44:09 AM
Add a fairly aggressive rate of cost inflation for road building and maintenance projects to that equation. We can't build any big things without the process including at least a decade's worth of public hearings, lawsuits, red tape entanglements, environmental issues and compliance with ever-changing (and always more expensive) safety standards. When the project can finally get moving costs of construction and materials have shot the original budget to hell.

So even if we had the gasoline tax pegged to a percentage of the price for a gallon of gasoline (which I think should be done) rather than a flat level (which hasn't changed in over 20 years in some states, like Oklahoma) we would still have all these time and cost bleeding issues taking place.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: TheArkansasRoadgeek on April 20, 2018, 02:29:55 AM
Add a fairly aggressive rate of cost inflation for road building and maintenance projects to that equation. We can't build any big things without the process including at least a decade's worth of public hearings, lawsuits, red tape entanglements, environmental issues and compliance with ever-changing (and always more expensive) safety standards. When the project can finally get moving costs of construction and materials have shot the original budget to hell.

So even if we had the gasoline tax pegged to a percentage of the price for a gallon of gasoline (which I think should be done) rather than a flat level (which hasn't changed in over 20 years in some states, like Oklahoma) we would still have all these time and cost bleeding issues taking place.
Why is Oklahoma looking to a gas tax when they have tolls? To me, a gas tax is the poor man's route. Now, gas tax + tolls= $$$.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Scott5114 on April 20, 2018, 03:02:55 AM
Oklahoma toll money has to stay on the toll road system. It cannot be used to upgrade free roads.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Plutonic Panda on April 20, 2018, 03:45:29 AM
Add a fairly aggressive rate of cost inflation for road building and maintenance projects to that equation. We can't build any big things without the process including at least a decade's worth of public hearings, lawsuits, red tape entanglements, environmental issues and compliance with ever-changing (and always more expensive) safety standards. When the project can finally get moving costs of construction and materials have shot the original budget to hell.

So even if we had the gasoline tax pegged to a percentage of the price for a gallon of gasoline (which I think should be done) rather than a flat level (which hasn't changed in over 20 years in some states, like Oklahoma) we would still have all these time and cost bleeding issues taking place.
Do you ever think that shit will be put in check or get worse? It seems like much needed infrastructure projects are nothing short of a miracle if they're completed these days.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on April 20, 2018, 10:44:53 AM
The thing really chapping my @$$ now is the Oklahoma state legislature wants to raise the fuel tax for the first time since the early 1990's, but the tax hike won't go to roads, it will go into public education to supposedly fund teacher pay raises.

I'm all for paying teachers a good, competitive wage. And average teacher pay in Oklahoma is either dead last or 49th in the nation depending on which stat is brought up. It's still a shameful embarrassment for the state. I personally know teachers who have left the state for far better paying teaching jobs elsewhere. School districts in Texas openly run job fairs in Oklahoma, poaching our better qualified teachers. Meanwhile Oklahoma has been doing "emergency certification" for hundreds of not fully qualified people to fill teaching vacancies. The whole thing is a very serious problem, one that is very bad for business -especially business recruitment. Any company looking at building a new factory, office, etc in a new location needs a work force to fill it. Good quality workers often have spouses and kids. Good quality public schools and good quality teachers are vital for those kids. There's no getting around that. If a certain location has a school system that is limping along after multiple years of bone deep budget cuts and losing qualified teachers right and left that location is going to have a hard time attracting and keeping working families.

At the same time, it's complete bull$#!+ that our state insists on coming up with stupid, regressive schemes to fund any improvements to public education. Pulling the funding out fuel taxes is Stealing from Peter to pay Paul. Unfortunately we have a state with no shortage of selfish, ignorant voters who think stuff like good roads or good schools shouldn't cost anything.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on April 20, 2018, 11:11:28 AM
Someone has to pay for those tax breaks for the uber-wealthy.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Scott5114 on April 22, 2018, 02:36:37 AM
The thing really chapping my @$$ now is the Oklahoma state legislature wants to raise the fuel tax for the first time since the early 1990's, but the tax hike won't go to roads, it will go into public education to supposedly fund teacher pay raises.
[...]
At the same time, it's complete bull$#!+ that our state insists on coming up with stupid, regressive schemes to fund any improvements to public education. Pulling the funding out fuel taxes is Stealing from Peter to pay Paul. Unfortunately we have a state with no shortage of selfish, ignorant voters who think stuff like good roads or good schools shouldn't cost anything.

Looks like we'll probably be shambling along from crisis to crisis. This time it's education, next it will be transportation, who knows what's after that. This year's Oklahoma gubernatorial election is going to be critical.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on April 22, 2018, 04:51:26 PM
I'm going to be voting my anger at lots of incumbents. And I will not be made to have any party loyalty either. This partisan/populist garbage (and how the media used it in combination with stoking fear and anger to boost ratings and ad sales) is a big part of what has us stumbling from one crisis to the next.

The functions of our modern society are held together in a delicate balance. It takes lots of people from all walks of life to see the importance of maintaining and contributing to the so-called greater good to keep the balance intact. If too many people are only concerned about what they can gain for themselves then our society's sense of balance erodes. We're well into that phase and seem to be speeding up the crumbling process. Institutionalized greed is not free from consequence. Just in terms of the process of building major infrastructure projects all of the connected players looking to get theirs are making big projects ever more impossible to build. On the individual level we're twisting our culture to make the act of raising a family a high priced luxury purchase. Lots of young, working class people will be forced to opt-out of that cornerstone of the so-called American dream. Then we'll really be screwed. But on the bright side the states won't need nearly as much money for public schools once there are far fewer students to teach.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: NE2 on April 22, 2018, 06:08:54 PM
On the individual level we're twisting our culture to make the act of raising a family a high priced luxury purchase. Lots of young, working class people will be forced to opt-out of that cornerstone of the so-called American dream.
Good. We need fewer kids.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: jbnv on April 22, 2018, 08:22:32 PM
On the individual level we're twisting our culture to make the act of raising a family a high priced luxury purchase. Lots of young, working class people will be forced to opt-out of that cornerstone of the so-called American dream.
Good. We need fewer kids.

Who is "we"?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: TheArkansasRoadgeek on April 22, 2018, 09:34:24 PM
On the individual level we're twisting our culture to make the act of raising a family a high priced luxury purchase. Lots of young, working class people will be forced to opt-out of that cornerstone of the so-called American dream.
Good. We need fewer kids.
Who is "we"?
The population as a whole?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on April 22, 2018, 10:31:29 PM
Quote from: NE2
Good. We need fewer kids.

It's only good if you desire a bleak future for this nation and the rest of the developed world.

At first glance fewer kids and smaller population might seem like a far more environmentally friendly thing. Fewer people consuming fewer resources. But that only works if different generational age groups maintain a proper size balance. You gotta have enough working age tax payers to fund the pensions, health care costs and end of life costs for all the older folks. The population of the US already had a median age skewing ever older before the Great Recession hit late last decade. Now the fertility rate of American born women is well under the replacement rate level and going downward. If it turns into a long term trend it will be financially disastrous for both business and government.

Then there's the comparative birth rates of other nations. Developing nations have higher birth rates and more youthful populations. The US is big on military spending, but how well is its military going to function if it suddenly has a rapidly shrinking pool of potential recruits? Lots of new business and innovation tend to happen among more youthful people.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: inkyatari on April 23, 2018, 09:02:07 AM
(http://iruntheinternet.com/lulzdump/images/rails-train-off-wherewearegoing-backtothefuture-1338955001l.jpg)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: TheArkansasRoadgeek on April 23, 2018, 10:16:49 AM
Quote from: NE2
Good. We need fewer kids.

It's only good if you desire a bleak future for this nation and the rest of the developed world.

At first glance fewer kids and smaller population might seem like a far more environmetally friendly thing. Fewer people consuming fewer resources. But that only works if different generational age groups maintain a proper size balance. You gotta have enough working age tax payers to fund the pensions, health care costs and end of life costs for all the older folks. The population of the US already had a median age skewing ever older before the Great Recession hit late last decade. Now the fertility rate of American born women is well under the replacement rate level and going downward. If it turns into a long term trend it will be financially disasterous both business and government.

Then there's the comparative birth rates of other nations. Developing nations have higher birth rates and more youthful populations. The US is big on military spending, but how well is its military going to function if it suddenly has a rapidly shrinking pool of potential recruits? Lots of new business and innovation tend to happen among more youthful people.
China’s got the world covered, oh and don’t forget about India!


iPhone
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on April 23, 2018, 05:38:20 PM
China and India both have very large populations. On the bright side China's population growth rate has dropped to a near stagnant level; its fertility rate was 1.57 births per woman in 2015, which is slightly less than the US. India still has a fertility rate above the 2.1 replacement level (2.4 in 2015). But that's down from 5.9 births per woman in 1960. India will reach the demographic transition soon, but its population is not forecast to show any net decline until 2050.

Some nations in the Middle East and Africa have much higher fertility rates. Niger currently has the world's highest birth rate at 6.62 births per woman. Iraq and Afghanistan are above the 4.5 level. Saudi Arabia has a more reasonable rate of 2.7 births per woman. Iran's rate was only 1.68 in 2015. Countries with high birth rates often have other problems like widespread poverty, high childhood mortality, lack of health care & education, oppression of women and political unrest. Violent ideology can spread easily in those environments. World powers have been keeping them in check for the most part. But if the populations in developed countries get stuck in long term negative growth we will be less able to maintain order in the world.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: jbnv on April 25, 2018, 10:48:36 PM
China’s got the world covered, oh and don’t forget about India!
[/quote]

Good luck getting the Chinese and Indians to pay for your Social Security and Medicare.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on April 26, 2018, 12:20:06 AM
China’s got the world covered, oh and don’t forget about India!

Good luck getting the Chinese and Indians to pay for your Social Security and Medicare.
[/quote]

Or the Republicans.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Scott5114 on April 26, 2018, 12:28:57 AM
If we don't have any population, we don't need I-49 in Arkansas!

There, it's on topic!

/s
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on April 27, 2018, 12:01:47 AM
We'll still need freeways like I-49 for city to city connections even if the nation's population lapses into a downward trend. But we'll need fewer highways. Small towns and rural areas have already been losing population. A negative birth rate trend could make matters worse. One would think the ridiculously high living costs would encourage more young adults to stay in small towns rather than keep migrating to big cities. The declining tax bases in many small towns leave them less able to fund police & fire, public schools, infrastructure, etc. Those problems won't go away if the entire nation starts losing population. On the bright side, it might become more affordable to live in the cities if there is an increasing glut of available housing.

A lot of the growth in NW Arkansas is brand new. That region is going to keep growing despite what happens to demographics nationwide. So there is still going to be a good case for completing I-49.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: qguy on April 27, 2018, 06:44:16 AM
Good luck getting the Chinese and Indians to pay for your Social Security and Medicare.

Or the Republicans.

Oh, those wascally Wepubwicans!  :rolleyes:
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on April 27, 2018, 09:48:58 AM
Posted just over 8 hours ago on the Arkansas business news site "TalkBusiness"

Quote
ArDOT ”˜dusts off’ $600 million future I-49 Barling to Alma stretch

The Arkansas Department of Transportation (ArDOT) and the Federal Highway Administration have cooperated on an environmental re-evaluation as well as refining the conceptual alignment for a new section of Interstate 49 (I-49) that would connect approximately 13.7 miles between Highway 22 in Sebastian County and the I-40/I-49 interchange in Crawford County.

ArDOT officials presented a portion of the work by Kansas City-based engineering firm HNTB Corporation on Thursday (April 26) from the Sacred Heart of Mary Catholic Church in Barling.

https://talkbusiness.net/2018/04/ardot-dusts-off-600-million-future-i-49-barling-to-alma-stretch/

Finishing Arkansas I-49 means finishing the "three Bs"

1. The "Bella Vista bypass".  (Waiting for news in June on an INFRA grant to Arkansas for Missouri to finish it.)

2. "The bridge".  (Which this article details more on.)

3. "The big one". (Greenwood to Texarkana.)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: In_Correct on April 27, 2018, 11:57:43 AM
We'll still need freeways like I-49 for city to city connections .... But we'll need fewer highways. Small towns and rural areas have already been losing population. ... One would think the ridiculously high living costs would encourage more young adults to stay in small towns rather than keep migrating to big cities. The declining tax bases in many small towns leave them less able to fund police & fire, public schools, infrastructure, etc. Those problems won't go away ... On the bright side, it might become more affordable to live in the cities if there is an increasing glut of available housing.

A lot of the growth in NW Arkansas is brand new. That region is going to keep growing despite what happens to demographics nationwide. So there is still going to be a good case for completing I-49.

The small town must be good enough for people to remain there. The small towns must have things such as high quality infrastructure which includes an Amtrak Stop, Greyhound Stop, Local Transit, and 4 lane roads inside the city (town) limits and connecting the small town to other 4 lane roads. The small towns must have rail bridges instead of being cut in half by railroad crossings. Some small towns have very high cost in electricity and groceries and taxes that are higher compared to other areas. And, if the denizens cannot find work at the small town, they will move to a different town. They will move to a larger city or perhaps a different small town that is not so isolated nor expensive.

While Small Towns depend on local taxes, they also depend on other funding for highway projects. And this source of funding is corrupt and / or used for other things such as school budget.

I really doubt that housing costs decrease.

Some areas such as Texas or in Arkansas are attracting population. Some of the population is moving to that area because their previous towns or cities were insufficient.

More traffic requires upgrades of roads and even freight corridors requires upgrades of roads. such as Interstate 49 be completed through Arkansas. If it is tolled I will be satisfied. If it needs to be built quickly, toll it.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on April 28, 2018, 11:52:32 AM
Given that the AHD is "dusting off" the bridge plans, it makes me wonder if they believe there is a very good chance that the INFRA grant to NW Arkansas for Missouri (for the Bella Vista bypass) will be awarded in June?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: TheArkansasRoadgeek on April 28, 2018, 01:57:37 PM
Posted just over 8 hours ago on the Arkansas business news site "TalkBusiness"

Quote
ArDOT ”˜dusts off’ $600 million future I-49 Barling to Alma stretch

The Arkansas Department of Transportation (ArDOT) and the Federal Highway Administration have cooperated on an environmental re-evaluation as well as refining the conceptual alignment for a new section of Interstate 49 (I-49) that would connect approximately 13.7 miles between Highway 22 in Sebastian County and the I-40/I-49 interchange in Crawford County.

ArDOT officials presented a portion of the work by Kansas City-based engineering firm HNTB Corporation on Thursday (April 26) from the Sacred Heart of Mary Catholic Church in Barling.

https://talkbusiness.net/2018/04/ardot-dusts-off-600-million-future-i-49-barling-to-alma-stretch/

Finishing Arkansas I-49 means finishing the "three Bs"

1. The "Bella Vista bypass".  (Waiting for news in June on an INFRA grant to Arkansas for Missouri to finish it.)

2. "The bridge".  (Which this article details more on.)

3. "The big one". (Greenwood to Texarkana.)
Soo... They've had the money the whole time?!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Wayward Memphian on May 03, 2018, 11:05:17 AM
There's so much State Highway that doean't need to be State Highway in Arkansas. Ark 214 in Poinsett Co. For Example. I own land off of it and still think it should be a county road. There are dozens of examples in Poinsett Co. alone.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on May 03, 2018, 12:01:19 PM
As populations continue to decline in rural areas (and more people are forced into urban/surburban areas) and the costs of road building and maintenance continue rising like they've been many states with lower populations but lots of land will be forced to decommission some state highways and even close a good number of roads and bridges. I can see that happening here in Oklahoma. We have huge numbers of section line roads criss-crossing the state. Many are gravel roads, but still cost money to maintain and keep open. Even gravel roads have a decent number of bridge crossings. Even if most of the bridges are modest they still cost money to build and maintain. What's the point of paying to maintain those facilities if their use drops off to very low levels? Oil, cattle and agricultural businesses might have an opportunity to take over some rural roads and turn them into private access roads, but I can't imagine those guys wanting to pay the maintenance costs themselves.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on May 03, 2018, 10:41:45 PM
As populations continue to decline in rural areas (and more people are forced into urban/surburban areas) and the costs of road building and maintenance continue rising like they've been many states with lower populations but lots of land will be forced to decommission some state highways and even close a good number of roads and bridges. I can see that happening here in Oklahoma. We have huge numbers of section line roads criss-crossing the state. Many are gravel roads, but still cost money to maintain and keep open. Even gravel roads have a decent number of bridge crossings. Even if most of the bridges are modest they still cost money to build and maintain. What's the point of paying to maintain those facilities if their use drops off to very low levels? Oil, cattle and agricultural businesses might have an opportunity to take over some rural roads and turn them into private access roads, but I can't imagine those guys wanting to pay the maintenance costs themselves.

For a state as large as Oklahoma (69,690 square miles) the state highway system is quite small (12,265 centerline miles plus 606 miles of turnpikes). There are lots of county and local roads in Oklahoma that would be state highways in other states. Arkansas, on the other hand is quite a bit smaller (53,180 square miles) and has 16,443 miles of state highways. I expect for there to be a mass decommissioning of state highways in Arkansas in the future. There are some highways (AR 370 in Polk County is a good example) that have no business being on the system.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on May 04, 2018, 10:10:26 AM
There's so much State Highway that doean't need to be State Highway in Arkansas. Ark 214 in Poinsett Co. For Example. I own land off of it and still think it should be a county road. There are dozens of examples in Poinsett Co. alone.

Arkansas has lots of state-maintained factory roads that only run half a mile.  Plus numerous state-maintained/numbered county roads (such as AR 74 east of Winslow)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: J N Winkler on May 04, 2018, 11:10:07 AM
For a state as large as Oklahoma (69,690 square miles) the state highway system is quite small (12,265 centerline miles plus 606 miles of turnpikes). There are lots of county and local roads in Oklahoma that would be state highways in other states. Arkansas, on the other hand is quite a bit smaller (53,180 square miles) and has 16,443 miles of state highways. I expect for there to be a mass decommissioning of state highways in Arkansas in the future. There are some highways (AR 370 in Polk County is a good example) that have no business being on the system.

Kansas has a surface area of 83,000 square miles with state highway mileage capped at 10,000 miles.  It takes only about 6500 miles (two-thirds of the way to the cap) to satisfy the county-cross rule, and there is a noticeable amount of second-tier state highway with no shoulders, ungenerous geometry, and 55 limits.  In comparison, Oklahoma's two-lane state highways are even more deficient in geometry and the lackings are more likely to affect principal through routes.  While I appreciate that Arkansas has a heavier burden of state highway mileage than Oklahoma, I think the latter state could stand to lose between 25% to 30% of its state highway centerline mileage and use the savings to ensure that all the remaining two-lane principal through routes are improved so that at minimum they have full shoulders with generous geometry and passing lanes.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: jbnv on May 04, 2018, 02:41:35 PM
Is there a list of the states ordered by state highway mileage per square mile?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on May 04, 2018, 10:31:20 PM
Talk Business this afternoon: (NWA) Regional planners await INFRA grant decision (on the grant for the Missouri section of the I-49 Bella Vista Bypass):

https://talkbusiness.net/2018/05/regional-planners-await-infra-grant-decision/

(Nothing really new...just a matter of waiting.  It says that if this grant is won the BVP would be complete by 2022, and remembering how they finished the Anderson-to-Pineville section, Missouri will move on this, barring the unforeseen.  Again, I wonder if the story in this same publication a few weeks ago about the AHD "dusting off" their I-49 Arkansas River bridge plans between Alma and Barling means they think this grant is likely and, like a new radiator hose puts additional pressure on any remaining bad ones, know that the river crossing has to be next?  Time will tell.)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on May 04, 2018, 10:34:41 PM
There's so much State Highway that doean't need to be State Highway in Arkansas. Ark 214 in Poinsett Co. For Example. I own land off of it and still think it should be a county road. There are dozens of examples in Poinsett Co. alone.

Arkansas has lots of state-maintained factory roads that only run half a mile.  Plus numerous state-maintained/numbered county roads (such as AR 74 east of Winslow)

State maintained county roads? The only thing similar to this that I've ever heard of is that sometimes the state will build a bridge and approaches on county roads. Polk County 74 over the Ouachita River is a good example.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on May 04, 2018, 10:47:06 PM
There's so much State Highway that doean't need to be State Highway in Arkansas. Ark 214 in Poinsett Co. For Example. I own land off of it and still think it should be a county road. There are dozens of examples in Poinsett Co. alone.

Arkansas has lots of state-maintained factory roads that only run half a mile.  Plus numerous state-maintained/numbered county roads (such as AR 74 east of Winslow)

State maintained county roads? The only thing similar to this that I've ever heard of is that sometimes the state will build a bridge and approaches on county roads. Polk County 74 over the Ouachita River is a good example.

Maybe the phrasing is wrong: county roads that the state has taken over maintenance (and numbered).  74 east of Winslow was CR 43 (still is after 4-5 miles) until the county asked ARDOT to maintain it.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on May 05, 2018, 12:34:13 AM
Hee hee: "Complete I-49 between Texarkana and Fort Smith." (And more than 1 person agreed.  :-D )

http://forums.hogville.net/index.php?topic=660507.0
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: TheArkansasRoadgeek on May 05, 2018, 01:16:53 AM
There's so much State Highway that doean't need to be State Highway in Arkansas. Ark 214 in Poinsett Co. For Example. I own land off of it and still think it should be a county road. There are dozens of examples in Poinsett Co. alone.

Arkansas has lots of state-maintained factory roads that only run half a mile.  Plus numerous state-maintained/numbered county roads (such as AR 74 east of Winslow)

State maintained county roads? The only thing similar to this that I've ever heard of is that sometimes the state will build a bridge and approaches on county roads. Polk County 74 over the Ouachita River is a good example.

Maybe the phrasing is wrong: county roads that the state has taken over maintenance (and numbered).  74 east of Winslow was CR 43 (still is after 4-5 miles) until the county asked ARDOT to maintain it.
I have a strong hunch that AR 10 (despite being a state highway) is maintained (in the Greenwood area) by Sebastian Co. Road Dept in Greenwood.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: yakra on May 05, 2018, 03:06:24 AM
I have a strong hunch that AR 10 (despite being a state highway) is maintained (in the Greenwood area) by Sebastian Co. Road Dept in Greenwood.
In AR, State routes are state maintenance, right? FWIW, They're in the ROAD_INVENTORY_AHTD shapefiles, with route numbers, section numbers, logmiles, and all the same info...
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: TheArkansasRoadgeek on May 05, 2018, 03:32:33 AM
I have a strong hunch that AR 10 (despite being a state highway) is maintained (in the Greenwood area) by Sebastian Co. Road Dept in Greenwood.
In AR, State routes are state maintenance, right? FWIW, They're in the ROAD_INVENTORY_AHTD shapefiles, with route numbers, section numbers, logmiles, and all the same info...
The reason for the speculation of AR 10 is due to lettings by the state for this specific area. I don't here much about Greenwood contracts for maintenance of AR 10. I have relatives in Greenwood and frequent the area regularly.

No doubt AR 10 is in the state's inventory, after all -- it is one of many heavily traveled highways in the Natural State.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on May 06, 2018, 12:13:28 AM
I have a strong hunch that AR 10 (despite being a state highway) is maintained (in the Greenwood area) by Sebastian Co. Road Dept in Greenwood.

It's maintained by the state, as all other state highways in Arkansas are.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on May 06, 2018, 12:14:28 AM
Hee hee: "Complete I-49 between Texarkana and Fort Smith." (And more than 1 person agreed.  :-D )

http://forums.hogville.net/index.php?topic=660507.0

Hogville is made of the dumbest bunch of numbskulls in America.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on May 06, 2018, 09:00:24 AM
I may have understood wrong, but I thought someone at the 612 Dedication said finishing the 412 was  the first priority, then finishing I-49
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on May 16, 2018, 09:42:13 PM
“Right now, we do show it industrial. Let’s change it to commercial, retail, whatever all that would be. It backs up to the college’s property. It’s sitting on the freeway. The minute that a bridge is announced – not built, but just announced – that property … (someone) would pay $150,000 an acre for it and not even flinch.”

(Three guesses what "bridge" he means and the first two don't count - and watch what happens around eastern Gravette, AR if the Bella Vista Bypass gets funded next month:)

Memco move to Chaffee Crossing in doubt after property offer rejected

https://talkbusiness.net/2018/05/memco-move-to-chaffee-crossing-in-doubt-after-property-offer-rejected/
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on May 16, 2018, 10:55:16 PM
FWIW, it looks like 549 at 71 south of Ft Smith will soon be getting it's first commercial interest: Casey's General Store. Casey's already has a location at 549 and AR 22.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: TBKS1 on May 18, 2018, 11:59:55 PM
I'm assuming this has been posted here before.

(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/911/28173120648_a11cb9f442_b.jpg)

 (https://flic.kr/p/JVyBes)AR-549 - Future I-49 (https://flic.kr/p/JVyBes) by TheInstrumentalist (https://www.flickr.com/photos/154936453@N06/), on Flickr

(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/978/28173121068_05bfdd84a4_b.jpg)

 (https://flic.kr/p/JVyBmG)Future I-49 sign (https://flic.kr/p/JVyBmG) by TheInstrumentalist (https://www.flickr.com/photos/154936453@N06/), on Flickr

(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/960/28173121428_1e2ee1cb8c_b.jpg)

 (https://flic.kr/p/JVyBsU)Future I-49 Exit 191 (https://flic.kr/p/JVyBsU) by TheInstrumentalist (https://www.flickr.com/photos/154936453@N06/), on Flickr

(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/824/28173120258_abebae1f24_b.jpg)

 (https://flic.kr/p/JVyB7J)Future I-49 Exit 193 (https://flic.kr/p/JVyB7J) by TheInstrumentalist (https://www.flickr.com/photos/154936453@N06/), on Flickr
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on May 19, 2018, 08:38:05 AM
I'm assuming this has been posted here before.

(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/911/28173120648_a11cb9f442_b.jpg)

 (https://flic.kr/p/JVyBes)AR-549 - Future I-49 (https://flic.kr/p/JVyBes) by TheInstrumentalist (https://www.flickr.com/photos/154936453@N06/), on Flickr

(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/978/28173121068_05bfdd84a4_b.jpg)

 (https://flic.kr/p/JVyBmG)Future I-49 sign (https://flic.kr/p/JVyBmG) by TheInstrumentalist (https://www.flickr.com/photos/154936453@N06/), on Flickr

(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/960/28173121428_1e2ee1cb8c_b.jpg)

 (https://flic.kr/p/JVyBsU)Future I-49 Exit 191 (https://flic.kr/p/JVyBsU) by TheInstrumentalist (https://www.flickr.com/photos/154936453@N06/), on Flickr

(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/824/28173120258_abebae1f24_b.jpg)

 (https://flic.kr/p/JVyB7J)Future I-49 Exit 193 (https://flic.kr/p/JVyB7J) by TheInstrumentalist (https://www.flickr.com/photos/154936453@N06/), on Flickr

You forgot Massard Rd ;)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: TBKS1 on May 19, 2018, 04:31:42 PM
I'm assuming this has been posted here before.

(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/911/28173120648_a11cb9f442_b.jpg)

 (https://flic.kr/p/JVyBes)AR-549 - Future I-49 (https://flic.kr/p/JVyBes) by TheInstrumentalist (https://www.flickr.com/photos/154936453@N06/), on Flickr

(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/978/28173121068_05bfdd84a4_b.jpg)

 (https://flic.kr/p/JVyBmG)Future I-49 sign (https://flic.kr/p/JVyBmG) by TheInstrumentalist (https://www.flickr.com/photos/154936453@N06/), on Flickr

(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/960/28173121428_1e2ee1cb8c_b.jpg)

 (https://flic.kr/p/JVyBsU)Future I-49 Exit 191 (https://flic.kr/p/JVyBsU) by TheInstrumentalist (https://www.flickr.com/photos/154936453@N06/), on Flickr

(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/824/28173120258_abebae1f24_b.jpg)

 (https://flic.kr/p/JVyB7J)Future I-49 Exit 193 (https://flic.kr/p/JVyB7J) by TheInstrumentalist (https://www.flickr.com/photos/154936453@N06/), on Flickr

You forgot Massard Rd ;)

We were actually on the way home from Fort Chaffee, and we accidentally took a wrong turn over here... so I don't have a picture of Massard Road.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: I-39 on May 25, 2018, 02:01:48 PM
So if the voters approve the gas tax hike in MO this fall, could we FINALLY see the Bella Vista Bypass finished?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Wayward Memphian on May 26, 2018, 07:34:58 AM
So if the voters approve the gas tax hike in MO this fall, could we FINALLY see the Bella Vista Bypass finished?

The problem with this is that the speculative market has decided to run up oil and therefore, gas prices. There plenty of oil but oh well.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on May 28, 2018, 01:11:29 PM
Drove the Bella Vista Bypass yesterday going to Gravette and noticed that they are already clearing trees and moving dirt south of the first AR-72 exit for the northbound carriageway even though there's no news on Missouri's ability to connect to it yet.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on May 29, 2018, 10:15:47 PM
Drove the Bella Vista Bypass yesterday going to Gravette and noticed that they are already clearing trees and moving dirt south of the first AR-72 exit for the northbound carriageway even though there's no news on Missouri's ability to connect to it yet.

ARDOT announced a few months ago that they intended to start on the other 2 lanes so they would be ready to go when Missouri got started.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Henry on May 30, 2018, 09:41:44 AM
Any news on Texarkana-Ft. Smith? My suspicions say that they will not start working on that until the Bella Vista Bypass is completed and opened to traffic.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on May 30, 2018, 01:17:23 PM
Any news on Texarkana-Ft. Smith? My suspicions say that they will not start working on that until the Bella Vista Bypass is completed and opened to traffic.

My suspicion is that they won't do any further planning of that portion other than city bypasses until the I-40 to AR-22 portion over the Arkansas River is completed.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on May 30, 2018, 01:31:16 PM
Any news on Texarkana-Ft. Smith? My suspicions say that they will not start working on that until the Bella Vista Bypass is completed and opened to traffic.


Something was mentioned at the AR612 dedication about finishing the 412 Bypass, THEN working on I-49.
My suspicion is that they won't do any further planning of that portion other than city bypasses until the I-40 to AR-22 portion over the Arkansas River is completed.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on June 01, 2018, 10:43:16 PM
Here's a picture I took last Saturday from a mile south of the current northern terminus of the Bella Vista Bypass, at what used to be called Gun Range Road.  Given that there are small segments of paved four lane (with two of them inaccessible) stretches at both this and the Highway 72 exit to the south and east of this photograph, it looks like the first full four lane section of the BVP may be between these two exits.

(http://a-b-p.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/20180526_134820.jpg)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on June 08, 2018, 01:44:15 PM
Arkansas will not receive any money under the INFRA grants.
http://www.nwaonline.com/news/2018/jun/08/no-federal-money-for-bella-vista-bypass/?news
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Plutonic Panda on June 08, 2018, 06:45:25 PM
Surely there will be more grants coming. When will the next round be?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on June 08, 2018, 09:45:13 PM
There is a Build America grant now until July 29th open for applications. Formerly Tiger grant, but the limit is 25 million, Missouri set aside money a couple of years ago but hasn't added to  the amount since, so it shows that 2022 want happen either. they need to show the Feds they are serious.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on July 20, 2018, 06:36:49 PM
Now we get to see if they finish the 412 Bypass or the Bella Vista Bypass first.  Not much light at the end of the tunnel for either one for a while, though.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: TheArkansasRoadgeek on July 21, 2018, 01:41:18 AM
Here's a picture I took last Saturday from a mile south of the current northern terminus of the Bella Vista Bypass, at what used to be called Gun Range Road.  Given that there are small segments of paved four lane (with two of them inaccessible) stretches at both this and the Highway 72 exit to the south and east of this photograph, it looks like the first full four lane section of the BVP may be between these two exits.

(http://a-b-p.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/20180526_134820.jpg)
Well, that's a rare sight! Yellow skip contrast lane lines.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on July 21, 2018, 02:35:28 PM
Here's a picture I took last Saturday from a mile south of the current northern terminus of the Bella Vista Bypass, at what used to be called Gun Range Road.  Given that there are small segments of paved four lane (with two of them inaccessible) stretches at both this and the Highway 72 exit to the south and east of this photograph, it looks like the first full four lane section of the BVP may be between these two exits.

(http://a-b-p.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/20180526_134820.jpg)
Well, that's a rare sight! Yellow skip contrast lane lines.

Pretty common on 2-way highways; in this case, the carriageway would be used for 2-way traffic until the other two lanes (pictured under construction) were opened; at that time, the striping would be redone as white.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: TheArkansasRoadgeek on July 21, 2018, 02:45:49 PM
Here's a picture I took last Saturday from a mile south of the current northern terminus of the Bella Vista Bypass, at what used to be called Gun Range Road.  Given that there are small segments of paved four lane (with two of them inaccessible) stretches at both this and the Highway 72 exit to the south and east of this photograph, it looks like the first full four lane section of the BVP may be between these two exits.

(http://a-b-p.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/20180526_134820.jpg)
Well, that's a rare sight! Yellow skip contrast lane lines.

Pretty common on 2-way highways; in this case, the carriageway would be used for 2-way traffic until the other two lanes (pictured under construction) were opened; at that time, the striping would be redone as white.
That seems to be the case, but I am referring to the general appearance of the style of the lane lines. I have not seen that style used anywhere in my travels across the state. Thanks for informing me about the difference in color between white and yellow purpose.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on July 21, 2018, 03:02:51 PM
OK -- now I see what you're talking about.  The spacing between the actual line segments appears to be quite a bit greater than usual.  Again, that may be an temporary situation; the paint will certainly be removed when the freeway is finished and replaced with white, at which time normal spacing may be deployed.  But if not, and the wide spacing is retained, this segment of I-49 may be functioning as a "test zone" to see if the wider spacing (which would save on paint!) might actually work in daily use.  Caltrans tried something similar on I-5 in the northern Sacramento Valley several years back; AFAIK that paint pattern is still there (IIRC, near Corning). 

BTW, those white outer lane-limit lines are also unique; the cross-hatches to the outside look like a painted method of emulating rumble strips.  It would be interesting to see if ARDOT applies this to other new freeway construction statewide. 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Rick1962 on July 21, 2018, 10:58:52 PM


BTW, those white outer lane-limit lines are also unique; the cross-hatches to the outside look like a painted method of emulating rumble strips.  It would be interesting to see if ARDOT applies this to other new freeway construction statewide.

Those are rumble strips. Zoom in, and you can see the aggregate in the concrete where they were ground out.

SM-T580

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on July 21, 2018, 11:13:22 PM


BTW, those white outer lane-limit lines are also unique; the cross-hatches to the outside look like a painted method of emulating rumble strips.  It would be interesting to see if ARDOT applies this to other new freeway construction statewide.

Those are rumble strips. Zoom in, and you can see the aggregate in the concrete where they were ground out.

SM-T580



OK -- my increasingly feeble eyes didn't initially see the textures in the white cross-strips.  Not that ARDOT is trying to win a MOMA award or anything, but those are some of the most attractive rumble strips I've seen; far better than the usual lateral grooves ground into the outer asphalt shoulders.  And this design obviously lets the driver know when they're barely out of the lane rather than a few feet outside.  Nice! 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on July 26, 2018, 09:19:58 AM
I-49 at Bentonville/Rogers is set to get Arkansas' first SPUI  (http://www.nwaonline.com/news/2018/jul/26/bid-openings-set-up-i-49-interchange-wo/)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on July 26, 2018, 10:50:02 AM
 Maybe with KNWA help and Missouri finally raising their funds the Bella Vista Bypass will finally be finished. I think U.S. Transportation Department has until the middle of this December  to let the BUILD grants.                                                                                                                                 BENTON COUNTY, Ark. (KNWA) -- A regional commission is seeking $25 million to complete a key part of Interstate 49 near Bella Vista.
The NWA Regional Planning Commission is working with Missouri officials to ask the U.S. Department of Transportation for a B.U.I.L.D. grant to help pay for part of the newly renamed I-49 Missouri-Arkansas connector in Missouri.
The Missouri Department of Transportation is providing more of its own funding as well, increasing it from $18 million to $25 million.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on July 26, 2018, 10:58:12 AM
Maybe with KNWA help and Missouri finally raising their funds the Bella Vista Bypass will finally be finished. I think U.S. Transportation Department has until the middle of this December  to let the BUILD grants.                                                                                                                                 BENTON COUNTY, Ark. (KNWA) -- A regional commission is seeking $25 million to complete a key part of Interstate 49 near Bella Vista.
The NWA Regional Planning Commission is working with Missouri officials to ask the U.S. Department of Transportation for a B.U.I.L.D. grant to help pay for part of the newly renamed I-49 Missouri-Arkansas connector in Missouri.
The Missouri Department of Transportation is providing more of its own funding as well, increasing it from $18 million to $25 million.

https://talkbusiness.net/2018/07/nwa-planners-apply-for-build-grant-to-pay-for-i-49-gap-between-arkansas-missouri/
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on July 26, 2018, 12:21:09 PM
Maybe with KNWA help and Missouri finally raising their funds the Bella Vista Bypass will finally be finished. I think U.S. Transportation Department has until the middle of this December  to let the BUILD grants.                                                                                                                                 BENTON COUNTY, Ark. (KNWA) -- A regional commission is seeking $25 million to complete a key part of Interstate 49 near Bella Vista.
The NWA Regional Planning Commission is working with Missouri officials to ask the U.S. Department of Transportation for a B.U.I.L.D. grant to help pay for part of the newly renamed I-49 Missouri-Arkansas connector in Missouri.
The Missouri Department of Transportation is providing more of its own funding as well, increasing it from $18 million to $25 million.

If that’s all the money that’s needed, Walmart should just gift the governments the cash and get the dang thing finished.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: mvak36 on July 26, 2018, 12:42:38 PM
https://www.transportation.gov/BUILDgrants/2018-build-application-faqs

Quote
When will awards be made?

Under the FY 2018 Appropriations Act, the Department must make awards by December 18, 2018.

I believe the article US71 posted also said something about the grants being awarded in December.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on July 26, 2018, 01:26:45 PM
In AHTD's April 26 Presentation to the Arkansas Higway Commission (http://www.arkansashighways.com/PowerPoints/2017/20170426%20AHC%20Meeting.pdf) .... they have a 2022 letting date for the Arkansas River bridge (p. 9/132 of pdf):
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/gallery/1615_26_04_17_5_56_52.jpeg)

Speaking of filling gaps in I-49, it looks like a long wait for the Fort Smith-Texarkana gap. The above chart shows ARDOT's "wish list" for the Trump infrastructure plan as including the Bella Vista Bypass and the Arkansas River Bridge gaps, but not the Fort Smith-Texarkana gap. ARDOT's 2019-2022 STIP (http://www.arkansashighways.com/stip/2019-2022/2019_2022_STIP_Draft_General_Electronic.pdf) also focuses on improving the "old" I-540 and the Arkansas River Bridge (pp. 31-32/216 of pdf; pp. 3-4 of document):

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/gallery/1615_26_07_18_1_04_24.png)

Also, a possible clue to how much on the "back burner" is the Fort Smith-Texarkana gap can be found in the US 71 listings in the Draft STIP (pp. 48-49/216 of pdf; pp. 20-21 of document):

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/gallery/1615_26_07_18_1_16_08.png)

The Mena Bypass has been mentioned as a potential first project in the Fort Smith-Texarkana gap. However, ARDOT is planning on putting passing lanes on "Mena North and South". I-49 is possibly not in the near future and Mena will have to be satisfied with the passing lanes.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on July 26, 2018, 01:27:43 PM


If that’s all the money that’s needed, Walmart should just gift the governments the cash and get the dang thing finished.

It would be nice, but they don't work that way.  ARDOT is building them an exit on I-49,  XNA was built with bonds sold by Alice Walton's Llama Company. 540 (now 49) north of Alma was basically a "gift" to Wal-Mart, Tyson, and JB Hunt.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on July 26, 2018, 01:52:32 PM

It would be nice, but they don't work that way.  ARDOT is building them an exit on I-49,  XNA was built with bonds sold by Alice Walton's Llama Company. 540 (now 49) north of Alma was basically a "gift" to Wal-Mart, Tyson, and JB Hunt.

Well, considering how many jobs those 3 companies provide the state and this part of the nation for that matter, despite NWA's lack of infrastructural attention coming from Little Rock until recently, it's less a gift than sharing the economic activity they provide with the less developed parts of the area.  I don't particularly fondly remember the college days of going back home to the river valley a couple of weekends a month driving US-71 at night and racing around slowly climbing semis on all too short passing zones.  That old road was a death-trap, although it is much more enjoyable to drive nowadays without all of the traffic on it when I don't have to be somewhere quickly.  Not that there are many opportunities like that these days.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on July 26, 2018, 07:42:49 PM
The proposed passing lanes on US 71 north and south of Mena might possibly be beyond the bypass in both directions.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on July 27, 2018, 10:57:09 AM
This week's I-49 article linked above is the most shared (300+) and most read (1,100+) article in Talk Business this week.  It's not even close.  You think there isn't a huge, silent interest in seeing this finished?:

https://talkbusiness.net/2018/07/nwa-planners-apply-for-build-grant-to-pay-for-i-49-gap-between-arkansas-missouri/

(Noteworthy that: A) Sen. Tom Cotton is putting weight behind this one, and; B) it's said that there's "momentum" for this in the article...that's less cautious wording than previous stories I've read.)

It's easy now to talk about how difficult the Greenwood-Texarkana I-49 stretch will be to complete.  If, however, this gets funded in December, and if (as Grzd said above) the I-49 Ark River bridge is let in 2022 and if (as was just said on the Texas I-69 thread) the ever-growing "Texas Trident" will have the emphasis on Texarkana, not Shreveport, as its northern terminus it's going to get a LOT more difficult to talk (and keep making excuses for) how difficult Greenwood-Texarkana will be.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on July 27, 2018, 04:27:58 PM
It sure would go a long way to getting some economic activity south of Ft. Smith for sure.  Scott County is slowly withering away since they've even closed down the Wal-Mart that was there for most of my lifetime.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: qguy on July 27, 2018, 04:29:44 PM
Here's a picture I took last Saturday from a mile south of the current northern terminus of the Bella Vista Bypass, at what used to be called Gun Range Road.  Given that there are small segments of paved four lane (with two of them inaccessible) stretches at both this and the Highway 72 exit to the south and east of this photograph, it looks like the first full four lane section of the BVP may be between these two exits.
(http://a-b-p.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/20180526_134820.jpg)
BTW, those white outer lane-limit lines are also unique; the cross-hatches to the outside look like a painted method of emulating rumble strips.  It would be interesting to see if ARDOT applies this to other new freeway construction statewide.
Those are rumble strips. Zoom in, and you can see the aggregate in the concrete where they were ground out.
SM-T580
OK -- my increasingly feeble eyes didn't initially see the textures in the white cross-strips.  Not that ARDOT is trying to win a MOMA award or anything, but those are some of the most attractive rumble strips I've seen; far better than the usual lateral grooves ground into the outer asphalt shoulders.  And this design obviously lets the driver know when they're barely out of the lane rather than a few feet outside.  Nice! 

I believe the original version of that groove pattern in the shoulder was an innovation developed by the Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission in the 1980s. The PTC called it (and still calls it) SNAP, for Sonic Nap Alert Pattern. The first operational installation was in 1989. It was nearly immediately recognized as extremely effective (and cost-effective) by DOTs around the country and similar pavement patterns are now used extensively just about everywhere.

Here's a pretty good write-up about the development, testing, specs, photos, etc.: http://www.usroads.com/journals/p/rilj/9808/ri980803.htm
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on July 27, 2018, 10:43:18 PM
Waldron was always a wretched place, but it's even worse without Walmart. The Walmart there was an old style store that was cramped and had very narrow lanes and low ceilings. A far cry from today's wide open Supercenters.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on July 27, 2018, 11:20:32 PM
I remember when Waldron High School was Class AAA in the 1980s (the equivalent of 5A today) and played Greenwood, Alma and Van Buren in football. Nowadays they have to eke by Dover to make the playoffs.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on July 28, 2018, 12:09:41 AM
Waldron was always a wretched place, but it's even worse without Walmart. The Walmart there was an old style store that was cramped and hsd very narrow lanes and low ceilings. A far cry from today's wide open Supercenters.

At least it functioned somewhat as a waypoint between Greenwood and Mena on the long slog down south (and back up north on the return) to Texarkana and points south.  The scenery is much greater than eastern Arkansas, but with nothing much noteworthy down there, it almost manages to be as depressing.  And that's coming from someone whose earliest memories were on a ranch 4 miles east of the rest area there at the AR 23 junction.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on July 28, 2018, 02:50:54 PM
Waldron was always a wretched place, but it's even worse without Walmart. The Walmart there was an old style store that was cramped and hsd very narrow lanes and low ceilings. A far cry from today's wide open Supercenters.

I remember visiting the Wal-Mart (old school!) in Broken Bow, OK back in the early '80's when visiting family there; it was just as described above -- more like an old "five & dime" store than a modern department facility.  One thing I remember -- it wasn't particularly well-lit, and it almost always smelled musty -- like some merchandise had been there for years and the dust build-up permeated the store's interior.  Never liked going there, but my relatives insisted on it because of the exceptionally low prices on some items (towel, underwear, cleaning supplies -- but, I noticed, rarely on food or drinks, particularly 12/24-packs of soda, which my cousins went through like water).  Of course these days Wal-Mart's store brands have drastically changed that profile.  Nevertheless, a lot of these older Wal-Marts still are hanging in there, particularly in smaller areas with a limited customer base.   
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on July 28, 2018, 04:47:22 PM
Waldron was always a wretched place, but it's even worse without Walmart. The Walmart there was an old style store that was cramped and hsd very narrow lanes and low ceilings. A far cry from today's wide open Supercenters.

I remember visiting the Wal-Mart (old school!) in Broken Bow, OK back in the early '80's when visiting family there; it was just as described above -- more like an old "five & dime" store than a modern department facility.  One thing I remember -- it wasn't particularly well-lit, and it almost always smelled musty -- like some merchandise had been there for years and the dust build-up permeated the store's interior.  Never liked going there, but my relatives insisted on it because of the exceptionally low prices on some items (towel, underwear, cleaning supplies -- but, I noticed, rarely on food or drinks, particularly 12/24-packs of soda, which my cousins went through like water).  Of course these days Wal-Mart's store brands have drastically changed that profile.  Nevertheless, a lot of these older Wal-Marts still are hanging in there, particularly in smaller areas with a limited customer base.   
Half the reason Walmart left was, in their eyes, it wasn't worth upgrading. I'm sure the new Harps store didn't help


SM-G930V

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on July 30, 2018, 10:46:44 AM
... It's easy now to talk about how difficult the Greenwood-Texarkana I-49 stretch will be to complete.  If, however, this gets funded in December, and if the I-49 Ark River bridge is let in 2022 and if (as was just said on the Texas I-69 thread) the ever-growing "Texas Trident" will have the emphasis on Texarkana, not Shreveport, as its northern terminus it's going to get a LOT more difficult to talk (and keep making excuses for) how difficult Greenwood-Texarkana will be.

With TxDOT doing a US 59/I-369 corridor study in Texarkana and Bowie County doing a feasibility study for an I-369 West Spur to the TexAmericas Center, I imagine the studies helped to inspire this July 22 Texarkana Gazette editorial (http://www.texarkanagazette.com/news/opinion/editorials/story/2018/jul/22/keep-waiting-i-49-will-benefit-millions-upon-completion-so-why-long-delay/735568/) in which they wondered why is it taking so long to complete I-49:

Quote
The promise of Interstate 49 was that it would speed traffic going from Kansas City to New Orleans and points in between, including Texarkana.
But the construction of I-49 itself hasn't been all that speedy.
Right now, the northern part of highway begins south of Kansas City and continues to Pineville, just north of the Arkansas state line. It picks up from Bella Vista, Ark., and runs to to Alma, Ark.
It picks up again north of Texarkana and continues on to I-220 in Shreveport before resuming as I-49 to Lafayette, La.
That's a lot of miles. But construction on I-49 began in Louisiana in 1981. That's a lot of years.
While work is continuing to complete the highway from Texarkana to Lafayette, the major portion through Arkansas is still a dream. On Wednesday, the Arkansas Department of Transportation told the Western Arkansas Intermodal Authority that studies should begin in the fall on the proposed route from Alma, Ark., to Barling, Ark.–a distance of about 17 miles.
Consider this: The initial Interstate Highway System, authorized in 1956, took just 35 years to build multiple highways covering more than 42,000 miles. Work on I-49 alone has been going on 37 years.
Yeas, we understand things are different today. Both costs and environmental awareness–which means more costs–are higher today. And we are talking limited government funds.
Those excuses are wearing thin. The government can find plenty of other things to spend money on–as our national debt plainly shows. And we suspect most readers never see any benefit from most of that money. The I-49 project has already benefited millions and will benefit millions more upon completion. Why isn't it on the front burner?
We have been waiting a long time. And it looks like we are going to be waiting a lot longer.

The editorial ended with an air of resignation that they will have to wait a lot longer, but maybe some momentum suggested by O Tamandua will speed it up.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: jbnv on July 30, 2018, 12:39:50 PM
Quote
Those excuses are wearing thin. The government can find plenty of other things to spend money on–as our national debt plainly shows. And we suspect most readers never see any benefit from most of that money.

This is the question every American--liberal or conservative--should be asking. And by "asking" I don't mean blaming "wars" or "welfare," but demanding real answers from the last three administrations and their Congresses. By my estimate, Louisiana's share of the national debt is $70 billion--which would complete I-49, rebuild I-10 through Baton Rouge, puts loops around Baton Rouge and Lafayette, upgrade US 165 to an interstate, AND build I-69 and I-14, and probably leave plenty to fix up the rest of our highways and bridges.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on July 30, 2018, 01:00:33 PM
Quote
Those excuses are wearing thin. The government can find plenty of other things to spend money on–as our national debt plainly shows. And we suspect most readers never see any benefit from most of that money.

This is the question every American--liberal or conservative--should be asking. And by "asking" I don't mean blaming "wars" or "welfare," but demanding real answers from the last three administrations and their Congresses. By my estimate, Louisiana's share of the national debt is $70 billion--which would complete I-49, rebuild I-10 through Baton Rouge, puts loops around Baton Rouge and Lafayette, upgrade US 165 to an interstate, AND build I-69 and I-14, and probably leave plenty to fix up the rest of our highways and bridges.

Quit giving tax breaks to the wealthy.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: jbnv on July 30, 2018, 01:49:01 PM
Quit giving tax breaks to the wealthy.

Debt is causes by excessive spending, not by revenue. Rephrase in the form of a real answer.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: vdeane on July 30, 2018, 09:29:24 PM
Quit giving tax breaks to the wealthy.

Debt is causes by excessive spending, not by revenue. Rephrase in the form of a real answer.
It is a real answer.  If revenue is already too low to cover spending, you don't cut it further.  It's like quitting your job right after signing a lease or taking out a loan.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: qguy on July 30, 2018, 10:03:35 PM
Quit giving tax breaks to the wealthy.
Debt is causes by excessive spending, not by revenue. Rephrase in the form of a real answer.
It is a real answer.  If revenue is already too low to cover spending, you don't cut it further.  It's like quitting your job right after signing a lease or taking out a loan.

Depending on what is being taxed and where the tax rate is set, reducing the tax rate can increase tax revenue and increasing the tax rate can reduce tax revenue. So increasing a tax rate and automatically expecting a tax revenue increase may not always be the wisest thing.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: jbnv on July 31, 2018, 09:26:25 AM
Quit giving tax breaks to the wealthy.
Debt is causes by excessive spending, not by revenue. Rephrase in the form of a real answer.
It is a real answer.  If revenue is already too low to cover spending, you don't cut it further.  It's like quitting your job right after signing a lease or taking out a loan.

It's not the government's money in the first place.

This is why I'm a big supporter of tollways. The people who use them will pay for and fund them.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Rothman on July 31, 2018, 09:38:00 AM
Quit giving tax breaks to the wealthy.
Debt is causes by excessive spending, not by revenue. Rephrase in the form of a real answer.
It is a real answer.  If revenue is already too low to cover spending, you don't cut it further.  It's like quitting your job right after signing a lease or taking out a loan.

It's not the government's money in the first place.

This is why I'm a big supporter of tollways. The people who use them will pay for and fund them.

This principle totally disintegrates at the local level on roads with dinky travel counts.  The toll would have to be astronomical and intolerable.  The inconsistency between those that say that they're all for tollways, but then would be stunned if the principle was actually and broadly implemented on the roads that they use regularly leads me to conclude that this kind of stance really is about not wanting to pay for roads, nearly at all.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: jbnv on July 31, 2018, 11:26:40 AM
... leads me to conclude that this kind of stance really is about not wanting to pay for roads, nearly at all.

Wow. You just told that to someone who just this last week stopped at a TxTag office in Austin to get a sticker for his new vehicle. Check your bigotry.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Rothman on July 31, 2018, 12:27:01 PM
... leads me to conclude that this kind of stance really is about not wanting to pay for roads, nearly at all.

Wow. You just told that to someone who just this last week stopped at a TxTag office in Austin to get a sticker for his new vehicle. Check your bigotry.
I don't see how your getting a personal tag is a response to my criticism of the "only actual users should pay for the road" mentality.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: vdeane on July 31, 2018, 01:30:58 PM
Depending on what is being taxed and where the tax rate is set, reducing the tax rate can increase tax revenue and increasing the tax rate can reduce tax revenue. So increasing a tax rate and automatically expecting a tax revenue increase may not always be the wisest thing.
We long passed that point in the Kennedy administration.  Please don't turn this country into Kansas.

It's not the government's money in the first place.

This is why I'm a big supporter of tollways. The people who use them will pay for and fund them.
Tollways cause traffic on local roads to increase due to shunpikers.  Just look at what's going on in Pennsylvania.  Traffic on US 30 is going through the roof because the Turnpike gets more expensive every year.  If you love tollways so much, maybe you should try moving to a place where you have to pay a toll to get just about anywhere on high-speed roadways and you'll see how annoying they are.  Whenever I go to visit my family in Rochester (3.5 hours away), tolls are 40% of the cost of the trip.  40%!!  And the Thruway is the cheapest toll road (on a per-mile basis) in the area!  Toll roads get expensive after a while, and definitely put a dampener on roadgeeking.  Having to pay one to commute?  Sounds like hell, I don't know how some people do it.  Life is expensive enough as it is.

As for "it's not the government's money"... I'd say that "your money" comprises only net, not gross.  It ceases to be "your money" the moment it's taxed.  And I'd say income (and consumption) taxes are far more legitimate than property taxes, which IMO represent a special kind of evil.  Income and consumption taxes adjust to your economic situation (either because you're making less or because you're spending less).  Property taxes don't.  If you go without an income long enough, they'll bankrupt your, even if you have no other expenses of any kind (ie, fully paid off house/land and self-sufficient).  Because of that, it's impossible to untangle oneself from the rat race.  Sure, you can make a bet that you'll die before your retirement savings run out, but if they do, no amount of other preparations will save you.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: jbnv on July 31, 2018, 01:54:04 PM
If you love tollways so much, maybe you should try moving to a place where you have to pay a toll to get just about anywhere on high-speed roadways and you'll see how annoying they are. 

I have an hourlong commute each day covering a significant part of I-12. I would gladly pay tolls on that commute for a high-quality, well-maintained highway with a lot fewer cheapskates in my way. I have used tollways in Texas several times--that's why I have the toll tag that I just mentioned.

Anybody else want to accuse me of hypocrisy?

As for "it's not the government's money"... I'd say that "your money" comprises only net, not gross.  It ceases to be "your money" the moment it's taxed. 

By that logic, the government can take whatever it wants, just by laying a tax on it. A tax on income is an assault on personal property and the right to pursue happiness. As a free citizen of a democratic system, I object to the government arbitrarily taking my money just because it says so.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: vdeane on July 31, 2018, 02:14:18 PM
I have an hourlong commute each day covering a significant part of I-12. I would gladly pay tolls on that commute for a high-quality, well-maintained highway with a lot fewer cheapskates in my way. I have used tollways in Texas several times--that's why I have the toll tag that I just mentioned.
Congratulations on being able to afford that.  Not all of us can.  Good roads shouldn't be restricted to those with money.

Also, an hour?  *shudder* Having a commute that long sounds unbearable to me, regardless of the condition of the road or traffic.

Quote
By that logic, the government can take whatever it wants, just by laying a tax on it. A tax on income is an assault on personal property and the right to pursue happiness. As a free citizen of a democratic system, I object to the government arbitrarily taking my money just because it says so.
And how are income taxes special in that regard?  Seems to me like a general argument against taxation at all, but society wouldn't function at all if we took that argument to its logical conclusion.

You also seem to be looking at the government as some external entity unto itself.  We live in a (theoretically) democratic system.  WE are the government.  If the government is acting in ways we don't like, it's only because we allow it to.  This is why a well-informed electorate is the most critical need of this country by far.  Without it, we lose everything.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Rothman on July 31, 2018, 02:15:47 PM
Vdeane: 40%?  Isn't the round-trip toll $18 and the round-trip mileage something like 450?

For me, that would be $40-$45 in gas alone (tank-and-a-half).  Tolls would therefore be less than 30% of the cost.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: vdeane on July 31, 2018, 02:27:25 PM
I estimate it's around tank and a quarter, but my Civic on empty still only takes 12 gallons, so closer to $30 for me.  Plus it was a rough estimation too.  No lodging costs for these trips since I stay with my parents, and I didn't factor in food since I could get away with not eating on the road for this trip if I didn't prefer to have all my dishes put away when traveling.

The toll each way for 24-45 is about $9.50, so $18 isn't too far off.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on July 31, 2018, 04:54:57 PM
Here's a picture I took last Saturday from a mile south of the current northern terminus of the Bella Vista Bypass, at what used to be called Gun Range Road.  Given that there are small segments of paved four lane (with two of them inaccessible) stretches at both this and the Highway 72 exit to the south and east of this photograph, it looks like the first full four lane section of the BVP may be between these two exits.
(http://a-b-p.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/20180526_134820.jpg)
BTW, those white outer lane-limit lines are also unique; the cross-hatches to the outside look like a painted method of emulating rumble strips.  It would be interesting to see if ARDOT applies this to other new freeway construction statewide.
Those are rumble strips. Zoom in, and you can see the aggregate in the concrete where they were ground out.
SM-T580
OK -- my increasingly feeble eyes didn't initially see the textures in the white cross-strips.  Not that ARDOT is trying to win a MOMA award or anything, but those are some of the most attractive rumble strips I've seen; far better than the usual lateral grooves ground into the outer asphalt shoulders.  And this design obviously lets the driver know when they're barely out of the lane rather than a few feet outside.  Nice! 

I believe the original version of that groove pattern in the shoulder was an innovation developed by the Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission in the 1980s. The PTC called it (and still calls it) SNAP, for Sonic Nap Alert Pattern. The first operational installation was in 1989. It was nearly immediately recognized as extremely effective (and cost-effective) by DOTs around the country and similar pavement patterns are now used extensively just about everywhere.

Here's a pretty good write-up about the development, testing, specs, photos, etc.: http://www.usroads.com/journals/p/rilj/9808/ri980803.htm


Just did a trip on the notorious 2-lane section of CA 152 east of Gilroy yesterday -- and noticed that they've put in rumble strips right on the outside lane line.  Considering the truck traffic an curvature of that particular road, this can only help until a long-awaited bypass is constructed (which, if the gas tax hike isn't rescinded in November, may finally get past the "line-on-a-map" stage). 

But for Interstate-geometry facilities, locating the rumble strips outside that line makes more sense; as larger trucks tend to hug the lane lines on inside curves, causing undue driver reaction via strips on the line might not be particularly wise.   Configurations such as seen in the picture of the I-49 Bella Vista bypass would likely be deemed optimal in those circumstances. 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on August 01, 2018, 09:40:51 AM

By that logic, the government can take whatever it wants, just by laying a tax on it. A tax on income is an assault on personal property and the right to pursue happiness. As a free citizen of a democratic system, I object to the government arbitrarily taking my money just because it says so.


Well, once you become a Billionaire, it gets easier. Government will arbitrarily give you everyone else's money . </s>
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on August 01, 2018, 04:20:49 PM

By that logic, the government can take whatever it wants, just by laying a tax on it. A tax on income is an assault on personal property and the right to pursue happiness. As a free citizen of a democratic system, I object to the government arbitrarily taking my money just because it says so.


Well, once you become a Billionaire, it gets easier. Government will arbitrarily give you everyone else's money . </s>

.......and let you buy your way into high public office!  (although with our current Fearless Leader* the actual "billionaire" label always seemed to be constantly in flux!) Of course, you'll get by with a little help from your (purported) friends!

*Rocky & Bullwinkle fans will certainly date themselves by recognizing this reference.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: qguy on August 01, 2018, 11:08:10 PM
As for "it's not the government's money"... I'd say that "your money" comprises only net, not gross.  It ceases to be "your money" the moment it's taxed.

Wow! Spoken like a true government employee. (And I used to be one, as a federal employee and state transportation employee.)

But seriously, are you kidding? My money is only the part the government in its infinite kindness decides to let me keep? And that's a valid way of looking at it simply because the taxing agents are elected officials? I think the founding fathers would have a thing or two to say about that kind of attitude toward taxation.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Rothman on August 02, 2018, 09:03:16 AM
Ah, the old logical circle.  Sure, your gross pay is what you actually earn.  But, if you don't pay taxes, you get punished.

So, are we advocating tax evasion here or not?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: qguy on August 02, 2018, 10:43:29 PM
No of course not. I'm talking about an attitude. Government officials, including elected representatives, who view the taxed portion of the citizen's income as not the citizen's income is in my opinion despicable. (And I promise to try to not slobber like Mel Blanc when I say that word.)

That attitude is how you have senators and representatives who shriek at any suggestion of lowering any tax rate and call any rate reduction "giving money away to people." That's ridiculous of course. Lowering a tax rate is not giving money away, it's simply not taking as much in the first place.

I'm not opposed to paying taxes. Not at all. But the natural tendency of government at all levels is to find increasingly creative ways to get more from the citizen's pocket. It's no wonder, when government officials' state of mind is to consider the taxed portion of the citizen's income to be the government's money already.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on August 02, 2018, 10:50:29 PM
That's why I view the Connecting Arkansas Program as one of the better methods of taxation.  It is dedicated to a specific goal, voted on by the populace, and has a mandated sunset.  The more local that taxation occurs, the more efficiently it tends to be allocated rather than passed up to the federal layer and then back down as they see fit after many hands have been in the till.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: vdeane on August 02, 2018, 10:57:44 PM
No of course not. I'm talking about an attitude. Government officials, including elected representatives, who view the taxed portion of the citizen's income as not the citizen's income is in my opinion despicable. (And I promise to try to not slobber like Mel Blanc when I say that word.)

That attitude is how you have senators and representatives who shriek at any suggestion of lowering any tax rate and call any rate reduction "giving money away to people." That's ridiculous of course. Lowering a tax rate is not giving money away, it's simply not taking as much in the first place.

I'm not opposed to paying taxes. Not at all. But the natural tendency of government at all levels is to find increasingly creative ways to get more from the citizen's pocket. It's no wonder, when government officials' state of mind is to consider the taxed portion of the citizen's income to be the government's money already.
If you buy something, do you view the money that was used to buy that thing to be "your money" even after it changed hands?  No?  Paying taxes is similar.

In any case, I budget off net and hardly pay attention to gross.  I've also never gotten anything other than a refund or had to file anything more complicated than a 1040A (and, once my student loans are paid off, 1040EZ) since graduating college, so I don't really notice them too much.  Also don't notice property taxes since I rent and therefore don't directly pay them.

Regarding what sparked this, the wealthy and businesses already weren't paying enough taxes, because they're able to hire teams of accountants to set things up such that they qualify for a ton of deductions.  Now, if we lowered the nominal rate but got rid of the deductions, that would be one thing (and actually quite helpful, since it would make taxes much simpler), but we don't do that.  We just lower the nominal rate and leave the deductions in place, sometimes even adding new ones.  These are structured so that those who already have a ton of money get a ton of benefit, but those they are theoretically supposed to help (to justify passing them) get peanuts.  The system is broken.  That's what we've been trying to say.  Why shouldn't those with the greatest ability to pay pay their fair share?  Right now we have a system where Warren Buffet pays a lower percentage of his income than his secretary does.

That's why I view the Connecting Arkansas Program as one of the better methods of taxation.  It is dedicated to a specific goal, voted on by the populace, and has a mandated sunset.  The more local that taxation occurs, the more efficiently it tends to be allocated rather than passed up to the federal layer and then back down as they see fit after many hands have been in the till.
Trouble is, not every community has the same ability to pay.  This is the reason why city school districts are crap while suburban school districts are good, for example.  Also why infrastructure in rich areas is shiny and new while infrastructure in poor areas is falling apart.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Scott5114 on August 03, 2018, 06:41:57 AM
If you love tollways so much, maybe you should try moving to a place where you have to pay a toll to get just about anywhere on high-speed roadways and you'll see how annoying they are. 

You're wishing Tulsa on him?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on August 03, 2018, 07:40:53 AM

Trouble is, not every community has the same ability to pay.  This is the reason why city school districts are crap while suburban school districts are good, for example.  Also why infrastructure in rich areas is shiny and new while infrastructure in poor areas is falling apart.

Little Rock and Northwest Arkansas have the best road systems , as witnessed by ever present roads work.  These two areas have, on average,  more money than the rest of the state.  Of course, Fayetteville keeps talking about wanting to get rid of the slums but can't get on one page. But that's another story.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Rothman on August 03, 2018, 08:19:59 AM
I have yet to hear an elected official criticize the idea of giving money back to the people.  I have heard elected officials warn of growing deficits because of tax cuts.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: qguy on August 03, 2018, 09:01:04 AM
If you buy something, do you view the money that was used to buy that thing to be "your money" even after it changed hands?  No?  Paying taxes is similar.

I don't have any problem looking at it that way. But I think too many politicians see our income as theirs first and ours second.

In any case, I budget off net and hardly pay attention to gross.

I've often thought that if everyone had to actually write a check for their taxes (including the nearly invisible payroll taxes) after every paycheck and pay their taxes by hand, so to speak, there would be a second revolution. Because their employers automatically deducts their taxes for them, most people are blissfully unaware of how much of their paycheck never gets to them.

Regarding what sparked this, the wealthy and businesses already weren't paying enough taxes…

That's your opinion. Not every economist agrees with that. (And yes, I'm aware of the adage that if you put 100 economists in a room, you'll get 100 different opinions on a particular aspect of the economy.)

Right now we have a system where Warren Buffet pays a lower percentage of his income than his secretary does.

Please don't haul out that old Warren-Buffett-and-his-secretary trope. PolitiFact debunked (http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2011/sep/21/does-secretary-pay-higher-taxes-millionaire/) that years ago.

I'll certainly agree, however (because I'm not really looking to engage in a spitting contest over fiscal policy), that the tax structure badly needs to be simplified and the nominal rate lowered. Personal income tax, corporate income tax, and capital gains tax structures.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on August 03, 2018, 09:08:12 AM
I have yet to hear an elected official criticize the idea of giving money back to the people.  I have heard elected officials warn of growing deficits because of tax cuts.

But never the same politician :)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: qguy on August 04, 2018, 09:05:02 AM
I have yet to hear an elected official criticize the idea of giving money back to the people.  I have heard elected officials warn of growing deficits because of tax cuts.

Really? You've never heard a politician call a tax cut a "giveaway?" Happens every time one is proposed. How could you miss it?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on August 04, 2018, 09:13:01 AM
I have yet to hear an elected official criticize the idea of giving money back to the people.  I have heard elected officials warn of growing deficits because of tax cuts.

Really? You've never heard a politician call a tax cut a "giveaway?" Happens every time one is proposed. How could you miss it?

But it's perfectly fine to give away money to the wealthy. Arkansas has no money to fix it's roads, but plenty of money for tax cuts for the wealthy.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: qguy on August 04, 2018, 10:24:59 AM
If a tax rate reduction (say on income) increases economic activity and results in increased tax revenue, I really don't care if the wealthy keep more money.

For example, most economists agree that a reduction in the capital gains tax rate (and remember that capital gains is how most super-wealthy generate their income, not straight so-called earned income) will result in an increase in capital gains tax revenue. President Obama even agreed, in a primary debate in April 2008. (How could he not? When Congress raised the rate to 28% under Clinton, capital gains tax revenue fell. When the rate was reduced to 20% later under Clinton, revenue increased, and when the rate was reduced to 15% under Bush, revenues increased again.) If that is true, why do I care if wealthy people keep more money?

I understand that not every tax point is currently set at a level where decreasing the tax rate increases the tax revenue (and vice versa). Liquid fuels taxes, which many states (including my home state) use to fund transportation projects, are probably usually set at a current level where raising the rate would increase the revenue. This would probably be true for nearly all toll rates.

That last example provides a good analogy. Consider a toll road on which the majority of the vehicles are trucks. (Perhaps even trucks owned by deep-pocketed trucking corporations.) The toll facility can set the toll rate high enough that it causes enough drivers to shunpike that any additional toll hike would result in a reduction in total toll revenue or a toll reduction would result in more drivers opting to use the facility resulting in an increase in toll revenue.

If the toll rate reduction resulted in a toll revenue increase, would I protest the toll reduction because many wealthy trucking companies got to keep more of their money. Of course not. It's a net benefit to the toll facility (and everyone else) so why would I care?

Same thing when that happens sometimes with tax rates, as is the case with capital gains tax rate reduction. If it's a net benefit to the government (it receives more revenue) and everyone else (over half of all Americans own stock of some type and that percentage has been increasing for decades) why do I care if the wealthy also keep more money?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on August 04, 2018, 01:06:25 PM
The best way to reduce the use of something is to tax it.  Obviously there are points of diminishing returns, though.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: qguy on August 04, 2018, 03:05:53 PM
True. Every tax has a sweet spot, an optimal tax rate which generates the maximum amount of revenue and which if either raised or lowered reduces the revenue. For any tax, fee, toll, or what have you, tax payers, politicians, economists, and anyone else can then argue about whether the current rate is set above or below that sweet spot.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: jbnv on August 06, 2018, 09:09:17 AM
If you buy something, do you view the money that was used to buy that thing to be "your money" even after it changed hands?  No?  Paying taxes is similar.

Of course not, because you willingly exchanged the money for a good or service. The money isn't yours any more, but the good or service is.

Paying tolls is essentially paying for access to or usage of a road. I can choose to pay the toll, or not pay the toll and not use the tolled road.

Income taxes, on the other hand, are flat-out confiscation. You can choose to not pay them, if you want to gamble your freedom.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on August 06, 2018, 09:53:37 AM
If you buy something, do you view the money that was used to buy that thing to be "your money" even after it changed hands?  No?  Paying taxes is similar.

Of course not, because you willingly exchanged the money for a good or service. The money isn't yours any more, but the good or service is.

Paying tolls is essentially paying for access to or usage of a road. I can choose to pay the toll, or not pay the toll and not use the tolled road.

Income taxes, on the other hand, are flat-out confiscation. You can choose to not pay them, if you want to gamble your freedom.

Then move to Texas :p
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: J N Winkler on August 06, 2018, 10:58:08 AM
This is why I'm a big supporter of tollways. The people who use them will pay for and fund them.

I am not, because of what the concept of toll viability means for systematic provision of high-capacity, high-speed road infrastructure.  If you insist on tolls as your sole method of paying for freeway construction, then the only freeways you build will be in corridors where motorists are willing to pay an excise tax on fuel (itself capable of paying for freeways) plus construction and maintenance cost for the toll road (paid through tolls) plus ~30% collection expense for tolls (paid through tolls).  The tolls themselves meter usage, so in the case of some marginally toll-viable facilities, you see far less usage than the roads would have without tolls and therefore a very high risk of needing bailout, which is often ultimately at public expense.

In contradistinction, if a systematic charge such as the fuel tax is the primary mechanism for funding freeways, the double-charging problem goes away, and you also pay less for the road operator to take your money since collection expense for the fuel tax is around 1% instead of 30%.

If a tax rate reduction (say on income) increases economic activity and results in increased tax revenue, I really don't care if the wealthy keep more money.

At the national level, as Vdeane points out, we are long past the point where tax cuts on earned income increase revenue.  And even if they were revenue-positive, it would still be a questionable premise that the goal of the income tax system should be revenue maximization.  High marginal tax rates for high income brackets tend to realign incentives away from executive compensation and toward building companies through capital formation.  This, in turn, tends to narrow income inequality and reduces the extent to which low- and middle-income workers end up on the downside of the wealth effect.

The problem with looking solely at what happens at the margin (if we reduce this tax rate 1%, then by what percentage do revenues increase or decrease?) is that especially over time, distributional consequences become significant.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: jbnv on August 06, 2018, 11:08:09 AM
Then move to Texas :p

Do you even bother to remember more than one thing I post?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: inkyatari on August 06, 2018, 11:22:59 AM
Soo...

How about that I-49?

Amirite?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: qguy on August 06, 2018, 07:59:17 PM
… And even if they were revenue-positive, it would still be a questionable premise that the goal of the income tax system should be revenue maximization.  High marginal tax rates for high income brackets tend to realign incentives away from executive compensation and toward building companies through capital formation.  This, in turn, tends to narrow income inequality and reduces the extent to which low- and middle-income workers end up on the downside of the wealth effect.

Tax system as social engineering. Aargh! So much for the goal simplifying the tax system.

Soo...

How about that I-49?

Amirite?

I'll go with that.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on August 06, 2018, 08:21:27 PM
If you buy something, do you view the money that was used to buy that thing to be "your money" even after it changed hands?  No?  Paying taxes is similar.

Of course not, because you willingly exchanged the money for a good or service. The money isn't yours any more, but the good or service is.

Paying tolls is essentially paying for access to or usage of a road. I can choose to pay the toll, or not pay the toll and not use the tolled road.

Income taxes, on the other hand, are flat-out confiscation. You can choose to not pay them, if you want to gamble your freedom.

Tolls flat out won't work in Arkansas.  Just too poor here for locals to pay to use the roads and would take US 71.  Only way it would work would be if there's a lot of extra out-of-state traffic that it pulls.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on August 06, 2018, 08:42:02 PM
Move along. Quit beating a dead horse.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: rte66man on August 06, 2018, 11:03:21 PM
Soo...

How about that I-49?

Amirite?


++++++1
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: txstateends on August 07, 2018, 01:24:36 AM
....and we are *how far* away from the $$$$ and construction of the Shreveport ICC and the Fort Smith-Texarkana sections?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on August 07, 2018, 09:48:05 AM
....and we are *how far* away from the $$$$ and construction of the Shreveport ICC and the Fort Smith-Texarkana sections?

Shreveport is likely 3-4 years from starting the ICC. Arkansas simply says "no money".
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: silverback1065 on September 11, 2018, 02:49:15 PM
I just noticed a new freeway US 412 in the Fayetteville area on google maps, how far will this ultimately go?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on September 11, 2018, 03:55:20 PM
I just noticed a new freeway US 412 in the Fayetteville area on google maps, how far will this ultimately go?

From where the divided highway portion ends at the edge of Tontitown to the twin White River bridges where it divides again between Sonora and Nob Hill.  What has been completed is the middle section.  No timelines (or funding) yet when the other two segments will happen, though.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on September 11, 2018, 04:44:24 PM
I just noticed a new freeway US 412 in the Fayetteville area on google maps, how far will this ultimately go?

From where the divided highway portion ends at the edge of Tontitown to the twin White River bridges where it divides again between Sonora and Nob Hill.  What has been completed is the middle section.  No timelines (or funding) yet when the other two segments will happen, though.

It is posted (for now) as AR 612.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: silverback1065 on September 11, 2018, 04:47:53 PM
Ok, just curious, I will be down there at the end of the month and I noticed that when I was plotting a route.  Is this really necessary for the area? I feel like finishing 49 is much more important.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on September 11, 2018, 05:09:27 PM
Ok, just curious, I will be down there at the end of the month and I noticed that when I was plotting a route.  Is this really necessary for the area? I feel like finishing 49 is much more important.

To some degree, yes. 412 sees more than its share of truck traffic, not to mention 412 through Springdale where it follows Business 71  XNA is also planning a toll road from new 412 to the airport, reducing that slow slog on AR 12 or AR 264
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: edwaleni on September 13, 2018, 11:37:59 PM
Ok, just curious, I will be down there at the end of the month and I noticed that when I was plotting a route.  Is this really necessary for the area? I feel like finishing 49 is much more important.

To some degree, yes. 412 sees more than its share of truck traffic, not to mention 412 through Springdale where it follows Business 71  XNA is also planning a toll road from new 412 to the airport, reducing that slow slog on AR 12 or AR 264

Having flow in and out of XNA a few times, yes, that airport access has to be a bit of a joke. Especially that 3 way stop in Cave Springs. You try to convince yourself you have made a wrong turn.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on September 14, 2018, 08:28:47 AM
Ok, just curious, I will be down there at the end of the month and I noticed that when I was plotting a route.  Is this really necessary for the area? I feel like finishing 49 is much more important.

To some degree, yes. 412 sees more than its share of truck traffic, not to mention 412 through Springdale where it follows Business 71  XNA is also planning a toll road from new 412 to the airport, reducing that slow slog on AR 12 or AR 264

Having flow in and out of XNA a few times, yes, that airport access has to be a bit of a joke. Especially that 3 way stop in Cave Springs. You try to convince yourself you have made a wrong turn.

But the land was cheap ;)

The last few years, ARDOT & XNA have been putting guide signs to find the airport.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: silverback1065 on September 14, 2018, 09:14:37 AM
so will this be a full interstate grade facility the whole way?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on September 14, 2018, 10:27:56 AM
so will this be a full interstate grade facility the whole way?

The airport road? I'm not sure
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: silverback1065 on September 14, 2018, 10:33:02 AM
so will this be a full interstate grade facility the whole way?

The airport road? I'm not sure

412
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on September 14, 2018, 10:36:09 AM
so will this be a full interstate grade facility the whole way?

The airport road? I'm not sure

412

Yes. new 412 will be controlled access.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on September 14, 2018, 12:19:13 PM
so will this be a full interstate grade facility the whole way?

The airport road? I'm not sure

412

Yes. new 412 will be controlled access.

What type is the new I-49/Bypass 412 interchange?  Trumpet, directional (semi-), diamond, cloverleaf, other? 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: triplemultiplex on September 14, 2018, 12:56:51 PM
What type is the new I-49/Bypass 412 interchange?  Trumpet, directional (semi-), diamond, cloverleaf, other? 

Looking at the ol' Google Earth, it's looking like partial build-out of a four-level stack.
(A stack that oddly preserves the local road configuration.)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: silverback1065 on September 16, 2018, 05:59:10 PM
seems like overkill
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on September 17, 2018, 01:05:13 PM
seems like overkill

Considering that US 412 is ultimately likely to become an Interstate in the (probably distant) future, it's just getting ahead of the curve for a change.  Where the forced exit is currently, you can see where the carriageway will ultimately extend eventually under the current overpass.  There will have to be another tier for the overpass coming from the east side of I-49 for southbound traffic when the bypass gets built out to the other side of Sonora.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on September 17, 2018, 04:18:42 PM
seems like overkill

Considering that US 412 is ultimately likely to become an Interstate in the (probably distant) future, it's just getting ahead of the curve for a change.  Where the forced exit is currently, you can see where the carriageway will ultimately extend eventually under the current overpass.  There will have to be another tier for the overpass coming from the east side of I-49 for southbound traffic when the bypass gets built out to the other side of Sonora.

That's the first I've heard regarding an Interstate concept for US 412 outside the Fictional realm -- although some sort of controlled-access/signal-less connection to Tulsa would be a worthwhile endeavor to enhance the connection between that city and NWA.  A Siloam Springs bypass might pose a political problem (IIRC that's been suggested before but dismissed), but the portion in OK, including the Cherokee Turnpike, seems doable.  But even extending the new segment west of I-49 to the west might be fiscally difficult in the near term -- so I wouldn't expect to see a new more comprehensive corridor concept brought up for quite some time.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on September 18, 2018, 10:33:25 AM
I can't exactly remember where I read it, and I cannot seem to find it anymore in a Google search, but I thought the 400 series US highways were numbered that way to indicate some sort of high-priority corridor, so it would make sense that ultimately, it would become an Interstate.  Political and financial realities come and go over time, so it's not likely to happen anytime soon, regardless.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: abqtraveler on September 18, 2018, 12:06:36 PM
I can't exactly remember where I read it, and I cannot seem to find it anymore in a Google search, but I thought the 400 series US highways were numbered that way to indicate some sort of high-priority corridor, so it would make sense that ultimately, it would become an Interstate.  Political and financial realities come and go over time, so it's not likely to happen anytime soon, regardless.

That might be true.  I recall reading somewhere many years ago that US-400 was a precursor designation for what would have been a planned (and now dead) extension of I-66 through Kansas and southern Colorado.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on September 18, 2018, 06:09:37 PM
I can't exactly remember where I read it, and I cannot seem to find it anymore in a Google search, but I thought the 400 series US highways were numbered that way to indicate some sort of high-priority corridor, so it would make sense that ultimately, it would become an Interstate.  Political and financial realities come and go over time, so it's not likely to happen anytime soon, regardless.

That might be true.  I recall reading somewhere many years ago that US-400 was a precursor designation for what would have been a planned (and now dead) extension of I-66 through Kansas and southern Colorado.

Both US 400 east of Wichita and US 412 east of Tulsa are part of the first batch of high priority corridors (#3 and #8 respectively) commissioned back in 1991 as part of the ISTEA legislation.  HPC #3 was an outgrowth of the "Transamerica" pipedream corridor cobbled together by various interests from Fresno, CA, Wichita, KS, and southern KY as a "I-66" proposal intended to serve regions previously bypassed by the Interstate system.  Relatively tightly defined between Wichita and West Virginia, it "petered out" heading west, mostly because of environmental objections to a route through both the Rocky Mountains of southern Colorado and the various national parks & monuments in Utah and Arizona.  And political considerations took it on a convoluted path eastward that ended up in Virginia Beach.  Certain portions of the route could, however, be considered intraregional SIU's; one of those was the Wichita-I-44 corridor; which was mostly overlaid on former KS 96 and which became US 400's eastern end, serving as a singularly-signed corridor from Wichita to eastward I-44 and vice-versa. 

HPC #8 was less nationally ambitious but with much the same rationale -- located across zones that were for the most part well away from established Interstate corridors; in this case, right across the heart of the Ozark Plateau.  US 412 was subsequently established as the "placeholder" for this corridor, often utilizing long multiplexes with existing routes (particularly US 62 in northern AR) where a new-terrain route would be both duplicative and pointless.  Political influence brought it across south-central TN to a terminus at I-65 where, lo and behold, there was considerable industrial development (the former Saturn automotive assembly facility was very near the eastern US 412/HPC #8 terminus).  Corridor status has primarily resulted in "spot" improvements to its roadways, particularly around Mountain Home Lake in AR and the former TN 20 between Dyersburg and Jackson, TN, which was brought up to expressway standards.  And while US 412 itself was extended west of Tulsa into NM (mostly on multiplexes), that part was never a designated high priority corridor.  The Springdale bypass is an integral part of that corridor; but like others of its ilk, any funding is done on a piecemeal basis and dependent upon the usual legislative machinations that characterize today's developmental modus operandi -- which is why its length, and current prospects for extension, is limited.     
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Wayward Memphian on September 19, 2018, 10:26:54 AM
US 412 from Huntsville to Harrison needs expressway'd as fast as possible after we pull a rabbit out of our butt for the rest of the Springdale bypass and a legit Siloam Springs expressway bypass. That 35 miles stretch between Huntsville and Alpena can be brutal.

I dream of it becoming an extension Of I-22 at least to Tulsa, incorporating it with I-555 and a new bridge north of Memphis that tries into I-69/I-269, making most of the I-269 loop become I-22.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Tomahawkin on September 19, 2018, 11:47:20 AM
My same thoughts about IH 22 being extended to Tulsa via IH 555 and US 412. north central Arkansas could be a crossroads for commerce with the IH 57 expansion...
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on September 19, 2018, 03:34:28 PM
US 412 from Huntsville to Harrison needs expressway'd as fast as possible after we pull a rabbit out of our butt for the rest of the Springdale bypass and a legit Siloam Springs expressway bypass. That 35 miles stretch between Huntsville and Alpena can be brutal.

I dream of it becoming an extension Of I-22 at least to Tulsa, incorporating it with I-555 and a new bridge north of Memphis that tries into I-69/I-269, making most of the I-269 loop become I-22.

That would be a handy stretch of freeway for multiple reasons.  It's going to have to happen eventually due to the growth of both northern corners of Arkansas.  The northwest corner is still the 14th fastest growing area of the nation, and soon to be in the top 100 MSAs.  Roads have just got to keep up.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Tomahawkin on September 19, 2018, 06:20:15 PM
I agree, having a East-west interstate in N Arkansas would relieve some of the traffic, especially trucks off of IH 540. This becoming a reality is 15 years away IMO
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on September 19, 2018, 07:23:13 PM
US 412 from Huntsville to Harrison needs expressway'd as fast as possible after we pull a rabbit out of our butt for the rest of the Springdale bypass and a legit Siloam Springs expressway bypass. That 35 miles stretch between Huntsville and Alpena can be brutal.

I dream of it becoming an extension Of I-22 at least to Tulsa, incorporating it with I-555 and a new bridge north of Memphis that tries into I-69/I-269, making most of the I-269 loop become I-22.

That would be a handy stretch of freeway for multiple reasons.  It's going to have to happen eventually due to the growth of both northern corners of Arkansas.  The northwest corner is still the 14th fastest growing area of the nation, and soon to be in the top 100 MSAs.  Roads have just got to keep up.

If perchance something like this does get developed as a limited-access facility, it'll be limited -- at least initially -- to a connector between NWA and Tulsa; anything east of there will be "spot" fixes on US 412 to address very specific and localized issues.  It'll come down to a matter of traffic potential -- and connecting an existing metro area to one that's growing -- particularly if a good portion of the corridor is already built -- would be a feasible -- from both political and logistical standpoints -- undertaking.  Extending that corridor east through the Ozarks is another story; it may be done eventually, but it'll be a long, slow incremental process; the pressing or glaring need that would be necessary to precipitate such action presently just isn't there.   
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on September 20, 2018, 03:20:50 PM
I certainly wouldn't mind seeing an Interstate quality route running the whole way between Tulsa and Springdale. The at-grade intersections on US-412 between Tulsa and the West end of the Cherokee Turnpike need to be eliminated. The turnpike would probably have to be extended to the AR state line due to US-412 being too badly encroached by properties from Dripping Springs to the border. The new US-412 bypass North of Springdale will complete a big chunk of the route. But there's still going to be a non-freeway gap in Siloam Springs.

As for US-412 East of Springdale, converting that to Interstate quality is a tougher sell. Aside from the cost & environmental concerns, there is big picture level competition coming from the US-60 corridor in Southern MO. US-60 is a lot farther along at being upgraded to expressway or freeway quality. That makes the concept of a Memphis to Springfield Interstate highway much more do-able. It could be extended farther West to Wichita along the US-400 corridor. I wouldn't call such a thing "I-22" though. I don't think the I-22 designation should extend above I-40.

I had one fictional idea of an I-50 corridor running from Jacksonville, FL to Provo, UT -but that would end up eating all of I-22 in the process of hitting cities like Albany, Columbus, Birmingham, Memphis, Springfield, Wichita, Pueblo and Grand Junction.

In Oklahoma US-412 is getting more 4-lane upgrades here and there. I saw a dream map of sorts for potential new Oklahoma turnpikes and they have one going as far as Boise City clear out in the Panhandle. It might be nice for the Cimarron Turnpike to be extended West thru Enid and to Woodward.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on September 20, 2018, 03:53:58 PM
^^^^^^^^
Given OK's seemingly perpetual lack of funds for transportation purposes, the prospects for extending any limited-access facilities in the northwest quadrant of the state (i.e., north of I-40 and west of I-35), tolled or not, would appear to be slim, despite the presence of "wish lists".  The only inducement for any such routes in that neck of the woods would be as a bypass of OKC -- something diverting I-40 traffic to either a northward facility such as I-35 or an alternate eastward bypass -- a Cimarron Turnpike extension, veering south at some point to I-40, might fit that bill well.  But discussing that any further should be reserved for a Fictional thread.  I'd guess that extending a tolled facility into NW OK, unless of the sort just described, would have a difficult time earning back its developmental cost -- there aren't just that many significant traffic generators (or destinations, for that matter) in that part of the state.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: The Ghostbuster on September 20, 2018, 04:14:57 PM
I see US 412 from Interstate 35 in Oklahoma to Interstate 49 in Arkansas possibly being upgraded into a freeway/tollway combo with no at-grade intersections, and access only at interchanges. West of Interstate 35, and east of the future eastern terminus of the future US 412 Springdale Bypass, I'm not so sure. I'll defer to others on that.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on September 20, 2018, 04:27:45 PM
^^^^^^^
That's probably about it for near-term possibilities; at that point there will be a continuous freeway/toll road from I-35 to I-49 (and fully limited access once that at-grade crossing west of Tulsa near the lake is addressed) to I-49 and NWA.  That'll take care of the most pressing connectivity and regional traffic issues; any extensions in either direction will have to wait until such time as there's ample funding to do so -- and unless there's a series of sea changes at both state and federal levels in terms of revenue raising and general philosophy, that probably won't happen in most of our lifetimes.   
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on September 20, 2018, 04:57:09 PM
Quote from: sparker
Given OK's seemingly perpetual lack of funds for transportation purposes, the prospects for extending any limited-access facilities in the northwest quadrant of the state (i.e., north of I-40 and west of I-35), tolled or not, would appear to be slim, despite the presence of "wish lists".

The Indian Nation Turnpike from Henryetta down to Hugo is a pretty odd, remote route. Henryetta to Durant (along the Tulsa to Dallas corridor) would have made a hell of a lot more sense. Paris, TX isn't exactly a major destination for Tulsa traffic.

The OTA is able to "cross-pledge" funds from profitable turnpikes (Turner, Will Rogers) to cover shortfalls on other turnpikes, as well as fund expansion plans like the widening of I-44 West of Tulsa or the Eastern Oklahoma County turnpike. Woodward has shown up from time to time in long term future expansion plans. I would like to see the OTA expand its system out in that direction since it could set some of the groundwork in place for a direct Denver to OKC diagonal highway. That's a glaring missing link in the Interstate system currently.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on September 20, 2018, 08:18:05 PM
The Indian Nation Turnpike from Henryetta down to Hugo is a pretty odd, remote route. Henryetta to Durant (along the Tulsa to Dallas corridor) would have made a hell of a lot more sense. Paris, TX isn't exactly a major destination for Tulsa traffic.

The southern terminus of the Indian Nation near Hugo was in all likelihood politically motivated, functionally "throwing a bone" to SE OK.  Weyerhaeuser Lumber has multiple facilities spread out along US 70 from Hugo east to the state line, including a huge mill in Valliant.  My grandfather was the lumber grading manager at their Broken Bow plant for several decades until he retired in the '50's; that plant closed down about 1965 or so in favor of an expanded Valliant plant.  One of the older original small-town WalMarts was located on the site of the old mill where US 70/259 crosses the TO&E rail line.  But the lumber producer is only one major player in the region; Tyson has a huge processing plant between Broken Bow and Idabel -- the single largest employment site in the area.  Between lumber, agriculture, and food processing, there's a lot of commercial activity in SE OK!  The INTP was the initial high-capacity route into the area; US 70 is being upgraded in bits and pieces (Idabel & Durant bypass; Hugo was bypassed as an extension of the INTP), although a major corridor-length expansion doesn't seem to be on the table.  I suppose when the INTP was planned, it was figured that the composite US 69/75 corridor would eventually be upgraded as a matter of course (the freeway section north of McAlester attests to that) -- but that situation is more than adequately covered in other threads. 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: rte66man on September 21, 2018, 03:13:36 PM
The Indian Nation Turnpike from Henryetta down to Hugo is a pretty odd, remote route. Henryetta to Durant (along the Tulsa to Dallas corridor) would have made a hell of a lot more sense. Paris, TX isn't exactly a major destination for Tulsa traffic.

The southern terminus of the Indian Nation near Hugo was in all likelihood politically motivated, functionally "throwing a bone" to SE OK.  The INTP was the initial high-capacity route into the area; US 70 is being upgraded in bits and pieces (Idabel & Durant bypass; Hugo was bypassed as an extension of the INTP), although a major corridor-length expansion doesn't seem to be on the table.  I suppose when the INTP was planned, it was figured that the composite US 69/75 corridor would eventually be upgraded as a matter of course (the freeway section north of McAlester attests to that) -- but that situation is more than adequately covered in other threads. 

FTFY

Just like OK6 from Altus to Elk City, the US70 corridor from Ardmore to Idabel will eventually be upgraded to expressway standards.   As you mentioned, the Weyerhouser and Tyson traffic alone justifies much of that. The rest was a political payoff to get improvements in the urban areas.  The Madill bypass was supposed to be the next big project but it has been put on hold.  Replacing the Roosevelt bridge over Lake Texoma has shown up in the most recent release of the 8 Year Plan. 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on September 26, 2018, 12:44:48 AM
That's the first I've heard regarding an Interstate concept for US 412 outside the Fictional realm -- although some sort of controlled-access/signal-less connection to Tulsa would be a worthwhile endeavor to enhance the connection between that city and NWA.  A Siloam Springs bypass might pose a political problem (IIRC that's been suggested before but dismissed), but the portion in OK, including the Cherokee Turnpike, seems doable.  But even extending the new segment west of I-49 to the west might be fiscally difficult in the near term -- so I wouldn't expect to see a new more comprehensive corridor concept brought up for quite some time.

I think one of the stupidest things ARDOT (then AHTD) did when I lived in Arkansas was to not build a bypass at Siloam Springs on US 412. And it was a thing where they came and asked: would you rather have a bypass or improve/widen the highway through the city, IIRC.
The city was against it, and possibly a bunch of residents, and probably politics were thrown in there. So they widened the road to 3 lanes in each direction with a median and a ton of traffic signals. At least they added the median.

Absolutely no forward thinking in that decision. It reminds me a bit of US 85 in Belle Fourche, SD (obviously on a much, much smaller scale). SDDOT came in and asked "bypass or widen US 85 through downtown". And of course, the city/locals didn't want the bypass and then complained when semi trucks were roaring through downtown once it was widened/improved (mainly due to the ND oil boom, but still).
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Arkansastravelguy on September 29, 2018, 05:49:55 AM
I remember about 15 years ago reading that US 412 between Tulsa and Arkansas was supposed to be Interstate 38. It’s been so long idr where I read it


iPhone
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: mgk920 on September 29, 2018, 10:08:16 AM
I remember about 15 years ago reading that US 412 between Tulsa and Arkansas was supposed to be Interstate 38. It’s been so long idr where I read it iPhone

I've never heard of that one.  Perhaps it was part of someone's fantasy/fictional highway musing.

Mike
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on September 29, 2018, 03:26:02 PM
I remember about 15 years ago reading that US 412 between Tulsa and Arkansas was supposed to be Interstate 38. It’s been so long idr where I read it iPhone

I've never heard of that one.  Perhaps it was part of someone's fantasy/fictional highway musing.

Mike

Really!  If you're going to speculate about future corridors, you may as well place them in the grid appropriately (unless they're diagonals, in which case at least part of it should be grid-compatible!).  Placing I-38 north of I-40 just doesn't work.  If you look over in Fictional, things like I-42, 46, and 50 have been suggested for the US 412 corridor, particularly the portion between I-35 and I-49.  But given the priorities of the states through which the corridor passes, such a proposal would be at best well off into the future.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: wdcrft63 on September 29, 2018, 06:11:41 PM
I remember about 15 years ago reading that US 412 between Tulsa and Arkansas was supposed to be Interstate 38. It’s been so long idr where I read it iPhone

I've never heard of that one.  Perhaps it was part of someone's fantasy/fictional highway musing.

Mike

Really!  If you're going to speculate about future corridors, you may as well place them in the grid appropriately (unless they're diagonals, in which case at least part of it should be grid-compatible!).  Placing I-38 north of I-40 just doesn't work.  If you look over in Fictional, things like I-42, 46, and 50 have been suggested for the US 412 corridor, particularly the portion between I-35 and I-49.  But given the priorities of the states through which the corridor passes, such a proposal would be at best well off into the future.
I-42 was assigned to North Carolina, of course; I-46 is probably the best fit.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on September 29, 2018, 11:06:06 PM
Quote from: wdcrft63
I-42 was assigned to North Carolina, of course; I-46 is probably the best fit.

I don't think the US-412 corridor between Tulsa and Springdale is long enough to justify burning another 2di Interstate designation, at least not unless the Western reaches extend well past Tulsa. FWIW, I think I-42 is a little silly for that "Intra-State" route in NC. OTOH there is a growing number of examples where duplicates of the same 2di route run in different parts of the country, such as the NC version of I-87. So it's possible for there to end up being two disconnected I-42 routes. If the decision was up to me those routes would probably just carry 3 digit Interstate designations.

Fictional territory alert: I think an "I-46" route ought to be built between Oklahoma City and Denver. More specifically, from OKC splitting off the Kilpatrick Turnpike and running diagonally thru Woodward then up into Western Kansas and ending at I-70 in Limon, CO. Taking the fantasy farther, the route should be extended SE down to a point near Texarkana, ending at I-49 (near Ashdown). In the OKC area the route would skirt the West and South sides of the metro, linking Yukon, Mustang and Norman. The combo of this route and I-49 would create an effective "Ports to Front Range" corridor.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on September 30, 2018, 03:54:21 AM
Quote from: wdcrft63
I-42 was assigned to North Carolina, of course; I-46 is probably the best fit.

I don't think the US-412 corridor between Tulsa and Springdale is long enough to justify burning another 2di Interstate designation, at least not unless the Western reaches extend well past Tulsa. FWIW, I think I-42 is a little silly for that "Intra-State" route in NC. OTOH there is a growing number of examples where duplicates of the same 2di route run in different parts of the country, such as the NC version of I-87. So it's possible for there to end up being two disconnected I-42 routes. If the decision was up to me those routes would probably just carry 3 digit Interstate designations.

Fictional territory alert: I think an "I-46" route ought to be built between Oklahoma City and Denver. More specifically, from OKC splitting off the Kilpatrick Turnpike and running diagonally thru Woodward then up into Western Kansas and ending at I-70 in Limon, CO. Taking the fantasy farther, the route should be extended SE down to a point near Texarkana, ending at I-49 (near Ashdown). In the OKC area the route would skirt the West and South sides of the metro, linking Yukon, Mustang and Norman. The combo of this route and I-49 would create an effective "Ports to Front Range" corridor.

I'll respectfully disagree with the concept of "burning" a 2di number; unless one is engaging in a I-designation version of fantasy football, the pool of numbers (and there are a hell of a lot of even ones in the 40-60 range that would be appropriate for US 412 -- even the "holy grail" I-50) is there to be used for anything reasonable that comes along, and even a relatively short corridor such as one between I-35 and I-49 would connect disparate regions (the Great Plains, metro Tulsa, and NWA) -- enough to be appropriate for a trunk designation.  And since the "fourth wall" of Fictional has been breached here, Bobby's long-sought OKC-Denver corridor would be a great place to put a I-52:  like its US numerical equivalent, it would be a NW>SE diagonal -- and there would be no in-state conflict with that US route much further north and east. 

I certainly don't mind dipping into the 2di "pool" from time to time (NC obviously shares my preference; they'll likely use up another one under 40 for the E-W corridor through Charlotte in the not-too-distant future); much better than exceptionally long 3di's, which weren't part of the original numbering scheme -- or a travesty like the southern I-87 (I'll go to my grave ranting about that one!).   
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on September 30, 2018, 08:11:10 PM
The problem with gratuitously using 2 digit Interstate designations on short routes is it raises multiple problems. One: it ignores future long term needs. We don't know how America's population will migrate and how/where they'll be driving decades from now. I think a 2-digit designation needs to run at least so many miles, but furthermore the 2-digit route needs to be far enough from other parallel 2-digit routes. The system needs to have some sense of balance. In Western states various Interstate routes are spread very very far apart. But Interstate routes are packed in like crazy in certain parts of the East.

North Carolina is going nuts with slapping 2-digit Interstate markers on all sorts of routes, many of them short and not even connected. That kind of makes a mockery of the Interstate system. It's a joke similar to the wacky crooked nature of certain new Interstate routes.

Quote from: sparker
And since the "fourth wall" of Fictional has been breached here, Bobby's long-sought OKC-Denver corridor would be a great place to put a I-52:  like its US numerical equivalent, it would be a NW>SE diagonal -- and there would be no in-state conflict with that US route much further north and east.

I keep bringing up I-46 for that fictional Denver-OKC route for a couple reasons. I-x4 and I-x6 routes are the next thing down from "major" East-West routes that end in zero. I-52 would probably be better used on a shorter route. Denver has a duplicate of I-76. The I-46 route would kind of go with that. It's like I-44 and I-64 ending in the St Louis metro area. I wish I-24 went farther than its current end at I-57. It would be cool if it went by Carbondale and diagonally up to Columbia, IL to cross the Mississippi into St Louis over what's currently I-255. I-24, I-44 and I-64 would all end in St Louis.

The idea of extending this I-46 concept from OKC to near Texarkana would also create an interesting intersection between I-46 and I-49.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Plutonic Panda on September 30, 2018, 09:50:47 PM
The OKC-Denver really should be Denver-New Orleans with OKC being in the middle. Would be a nice interstate to have even if there wouldn’t be much traffic on it. I’d support it.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on September 30, 2018, 11:54:17 PM
The problem with gratuitously using 2 digit Interstate designations on short routes is it raises multiple problems. One: it ignores future long term needs. We don't know how America's population will migrate and how/where they'll be driving decades from now. I think a 2-digit designation needs to run at least so many miles, but furthermore the 2-digit route needs to be far enough from other parallel 2-digit routes. The system needs to have some sense of balance. In Western states various Interstate routes are spread very very far apart. But Interstate routes are packed in like crazy in certain parts of the East.

North Carolina is going nuts with slapping 2-digit Interstate markers on all sorts of routes, many of them short and not even connected. That kind of makes a mockery of the Interstate system. It's a joke similar to the wacky crooked nature of certain new Interstate routes.

Quote from: sparker
And since the "fourth wall" of Fictional has been breached here, Bobby's long-sought OKC-Denver corridor would be a great place to put a I-52:  like its US numerical equivalent, it would be a NW>SE diagonal -- and there would be no in-state conflict with that US route much further north and east.

I keep bringing up I-46 for that fictional Denver-OKC route for a couple reasons. I-x4 and I-x6 routes are the next thing down from "major" East-West routes that end in zero. I-52 would probably be better used on a shorter route. Denver has a duplicate of I-76. The I-46 route would kind of go with that. It's like I-44 and I-64 ending in the St Louis metro area. I wish I-24 went farther than its current end at I-57. It would be cool if it went by Carbondale and diagonally up to Columbia, IL to cross the Mississippi into St Louis over what's currently I-255. I-24, I-44 and I-64 would all end in St Louis.

The idea of extending this I-46 concept from OKC to near Texarkana would also create an interesting intersection between I-46 and I-49.

I don't think it's too terribly gratuitous, seeing as how the even-numbered pool between 26 and 64 has 14 available designations; only 3 corridors portending potential "raids" on this pool have even been discussed in this thread.  Put it this way -- there's not enough funding out there to even come close to depleting the supply of available Interstate 1di or 2di designations, particularly within the group just cited. 

And if you're going to extend your Denver-OKC corridor to Texarkana, please route it through Broken Bow -- my relatives down there could use the business!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: silverback1065 on October 01, 2018, 08:37:16 AM
we don't need all of these new interstates, it's annoying that we come up with these small, irrelevant excuses to build a new interstate.  What we have is fine.  It's just adding extraneous mileage we have no money to pay for. 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: In_Correct on October 01, 2018, 08:55:23 AM
I remember about 15 years ago reading that US 412 between Tulsa and Arkansas was supposed to be Interstate 38. It’s been so long idr where I read it iPhone
I've never heard of that one.  Perhaps it was part of someone's fantasy/fictional highway musing.

Mike

Really!  If you're going to speculate about future corridors, you may as well place them in the grid appropriately (unless they're diagonals, in which case at least part of it should be grid-compatible!).  Placing I-38 north of I-40 just doesn't work.  If you look over in Fictional, things like I-42, 46, and 50 have been suggested for the US 412 corridor, particularly the portion between I-35 and I-49.  But given the priorities of the states through which the corridor passes, such a proposal would be at best well off into the future.

"Interstate 50" makes sense for U.S. 412.  :nod:
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on October 02, 2018, 10:31:35 AM
I remember about 15 years ago reading that US 412 between Tulsa and Arkansas was supposed to be Interstate 38. It’s been so long idr where I read it iPhone
I've never heard of that one.  Perhaps it was part of someone's fantasy/fictional highway musing.

Mike

Really!  If you're going to speculate about future corridors, you may as well place them in the grid appropriately (unless they're diagonals, in which case at least part of it should be grid-compatible!).  Placing I-38 north of I-40 just doesn't work.  If you look over in Fictional, things like I-42, 46, and 50 have been suggested for the US 412 corridor, particularly the portion between I-35 and I-49.  But given the priorities of the states through which the corridor passes, such a proposal would be at best well off into the future.

"Interstate 50" makes sense for U.S. 412.  :nod:

That would be a good number for it.  No route 50 in Arkansas already to confuse things, and the US-412 runs from N.M. to Tennessee, so it's ultimately going to be a several state freeway ultimately, even if it does take our lifetimes to realize it.  I-49 and I-50 would make the numeric center of the interstate system have a junction in Lowell, AR, which is pretty much the center of Northwest Arkansas, which isn't that far from the population center of the country.  If folks have a problem with having a 2DI Interstate number on a shorter section from Tulsa to Lowell (Springdale) until it runs more than 100 miles, then there can be a temporary 3DI designation until the road gets fleshed out further, like I-549 or I-544.  That's pretty much what happened with I-49 in Arkansas until Missouri almost connected up with it and went ahead and had the designation changed on US-71.  Arkansas' designation was I-540 until all that was left was the Bella Vista Bypass to have a connection from I-70 to I-40.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: msunat97 on October 16, 2018, 05:44:19 PM
Question for the board...any updates to the construction thru NWA?  Is the construction wrapping up along 49 in the Fayetteville / Springdale areas?  Any activity from Missouri on getting funding for their last section to be completed?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: edwaleni on October 16, 2018, 07:52:55 PM
Question for the board...any updates to the construction thru NWA?  Is the construction wrapping up along 49 in the Fayetteville / Springdale areas?  Any activity from Missouri on getting funding for their last section to be completed?

Missouri has a road tax increase on the November mid-term ballot. An attempt to have it thrown off as unconstitutional was tossed out.

As for construction through NWA, the only thing I can think of is the Springdale Bypass project and the AR section of the Bella Vista Bypass.

As for the Springdale Bypass, the ramps off I-49 are open going west, but it stops short of US-412 right now as construction continues.

As for the Bella Vista Bypass, AR is going to go ahead and finish their part of it to the Missouri state line regardless of the Missouri tax vote.

When the Bella Vista opens, posting volume in AARoads will drop by 30% as no one in NWA will have anything to talk about anymore.



Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: In_Correct on October 16, 2018, 08:15:49 PM
Question for the board...any updates to the construction thru NWA?  Is the construction wrapping up along 49 in the Fayetteville / Springdale areas?  Any activity from Missouri on getting funding for their last section to be completed?

Missouri has a road tax increase on the November mid-term ballot. An attempt to have it thrown off as unconstitutional was tossed out.

As for construction through NWA, the only thing I can think of is the Springdale Bypass project and the AR section of the Bella Vista Bypass.

As for the Springdale Bypass, the ramps off I-49 are open going west, but it stops short of US-412 right now as construction continues.

As for the Bella Vista Bypass, AR is going to go ahead and finish their part of it to the Missouri state line regardless of the Missouri tax vote.

When the Bella Vista opens, posting volume in AARoads will drop by 30% as no one in NWA will have anything to talk about anymore.

Or you could post pictures of the highway construction and also after it opens.  :nod:
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on October 16, 2018, 10:21:19 PM
There is still construction going on in Bentonville/Rogers between exits 83 and 88.  It is down to 4 lanes in that stretch other than the Exit Only lanes for 85 and 86 until they finish up the new 8th Street exit which will likely be Exit 87 and build a new overpass over 71B at Exit 85.  And of course the Bella Vista Bypass still isn't funded by Missouri for sure yet.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on October 16, 2018, 10:29:05 PM
Question for the board...any updates to the construction thru NWA?  Is the construction wrapping up along 49 in the Fayetteville / Springdale areas?  Any activity from Missouri on getting funding for their last section to be completed?

Missouri has a road tax increase on the November mid-term ballot. An attempt to have it thrown off as unconstitutional was tossed out.

As for construction through NWA, the only thing I can think of is the Springdale Bypass project and the AR section of the Bella Vista Bypass.

As for the Springdale Bypass, the ramps off I-49 are open going west, but it stops short of US-412 right now as construction continues.

As for the Bella Vista Bypass, AR is going to go ahead and finish their part of it to the Missouri state line regardless of the Missouri tax vote.

When the Bella Vista opens, posting volume in AARoads will drop by 30% as no one in NWA will have anything to talk about anymore.

That's not true!  Then the topic will change focus to the I-49 stretch between I-40 and AR-22 that has a half billion dollar unfunded bridge over the Arkansas River that's needed before the AR-549 segment between AR-22 and US-71 south of Ft. Smith gets connected up.  That's likely the last part of I-49 in Arkansas for a couple of decades unless the U.S. comes up with some different funding mechanisms for new Interstate projects.  Or Arkansas' economy booms so much that we suddenly cease to be 48th or 49th in everything nationally.  We seem to run with Mississippi and West Virginia in most things that people view as things to strive for excellence in.  Except for obesity and teenage pregnancy!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on October 17, 2018, 09:12:43 AM
Question for the board...any updates to the construction thru NWA?  Is the construction wrapping up along 49 in the Fayetteville / Springdale areas?  Any activity from Missouri on getting funding for their last section to be completed?

Missouri has a road tax increase on the November mid-term ballot. An attempt to have it thrown off as unconstitutional was tossed out.

As for construction through NWA, the only thing I can think of is the Springdale Bypass project and the AR section of the Bella Vista Bypass.

As for the Springdale Bypass, the ramps off I-49 are open going west, but it stops short of US-412 right now as construction continues.

As for the Bella Vista Bypass, AR is going to go ahead and finish their part of it to the Missouri state line regardless of the Missouri tax vote.

When the Bella Vista opens, posting volume in AARoads will drop by 30% as no one in NWA will have anything to talk about anymore.



I beg to differ.

We could talk about the proposed SPUI in Fayetteville at US 62, the Wedington Drive (AR 16) interchange reconstruction, widening 49 to Alma (someday, I'm sure), or the Exit 67 mixmaster.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: GreenLanternCorps on October 17, 2018, 02:13:55 PM
Question for the board...any updates to the construction thru NWA?  Is the construction wrapping up along 49 in the Fayetteville / Springdale areas?  Any activity from Missouri on getting funding for their last section to be completed?

Missouri has a road tax increase on the November mid-term ballot. An attempt to have it thrown off as unconstitutional was tossed out.

As for construction through NWA, the only thing I can think of is the Springdale Bypass project and the AR section of the Bella Vista Bypass.

As for the Springdale Bypass, the ramps off I-49 are open going west, but it stops short of US-412 right now as construction continues.

As for the Bella Vista Bypass, AR is going to go ahead and finish their part of it to the Missouri state line regardless of the Missouri tax vote.

When the Bella Vista opens, posting volume in AARoads will drop by 30% as no one in NWA will have anything to talk about anymore.

That's not true!  Then the topic will change focus to the I-49 stretch between I-40 and AR-22 that has a half billion dollar unfunded bridge over the Arkansas River that's needed before the AR-549 segment between AR-22 and US-71 south of Ft. Smith gets connected up.  That's likely the last part of I-49 in Arkansas for a couple of decades unless the U.S. comes up with some different funding mechanisms for new Interstate projects.  Or Arkansas' economy booms so much that we suddenly cease to be 48th or 49th in everything nationally.  We seem to run with Mississippi and West Virginia in most things that people view as things to strive for excellence in.  Except for obesity and teenage pregnancy!

(http://images2.fanpop.com/image/photos/9400000/We-ll-always-have-Paris-casablanca-9495176-720-540.jpg)

We'll always have Ft. Smith...
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on October 17, 2018, 10:46:02 PM
Question for the board...any updates to the construction thru NWA?  Is the construction wrapping up along 49 in the Fayetteville / Springdale areas?  Any activity from Missouri on getting funding for their last section to be completed?

Missouri has a road tax increase on the November mid-term ballot. An attempt to have it thrown off as unconstitutional was tossed out.

As for construction through NWA, the only thing I can think of is the Springdale Bypass project and the AR section of the Bella Vista Bypass.

As for the Springdale Bypass, the ramps off I-49 are open going west, but it stops short of US-412 right now as construction continues.

As for the Bella Vista Bypass, AR is going to go ahead and finish their part of it to the Missouri state line regardless of the Missouri tax vote.

When the Bella Vista opens, posting volume in AARoads will drop by 30% as no one in NWA will have anything to talk about anymore.

Arkansas and Missouri are awaiting the possibility of a BUILD grant this December to finish the bypass on the Missouri side.  It's been reported that there's a lot of optimism about this one - Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR) is standing behind it.  We will see.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: codyg1985 on October 18, 2018, 11:43:19 AM
As for construction through NWA, the only thing I can think of is the Springdale Bypass project and the AR section of the Bella Vista Bypass.

Another segment of the Springdale bypass is under construction now? I noticed on Google Street View that the second carriageway is currently under construction along the Bella Vista Bypass between CR 34 and AR 72. Also of note: new signs have been posted along the BVB that shows exit numbers in the 200s; presumably for the ultimate build out of I-49.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on October 18, 2018, 12:07:26 PM
As for construction through NWA, the only thing I can think of is the Springdale Bypass project and the AR section of the Bella Vista Bypass.

Another segment of the Springdale bypass is under construction now? I noticed on Google Street View that the second carriageway is currently under construction along the Bella Vista Bypass between CR 34 and AR 72. Also of note: new signs have been posted along the BVB that shows exit numbers in the 200s; presumably for the ultimate build out of I-49.

ARDOT started the second carriageway back in the Spring so they can be ready whenever Missouri get going. 

The exit signs are new-ish. Last time I was there (January?) , the exits weren't signed.  ARDOT is supposed to be replacing most of the exit signs on 49 sometime this Fall, but never responded when I asked if they'd be updating the exit numbers. I guess maybe they are, so I need to document all the current signs for posterity.

As far as the 412/ Springdale Bypass, I've seen no updates. The next segment will likely be west of AR 112 so XNA can build their toll road.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: wdcrft63 on October 18, 2018, 06:58:12 PM
Question for the board...any updates to the construction thru NWA?  Is the construction wrapping up along 49 in the Fayetteville / Springdale areas?  Any activity from Missouri on getting funding for their last section to be completed?

Missouri has a road tax increase on the November mid-term ballot. An attempt to have it thrown off as unconstitutional was tossed out.

As for construction through NWA, the only thing I can think of is the Springdale Bypass project and the AR section of the Bella Vista Bypass.

As for the Springdale Bypass, the ramps off I-49 are open going west, but it stops short of US-412 right now as construction continues.

As for the Bella Vista Bypass, AR is going to go ahead and finish their part of it to the Missouri state line regardless of the Missouri tax vote.

When the Bella Vista opens, posting volume in AARoads will drop by 30% as no one in NWA will have anything to talk about anymore.

Arkansas and Missouri are awaiting the possibility of a BUILD grant this December to finish the bypass on the Missouri side.  It's been reported that there's a lot of optimism about this one - Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR) is standing behind it.  We will see.
People hate obvious freeway gaps, especially short ones that require long detours. The more Arkansas builds, the greater the pressure on Missouri to fill the gap.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on October 18, 2018, 07:06:51 PM
The bid for updating the signs from Alma to Bella Vista is Oct. 24th.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on October 19, 2018, 10:24:08 PM
The bid for updating the signs from Alma to Bella Vista is Oct. 24th.

So, they figured out what they're going to do about the mileage considering that I-49 takes a 5 mile detour out to Texas?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on October 19, 2018, 10:33:51 PM
The bid for updating the signs from Alma to Bella Vista is Oct. 24th.

So, they figured out what they're going to do about the mileage considering that I-49 takes a 5 mile detour out to Texas?

The Barling section has had mile based exits since it opened, so I'd say ARDOT decided a few years ago what to about Texarkana.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on October 19, 2018, 11:31:02 PM
Will the short segment of I-49 in Texas have any exits?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on October 20, 2018, 12:27:56 AM
Will the short segment of I-49 in Texas have any exits?

Some plan variants show the off-and-on-planned western Texarkana loop intersecting the main line of I-49 within TX; but there's always the chance that one or another surface road may be extended north or northeast to provide access to I-49 if that western loop doesn't materialize.  But since there will be about 7-8 miles of the route within the state, anything could happen by the time final plans are nailed down.   
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on October 20, 2018, 02:40:34 AM
7 or 8 miles? The way it looks I-49 would be lucky to hit the 5 mile mark on that far NE corner of Texas. Looking at the possible path the only road of significance in the way is Summerhill Road (aka FM 1397). Where I-49 would intersect that road appears to be in the flood plain (taking note of past undulations of former Red River bed on the terrain). I wouldn't be surprised to see locals in that area opposed to an I-49 exit there, looking to prevent a bunch of heavy truck traffic lumbering up through their currently quiet neighborhood.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on October 20, 2018, 09:38:09 AM
According to Wikipedia, there are two proposed exits in Texas (with Arkansas-based mileage)

I-369 south — Houston  (Exit 44)

CR 2320 / Hush Puppy Road  (Exit 46)

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: The Ghostbuster on October 22, 2018, 02:59:09 PM
How would Interstate 369 be extended to connect with future Interstate 49? Given the amount of development immediately north of 369's present northern terminus at Interstate 30, there seems to be quite a few homes and businesses to tear down. Once you get past the University of Texas A&M/Texarkana campus, constructing a freeway would be easier.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: abqtraveler on October 22, 2018, 03:44:28 PM
How would Interstate 369 be extended to connect with future Interstate 49? Given the amount of development immediately north of 369's present northern terminus at Interstate 30, there seems to be quite a few homes and businesses to tear down. Once you get past the University of Texas A&M/Texarkana campus, constructing a freeway would be easier.

Which would probably explain why TxDOT is proposing an alignment further to the west of Loop 151 for I-369 to eventually run, so it will ultimately be able to comnect with both I-30 and I-49. The westward shift would take I-369 through a less-developed area and avoid a lot of the issues mentioned with simply extending it northward from the I-30/Loop 151 interchange.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Anthony_JK on October 22, 2018, 08:12:09 PM
How would Interstate 369 be extended to connect with future Interstate 49? Given the amount of development immediately north of 369's present northern terminus at Interstate 30, there seems to be quite a few homes and businesses to tear down. Once you get past the University of Texas A&M/Texarkana campus, constructing a freeway would be easier.

Which would probably explain why TxDOT is proposing an alignment further to the west of Loop 151 for I-369 to eventually run, so it will ultimately be able to comnect with both I-30 and I-49. The westward shift would take I-369 through a less-developed area and avoid a lot of the issues mentioned with simply extending it northward from the I-30/Loop 151 interchange.

Ummm...no, that would be the Outer Texarkana Loop, now no longer part of I-369. TXDOT is now officially studying a direct connection and upgrade of US 59 (with new terrain segments) to Loop 151.

Details here in this other thread:

https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=10684.msg2344394#msg2344394
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on October 29, 2018, 06:50:39 PM
The bid for updating the signs from Alma to Bella Vista is Oct. 24th.

Creative Design Concepts of Van Buren, Arkansas received the contract worth $9.981 million. Includes gantry signage, better wayfinding signs, plus message boards and additional traffic cameras.
(I never knew we had a sign contractor in the area.)

https://talkbusiness.net/2018/10/more-than-63-million-in-interstate-rehab-signage-set-for-fort-smith-metro-nwa/
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: GreenLanternCorps on October 29, 2018, 07:17:20 PM
The bid for updating the signs from Alma to Bella Vista is Oct. 24th.

Creative Design Concepts of Van Buren, Arkansas received the contract worth $9.981 million. Includes gantry signage, better wayfinding signs, plus message boards and additional traffic cameras.
(I never knew we had a sign contractor in the area.)

https://talkbusiness.net/2018/10/more-than-63-million-in-interstate-rehab-signage-set-for-fort-smith-metro-nwa/

Will they be updating the exit numbers and mile markers to I-49's instead I-540?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on October 29, 2018, 07:45:10 PM
The bid for updating the signs from Alma to Bella Vista is Oct. 24th.

Creative Design Concepts of Van Buren, Arkansas received the contract worth $9.981 million. Includes gantry signage, better wayfinding signs, plus message boards and additional traffic cameras.
(I never knew we had a sign contractor in the area.)

https://talkbusiness.net/2018/10/more-than-63-million-in-interstate-rehab-signage-set-for-fort-smith-metro-nwa/

Will they be updating the exit numbers and mile markers to I-49's instead I-540?

No idea. I asked them a while back and they never responded.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: edwaleni on November 08, 2018, 08:37:26 AM
I picked up on this news blurb.

Arkansas is working on an inland port in Fort Smith with Union Pacific to support intermodal.  This means more effort for I-49.

Per Trains:

Quote
VAN BUREN, Ark. – Progress is “going pretty well”  on a study of what Union Pacific calls a Northwest Arkansas Regional Port on the Arkansas River, according to Arkansas State Rep. Mathew Pitsch, R-Fort Smith. Functioning as a consultant on the project for the Western Arkansas Intermodal Authority, Pitsch says “a few [potential] customers are interested”  in the proposed 2,000-acre facility.

In April, UP posted on its website that Ports America, the country’s largest port operator, had signed a memorandum of understanding with the state authority to conduct a “six-month exclusive diligence process to evaluate the commercial potential”  for such a facility. It would be a multi-modal, multi-commodity site designed for storage and for import and export.

The new port would link UP, river barge traffic, and Interstates 40 and 49. Efforts to develop such a facility have been underway for several years. Van Buren is adjacent to Fort Smith which is on the Arkansas-Oklahoma border. Besides UP, both are served by short line Arkansas & Missouri and Kansas City Southern.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Henry on November 08, 2018, 10:09:47 AM
Will the short segment of I-49 in Texas have any exits?

Some plan variants show the off-and-on-planned western Texarkana loop intersecting the main line of I-49 within TX; but there's always the chance that one or another surface road may be extended north or northeast to provide access to I-49 if that western loop doesn't materialize.  But since there will be about 7-8 miles of the route within the state, anything could happen by the time final plans are nailed down.   
Since I-369 will go to Texarkana anyway, are there plans to extend it up the loop to I-49, or will an I-x49 number be used instead? I like the idea of having an I-249 come around the southern and western sides of town.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on November 08, 2018, 05:37:24 PM
Will the short segment of I-49 in Texas have any exits?

Some plan variants show the off-and-on-planned western Texarkana loop intersecting the main line of I-49 within TX; but there's always the chance that one or another surface road may be extended north or northeast to provide access to I-49 if that western loop doesn't materialize.  But since there will be about 7-8 miles of the route within the state, anything could happen by the time final plans are nailed down.   
Since I-369 will go to Texarkana anyway, are there plans to extend it up the loop to I-49, or will an I-x49 number be used instead? I like the idea of having an I-249 come around the southern and western sides of town.

If the present plans to retain the current I-369/US 59 west side freeway as the northern end of the full I-369 corridor, there's little chance of it extending north of its present I-30 terminus (although I would expect upgrades to the 30/369 interchange over time).  Any connection to the short TX segment of planned I-49 would most likely have to be part of an additional outer loop crossing I-30 well west of the current 369/59 and curving back to I-369 at some point TBD.  It would be nice if it could tie in to Loop 151 to, with I-49, form a full loop around greater Texarkana -- but development around where 369 will likely intersect 151 (nothing is a given at this point) might render such a connection problematic in much the same way as a direct northern extension of I-369 would; it may instead intersect I-369 several miles south of town simply to avoid significant taking of developed properties.   

Given the delays/procrastination/funding shortfalls that have plagued the I-49 project north of Texarkana, it appears that "Plan A" of the Alliance for I-69/Texas and their cohorts is simply to get the corridor completed from Houston to I-30 to provide the long-desired northeast Interstate-grade egress from the Houston area.  A connection of I-49 would be "gravy" -- another corridor to an additional set of destinations (NWA + MO metro areas).  As I've stated upstream, if the 151 loop is added to the area's Interstate network (or not; it's already in full service), that would effectively serve as the I-49 connection for the time being.     
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on November 25, 2018, 06:20:30 PM
The Arkansas Department of Transportation will explore other options after a study revealed that using tolls to finance the construction and operation of a stretch of Interstate 49 River Bridge project wouldn't raise the needed revenue."The next task is to break it into reasonable jobs and something that would make a little bit of a difference," he said. "Of course, the biggest cost of this is the river bridge. But you could build it from highway to highway, or highway to local road. We can build it as a two-lane facility.https://www.arkansasonline.com/news/2018/nov/19/state-looks-away-from-tolls-to-pay-for--1/?news-arkansas
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: vdeane on November 25, 2018, 07:09:52 PM
So basically, they plan to build it as something other than I-49.  Tell me: why are we letting AR designate new interstate corridors like I-57 when they can't even finish the ones they have?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Tomahawkin on November 25, 2018, 07:58:19 PM
Good question. My only guess is that its a helluva lot cheaper to finish 57 than 49. I don't see 49 construction starting until 2024 after hearing that recent press release. SMFH
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on November 25, 2018, 08:54:33 PM
So basically, they plan to build it as something other than I-49.  Tell me: why are we letting AR designate new interstate corridors like I-57 when they can't even finish the ones they have?
Good question. My only guess is that its a helluva lot cheaper to finish 57 than 49. I don't see 49 construction starting until 2024 after hearing that recent press release. SMFH

My guess is that what's going to happen is that outside of the Arkansas River bridge, which will need to be 4 lanes in any case, much of the remainder of I-49 in AR will follow the Bella Vista model -- originally do 2 lanes of I-grade carriageway in any location where the alignment doesn't overlay the existing route -- and for those overlain sections, where ROW acquisition would be less in any case, perform whatever upgrades are necessary for 2 lanes of Interstate geometrics while eliminating private access points.  Add freeway bypasses of the major towns along the route (Mena, De Queen, Ashdown) and you have a project that may take time to complete but which can be broken up into sections -- with the full-length buildout to occur later.  Essentially the upper-Midwest expressway format with lengthy 2-lane segments (complete with passing lanes deployed in hill country) as interim improvements to US 71.  It's also the answer to how you eat an elephant: one bite at a time.  If spread out along the full incomplete corridor, it could also enhance political feasibility by providing developmental activity segment by segment.  An approach such as this one is necessary considering the topographical difficulty of the project, particularly in the Waldron to Mena segment that "tops out" the corridor. 

And yes -- if backers in NE AR keep up any sort of pressure, I-57 will likely be built within the state before I-49 is developed much farther than the Arkansas River bridge -- principally because of those same topographic issues.



Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: JREwing78 on November 25, 2018, 09:30:52 PM
The toll road study should be for the entire stretch between Fort Smith and Texarkana. Obviously, just tolling the I-49 bridge doesn't make financial sense. They need to think bigger.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Plutonic Panda on November 25, 2018, 09:52:30 PM
There shouldn’t be any tolls period. The state needs to step up its game along with the entire country and get our roads properly funded. I’m not against toll roads, just not for interstate corridors.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: edwaleni on November 25, 2018, 11:19:25 PM
The Ohio River Bridge is having the same issues for I-69 between Evansville IN and Hendersonville KY.

Inadequate funding and AADT.

If they toll it, worried that too much traffic will divert to the US-41 bridge nearby.  Considering tearing down one half of the US-41 bridge for local traffic or using license plate detection to allow local residents to pass toll free.

They have bigger issues trying to get I-49 finished down to DeQueen.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Tomahawkin on November 25, 2018, 11:29:25 PM
I'm guessing it will be built in 15-20 mile sections like IH 22 was built in NW Alabama. They had the same funding and topographical issues that 49 is facing...
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on November 25, 2018, 11:34:12 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda
There shouldn’t be any tolls period. The state needs to step up its game along with the entire country and get our roads properly funded. I’m not against toll roads, just not for interstate corridors.

The problem is fuel taxes can be misdirected to other things. Here in Oklahoma the extra revenue from the first fuel tax increase in over 25 years was put into teacher pay raises. The teachers certainly needed a raise, but the funding should not have come from fuel taxes. We have a lot of idiot voters and shameless politicians willing to pander to the worst tendencies of voters. Politicians come up with stupid schemes to avoid actually dealing with a problem, kicking the can down the road to the next administrations in the future.

Toll gates are annoying. But if anyone did a broad poll of the public I'd bet the vast majority of them would say they already pay way too much in fuel taxes and would say no to any increase.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Plutonic Panda on November 26, 2018, 01:11:44 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda
There shouldn’t be any tolls period. The state needs to step up its game along with the entire country and get our roads properly funded. I’m not against toll roads, just not for interstate corridors.

The problem is fuel taxes can be misdirected to other things. Here in Oklahoma the extra revenue from the first fuel tax increase in over 25 years was put into teacher pay raises. The teachers certainly needed a raise, but the funding should not have come from fuel taxes. We have a lot of idiot voters and shameless politicians willing to pander to the worst tendencies of voters. Politicians come up with stupid schemes to avoid actually dealing with a problem, kicking the can down the road to the next administrations in the future.

Toll gates are annoying. But if anyone did a broad poll of the public I'd bet the vast majority of them would say they already pay way too much in fuel taxes and would say no to any increase.
Which is exactly why they should pass a law ensuring gas tax can’t be redirected.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on November 26, 2018, 11:19:19 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda
There shouldn’t be any tolls period. The state needs to step up its game along with the entire country and get our roads properly funded. I’m not against toll roads, just not for interstate corridors.

The problem is fuel taxes can be misdirected to other things. Here in Oklahoma the extra revenue from the first fuel tax increase in over 25 years was put into teacher pay raises. The teachers certainly needed a raise, but the funding should not have come from fuel taxes. We have a lot of idiot voters and shameless politicians willing to pander to the worst tendencies of voters. Politicians come up with stupid schemes to avoid actually dealing with a problem, kicking the can down the road to the next administrations in the future.

Toll gates are annoying. But if anyone did a broad poll of the public I'd bet the vast majority of them would say they already pay way too much in fuel taxes and would say no to any increase.

Our governor is now talking a half-cent gas tax increase, after opposing any tax increases. He must want better roads to lead to the new casinos.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: edwaleni on November 26, 2018, 12:39:20 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda
There shouldn’t be any tolls period. The state needs to step up its game along with the entire country and get our roads properly funded. I’m not against toll roads, just not for interstate corridors.

The problem is fuel taxes can be misdirected to other things. Here in Oklahoma the extra revenue from the first fuel tax increase in over 25 years was put into teacher pay raises. The teachers certainly needed a raise, but the funding should not have come from fuel taxes. We have a lot of idiot voters and shameless politicians willing to pander to the worst tendencies of voters. Politicians come up with stupid schemes to avoid actually dealing with a problem, kicking the can down the road to the next administrations in the future.

Toll gates are annoying. But if anyone did a broad poll of the public I'd bet the vast majority of them would say they already pay way too much in fuel taxes and would say no to any increase.
Which is exactly why they should pass a law ensuring gas tax can’t be redirected.

Bankrupt Illinois just passed a constitutional amendment that taxes for transportation can't be redirected. The General Assembly had DOT in maintenance mode due to income redirection to prop up the states union employees.

Now they go into a lockbox.

Hopefully the GA doesn't pull a stunt by borrowing against itself using the lockbox as collateral. That is what the Feds have done with the Social Security "lockbox" for 30+ years.

As for people saying they pay too much in fuel taxes, is a bit of a laugh. People pay less now for road fuel taxes relative to income than their parents or grandparents did.

The Fed tax is still set at 1996 levels. Many states haven't moved since before that.

Many people prefer unlimited data cell phones then paying more fuel taxes, even if the taxes on their cell phone are higher on a monthly basis.

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Henry on November 28, 2018, 09:42:46 AM
So basically, they plan to build it as something other than I-49.  Tell me: why are we letting AR designate new interstate corridors like I-57 when they can't even finish the ones they have?
Good question. My only guess is that its a helluva lot cheaper to finish 57 than 49. I don't see 49 construction starting until 2024 after hearing that recent press release. SMFH

My guess is that what's going to happen is that outside of the Arkansas River bridge, which will need to be 4 lanes in any case, much of the remainder of I-49 in AR will follow the Bella Vista model -- originally do 2 lanes of I-grade carriageway in any location where the alignment doesn't overlay the existing route -- and for those overlain sections, where ROW acquisition would be less in any case, perform whatever upgrades are necessary for 2 lanes of Interstate geometrics while eliminating private access points.  Add freeway bypasses of the major towns along the route (Mena, De Queen, Ashdown) and you have a project that may take time to complete but which can be broken up into sections -- with the full-length buildout to occur later.  Essentially the upper-Midwest expressway format with lengthy 2-lane segments (complete with passing lanes deployed in hill country) as interim improvements to US 71.  It's also the answer to how you eat an elephant: one bite at a time.  If spread out along the full incomplete corridor, it could also enhance political feasibility by providing developmental activity segment by segment.  An approach such as this one is necessary considering the topographical difficulty of the project, particularly in the Waldron to Mena segment that "tops out" the corridor. 

And yes -- if backers in NE AR keep up any sort of pressure, I-57 will likely be built within the state before I-49 is developed much farther than the Arkansas River bridge -- principally because of those same topographic issues.




IMHO, doing an expanded version of what is being done around Bella Vista would be a great idea, with or without tolls. As I-57 has much less mileage to complete on the other side of the state, I agree that it should be AR's main priority (and MO's too, for that matter); once that's done, then I-49 can be the main focus.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on November 28, 2018, 12:33:28 PM
^^^^^^^^^
If ARDOT is broken up into districts like most similar state agencies, then "toggling" from one project (I-49) to the other (I-57), with one or another being the focus at any given time, probably won't happen.  Instead, the likelihood is that some activity (ROW acquisition, initial surveying/grubbing) might occur at one site, followed by similar activity at the other end of the state.  Public agencies tend to go to great lengths to not antagonize one group of project activists by solely concentrating their efforts on another; this CYA attitude isn't going to change anytime soon.  The districts normally hear the rumblings well before the full agency does -- although, that being said, the autonomy level of each district in a smaller state such as AR is probably less than out here in CA, where the 12 Caltrans districts tend to promulgate their own policies and schedules as long as they basically correspond to the current working STIP.  But in either case projects are normatively spread around the districts.   
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on December 05, 2018, 08:21:17 PM
Missouri has Awarded the Building removal job for future I49 last segment today and ARDOT has one project on going to build additional lanes on the Bella Vista Bypass. With ARDOT has 2 projects to finish their part and MODOT has the final project to finish their part I believe there is a good Situation to get the Build Grant from Federal Transportation. Senator Tom Cotton is also helping. They have until December 18 to award the grants. Lets hope the do nothing congress funds the upcoming funding gap so it doesn't get delayed.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on December 05, 2018, 08:30:40 PM
Missouri has Awarded the Building removal job for future I49 last segment today and ARDOT has one project on going to build additional lanes on the Bella Vista Bypass. With ARDOT has 2 projects to finish their part and MODOT has the final project to finish their part I believe there is a good Situation to get the Build Grant from Federal Transportation. Senator Tom Cotton is also helping. They have until December 18 to award the grants. Lets hope the do nothing congress funds the upcoming funding gap so it doesn't get delayed.

Hopefully, but I'm not holding my breath.  Arkansas is basically a "fly over" state so we're often low on the list of priorities... especially since John Paul Hammerschmidt retired from the House.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Wayward Memphian on December 06, 2018, 05:14:32 PM
Grant approved!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on December 06, 2018, 05:21:24 PM
Grant approved!

https://www.nwahomepage.com/news/fox-24/-25-million-grant-awarded-to-complete-arkansas-missouri-i-49-connection_/1643707068?utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook_FOX24_News
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: mvak36 on December 06, 2018, 05:31:54 PM
Grant approved!

https://www.nwahomepage.com/news/fox-24/-25-million-grant-awarded-to-complete-arkansas-missouri-i-49-connection_/1643707068?utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook_FOX24_News
Heck yeah. That's great news.

EDIT: https://www.joplinglobe.com/news/interstate-project-gets-million-boost-from-federal-grant/article_0d426cc4-f9a5-11e8-be48-57955c14520d.html
Quote
Transportation departments from Missouri and Arkansas have been working on completing this project for about 25 years. according to the press release. An engineer with MoDOT's Southwest District said in June that if the full $25 million was awarded, then state officials could propose to begin working on the project in 2021 or 2022.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on December 06, 2018, 06:37:26 PM
BOOM!!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on December 06, 2018, 06:50:54 PM
According to ARDOT, this money will be used to complete the Missouri segment since the Arkansas portion is already funded.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: intelati49 on December 06, 2018, 07:27:03 PM
 :clap: :coffee: :clap:

Just in time, 25 years later. Haha
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: GreenLanternCorps on December 07, 2018, 02:10:36 PM
:clap: :coffee: :clap:

Just in time, 25 years later. Haha

Better late than never...

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: The Ghostbuster on December 07, 2018, 04:06:07 PM
That was a great scene from Ghostbusters II (1989). I am a Ghostbusters fanatic, which is why my profile is titled The Ghostbuster.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: csw on December 07, 2018, 05:32:21 PM
That was a great scene from Ghostbusters II (1989). I am a Ghostbusters fanatic, which is why my profile is titled The Ghostbuster.

This was a great post from The Ghostbuster (12/7/2018, 04:06:06 PM). I am a great post fanatic, which is why you must really be great at parties.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Plutonic Panda on December 07, 2018, 07:10:28 PM
That was a great scene from Ghostbusters II (1989). I am a Ghostbusters fanatic, which is why my profile is titled The Ghostbuster.

This was a great post from The Ghostbuster (12/7/2018, 04:06:06 PM). I am a great post fanatic, which is why you must really be great at parties.
What are you supposed to be? The post master? You know everything there is to know about posts? August 12th, 2023(exact time to the hour:minute unknown). A thread about the revival of the 710 tunnel in the Pacific Southwest section. Mark it down.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on December 07, 2018, 08:07:03 PM
:clap: :coffee: :clap:

Just in time, 25 years later. Haha

Better late than never...


"Better never late" as my friend Thomas used to say  :spin: :pan:
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on December 08, 2018, 07:06:13 PM
Here is a quote from Bennett. "Now that Missouri DOT has the money to fund its portion of the bypass, we can now begin to schedule the remaining components here in Arkansas," said Scott Bennett, the director of the Arkansas Department of Transportation. "And that will happen quickly because we already have the money provided by the voter-approved Connecting Arkansas Program."
 Also I read where a Missouri engineer said that they would have to update the environmental part and that would take a year or less. So Maybe it can still be done in a few years.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on December 08, 2018, 09:24:53 PM
Here is a quote from Bennett. "Now that Missouri DOT has the money to fund its portion of the bypass, we can now begin to schedule the remaining components here in Arkansas," said Scott Bennett, the director of the Arkansas Department of Transportation. "And that will happen quickly because we already have the money provided by the voter-approved Connecting Arkansas Program."
 Also I read where a Missouri engineer said that they would have to update the environmental part and that would take a year or less. So Maybe it can still be done in a few years.

On Twitter, ARDOT said 2022/2023 for completion
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: abqtraveler on December 08, 2018, 11:17:44 PM
Here is a quote from Bennett. "Now that Missouri DOT has the money to fund its portion of the bypass, we can now begin to schedule the remaining components here in Arkansas," said Scott Bennett, the director of the Arkansas Department of Transportation. "And that will happen quickly because we already have the money provided by the voter-approved Connecting Arkansas Program."
 Also I read where a Missouri engineer said that they would have to update the environmental part and that would take a year or less. So Maybe it can still be done in a few years.

On Twitter, ARDOT said 2022/2023 for completion

If that's the case, I suspect that MoDOT and ArDOT both have construction contracts ready to let out for bidding?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on December 10, 2018, 11:10:42 AM
A brief update on the I-49 sign upgrades:

A contractor for ARDOT is currently installing new sign posts and post footings. Also along I-40 at I-49.

In the Lowell area. the median barrier has been removed in places to make way for installing new gantry signposts.

I doubt the new signs will start to be posted until at least January.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on December 11, 2018, 07:54:24 PM
The build projects for Arkansas are on the US department of transportation now. I49 Missouri project and Arkansas projects are figured to cost a total of $134,516,665.00.  https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/docs/policy-initiatives/327856/build-fact-sheets-121118-355pm-update.pdf
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: GreenLanternCorps on December 12, 2018, 01:09:55 PM
So to complete AR 549/Future I-49 in Northwest Arkansas, the following needs to be done:

1. Add second lane to AR 549/Future I-49 from I-49/US 71 roundabout to Rocky Dell Hollow Road.  (in progress)

2. Complete AR 549/I-49/US 71/N. Walton Blvd interchange

3. Complete Rocky Dell Hollow Road interchange and Extend four lanes of Future I-49 to Missouri State Line.

4. Wait for Missouri to finish it's part.

Am I missing anything?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on December 12, 2018, 01:54:38 PM
I'm hearing from a Bella Vista source that Walmart has purchased land at the Rocky Dell Road (also was the old "Gun Range Road") interchange for a Neighborhood Market.  Given that WM builds these only when they're surrounded by neighborhoods, they clearly see this as a hot growth spot.  And again, can't wait to see what will indubitably be a "Texarkana-class" Arkansas Welcome Center near there, although that won't be at an interchange.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on December 12, 2018, 02:01:56 PM
I'm hearing from a Bella Vista source that Walmart has purchased land at the Rocky Dell Road (also was the old "Gun Range Road") interchange for a Neighborhood Market.  Given that WM builds these only when they're surrounded by neighborhoods, they clearly see this as a hot growth spot.  And again, can't wait to see what will indubitably be a "Texarkana-class" Arkansas Welcome Center near there, although that won't be at an interchange.

There's a need for more services on the west side of Bella Vista for sure as most are concentrated along 71B currently.  And Highlands Blvd. is pretty close to there, so there will be a ready supply of traffic for that exit even without the eminent buildup of that area.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Tomahawkin on December 12, 2018, 07:34:38 PM
OT I think the stretch of 49 from From Smith to Texarkana might be done the same way IH 22 was done in Alabama. That took nearly 20 years to do 100 miles. Even though about 20-30 miles outside of Birmingham is 6 lanes which I love, but the 22/65 interchange took 5-7 years...
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on December 12, 2018, 07:40:55 PM
I'm hearing from a Bella Vista source that Walmart has purchased land at the Rocky Dell Road (also was the old "Gun Range Road") interchange for a Neighborhood Market.  Given that WM builds these only when they're surrounded by neighborhoods, they clearly see this as a hot growth spot.  And again, can't wait to see what will indubitably be a "Texarkana-class" Arkansas Welcome Center near there, although that won't be at an interchange.

There's a need for more services on the west side of Bella Vista for sure as most are concentrated along 71B currently.  And Highlands Blvd. is pretty close to there, so there will be a ready supply of traffic for that exit even without the eminent buildup of that area.

But it's a pain in the tukus to go from I-49 over to Highlands Blvd. It wouldn't surprise me if some of the big players like Love's were already scouting out the area or even quietly buying land.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on December 12, 2018, 10:47:49 PM
Proper grammar.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on December 12, 2018, 10:49:04 PM
OT I think the stretch of 49 from From Smith to Texarkana might be done the same way IH 22 was done in Alabama. That took nearly 20 years to do 100 miles. Even though about 20-30 miles outside of Birmingham is 6 lanes which I love, but the 22/65 interchange took 5-7 years...
Is I-22 ever going to be extended to US 31?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Tomahawkin on December 13, 2018, 10:35:59 AM
I don't think so. Not in the next 5 years. I would love another way to bypass Birmingham.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on December 13, 2018, 12:06:34 PM
I'm hearing from a Bella Vista source that Walmart has purchased land at the Rocky Dell Road (also was the old "Gun Range Road") interchange for a Neighborhood Market.  Given that WM builds these only when they're surrounded by neighborhoods, they clearly see this as a hot growth spot.  And again, can't wait to see what will indubitably be a "Texarkana-class" Arkansas Welcome Center near there, although that won't be at an interchange.

There's a need for more services on the west side of Bella Vista for sure as most are concentrated along 71B currently.  And Highlands Blvd. is pretty close to there, so there will be a ready supply of traffic for that exit even without the eminent buildup of that area.

But it's a pain in the tukus to go from I-49 over to Highlands Blvd. It wouldn't surprise me if some of the big players like Love's were already scouting out the area or even quietly buying land.

Casey's, too.  There really are very few "filling station" (what a quaint phrase) options between Anderson, MO and Bentonville at this point along the true (I-49) Bella Vista Bypass.  You have to go a mile east into Pineville to get gas there.  The community formerly known as Hiwasse has a nice rebuilt and locally-owned store (or did) but it, too, is off the interchange.  And all the gas pumps in Gravette are currently a couple miles west.  There are BIG opportunities for fueling operators at the Rocky Dell Hollow and Hwy 72 BVP Arkansas interchanges.

I forget...will there also be an interchange on the Missouri side (on this final section) at the road which heads west to Noel?  With all the summertime canoeing, that, too, might hold similar value for a Casey's or Kum and Go type store.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on December 13, 2018, 12:47:59 PM


I forget...will there also be an interchange on the Missouri side (on this final section) at the road which heads west to Noel?  With all the summertime canoeing, that, too, might hold similar value for a Casey's or Kum and Go type store.

You're thinking MO 90? Yes, there will be an interchange there.  Love's opened a new store in Neosho at MO 86 last year and a new store at AR 282 near Alma earlier this year.

Casey's just opened another Ft Smith location about a month ago a mile north of 549 on 71. Slightly larger store with an outdoor picnic area. They are also the first Casey's in town to offer E-85, but it trends higher than the E-10 "Regular".
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on December 13, 2018, 01:05:17 PM


I forget...will there also be an interchange on the Missouri side (on this final section) at the road which heads west to Noel?  With all the summertime canoeing, that, too, might hold similar value for a Casey's or Kum and Go type store.

You're thinking MO 90? Yes, there will be an interchange there.  Love's opened a new store in Neosho at MO 86 last year and a new store at AR 282 near Alma earlier this year.

Casey's just opened another Ft Smith location about a month ago a mile north of 549 on 71. Slightly larger store with an outdoor picnic area. They are also the first Casey's in town to offer E-85, but it trends higher than the E-10 "Regular".

Thanks, US71.  That road to Noel will still be scenic yet a bit tortuous but this will still make it a bit quicker to get there.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on December 13, 2018, 03:33:32 PM
OT I think the stretch of 49 from From Smith to Texarkana might be done the same way IH 22 was done in Alabama. That took nearly 20 years to do 100 miles. Even though about 20-30 miles outside of Birmingham is 6 lanes which I love, but the 22/65 interchange took 5-7 years...

I don't see much progress on that stretch until the Waldron, Mena, and De Queen bypasses are done, like Fayetteville was done originally before the rest of I-540 connected up Bella Vista to Alma.  Then, the bypasses connected together, probably with Texarkana to DeQueen connected first as it's the lowest hanging fruit, topography-wise.  Hopefully they put some thought into the interchanges when the time comes so they don't have to redo them like the north side of Fayetteville had to have done.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on December 13, 2018, 03:39:44 PM
I'm hearing from a Bella Vista source that Walmart has purchased land at the Rocky Dell Road (also was the old "Gun Range Road") interchange for a Neighborhood Market.  Given that WM builds these only when they're surrounded by neighborhoods, they clearly see this as a hot growth spot.  And again, can't wait to see what will indubitably be a "Texarkana-class" Arkansas Welcome Center near there, although that won't be at an interchange.

I just wonder how long after the connection is made before they get around to a non-pitiful welcome center.  I'm sure there'll be a  fair amount of truck parking, unless it looks like a number of truck stops start popping up in the area.  The current welcome center in Bella Vista isn't very accessible to anything more than a handful of cars, so they're going to have to up their game to put a better face on the state for travelers.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on December 13, 2018, 07:16:23 PM
OT I think the stretch of 49 from From Smith to Texarkana might be done the same way IH 22 was done in Alabama. That took nearly 20 years to do 100 miles. Even though about 20-30 miles outside of Birmingham is 6 lanes which I love, but the 22/65 interchange took 5-7 years...

I don't see much progress on that stretch until the Waldron, Mena, and De Queen bypasses are done, like Fayetteville was done originally before the rest of I-540 connected up Bella Vista to Alma.  Then, the bypasses connected together, probably with Texarkana to DeQueen connected first as it's the lowest hanging fruit, topography-wise.  Hopefully they put some thought into the interchanges when the time comes so they don't have to redo them like the north side of Fayetteville had to have done.

As I've said before, ARDOT doesn't seem to plan ahead. The Fayetteville Bypass is a good example: built as 2 lanes at-grade, then piecemeal upgraded to 4 Lanes, then sticking 4-Lane 71 next to AR 112, then eventually rebuilding the junction. Not to mention waiting almost 40 years to build a flyover from NB 71B to the SB Bypass. They are more RE-active than PRO-active.

I figure by the time I-49 is complete from Bella Vista to Missouri, ARDOT will decide it needs major upgrades.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: TheArkansasRoadgeek on December 13, 2018, 07:19:06 PM
OT I think the stretch of 49 from From Smith to Texarkana might be done the same way IH 22 was done in Alabama. That took nearly 20 years to do 100 miles. Even though about 20-30 miles outside of Birmingham is 6 lanes which I love, but the 22/65 interchange took 5-7 years...

I don't see much progress on that stretch until the Waldron, Mena, and De Queen bypasses are done, like Fayetteville was done originally before the rest of I-540 connected up Bella Vista to Alma.  Then, the bypasses connected together, probably with Texarkana to DeQueen connected first as it's the lowest hanging fruit, topography-wise.  Hopefully they put some thought into the interchanges when the time comes so they don't have to redo them like the north side of Fayetteville had to have done.

As I've said before, ARDOT doesn't seem to plan ahead. The Fayetteville Bypass is a good example: built as 2 lanes at-grade, then piecemeal upgraded to 4 Lanes, then sticking 4-Lane 71 next to AR 112, then eventually rebuilding the junction. Not to mention waiting almost 40 years to build a flyover from NB 71B to the SB Bypass. They are more RE-active than PRO-active.

I figure by the time I-49 is complete from Bella Vista to Missouri, ARDOT will decide it needs major upgrades.
I wonder if they're worried about induced demand? :hmmm:
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Tomahawkin on December 13, 2018, 07:32:56 PM
@US71

I did not know that about the Fayetteville bypass but it makes sense. I'm baffled in their reactive approach considering how many students commute to the U of A and NWACC. Im in the belief now that bypasses will be built in those towns south of IH 40 And then will connect to 49 built in stretches, kinda a built it up a over a long stretch (20 years)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on December 13, 2018, 07:53:23 PM
I'm hearing from a Bella Vista source that Walmart has purchased land at the Rocky Dell Road (also was the old "Gun Range Road") interchange for a Neighborhood Market.  Given that WM builds these only when they're surrounded by neighborhoods, they clearly see this as a hot growth spot.  And again, can't wait to see what will indubitably be a "Texarkana-class" Arkansas Welcome Center near there, although that won't be at an interchange.

I just wonder how long after the connection is made before they get around to a non-pitiful welcome center.  I'm sure there'll be a  fair amount of truck parking, unless it looks like a number of truck stops start popping up in the area.  The current welcome center in Bella Vista isn't very accessible to anything more than a handful of cars, so they're going to have to up their game to put a better face on the state for travelers.

MikieTimT, I mentioned that earlier.  A few years ago, I actually emailed the state department (Can't remember if its Parks or AHTD) which handles these welcome centers and was told there would be a new center planned.  I'd mentioned here that I'd be surprised, given how much money is spent elsewhere in NWA to attract tourists to Crystal Bridges, the Amazeum, Brightwater, etc., if this isn't a "Texarkana-class" Welcome Center (below).  I've made a rest stop at the TXK center along I-30 and it's nice.  And right now, there's still significant land available for this just south of the state line on future I-49.

(https://onlyinark.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/Texarkana-Welcome-Center-.jpg)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: cjk374 on December 13, 2018, 10:01:58 PM
I'm hearing from a Bella Vista source that Walmart has purchased land at the Rocky Dell Road (also was the old "Gun Range Road") interchange for a Neighborhood Market.  Given that WM builds these only when they're surrounded by neighborhoods, they clearly see this as a hot growth spot.  And again, can't wait to see what will indubitably be a "Texarkana-class" Arkansas Welcome Center near there, although that won't be at an interchange.

I just wonder how long after the connection is made before they get around to a non-pitiful welcome center.  I'm sure there'll be a  fair amount of truck parking, unless it looks like a number of truck stops start popping up in the area.  The current welcome center in Bella Vista isn't very accessible to anything more than a handful of cars, so they're going to have to up their game to put a better face on the state for travelers.

MikieTimT, I mentioned that earlier.  A few years ago, I actually emailed the state department (Can't remember if its Parks or AHTD) which handles these welcome centers and was told there would be a new center planned.  I'd mentioned here that I'd be surprised, given how much money is spent elsewhere in NWA to attract tourists to Crystal Bridges, the Amazeum, Brightwater, etc., if this isn't a "Texarkana-class" Welcome Center (below).  I've made a rest stop at the TXK center along I-30 and it's nice.  And right now, there's still significant land available for this just south of the state line on future I-49.

(https://onlyinark.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/Texarkana-Welcome-Center-.jpg)

The El Dorado welcome center on US 167 @ US 82 looks just like this one at Texarkana.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on December 13, 2018, 10:37:22 PM
@US71

I did not know that about the Fayetteville bypass but it makes sense. I'm baffled in their reactive approach considering how many students commute to the U of A and NWACC. Im in the belief now that bypasses will be built in those towns south of IH 40 And then will connect to 49 built in stretches, kinda a built it up a over a long stretch (20 years)
Well, that's basically how I-44 was built in Missouri (among other roads) : piecemeal upgrades & bypasses. Bugo has predicted in the past that Mena would likely be one of the first towns to be bypassed.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on December 14, 2018, 10:51:43 AM
Obviously the bypasses around the towns along the route (Ashdown, DeQueen, Mena, Waldron, Mansfield, etc) need to be done first. The cost of building those segments will get ever more expensive the longer they're put off to the future. The rural sections will be less expensive to build and may not be subject to as much cost inflation.

It would be a big mistake for ARDOT to start at one end of existing I-49 and add extensions to in linear fashion. The proposed ROW in all the towns farther down the route would be deliberately overrun with development. One motivation behind that is so people can cash in from the gub'ment when it comes time to buy up the ROW and demolish all those newly built properties. The other motivation is simply blocking the way in an attempt to prevent it from being built.

The first thing ARDOT needs to do is buy up the ROW needed for those town bypasses. I think they need to do that before building any actual I-49 freeway between Fort Smith and Texarkana. Once they have that done it will be easier (and less costly) to piece everything else together.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: seicer on December 14, 2018, 10:58:02 AM
How will the south terminus of the Bella Vista bypass tie into mainline 49? It has the temporary ramps now.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on December 14, 2018, 11:57:46 AM
How will the south terminus of the Bella Vista bypass tie into mainline 49? It has the temporary ramps now.

My guess is there will be an overpass connecting the segments, probably making a clusterf*ck out of what's already there
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: wdcrft63 on December 14, 2018, 06:32:08 PM
Obviously the bypasses around the towns along the route (Ashdown, DeQueen, Mena, Waldron, Mansfield, etc) need to be done first. The cost of building those segments will get ever more expensive the longer they're put off to the future. The rural sections will be less expensive to build and may not be subject to as much cost inflation.

It would be a big mistake for ARDOT to start at one end of existing I-49 and add extensions to in linear fashion. The proposed ROW in all the towns farther down the route would be deliberately overrun with development. One motivation behind that is so people can cash in from the gub'ment when it comes time to buy up the ROW and demolish all those newly built properties. The other motivation is simply blocking the way in an attempt to prevent it from being built.

The first thing ARDOT needs to do is buy up the ROW needed for those town bypasses. I think they need to do that before building any actual I-49 freeway between Fort Smith and Texarkana. Once they have that done it will be easier (and less costly) to piece everything else together.
North Carolina built I-73 in a linear fashion but it is building I-42 with bypasses first. So it works either way. The most important thing is to sketch out the entire route through a feasibility study and then decide with public hearings how to prioritize the various segments. Is anything like that happening?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: vdeane on December 14, 2018, 08:47:09 PM
Obviously the bypasses around the towns along the route (Ashdown, DeQueen, Mena, Waldron, Mansfield, etc) need to be done first. The cost of building those segments will get ever more expensive the longer they're put off to the future. The rural sections will be less expensive to build and may not be subject to as much cost inflation.

It would be a big mistake for ARDOT to start at one end of existing I-49 and add extensions to in linear fashion. The proposed ROW in all the towns farther down the route would be deliberately overrun with development. One motivation behind that is so people can cash in from the gub'ment when it comes time to buy up the ROW and demolish all those newly built properties. The other motivation is simply blocking the way in an attempt to prevent it from being built.

The first thing ARDOT needs to do is buy up the ROW needed for those town bypasses. I think they need to do that before building any actual I-49 freeway between Fort Smith and Texarkana. Once they have that done it will be easier (and less costly) to piece everything else together.
It's too bad states can't just declare the corridor to "lock in" the ROW costs, with the current costs of the properties along the route being a price ceiling for the amount the state would have to pay when the projects move forward.  That would stop developers from being able to scoop up the land, develop it, and then take the eminent domain as profit.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on December 14, 2018, 08:53:51 PM
Now there is money to finish the Bella Vista Bypass and engineering has started on the Arkansas river Bridge section to Fill that gap is next priority. Then I would to see it extended from Hwy 71 in Fort smith to bypass Mansfield because of the sharp turn and hill north of Mansfield is a Bottle neck for traffic. Then next would be Mena because of the long route thru town. Traffic would flow a lot better for increased truck traffic. One thing that is costly is Waldron has been relocated before and they immediately build along side of that bypass so you have to move it again. Waldron is not that big anyway and just strung out now.   
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on December 14, 2018, 09:09:13 PM
Now there is money to finish the Bella Vista Bypass and engineering has started on the Arkansas river Bridge section to Fill that gap is next priority. Then I would to see it extended from Hwy 71 in Fort smith to bypass Mansfield because of the sharp turn and hill north of Mansfield is a Bottle neck for traffic. Then next would be Mena because of the long route thru town. Traffic would flow a lot better for increased truck traffic. One thing that is costly is Waldron has been relocated before and they immediately build along side of that bypass so you have to move it again. Waldron is not that big anyway and just strung out now.   


Won't happen any time soon. ARDOT cares more about the 412 Bypass.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on December 15, 2018, 06:05:21 PM
Political and public pressure to extend I-49 South from Fort Smith will increase only after the Alma to Barling segment is finally built. The price of that proposed bridge over the Arkansas River is only getting more expensive the longer it keeps getting pushed off into the future, like a game of political kick the can. The US-412 bypass up in NWA is easier to build because its cost is cheaper per mile and it's located closer to higher income locations than the lower rent stuff around Fort Smith. So they're making that a bigger priority.

This all gets back to why the federal government has to be taking a far bigger leadership role in this stuff. It's important to the overall Interstate highway network that ALL of I-49 gets completed. If individual states and local areas are going to be doing more of the deciding on what gets built and when then that notion of a big picture NATIONAL highway network becomes completely irrelevant. As much as Fort Smith is kind of a red-headed step child to its neighbors up the road to the North the smaller communities between Fort Smith and Texarkana are even less of a priority. IMHO it will take a lot of federal intervention and federal funding for the I-49 segment between Fort Smith and Texarkana to get built. If it's left up to Arkansas alone the road may never get built.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Rick Powell on December 16, 2018, 12:45:37 AM
It's too bad states can't just declare the corridor to "lock in" the ROW costs, with the current costs of the properties along the route being a price ceiling for the amount the state would have to pay when the projects move forward.  That would stop developers from being able to scoop up the land, develop it, and then take the eminent domain as profit.

Several states have corridor protection laws that do just that. Once the corridor is recorded, the developer of any proposed new building inside the corridor limits must contact the state, which has right of first refusal to purchase the underlying property to prevent its development. If the developer neglects to follow the process and somehow gets local approval to build without notifying the state, the value of the buildings is not considered in any future eminent domain proceedings. I was involved in a test case in IL that went all the way to the US Supreme Court, that validated the state's corridor protection law. IN modeled their corridor protection law almost word for word on the IL law.

One problem with corridor protection is that, if it isn't done in combination with the NEPA (federal environmental) process, you may have a corridor that is partially or wholly unusable because it can't get the required federal and state environmental permits. But on the plus side, assuming the corridor is on a permittable alignment, it helps lock in a buildable corridor without the state having to buy all the land years or decades in advance of the need.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on December 16, 2018, 02:02:26 PM
Political and public pressure to extend I-49 South from Fort Smith will increase only after the Alma to Barling segment is finally built. The price of that proposed bridge over the Arkansas River is only getting more expensive the longer it keeps getting pushed off into the future, like a game of political kick the can. The US-412 bypass up in NWA is easier to build because its cost is cheaper per mile and it's located closer to higher income locations than the lower rent stuff around Fort Smith. So they're making that a bigger priority.

This all gets back to why the federal government has to be taking a far bigger leadership role in the stuff. It's important to the overall Interstate highway network that ALL of I-49 gets completed. If individual states and local areas are going to be doing more of the deciding on what gets built and when then that notion of a big picture NATIONAL highway network becomes completely irrelevant. As much as Fort Smith is kind of a red-headed step child to its neighbors up the road to the North the smaller communities between Fort Smith and Texarkana are even less of a priority. IMHO it will take a lot of federal intervention and federal funding for the I-49 segment between Fort Smith and Texarkana to get built. If it's left up to Arkansas alone the road may never get built.

All well and good -- but the main obstacle to federal initiative is 45+ years of executive orders and legislation directed specifically in the other direction -- an initiated by none other than the 37th President, Richard Nixon.  For those not old enough to remember the 1968 election, there was a 3rd party candidate, Gov. George Wallace of Alabama, who openly espoused pre-Civil Rights Act (1964) sentiments, attracting a sizeable chunk of Southern Democrats, who at the time were considerably well to the right of most Republicans (who had a limited Southern contingent up to that time due to post-Civil War activities by that party).  Wallace's "American Independent" party (AIP) threatened to eat a sizeable piece of the electorate in states from Virginia to Texas by espousing a "states' rights" platform.  Nixon won his very narrow victory over Hubert Humphrey largely by promising to enact measures that would drastically reduce the ability to promulgate top-down programs at the federal level -- but do so in the fiscal realm rather than the political.  In that way he was able to attract both those who wished to punish the federal government for enacting not only the '64 Civil Rights act but increasing the bureaucracy necessary to enforce it as well as the more traditional fiscal conservatives intrinsically drawn to the Republican party.  And that ad hoc coalition was rewarded by the "block grant" measures drafted by the Nixon administration and pushed through Congress from 1971 through early 1973, after which time that administration was swamped with the Watergate affair.  These made the states responsible for initiating activities and measures -- which would be funded by yearly budgeted "block grants" to each state, with the various federal agencies largely limited to a "vetting" role, typified by feasibility and environmental reviews.  Depending upon one's POV, the Nixon initiatives were either one of the most backhanded and downright sneaky (almost to an "evil genius" level) way to achieve a political goal or a simple "elections have consequences" expression of political will.  In any case, the measures did leave a giant hole in the ability to initiate policies and programs at the federal level (i.e., how such things as the Interstate system originated); the changes to Title 23 alone -- the section of the U.S. Code addressing transportation issues -- made such things as the 1968 USDOT-initiated batch of Interstate additions effectively impossible to replicate.  But such actions by the Nixon administration were an important part of the shift in Southern politics from conservative (and largely racist/segregationist) Democrat to correspondingly conservative (but less overtly racist) Republican by the early '80's (of course by then a major component of the "Reagan Revolution").   A political goal was achieved -- but at the expense of cohesive national policy; transportation was simply one of the areas in which this sea change was manifested.

It would take "walking back" much of that legislation from the '70's to reinstate the sort of Federal initiative seen with both the initial '56 Interstate authorization and its '68 extension -- and the past several Congressional iterations have either been openly hostile to such concepts or have taken a "CYA" stance, not willing to commit to any ideas that could be deemed controversial.   The fact that I-49 was designated at all north of Shreveport is in itself a minor miracle; that a state not teeming with fiscal resources such as Arkansas (and MO to a somewhat lesser extent) can get a decent percentage of its corridor mileage actually built is noteworthy.   A result of the past 45+ years of national policy in this arena is that resource-rich states -- or influential factions within those states -- such as NC or TX can initiate new Interstate corridors almost at will, exemplified by the I-69 cluster in TX, the nascent I-14 in that same state, or the various Interstate projects crisscrossing NC.  Raising the 20% state/local share for corridor development doesn't pose the same problems in those wealthier states that it does in other areas not as fortunate -- so both clearly warranted and speculative corridors flourish there. 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on December 16, 2018, 04:01:01 PM
The states and federal government need to figure out something and do so soon. The current model used by the states and federal government works poorly. It is literally taking away this nation's ability to build any big things. Highways, railroads and other pieces of infrastructure are all critical for commerce. We wouldn't be a modern society without it. But we're not the only nation building this kind of stuff. Nations like China, Japan and South Korea all build this stuff and do so a lot faster and for less money. If we can't upgrade our infrastructure in a timely, efficient manner we're going to be at an ever-worsening competitive disadvantage with countries like China. They're not standing still, yet we've got our feet stuck in concrete.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on December 16, 2018, 05:12:24 PM
Just a Small project like Missouri 5.5 mile section to finish I 49 it is going to take up to a year to update environmental part. Too much red tape and spending money that when it was good back in 2009 when Arkansas and Missouri applied for a tiger grant to get started.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on December 16, 2018, 06:07:47 PM
Just a Small project like Missouri 5.5 mile section to finish I 49 it is going to take up to a year to update environmental part. Too much red tape and spending money that when it was good back in 2009 when Arkansas and Missouri applied for a tiger grant to get started.

My guess is it won't be a complete new environmental assessment, but merely updating "hot spots", for lack of a better term.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on December 17, 2018, 05:14:24 PM
Political and public pressure to extend I-49 South from Fort Smith will increase only after the Alma to Barling segment is finally built. The price of that proposed bridge over the Arkansas River is only getting more expensive the longer it keeps getting pushed off into the future, like a game of political kick the can. The US-412 bypass up in NWA is easier to build because its cost is cheaper per mile and it's located closer to higher income locations than the lower rent stuff around Fort Smith. So they're making that a bigger priority.

This all gets back to why the federal government has to be taking a far bigger leadership role in this stuff. It's important to the overall Interstate highway network that ALL of I-49 gets completed. If individual states and local areas are going to be doing more of the deciding on what gets built and when then that notion of a big picture NATIONAL highway network becomes completely irrelevant. As much as Fort Smith is kind of a red-headed step child to its neighbors up the road to the North the smaller communities between Fort Smith and Texarkana are even less of a priority. IMHO it will take a lot of federal intervention and federal funding for the I-49 segment between Fort Smith and Texarkana to get built. If it's left up to Arkansas alone the road may never get built.

The US 412 Bypass will likely serve more AADT for the foreseeable future, so it makes sense for Arkansas to prioritize the remaining 2 segments over anything south of Rye Hill at this point.  That said, it would knock about 10-12 minutes off my drive back to my hometown if they would build the bridge and remaining river valley I-49 segment.  And Ft. Smith has earned the red-headed stepchild reputation due to their perpetually dysfunctional city government that puts any business over a barrel that wants to operate there.  A completed Interstate 49 will help a little with commercial/industrial growth, but it won't change the culture of government there that's really the reason it's hamstrung.  Ft. Smith has so many things going for it that should make it growth-positive, like cheap land and labor, status as a border city, access to a navigable river and Class I railroad, etc.

Left up to Arkansas, it'll be 25-30 years until it's done unless we grow another John Paul Hammerschmidt to get some infrastructure budgeted from the federal government since it is actually a federal highway serving interstate traffic, probably even more so than local traffic for a few counties south of Sebastian.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on December 17, 2018, 05:21:18 PM
OT I think the stretch of 49 from From Smith to Texarkana might be done the same way IH 22 was done in Alabama. That took nearly 20 years to do 100 miles. Even though about 20-30 miles outside of Birmingham is 6 lanes which I love, but the 22/65 interchange took 5-7 years...

I don't see much progress on that stretch until the Waldron, Mena, and De Queen bypasses are done, like Fayetteville was done originally before the rest of I-540 connected up Bella Vista to Alma.  Then, the bypasses connected together, probably with Texarkana to DeQueen connected first as it's the lowest hanging fruit, topography-wise.  Hopefully they put some thought into the interchanges when the time comes so they don't have to redo them like the north side of Fayetteville had to have done.

As I've said before, ARDOT doesn't seem to plan ahead. The Fayetteville Bypass is a good example: built as 2 lanes at-grade, then piecemeal upgraded to 4 Lanes, then sticking 4-Lane 71 next to AR 112, then eventually rebuilding the junction. Not to mention waiting almost 40 years to build a flyover from NB 71B to the SB Bypass. They are more RE-active than PRO-active.

I figure by the time I-49 is complete from Bella Vista to Missouri, ARDOT will decide it needs major upgrades.

I think that NWA has just about reached the stage of being in perpetual construction.  It's about to cross into Top 100 MSA territory.  By the time 2020 comes around and the current phase of 6-laning wraps up, they'll need a couple more lanes, and then be tapped out on the ability to handle anything more on the current I-49.  Then the Western Beltway will be dusted off again and it'll be time for me to move out of here since I don't want an interstate next to the nice quiet woods I live in now.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Tomahawkin on December 17, 2018, 06:14:02 PM
That's good foreshadowing. By 2025 there might be preliminary talks on a total loop around Fayetteville, Springdale and Rogers. Especially if the growth rate continues at the current pace...By then this post will be at 150 pages...
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on December 17, 2018, 06:37:34 PM
That's good foreshadowing. By 2025 there might be preliminary talks on a total loop around Fayetteville, Springdale and Rogers. Especially if the growth rate continues at the current pace...By then this post will be at 150 pages...

It has been discussed in passing.  In the interim, the AR 265 extension will handle traffic from Fayetteville to Rogers on the east side of town.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Tomahawkin on December 17, 2018, 08:08:18 PM
Yeah I remember people 15 years ago, using 265 (crossover rd?) To bypass US71. If that is still the case, they need to 6 lane that whole corridor. Ditto with SR 112
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on December 17, 2018, 08:37:36 PM
Yeah I remember people 15 years ago, using 265 (crossover rd?) To bypass US71. If that is still the case, they need to 6 lane that whole corridor. Ditto with SR 112

265 is being 4-Laned to AR 94 in Rogers. The double curve is being straightened on the north side of Springdale and the road widened.  At Rogers, it will shift from Old Wire Road to S 1st Street via a new connector. Last I looked, it was almost finished, but I've seen no updates from ARDOT.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on December 17, 2018, 09:42:10 PM
I received a message from ARDOT that the 49/Bus 71 junction at Bella Vista will be a SPUI. It will likely be bid sometime next year depending on MODOT's progress.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: mvak36 on December 17, 2018, 10:30:38 PM
I received a message from ARDOT that the 49/Bus 71 junction at Bella Vista will be a SPUI. It will likely be bid sometime next year depending on MODOT's progress.

Is that where the roundabout is right now?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on December 18, 2018, 02:09:50 AM
I think that NWA has just about reached the stage of being in perpetual construction.  It's about to cross into Top 100 MSA territory.  By the time 2020 comes around and the current phase of 6-laning wraps up, they'll need a couple more lanes, and then be tapped out on the ability to handle anything more on the current I-49.  Then the Western Beltway will be dusted off again and it'll be time for me to move out of here since I don't want an interstate next to the nice quiet woods I live in now.

NWA's ever-growing status may yet prompt a serious attempt to deploy a direct Interstate-grade Tulsa-Springville connection along or paralleling US 412.  OK probably wouldn't mind as long as they could add the additional mileage to be constructed to their toll network, but someone at ARDOT would have to inform the folks in Siloam Springs that like it or not, they're getting bypassed -- and that they would need to make arrangements to take all due advantage of said bypass.  Now -- whether a parallel "relief" route for I-49 is warranted in the near term might be a subject for debate; I'd guess increasing the capacity of the existing freeway (and dealing with the "non-standard" features) would be given prioritization; a bypass loop would come later when even an enhanced 49 corridor was starting to display signs of inadequacy.     
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on December 18, 2018, 08:11:51 AM
I received a message from ARDOT that the 49/Bus 71 junction at Bella Vista will be a SPUI. It will likely be bid sometime next year depending on MODOT's progress.

Is that where the roundabout is right now?

Yes. I was discussing their plans for the SPUI at 49/Bus 71 in Bentonville (Exit 85) and they mentioned a proposed SPUI at Bella Vista, plus one at AR 10 and Rodney Parham in Little Rock (I didn't think the two crossed)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: GreenLanternCorps on December 18, 2018, 08:32:41 AM
I received a message from ARDOT that the 49/Bus 71 junction at Bella Vista will be a SPUI. It will likely be bid sometime next year depending on MODOT's progress.

Is that where the roundabout is right now?

Yes. I was discussing their plans for the SPUI at 49/Bus 71 in Bentonville (Exit 85) and they mentioned a proposed SPUI at Bella Vista, plus one at AR 10 and Rodney Parham in Little Rock (I didn't think the two crossed)

Given the geography of the I-49/US 71/AR 549 (Future I-49) interchange location,  redesigning it to an SPUI and maintaining traffic is going to be challenging to say the least.

I'm no engineer, but fitting this:

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b1/Spui-schematic.svg/300px-Spui-schematic.svg.png)

Into this:

https://www.google.com/maps/@36.4143432,-94.2243708,16.33z

Is going to require a lot of construction.

I'd love to see the drawings and plans on how they are going to maintain traffic.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Henry on December 18, 2018, 09:56:31 AM
I just noticed that at the current north end of the BVB (at Rocky Dell Hollow Road), there are many side roads in the way, as well as a couple of small ponds. How different will the layout be from what's there now, and what roads in the area will be rerouted/eliminated?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on December 18, 2018, 10:31:04 AM
I just noticed that at the current north end of the BVB (at Rocky Dell Hollow Road), there are many side roads in the way, as well as a couple of small ponds. How different will the layout be from what's there now, and what roads in the area will be rerouted/eliminated?

CR 34 has already been rerouted to the west and Highlands Blvd will likely have a grade separation. Beyond that, you'd probably have to ask ARDOT
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on December 18, 2018, 11:44:39 AM
Quote from: GreenLanternCorps
Given the geography of the I-49/US 71/AR 549 (Future I-49) interchange location,  redesigning it to an SPUI and maintaining traffic is going to be challenging to say the least.

Given the footprint of the existing I-49 interchange and roundabout, I doubt ARDOT would need to acquire any more ROW. A SPUI could fit in that foot print pretty easily.

Maintaining traffic and minimizing disruptions is another matter. My guess is they'll build the I-49 main lanes on a bridge over the North half of the existing roundabout. The bridge structure would go up first and everything else would build out from it. They're going to have to add that second set of lanes to future I-49 on the West side of the interchange. Traffic could shift to the new lanes when part of the new bridge is finished so the existing approach can be elevated. Conversion of the roundabout into a SPUI would happen underneath.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on December 18, 2018, 11:47:55 AM
Quote from: GreenLanternCorps
Given the geography of the I-49/US 71/AR 549 (Future I-49) interchange location,  redesigning it to an SPUI and maintaining traffic is going to be challenging to say the least.

Given the footprint of the existing I-49 interchange and roundabout, I doubt ARDOT would need to acquire any more ROW. A SPUI could fit in that foot print pretty easily.

Maintaining traffic and minimizing disruptions is another matter. My guess is they'll build the I-49 main lanes on a bridge over the North half of the existing roundabout. The bridge structure would go up first and everything else would build out from it. They're going to have to add that second set of lanes to future I-49 on the West side of the interchange. Traffic could shift to the new lanes when part of the new bridge is finished so the existing approach can be elevated. Conversion of the roundabout into a SPUI would happen underneath.

Sort of what they are doing with the Exit 85 conversion. They will convert one side, then the other side.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on December 18, 2018, 12:04:43 PM
Political and public pressure to extend I-49 South from Fort Smith will increase only after the Alma to Barling segment is finally built. The price of that proposed bridge over the Arkansas River is only getting more expensive the longer it keeps getting pushed off into the future, like a game of political kick the can. The US-412 bypass up in NWA is easier to build because its cost is cheaper per mile and it's located closer to higher income locations than the lower rent stuff around Fort Smith. So they're making that a bigger priority.

This all gets back to why the federal government has to be taking a far bigger leadership role in this stuff. It's important to the overall Interstate highway network that ALL of I-49 gets completed. If individual states and local areas are going to be doing more of the deciding on what gets built and when then that notion of a big picture NATIONAL highway network becomes completely irrelevant. As much as Fort Smith is kind of a red-headed step child to its neighbors up the road to the North the smaller communities between Fort Smith and Texarkana are even less of a priority. IMHO it will take a lot of federal intervention and federal funding for the I-49 segment between Fort Smith and Texarkana to get built. If it's left up to Arkansas alone the road may never get built.

The US 412 Bypass will likely serve more AADT for the foreseeable future, so it makes sense for Arkansas to prioritize the remaining 2 segments over anything south of Rye Hill at this point.  That said, it would knock about 10-12 minutes off my drive back to my hometown if they would build the bridge and remaining river valley I-49 segment.  And Ft. Smith has earned the red-headed stepchild reputation due to their perpetually dysfunctional city government that puts any business over a barrel that wants to operate there.  A completed Interstate 49 will help a little with commercial/industrial growth, but it won't change the culture of government there that's really the reason it's hamstrung.  Ft. Smith has so many things going for it that should make it growth-positive, like cheap land and labor, status as a border city, access to a navigable river and Class I railroad, etc.

Left up to Arkansas, it'll be 25-30 years until it's done unless we grow another John Paul Hammerschmidt to get some infrastructure budgeted from the federal government since it is actually a federal highway serving interstate traffic, probably even more so than local traffic for a few counties south of Sebastian.

Interesting you should say that about FSM.  In the most recent mayor's race, there was a Brazilian (a US military veteran who is a UAFS student, from a wealthy farming family in Brazil) who wanted to "make Fort Smith great again" and did speak positively of I-49 in his mayoral campaign.  He was simply too young to be taken seriously, though he was a good kid who seemed on the right side of the issues I saw him speak about.  As it is now, I'd really be curious to hear the new mayor's genuine thoughts on I-49, especially given that the "marooned" segment and the Arkansas River bridge are or will be pretty much Alma-Kibler-Barling-Greenwood things with very little carriageway in the FSM city limits.  (Again, I wonder whether or not either the Brazilian candidate or the new mayor know the NWA paper ran an article over a decade ago saying that a completed I-49 is projected to make FSM grow like NWA.)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: GreenLanternCorps on December 18, 2018, 12:15:03 PM
Quote from: GreenLanternCorps
Given the geography of the I-49/US 71/AR 549 (Future I-49) interchange location,  redesigning it to an SPUI and maintaining traffic is going to be challenging to say the least.

Given the footprint of the existing I-49 interchange and roundabout, I doubt ARDOT would need to acquire any more ROW. A SPUI could fit in that foot print pretty easily.

Maintaining traffic and minimizing disruptions is another matter. My guess is they'll build the I-49 main lanes on a bridge over the North half of the existing roundabout. The bridge structure would go up first and everything else would build out from it. They're going to have to add that second set of lanes to future I-49 on the West side of the interchange. Traffic could shift to the new lanes when part of the new bridge is finished so the existing approach can be elevated. Conversion of the roundabout into a SPUI would happen underneath.

Sort of what they are doing with the Exit 85 conversion. They will convert one side, then the other side.

The tricky part is not the bridge over the roundabout, the tricky part is maintaining the I-49 to US 71 Connection for a large amount of north and southbound traffic until the connection from I-49 to AR 549 is built AND Missouri completes it's end of the bypass.  Sequencing and timing are going to be important.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on December 18, 2018, 12:48:04 PM
Interesting you should say that about FSM.  In the most recent mayor's race, there was a Brazilian (a US military veteran who is a UAFS student, from a wealthy farming family in Brazil) who wanted to "make Fort Smith great again" and did speak positively of I-49 in his mayoral campaign.  He was simply too young to be taken seriously, though he was a good kid who seemed on the right side of the issues I saw him speak about.  As it is now, I'd really be curious to hear the new mayor's genuine thoughts on I-49, especially given that the "marooned" segment and the Arkansas River bridge are or will be pretty much Alma-Kibler-Barling-Greenwood things with very little carriageway in the FSM city limits.  (Again, I wonder whether or not either the Brazilian candidate or the new mayor know the NWA paper ran an article over a decade ago saying that a completed I-49 is projected to make FSM grow like NWA.)

FSM only really has connections to I-49 along Mazzard and, if they annex everything up to and including Rye Hill southward until they butt up against where Greenwood will likely attempt to annex up to them along US 71, I'd expect the south side of Ft. Smith to be where the growth occurs to meet up with those two major exits.  Barling has them blocked off from a lot of the Chaffee Crossing industrial areas.  The real explosion in growth is going to be Alma.  Anywhere 2 major interstates cross is ripe for huge growth.  I-49 just isn't yet a major, or even a close to complete interstate.  Wish I had some money to sink into real estate in that area to hopefully retire on in 20-25 years.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on December 18, 2018, 01:32:15 PM
Quote
The tricky part is not the bridge over the roundabout, the tricky part is maintaining the I-49 to US 71 Connection for a large amount of north and southbound traffic until the connection from I-49 to AR 549 is built AND Missouri completes it's end of the bypass.  Sequencing and timing are going to be important.

I'm sure they'll try to avoid messing with the main movements of I-49 and US-71 North of the Interchange as long as possible, building other phases of the project first. There will be a lot of grading to do. I think at some point they'll have to reduce traffic on the existing I-49/US-71 road to just one lane in each direction, shifting everything over to the Northbound carriageway. That seems unavoidable, particularly for attaching the new I-49 main lanes into the existing route Southeast of the interchange. It also seems unavoidable for some entrance and exit ramps to be closed. I think Business US-71 coming up from the South could be cut off for weeks or even months during the project.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on December 19, 2018, 09:48:11 PM
That's good foreshadowing. By 2025 there might be preliminary talks on a total loop around Fayetteville, Springdale and Rogers. Especially if the growth rate continues at the current pace...By then this post will be at 150 pages...

It has been discussed in passing.  In the interim, the AR 265 extension will handle traffic from Fayetteville to Rogers on the east side of town.

It's been more than discussed.
https://nwarpc.org/datacatalog/western-beltway-feasibility-study/ (https://nwarpc.org/datacatalog/western-beltway-feasibility-study/)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Tomahawkin on December 19, 2018, 11:11:31 PM
Thanks chief. OT, IMO IH-49 should have lighting from 40 north to Fayetteville. I have been there many times where you can't see deer crossing the road. As well as the storms and fog. Also IMO 49 should have call boxes at every mile like IH 10 In Florida. But I know the state is broke???
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on December 20, 2018, 03:38:09 AM
I think that NWA has just about reached the stage of being in perpetual construction.  It's about to cross into Top 100 MSA territory.  By the time 2020 comes around and the current phase of 6-laning wraps up, they'll need a couple more lanes, and then be tapped out on the ability to handle anything more on the current I-49.  Then the Western Beltway will be dusted off again and it'll be time for me to move out of here since I don't want an interstate next to the nice quiet woods I live in now.

NWA's ever-growing status may yet prompt a serious attempt to deploy a direct Interstate-grade Tulsa-Springville connection along or paralleling US 412.  OK probably wouldn't mind as long as they could add the additional mileage to be constructed to their toll network, but someone at ARDOT would have to inform the folks in Siloam Springs that like it or not, they're getting bypassed -- and that they would need to make arrangements to take all due advantage of said bypass.  Now -- whether a parallel "relief" route for I-49 is warranted in the near term might be a subject for debate; I'd guess increasing the capacity of the existing freeway (and dealing with the "non-standard" features) would be given prioritization; a bypass loop would come later when even an enhanced 49 corridor was starting to display signs of inadequacy.   
They're not going to build a new terrain freeway paralleling US 412 between Tulsa and Springdale. There is a perfectly good expressway between the two points. If anything happens, it would be the upgrading the existing expressway into a freeway. Other than Siloam Springs and in Springdale there are no lights or stop signs along this part of the highway. There is no need for a new terrain freeway paralleling US 412.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on December 20, 2018, 05:08:17 AM
^^^^^^^^
The only "new terrain" mileage on an enhanced US 412-based Tulsa-NWA corridor would be a continuation of the current Springdale bypass -- just enough to bypass that portion of 412 with considerable private access, as well as the previously mentioned Siloam Springs bypass facility.  The rest, particularly the OK mileage, is either the Cherokee Turnpike or expressway and could be upgraded along the present ROW.  But such an upgrade isn't going to happen anytime soon; both states have too much else on their plates.  Nevertheless, if NWA continues growing at anywhere near its recent pace, E-W access will likely show up on the agenda at some point -- and the potential of the Springdale bypass as a starting point won't go unnoticed.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on December 20, 2018, 08:59:03 PM
I think it's only a matter of time before a fully Interstate-class highway becomes necessary between Tulsa and NW Arkansas.

The 26 mile segment of US-412 between the I-44 & US-412 interchange on the East side of Tulsa and the beginning of the Cherokee Turnpike would be relatively easy to upgrade. There's not very many properties too close the highway. The existing expressway is pretty much Interstate-grade; it just has 23 at-grade intersections to modify. The intersections are all crossing roads. No driveways. Some intersections are already ready to upgrade into Interstate quality exits. Other intersections will take more work to upgrade into Interstate exits. Some intersecting roads will just have to be bridged over US-412 without any on/off ramps. Overall it looks similar to some of work that had to be done to US-71 in Missouri to turn it into I-49.

From the East end of the Cherokee Turnpike US-412 requires more work to get into Arkansas. Along with intersections there is a bunch of driveways and properties close to the road. A new terrain bypass may indeed be necessary.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Tomahawkin on December 20, 2018, 09:16:25 PM
I agree Bobby. And a 412 extension to 555 in NE Arkansas would be nice. Its such a pain in the Ass to have to go south to IH 40 to get to NE Arkansas. That also would mean a new rerouting of 412 bypassing Springdale. That is light years away to. But its good to be proactive instead of reactivate...
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on December 20, 2018, 11:03:52 PM
I think it's only a matter of time before a fully Interstate-class highway becomes necessary between Tulsa and NW Arkansas.

The 26 mile segment of US-412 between the I-44 & US-412 interchange on the East side of Tulsa and the beginning of the Cherokee Turnpike would be relatively easy to upgrade. There's not very many properties too close the highway. The existing expressway is pretty much Interstate-grade; it just has 23 at-grade intersections to modify. The intersections are all crossing roads. No driveways. Some intersections are already ready to upgrade into Interstate quality exits. Other intersections will take more work to upgrade into Interstate exits. Some intersecting roads will just have to be bridged over US-412 without any on/off ramps. Overall it looks similar to some of work that had to be done to US-71 in Missouri to turn it into I-49.

From the East end of the Cherokee Turnpike US-412 requires more work to get into Arkansas. Along with intersections there is a bunch of driveways and properties close to the road. A new terrain bypass may indeed be necessary.

It'd likely be that the east end of the Cherokee Turnpike would likely have to be the start of the bypass around West Siloam and Siloam Springs, I'd bet to the north since things get fairly vertical to the south of both due to the Illinois River.  Just a bend around the airport and pick up the current expressway east of Siloam.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on December 20, 2018, 11:13:24 PM
I agree Bobby. And a 412 extension to 555 in NE Arkansas would be nice. Its such a pain in the Ass to have to go south to IH 40 to get to NE Arkansas. That also would mean a new rerouting of 412 bypassing Springdale. That is light years away to. But its good to be proactive instead of reactivate...

I get that way a couple of times a year, and I usually take the southern/faster route on my way to my client there, but usually take 412 back as I hate backtracking after working away from home.  It's a pretty fun route anyway in a WRX, but does take another 30-45 minutes.  I find it hard to believe that there would be an interstate any further east of Harrison in my lifetime or at least until retirement, but miracles do occur.  It'd take a doubling of NWA and a quadrupling of NEA for there to be enough of a push to connect the two in my estimation.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Tomahawkin on December 20, 2018, 11:54:54 PM
Well hell. North Central Arkansas is a huge area to retire to as well. More people in those towns there would necessitate a thruway through there. It might be 2030 before that happens
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Tomahawkin on December 21, 2018, 12:02:33 AM
Also. The only way People would consider moving to NEA Is if those counties went wet. Jonesboro loses so much money on revenue and prevention from people/jobs locating there because of the dry county BS. The only thing out there that gets attention there is the rampant mosquitoes...
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: qguy on December 21, 2018, 06:25:03 AM
... That also would mean a new rerouting of 412 bypassing Springdale. That is light years away to.

A light year is a measure of distance, not time, so you'll need to provide a conversion factor. What's that in miles... or dog years?  :D
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on December 21, 2018, 09:59:51 AM
Well hell. North Central Arkansas is a huge area to retire to as well. More people in those towns there would necessitate a thruway through there. It might be 2030 before that happens

Putting an interstate through there would draw more than retirees there as it becomes a lot more accessible.  And then it becomes another Bella Vista too.  Don't get me wrong, I'd love an I-50 to run across northern Arkansas, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Texas, and New Mexico, but with that comes a lot of development that runs contrary to the goals of most retirees, which in general are seeking out cheap and quiet places to live out their golden years.  North Arkansas becomes a tourist mecca instead of an ideal retirement destination if an expressway gets completed.  Depends on what your goals are.  Like I said in an earlier post, if they ever do the Western Beltway bypass for I-49 that was studied back in 2011, it would be supremely convenient to hop on an interstate that would have an exit 2 miles from my home.  But with that comes development, crime, noise, pollution, traffic, and other undesirable aspects of freeways that you don't necessarily want at your doorstep.  It's the reason I moved into what is essentially a retirement community outside of Fayetteville even in my youth.  Makes for a great place to raise kids without worrying about their every waking moment like many of our parents had the blessing of, and gives them an appreciation for nature that many city dwellers only get from afar that often turns into nature worship.  When NWA grows to my doorstep, it's time to move.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on December 21, 2018, 10:36:02 AM
An Interstate quality link between Tulsa and Springdale would be a reaction to development growth and increases in traffic that has already happened.

It's another point of debate whether such an Interstate connection should be extended farther East. IMHO, upgrading the US-412 corridor across Northern Arkansas to Interstate standards is unnecessary. Some of the 2-lane segments might be worth upgrading to 4 lanes.

As far as highways in NE Arkansas go the I-57 project would be the biggest priority, followed by extending I-555 to Walnut Ridge and then (long term) extending up into Missouri to patch into the US-60 corridor on the way to Springfield. That's a more significant East-West corridor than US-412 across Northern Arkansas. It's a lot farther along in the process of being upgraded into an Interstate class facility.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on December 21, 2018, 10:36:24 AM
Well hell. North Central Arkansas is a huge area to retire to as well. More people in those towns there would necessitate a thruway through there. It might be 2030 before that happens

Putting an interstate through there would draw more than retirees there as it becomes a lot more accessible.  And then it becomes another Bella Vista too.  Don't get me wrong, I'd love an I-50 to run across northern Arkansas, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Texas, and New Mexico, but with that comes a lot of development that runs contrary to the goals of most retirees, which in general are seeking out cheap and quiet places to live out their golden years.  North Arkansas becomes a tourist mecca instead of an ideal retirement destination if an expressway gets completed.  Depends on what your goals are.  Like I said in an earlier post, if they ever do the Western Beltway bypass for I-49 that was studied back in 2011, it would be supremely convenient to hop on an interstate that would have an exit 2 miles from my home.  But with that comes development, crime, noise, pollution, traffic, and other undesirable aspects of freeways that you don't necessarily want at your doorstep.  It's the reason I moved into what is essentially a retirement community outside of Fayetteville even in my youth.  Makes for a great place to raise kids without worrying about their every waking moment like many of our parents had the blessing of, and gives them an appreciation for nature that many city dwellers only get from afar that often turns into nature worship.  When NWA grows to my doorstep, it's time to move.

I never considered the Woods to be a retirement community. 20 years ago, it seemed to be old, retired hippies and hermits. ;)

I drove by about a month ago just for giggles and it looked like it was about to be swallowed up by the city.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on December 21, 2018, 01:43:03 PM
I never considered the Woods to be a retirement community. 20 years ago, it seemed to be old, retired hippies and hermits. ;)

I drove by about a month ago just for giggles and it looked like it was about to be swallowed up by the city.

There are a fair number of old hippies that live around us, but also some other small business owners, U of A professor types, and some younger families moving in as well.  Nothing's really built up in our area just yet, still mostly east of Double Springs Rd. where all of the new spec house subdivisions are going up, but there's a few neighborhoods like that south on Harmon Rd. that have been there a little while now.  Only development in our neighborhood was a developer snapping up a property across Harmon Rd. from one of the entrances into our little community tried to put through a red dirt mine, but the old hippies banded together to put a stop to it.  Normally wouldn't object to anyone trying to get value out of their land, but convoys of dump trucks trying to climb that hill dumping rock at 7MPH just seemed like a disaster waiting to happen, particularly with traffic coming down that steep hill around a blind corner with dump trucks turning on.  Anyway, it's stopped, at least for now.  Eventually development will be right next door, but hopefully not for 15 more years at least.  Like to get the kids through college first before picking up shop.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on December 21, 2018, 01:44:59 PM
An Interstate quality link between Tulsa and Springdale would be a reaction to development growth and increases in traffic that has already happened.

It's another point of debate whether such an Interstate connection should be extended farther East. IMHO, upgrading the US-412 corridor across Northern Arkansas to Interstate standards is unnecessary. Some of the 2-lane segments might be worth upgrading to 4 lanes.

As far as highways in NE Arkansas go the I-57 project would be the biggest priority, followed by extending I-555 to Walnut Ridge and then (long term) extending up into Missouri to patch into the US-60 corridor on the way to Springfield. That's a more significant East-West corridor than US-412 across Northern Arkansas. It's a lot farther along in the process of being upgraded into an Interstate class facility.

I completely agree.  Just don't see much progress east of Huntsville for the next 15 years or so, though.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on December 21, 2018, 03:39:14 PM
^^^^^^^^
As far as future development of the US 412 (BTW, it's also HPC #8, so while hardly funded, is at least directly eligible for federal matching) corridor goes, I can see an Interstate-grade Tulsa-to-I-49 connection happening in the next 15-20 years, and possibly a 4-lane expressway with at-grade intersections from there east to US 65 -- i.e., upgrading the E-W access to the NWA/I-49 corridor.  East from there, it'll probably be a mixture of mostly 2-lane highway, albeit with realignment of some of the older stretches and several passing lanes, with 4-lane sections (or the infamous Arkansas 5-lane) in and around communities; that configuration would likely continue east to Walnut Ridge.  East across the flatlands into the MO bootheel, US 412 would likely get a mixture of divided expressway and 2-lanes with quite a few passing lanes (although some would prefer an Interstate-grade facility connecting with I-155, that's not likely to happen given the push for I-57 toward Poplar Bluff).  Upshot: east of US 65, it'll remain pretty much the same but with spot enhancements. 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: rte66man on December 22, 2018, 12:33:02 PM
^^^^^^^^
As far as future development of the US 412 (BTW, it's also HPC #8, so while hardly funded, is at least directly eligible for federal matching) corridor goes, I can see an Interstate-grade Tulsa-to-I-49 connection happening in the next 15-20 years...... 

Oklahoma is VERY incrementally upgrading 412 east of Tulsa to a freeway:
http://www.odot.org/cwp-8-year-plan/cwp_ffy2019-ffy2026/8_year_cwp_divisiontul_map.pdf

The intersection at 412P is scheduled to become an interchange in 2026.  :banghead:

Getting OK and AR to agree on a Siloam Springs bypass might be problematic.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: The Ghostbuster on December 22, 2018, 02:46:24 PM
Will these incremental US 412 upgrades be tolled? Will they be free of charge? Or have they not decided which route they will go yet (tolled or free)?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on December 22, 2018, 02:54:59 PM
^^^^^^^^
As far as future development of the US 412 (BTW, it's also HPC #8, so while hardly funded, is at least directly eligible for federal matching) corridor goes, I can see an Interstate-grade Tulsa-to-I-49 connection happening in the next 15-20 years...... 

Oklahoma is VERY incrementally upgrading 412 east of Tulsa to a freeway:
http://www.odot.org/cwp-8-year-plan/cwp_ffy2019-ffy2026/8_year_cwp_divisiontul_map.pdf

The intersection at 412P is scheduled to become and interchange in 2026.  :banghead:

Getting OK and AR to agree on a Siloam Springs bypass might be problematic.

It's definitely got the makings of another Bella Vista Bypass debacle, except Bella Vista actually wanted to be bypassed.

By the way, just drove all of the current Bella Vista Bypass yesterday.  Looks like they've made very good progress on the northbound carriageway in regards to earth moving.  Except for the southern mile and a half from the traffic circle, they've got most of earth moving for the road base leveled out except for one spot next to an overpass.  They have 2 of the bridges started and I took a dash video using my phone of all of the Benton County construction spots up to the first AR 72 exit northbound if anyone cares to see the current status of the projects via video.  Right now they're just on my Google drive, but I can figure out another spot to host them for the sake of posting links here.  I just don't want my real-life name out on the interwebs, and the current method I have them saved would leak that out.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Plutonic Panda on December 23, 2018, 02:50:20 AM
Will these incremental US 412 upgrades be tolled? Will they be free of charge? Or have they not decided which route they will go yet (tolled or free)?
Hopefully they won’t be tolled. Tulsa and NE Oklahoma needs a break from tolls. Once they’re done with the turner turnpike between OKC and Tulsa widening, it’d be nice to see them remove all tolls on I-44 from Tulsa to Missouri state line.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: I-39 on December 23, 2018, 09:40:41 AM
What is going on with the I-49 Arkansas River bridge? Haven’t heard anything in a while.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on December 23, 2018, 10:40:33 AM
What is going on with the I-49 Arkansas River bridge? Haven’t heard anything in a while.

Nothing. "No money". All talk, no action.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on December 23, 2018, 11:16:37 AM
040748 Crawford & Sebastian I-49 Hwy. 22 - I-40 (Arkansas River) (S) Project Development 13.56 miles  $9,700 - TOTAL State 2020 FRONTIER. This is on the STIP for 2020 but they had money left over allotted to start the 2017 so hopefully they will continue the engineering. The environmental was done and Bennett said they would look into a section of road at a time. But I think only engineering until 2022 Because no money.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: rte66man on December 24, 2018, 10:19:18 AM
Will these incremental US 412 upgrades be tolled? Will they be free of charge? Or have they not decided which route they will go yet (tolled or free)?
Hopefully they won’t be tolled. Tulsa and NE Oklahoma needs a break from tolls. Once they’re done with the turner turnpike between OKC and Tulsa widening, it’d be nice to see them remove all tolls on I-44 from Tulsa to Missouri state line.

Since they will be using the existing carriageways (which were built in the 70's on a new alignment), they won't be tolled, at least from Tulsa to Chouteau where the Cherokee Turnpike begins.  Can't say they won't to get around Siloam Springs.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on December 24, 2018, 11:04:53 AM
Will these incremental US 412 upgrades be tolled? Will they be free of charge? Or have they not decided which route they will go yet (tolled or free)?
Hopefully they won’t be tolled. Tulsa and NE Oklahoma needs a break from tolls. Once they’re done with the turner turnpike between OKC and Tulsa widening, it’d be nice to see them remove all tolls on I-44 from Tulsa to Missouri state line.

Since they will be using the existing carriageways (which were built in the 70's on a new alignment), they won't be tolled, at least from Tulsa to Chouteau where the Cherokee Turnpike begins.  Can't say they won't to get around Siloam Springs.
The divided carriageway ends just as you enter West Siloam Springs, so that would make a good spot for a Siloam Springs Bypass....provided the area isn't overbuilt.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on December 27, 2018, 09:30:33 AM
Will these incremental US 412 upgrades be tolled? Will they be free of charge? Or have they not decided which route they will go yet (tolled or free)?
Hopefully they won’t be tolled. Tulsa and NE Oklahoma needs a break from tolls. Once they’re done with the turner turnpike between OKC and Tulsa widening, it’d be nice to see them remove all tolls on I-44 from Tulsa to Missouri state line.

Since they will be using the existing carriageways (which were built in the 70's on a new alignment), they won't be tolled, at least from Tulsa to Chouteau where the Cherokee Turnpike begins.  Can't say they won't to get around Siloam Springs.
The divided carriageway ends just as you enter West Siloam Springs, so that would make a good spot for a Siloam Springs Bypass....provided the area isn't overbuilt.

The tricky thing with Siloam Springs is that to the south, the terrain is all hollows emptying down toward the Illinois River valley several miles to the south, which is difficult terrain to build through.  You can see it pretty easily with Satellite View on Google Maps.  The north side would be much easier, terrain-wise, but you have to go about 2-3 miles north with a bypass to get around the university and the higher end residential areas on the north side of town close to the lake and country club.  A bypass taken right at the end of the current median separated expressway would pretty much have to take a straight 2 mile north leg even before starting back east without taking a great deal of residential development, much of it pricier than the average for the rest of town.  If it isn't bypassed within the next 10-15 years, there's going to be a spillover of growth from the I-49 corridor out that way and make it much harder and more expensive, or take the bypass further out, which obviously reduces the time saved with the increased mileage.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on December 28, 2018, 11:05:49 PM
If a new bypass split from the Cherokee Turnpike just a bit West of its current terminus near Dripping Springs it could follow along or near Flint Creek and bypass North of Siloam Springs. Of course things get tricky once the highway gets into Arkansas. Dawn Hill Country Club is next to Siloam Springs Lake. Probably not going to be able plow a freeway through that. But there are (for now) possible routes for attaching the road to the US-412 bypass currently under construction.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: galador on January 03, 2019, 11:47:32 AM
Gov. Hutchinson appoints Keith Gibson of Fort Smith to Arkansas Highway Commission (https://talkbusiness.net/2019/01/gov-hutchinson-appoints-keith-gibson-of-fort-smith-to-arkansas-highway-commission/)

Maybe this is some good news for getting some funding to build the bridge? /wishful thinking
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on January 03, 2019, 07:15:06 PM
Gov. Hutchinson appoints Keith Gibson of Fort Smith to Arkansas Highway Commission (https://talkbusiness.net/2019/01/gov-hutchinson-appoints-keith-gibson-of-fort-smith-to-arkansas-highway-commission/)

Maybe this is some good news for getting some funding to build the bridge? /wishful thinking

Boy, there seem to be multiple people being wishful.  If this man can help the I-49 Arkansas River bridge be built, that will put all the pressure necessary on building Greenwood-to-Texarkana.  From the article:

Quote
The last full-term highway commissioner from the Fort Smith region was Jake Patterson, appointed in the Rockefeller administration in 1969.

Hutchinson said repeatedly while campaigning for reelection in 2018 that the next highway commissioner would come from “south of the mountain”  and from the (Arkansas) River valley, noting that a commissioner from the Fort Smith area was very important to the region even though he would be responsible for meeting the needs of the entire state.

State Senator Mat Pitsch of Fort Smith said the appointment of a commissioner from Fort Smith was “huge.”

“When you have five guys in a room determining where you are going to build the biggest economic driver we have, which is new roads, new transportation, and now one of those five men is from our hometown, that’s huge. We’ve worked the last four years to make this happen,”  Pitsch said, noting that he hopes the appointment could push development of I-49 and all transportation, including rail, river and roads, in the area.

I-49, the north-south corridor that originates in Lafayette, Louisiana, runs through the western flank of Arkansas, and stretches north to Kansas City, Missouri has been a major funding challenge for the Fort Smith region. The southern stretch of the Arkansas portion of the interstate has come up short in funding for decades. Recently, the northwest Arkansas portion of the road known as the Bella Vista Bypass received funding to complete.

Gibson’s appointment will raise expectations for the southern stretch of I-49. He was cautious in his comments on the issue at Wednesday’s press conference.

“It is certainly something I want to look at closely. I look forward to learning more specifics about it,”  he said. “I know it’s critically important to a lot of people in this area, so that is something I want to look at closely.”


Tim Allen, Fort Smith Regional Chamber of Commerce President and CEO, said Gibson’s appointment will create new opportunities for the region.

“Governor Hutchinson’s appointment of Keith Gibson to the Arkansas Highway Commission is further endorsement that Fort Smith and western Arkansas are indeed open for business, and that the state is watching. The region is primed for high-powered growth with the transportation infrastructure we already have in place and the potential development being discussed,”  Allen said. “The Fort Smith region plays a crucial role in advanced manufacturing logistics and having Keith’s voice in discussions regarding highway progress will set the stage for additional economic expansion.”
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on January 03, 2019, 07:23:43 PM
...and even though an interstate road doesn't always bring change there is this other entry in Talk Business (actually, there are a few of them though some are in the "looking back at 2018" category):

Quote
As I travel the state, I often talk about Interstate 49. I don’t think there is a better example than I-49 of a road anywhere that truly changed a region. It’s well designed, and it’s a beautiful ride on a fall afternoon. But the real value of I-49 is it connected a group of diverse and growing communities and made them a region. A real region where communities understand what is good for one community is good for all.

It’s the backbone of a part of the state where large and small businesses thrive, where school districts outperform the rest of the state, and where the number of tourists coming here increases monthly.

https://talkbusiness.net/2019/01/random-thoughts-sitting-in-traffic-at-rainbow-curve/
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on January 10, 2019, 11:30:14 AM
To me, this wording is sort of gobbledygook, but it's likely just me.  :-D  The picture atop the article (and the number of shares) tells me the thing that's atop a lot more people's minds than we know, especially given these mysterious "contingencies" from Louisiana firms.  The words in bold below seem to echo Chaffee Crossing's Ivy Owen when he said he expects to be able to drive on the I-49 Ark River bridge in his lifetime:

Quote
Looking at bigger projects, Pitsch told the board that ARDOT Director Scott Bennett had a study done on the feasibility of a bridge and a roughly 13-mile section of I-49 north of Fort Chaffee that would connect Highway 22 in Sebastian County and the I-40/I-49 interchange in Crawford County to be a toll system. The timing for that section of the interstate would have to be started within the next five years, he said.

“No one wanted to commit to a 13-mile section, but by doing it the way he did, he could see who might be interested in a toll contract on the highway without having to commit to starting the entire project,”  Pitsch said. “It was a very smart way to do it. We don’t know if any of the (interstate) will be toll, but by using funds for the study, it was a commitment that construction on that section would have to be started within five years.”

https://talkbusiness.net/2019/01/western-arkansas-intermodal-authority-updates-on-greenwood-bypass-i-49-north-of-fort-chaffee/
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on January 11, 2019, 04:24:03 PM
ARDOT Highway commission meeting Jan. 9th shows the Connecting Arkansas Program that the two jobs remaining for Bella Vista Bypass Future I49 is scheduled for 2020. No actual date so I would assume they have talked to Missouri and they will start there job also during 2020.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on February 12, 2019, 02:30:06 PM
Going to be a mess in Bentonville/Rogers for a few months with Exit 86 north ramps (entrance and exit) closed to tie in with the 8th St. exit rampworks.  Looks like a bunch of traffic getting dumped onto Exit 85 for U-turns, so I'd definitely avoid Exit 85 until after May.

http://ardot.gov/news/2019_news/NR%2019-033.pdf (http://ardot.gov/news/2019_news/NR%2019-033.pdf)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on February 12, 2019, 08:48:05 PM
Going to be a mess in Bentonville/Rogers for a few months with Exit 86 north ramps (entrance and exit) closed to tie in with the 8th St. exit rampworks.  Looks like a bunch of traffic getting dumped onto Exit 85 for U-turns, so I'd definitely avoid Exit 85 until after May.

http://ardot.gov/news/2019_news/NR%2019-033.pdf (http://ardot.gov/news/2019_news/NR%2019-033.pdf)

Likely going to be a mess after they finish, as well, with SB traffic exiting at 8th Street to access 14th.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: mvak36 on February 27, 2019, 11:40:21 AM
https://www.4029tv.com/article/updates-on-benton-county-i-49-road-construction/26337335
Quote
Construction continues on the Bella Vista Bypass; ArDOT waiting for MODOT to issue contracts

There's good news for Bella Vista drivers - especially those that share the road with big rigs. The completed bypass will connect I-49 south of Pineville, MO to I-49 in Benton County. Danny Straessle says about 7,500 vehicles use the existing Highway 549 each day. When the roadway becomes a full-fledged interstate, the effect will be noticeable.

“The trucks that go through the area will take the interstate and that will get them out of Bella Vista and that should help the traffic congestion there greatly,”  Straessle said.

Right now - two lanes take State Highway 549 from the Bella Vista/Bentonville roundabout to Hiwassee - about 2 miles short of the Arkansas-Missouri border.

In the meantime, construction continues on the northbound lanes of the future interstate. ArDOT says it is waiting on Missouri's highway department to issue contracts for their piece of the connection. Once that is done, ArDOT will begin work on assembling their contracts for the piece near the state line and at the roundabout in Bentonville & Bella Vista.

There will be 4 interchanges along the new bypass - including a new, single-point urban interchange at the roundabout. Construction is expected to wrap up on the Bella Vista Bypass at the end of 2020.

I assume when they're talking about construction being completed by 2020 it might just be the Arkansas side?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on February 27, 2019, 12:41:06 PM
A 2020 finish time for the current work in progress (adding the second set of lanes) makes sense. MO DOT has yet to let any contracts on their portion of the bypass. They have a lot more work to do on their side of the state line. If they were already at work clearing the final alignment and doing grading work it might be possible for MO DOT to finish their side of the bypass by the end of 2020. But since they haven't even gotten started yet I'd bet it would be more like 2022-2024 for the over-long soap opera to finally come to an end.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on February 27, 2019, 02:55:29 PM
The process of clearing out structures in the right-of-way on Missouri's side only recently began, so it'll be a while before they actually start blasting hills and moving dirt.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: GreenLanternCorps on February 27, 2019, 03:09:15 PM
https://www.4029tv.com/article/updates-on-benton-county-i-49-road-construction/26337335
Quote
Construction continues on the Bella Vista Bypass; ArDOT waiting for MODOT to issue contracts

There's good news for Bella Vista drivers - especially those that share the road with big rigs. The completed bypass will connect I-49 south of Pineville, MO to I-49 in Benton County. Danny Straessle says about 7,500 vehicles use the existing Highway 549 each day. When the roadway becomes a full-fledged interstate, the effect will be noticeable.

“The trucks that go through the area will take the interstate and that will get them out of Bella Vista and that should help the traffic congestion there greatly,”  Straessle said.

Right now - two lanes take State Highway 549 from the Bella Vista/Bentonville roundabout to Hiwassee - about 2 miles short of the Arkansas-Missouri border.

In the meantime, construction continues on the northbound lanes of the future interstate. ArDOT says it is waiting on Missouri's highway department to issue contracts for their piece of the connection. Once that is done, ArDOT will begin work on assembling their contracts for the piece near the state line and at the roundabout in Bentonville & Bella Vista.

There will be 4 interchanges along the new bypass - including a new, single-point urban interchange at the roundabout. Construction is expected to wrap up on the Bella Vista Bypass at the end of 2020.

I assume when they're talking about construction being completed by 2020 it might just be the Arkansas side?

Based on the article the existing portions of AR 549 from just west of the roundabout to Rocky Dell Hollow Road will be completed to Interstate standards.  The Section from Rocky Dell Hollow Road North to the State Line and the interchange to replace the roundabout at the I-49/US 71 North Interchange (Exit 93) will not start until MDOT actually lets contracts for the section from the State Line north to I-49.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on February 27, 2019, 03:19:36 PM
Based on the article the existing portions of AR 549 from just west of the roundabout to Rocky Dell Hollow Road will be completed to Interstate standards.  The Section from Rocky Dell Hollow Road North to the State Line and the interchange to replace the roundabout at the I-49/US 71 North Interchange (Exit 93) will not start until MDOT actually lets contracts for the section from the State Line north to I-49.

And that roundabout will be replaced by the 2nd SPUI in NWA.  The first being at (current) Exit 85 for 71B in Rogers/Bentonville.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on February 27, 2019, 10:41:24 PM
Based on the article the existing portions of AR 549 from just west of the roundabout to Rocky Dell Hollow Road will be completed to Interstate standards.  The Section from Rocky Dell Hollow Road North to the State Line and the interchange to replace the roundabout at the I-49/US 71 North Interchange (Exit 93) will not start until MDOT actually lets contracts for the section from the State Line north to I-49.

And that roundabout will be replaced by the 2nd SPUI in NWA.  The first being at (current) Exit 85 for 71B in Rogers/Bentonville.

Going to be interesting to watch them convert that.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on February 28, 2019, 02:51:30 AM
Even after all the improvements, the Exit 86 interchange is still going to be horrific for traffic on the Rogers side. It's technically still Bentonville, but the Rogers city limits are just to the east.

When I lived there, I talked with the Bentonville transportation guy, since the city was behind the Exit 86/new 8th Street interchange. I tried to express my concerns with the traffic congestion to the east of I-49.

He didn't care. And apparently, Rogers doesn't care either.

But...

I found this:
http://www.arkansashighways.com/public_meetings/2019_PM/090500/090500.aspx

I'm just glad that stupid intersection at AR 94 and US 62 will be fixed.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on February 28, 2019, 10:49:15 AM
Even after all the improvements, the Exit 86 interchange is still going to be horrific for traffic on the Rogers side. It's technically still Bentonville, but the Rogers city limits are just to the east.

When I lived there, I talked with the Bentonville transportation guy, since the city was behind the Exit 86/new 8th Street interchange. I tried to express my concerns with the traffic congestion to the east of I-49.

He didn't care. And apparently, Rogers doesn't care either.

But...

I found this:
http://www.arkansashighways.com/public_meetings/2019_PM/090500/090500.aspx

I'm just glad that stupid intersection at AR 94 and US 62 will be fixed.

And I'm just glad Alternative 2 adds an extra lane each direction between SW I St. and SE C St.  That stretch is gridlock with regularity.  And both alternatives add right turn lanes and radius the corners at major intersections, so that will certainly help with traffic flow and trailers making corners for all of the semis on that stretch.

Unfortunately, this is just the study, the actual project has a tentative 2040 date in the documents.  And they state: When will the construction begin?  The  Highway  62  and  102  study  will  provide  a  master  plan  of  improvements.  There  are  no  funds  currently  identified  for  construction  along  this  study  segment.  If  funds  are  identified, a project schedule will be developed that will identify when construction will begin and end. 

So, there is a plan, but no money.  Baby steps, though.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on February 28, 2019, 10:35:28 PM
Even after all the improvements, the Exit 86 interchange is still going to be horrific for traffic on the Rogers side. It's technically still Bentonville, but the Rogers city limits are just to the east.

When I lived there, I talked with the Bentonville transportation guy, since the city was behind the Exit 86/new 8th Street interchange. I tried to express my concerns with the traffic congestion to the east of I-49.

He didn't care. And apparently, Rogers doesn't care either.

But...

I found this:
http://www.arkansashighways.com/public_meetings/2019_PM/090500/090500.aspx

I'm just glad that stupid intersection at AR 94 and US 62 will be fixed.

That's been a clusterfork for years.  Typical of AHTD/ARDOT's failure to plan ahead until it's too late.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: GreenLanternCorps on March 13, 2019, 07:11:50 AM
Since this effects I-49 in Arkansas too, here is a link to the Missouri website for the Missouri-Arkansas Connector (aka The Bella Vista Bypass) from the I-49 Coming to Missouri thread:

https://www.modot.org/i-49-missouriarkansas-connector

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: The Ghostbuster on March 13, 2019, 02:05:00 PM
When the entire Bella Vista Bypass is complete, will the US 71 designation be moved onto the bypass? Or will it remain on its existing alignment? My assumption is that US 71 will move to the bypass.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on March 13, 2019, 03:02:54 PM
When the entire Bella Vista Bypass is complete, will the US 71 designation be moved onto the bypass? Or will it remain on its existing alignment? My assumption is that US 71 will move to the bypass.

To my knowledge current 71 will remain 71, but the bypass will become I-49 (though they did try to do that with the highway out of Alma once upon a time)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Anthony_JK on March 14, 2019, 07:06:18 PM
When the entire Bella Vista Bypass is complete, will the US 71 designation be moved onto the bypass? Or will it remain on its existing alignment? My assumption is that US 71 will move to the bypass.

To my knowledge current 71 will remain 71, but the bypass will become I-49 (though they did try to do that with the highway out of Alma once upon a time)


IIRC, the Bella Vista Bypass in Arkansas is currently signed as AR 549, correct?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on March 14, 2019, 07:10:53 PM
When the entire Bella Vista Bypass is complete, will the US 71 designation be moved onto the bypass? Or will it remain on its existing alignment? My assumption is that US 71 will move to the bypass.

To my knowledge current 71 will remain 71, but the bypass will become I-49 (though they did try to do that with the highway out of Alma once upon a time)


IIRC, the Bella Vista Bypass in Arkansas is currently signed as AR 549, correct?

Yes. As is future 49 between Ft Smith and Barling.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on March 15, 2019, 04:29:15 PM
When the entire Bella Vista Bypass is complete, will the US 71 designation be moved onto the bypass? Or will it remain on its existing alignment? My assumption is that US 71 will move to the bypass.

To my knowledge current 71 will remain 71, but the bypass will become I-49 (though they did try to do that with the highway out of Alma once upon a time)


IIRC, the Bella Vista Bypass in Arkansas is currently signed as AR 549, correct?

Yes. As is future 49 between Ft Smith and Barling.


As was I-49 south of AR 151 at Texarkana until the facility was completed around that city and south to the LA state line.  "549" is basically a placeholder for incomplete I-49 projects.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on March 22, 2019, 08:11:43 PM
ArDOT Has listed jobs CA0903 Hwy 71 Interchange (Bella Vista) and CA0905 Co RD 34 - Missouri State Line ( Bella Vista) for July 24th 2019. https://www.arkansashighways.com/ProgCon/General/Next_Three_Lettings.pdf. So this future I 49 connector is making some progress.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on March 22, 2019, 09:35:08 PM
ArDOT Has listed jobs CA0903 Hwy 71 Interchange (Bella Vista) and CA0905 Co RD 34 - Missouri State Line ( Bella Vista) for July 24th 2019. https://www.arkansashighways.com/ProgCon/General/Next_Three_Lettings.pdf. So this future I 49 connector is making some progress.

The SPUI at 549/71 is going to be a pain in the a$$ while it's being built.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: mvak36 on March 23, 2019, 12:36:13 PM
If they're being let in July, does that mean both projects will be done sometime in 2021, give or take?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on March 23, 2019, 12:46:15 PM
If they're being let in July, does that mean both projects will be done sometime in 2021, give or take?

Well, MODOT expects to be done sometime in 2022, so 2021-2022 depending on weather and cost overruns.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: GreenLanternCorps on March 28, 2019, 07:44:39 AM
Are there drawings of the SPUI project for I-49/AR 549 and US71 on the web?  Not even sure where to look on the ARDOT website.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on March 28, 2019, 10:46:56 AM
Are there drawings of the SPUI project for I-49/AR 549 and US71 on the web?  Not even sure where to look on the ARDOT website.

I've not seen any. Have you tried writing ARDOT?
https://site.idrivearkansas.com/index.php/contact/ask-a-question

I used to have a direct e-mail, but can't find it at the moment.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: edwaleni on March 28, 2019, 06:32:21 PM
https://talkbusiness.net/2018/04/ardot-dusts-off-600-million-future-i-49-barling-to-alma-stretch/ (https://talkbusiness.net/2018/04/ardot-dusts-off-600-million-future-i-49-barling-to-alma-stretch/)

Quote
The Arkansas Department of Transportation (ArDOT) and the Federal Highway Administration have cooperated on an environmental re-evaluation as well as refining the conceptual alignment for a new section of Interstate 49 (I-49) that would connect approximately 13.7 miles between Highway 22 in Sebastian County and the I-40/I-49 interchange in Crawford County.

ArDOT officials presented a portion of the work by Kansas City-based engineering firm HNTB Corporation on Thursday (April 26) from the Sacred Heart of Mary Catholic Church in Barling.

The proposed project was originally part of a larger environmental study known as the “US 71 Relocation.”  The previous study extended from Highway 70 in DeQueen to I-40 near Alma, and it encompassed approximately 125 miles. The relocation of U.S. 71 in Arkansas is part of Congressionally-Designated High Priority Corridor 1 and Corridor 72, running from Shreveport, La., to Kansas City, Mo. A final environmental impact statement was prepared and a record of decision was issued in December of 1997 that approved the general alignment of a new location, four-lane highway in western Arkansas.

Due to the length of the corridor and funding constraints, design and construction of sections of the corridor have been completed as funding has become available. HNTB’s work on this particular section will include a toll feasibility analysis to see if there would be enough traffic to justify tolling as a funding mechanism to pay for the $600 million stretch.

”˜NOT A DONE DEAL’
Danny Straessle, public information officer for the Arkansas Highway and Transportation Department (AHTD), told Talk Business & Politics HNTB’s portion of the work should be completed by the end of 2018. “We’re basically taking it off the shelf, blowing the dust off, and taking another look at it. We still don’t have any money for this, but there’s enough of I-49 that has been completed where it’s reasonable to take a look at it again, especially since we have a Chaffee Crossing part that goes from 71 to 22. Going from 22 to I-40 is the next logical step.”

Straessle continued: “It’s not a done deal. The consultant might find that we won’t collect enough tolls. We’ve done several toll studies in the state already where it has been determined that no, it’s not feasible.”

Still, Straessle added, no toll doesn’t necessarily mean no project.

“The project will be done one day. We’ve just got to find the money for it. We don’t have $600 million laying around.”  When asked if it could be another 20 years before the 13.7 miles is built, he said, “Possibly, but not preferably.”

What’s different this time is that there is “a groundswell of support from the community, and the department looks at this as something that’s doable”  and would help support Arkansas’ economic development.

“You know, the highways in Arkansas are our backbone of economic development, so it just makes sense to complete it. But you’ve got to balance this (project) with the other priorities we have in the state. We have the 12th largest highway system in the country. We have more than 16,400 miles of highways, and we rank 42nd in being able to take care of what we got. Meaning, we have a lot of miles; we don’t have a lot of money. So the commission has to make tough decisions every day on where to spend what limited money we have, and when you look at a brand spanking new four-lane divided Interstate that’s theoretically priced around $600 million, that’s $600 million you can spend over five years in other areas of the state. So how do you balance these potholes over here or this bridge that’s failing, versus a nice, shiny, nice-to-have Interstate that would help economic development in the community over here?”

PAYING FOR IT
One way the department has done it is through a half-cent sales tax on everything but food, gas, and medicine. It was passed by voters in November of 2012, but the sunset date is in 2023, and there’s no guarantee of renewal.

“The money off of that, we use to leverage bonds to pay for all this construction we’re doing. It’s about a $1.8 billion program, so when the public steps up and votes and says, ”˜Yes, good roads do matter to us in Arkansas,’ it gives us these opportunities.”  However, due to the sunset date, “none of that money will apply to this project,”  Straessle said, “but a program like that could help fund something like this. We have a project in Little Rock that is about the same price tag. It’s called ’30 Crossing.’ They’re redoing Interstate 30 through the downtown Little Rock and North Little Rock areas and part of I-40. It’s about a $630 million project, and it’s being paid for with that half-cent sales tax.”

Other funding comes through the state’s existing fuel tax, which has not increased in over 20 years.

“But if you think about it, the gas tax hasn’t been raised since the mid-to-late 1990s, yet think about what the cost of construction has done since then. It’s gone up,”  Straessle said. “It’s more expensive to build a mile of highway. Six million dollars for a lane mile of interstate. For every two lanes, you’ve got $12 million per mile easily. Have the other two lanes going the other way, or multiply ($6 million) times four, basically, and all of the sudden, it’s gotten really expensive.”

As an example, Straessle pointed to the first 4.5-mile segment of the Springdale bypass. The project held a ribbon cutting on Wednesday and officially “opens”  on Monday (April 30). “It’s a four-lane divided Interstate, in a new location. It was $100.6 million, all paid for by the half-cent sales tax.”

Concerning how the department prioritizes projects, Straessle said money usually follows the traffic, and that of Arkansas’ 16,400 miles of road, only half (or close to 8,500) supports 92% of the state’s traffic.

“Those are interstates, major arteries, routes of regional significance. And there are some areas where we’ve had to do capacity upgrades, like we just got finished widening I-49 to three lanes in both directions. With a project like this – we were able to build the stretch across Chaffee Crossing relatively cheaply in terms of construction because the federal government gave us the land. We did not have to purchase right-of-way. Right-of-way purchase, utility relocation costs – those tremendously add to the cost of a project.”

THE I-49 CORRIDOR
Summing up the mission of the I-49 corridor, Straessle said the vision is to create a mid-continental, north-south route for shipments. With the widening of the Panama Canal, “those big container ships can go to the Port of New Orleans now”  and the idea would be “to put all the containers on the trucks and drive straight up I-49 through Arkansas, up into Kansas City or wherever it terminates there in the middle of the country. That way, you don’t go to the port on the east coast or the port on the west coast and then truck it in on I-40. So there’s a lot of benefit to it.”

Other major projects ahead include completion of the Bella Vista bypass and the segment of I-49 connecting Greenwood, US-71, and Texarkana, the latter of which is an estimated $2 billion project.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on March 29, 2019, 02:33:28 AM
Are there drawings of the SPUI project for I-49/AR 549 and US71 on the web?  Not even sure where to look on the ARDOT website.
If there's a job number for the project, I can do some digging, but I'm sure there isn't yet.
If someone can figure out when a public meeting was held for it, that will be posted on ARDOT's website.
And the obligatory comment that ARDOT's website needs a huge overhaul, which it does.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on March 29, 2019, 11:54:38 AM
CA0903 Hwy 71 interchange
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on April 04, 2019, 01:09:42 PM

ARDOT (https://www.swtimes.com/news/20190404/ardot-i-49-extension-from-alma-to-barling-not-viable-as-toll-road) announces tolling I-49 from Alma to Barling is "not viable".
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on April 04, 2019, 07:03:15 PM

ARDOT (https://www.swtimes.com/news/20190404/ardot-i-49-extension-from-alma-to-barling-not-viable-as-toll-road) announces tolling I-49 from Alma to Barling is "not viable".


As a stand-alone facility, a Fort Smith I-49 bypass wouldn't be particularly viable as a toll road, since the opportunities for shunpiking across the Arkansas River (US 64/71, I-540) are there and functional.  The only way that tolls -- limited to the bridge itself rather than the entire bypass -- would be a viable concept is after I-49 is completed south to Texarkana; it's likely that a driver not intending to overnight in the Fort Smith area would expend the effort to shunpike over surface facilities but rather remain on the I-49 main line and pay the bridge toll.  Of course, revenues from this would necessarily be directed toward maintenance rather than construction of the facility -- which doesn't presently help the prospects for deployment.  Nevertheless, it's something that could be useful down the line. 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on April 04, 2019, 08:28:04 PM

ARDOT (https://www.swtimes.com/news/20190404/ardot-i-49-extension-from-alma-to-barling-not-viable-as-toll-road) announces tolling I-49 from Alma to Barling is "not viable".


As a stand-alone facility, a Fort Smith I-49 bypass wouldn't be particularly viable as a toll road, since the opportunities for shunpiking across the Arkansas River (US 64/71, I-540) are there and functional.  The only way that tolls -- limited to the bridge itself rather than the entire bypass -- would be a viable concept is after I-49 is completed south to Texarkana; it's likely that a driver not intending to overnight in the Fort Smith area would expend the effort to shunpike over surface facilities but rather remain on the I-49 main line and pay the bridge toll.  Of course, revenues from this would necessarily be directed toward maintenance rather than construction of the facility -- which doesn't presently help the prospects for deployment.  Nevertheless, it's something that could be useful down the line. 

As I've said before, ARDOT could get rid of state maintained factory "driveways" and short highways that turn into a dirt road after 3 miles. Maybe then they'd have a little more money for important projects, but they've always had misplaced priorities.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on April 05, 2019, 08:31:32 PM
Last November when ARDOT said that the toll road was not going to be feasible, Bennett said they would look at doing road to road sections and get the cost down to a more manageable price to build the bridge. Also they said the environmental was updated in the cost of the toll would not pay for it. I hope that is still an option and they continue to work on engineering for that.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on April 05, 2019, 10:48:22 PM
Yeah, a toll bridge on its own wouldn't work. Too easy to shunpike unless the toll was dirt cheap. I think a toll facility on I-49 would only work as a single, uninterrupted, long distance run from I-40 all the way down to the state line. Otherwise it's going to have to be a gas tax-funded road.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on May 27, 2019, 09:31:57 PM
Years ago, the late Christopher Hitchens took a trip to North Korea and witnessed (the better word might be "initiated") an obscure yet sad scene there.  His ever-present North Korean interpreter at the end said: "Such pity".

Today, after the idea of I-49 with an Arkansas River bridge and link to Texarkana has been diddled around on, the I-540 and Midland bridges to Fort Smith are to be closed tonight, with U.S. 64 into Oklahoma closed at Garrison Ave. as well (https://5newsonline.com/).  The only other Arkansas River bridge available for FSM/Van Buren is the (EDIT: excuse me, Arkansas 59) bridge at Barling, and it may be closed in the future as well given what KFSM-TV reporters are saying...the river hasn't crested yet, and it's going to stay at that level for awhile (with more rounds of severe weather, and rain, predicted for tomorrow through Wednesday in Kansas and Oklahoma, where this is coming from).

Such pity.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on May 27, 2019, 10:20:00 PM
Years ago, the late Christopher Hitchens took a trip to North Korea and witnessed (the better word might be "initiated") an obscure yet sad scene there.  His ever-present North Korean interpreter at the end said: "Such pity".

Today, after the idea of I-49 with an Arkansas River bridge and link to Texarkana has been diddled around on, the I-540 and Midland bridges to Fort Smith are to be closed tonight, with U.S. 64 into Oklahoma closed at Garrison Ave. as well (https://5newsonline.com/).  The only other Arkansas River bridge available for FSM/Van Buren is the U.S. 59 bridge at Barling, and it may be closed in the future as well given what KFSM-TV reporters are saying...the river hasn't crested yet, and it's going to stay at that level for awhile (with more rounds of severe weather, and rain, predicted for tomorrow through Wednesday in Kansas and Oklahoma, where this is coming from).

Such pity.

AR 59 at Barling  US 59 is south of Sallisaw, OK :)

But US 271 to US 59 north to Sallisaw, then back to Van Buren on I-40 is an alternative if needed.  :spin:
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on May 27, 2019, 11:00:43 PM
Years ago, the late Christopher Hitchens took a trip to North Korea and witnessed (the better word might be "initiated") an obscure yet sad scene there.  His ever-present North Korean interpreter at the end said: "Such pity".

Today, after the idea of I-49 with an Arkansas River bridge and link to Texarkana has been diddled around on, the I-540 and Midland bridges to Fort Smith are to be closed tonight, with U.S. 64 into Oklahoma closed at Garrison Ave. as well (https://5newsonline.com/).  The only other Arkansas River bridge available for FSM/Van Buren is the U.S. 59 bridge at Barling, and it may be closed in the future as well given what KFSM-TV reporters are saying...the river hasn't crested yet, and it's going to stay at that level for awhile (with more rounds of severe weather, and rain, predicted for tomorrow through Wednesday in Kansas and Oklahoma, where this is coming from).

Such pity.

AR 59 at Barling  US 59 is south of Sallisaw, OK :)

But US 271 to US 59 north to Sallisaw, then back to Van Buren on I-40 is an alternative if needed.  :spin:

Thank you for the correction, US 71.  Rumor mill is flying that I-40 might be closed in the future as these bridges were closed with the water just under 40', and the crest is expected to be 42.5', but can't we discount that?  I-40's close to a lot of water (especially at and near Russellville) but it's not THAT close...
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on May 28, 2019, 12:06:12 PM
The Great Arkansas River Flood of 2019 just made it that much more expensive to ever cross the Arkansas River with I-49 as they'll have to re-figure how high to make the bridge, approaches, and even the roadbed through the Kibler Bottoms because of this historic flood.  2040 would be a best-case scenario at this point, and the price tag has undoubtedly just jumped significantly.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on May 30, 2019, 09:30:30 PM
On the bright side ArDOT might not have as many homes and properties near the river to buy and clear in order to build the bridge and its approaches.
 :)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on May 30, 2019, 09:39:32 PM
On the bright side ArDOT might not have as many homes and properties near the river to buy and clear in order to build the bridge and its approaches.
 :)

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on May 31, 2019, 12:53:27 AM
The Great Arkansas River Flood of 2019 just made it that much more expensive to ever cross the Arkansas River with I-49 as they'll have to re-figure how high to make the bridge, approaches, and even the roadbed through the Kibler Bottoms because of this historic flood.  2040 would be a best-case scenario at this point, and the price tag has undoubtedly just jumped significantly.
On the other hand, with the area cut in half by the bridge closings with no access, the need for an additional and secure crossing is made apparent, which could spur action.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: RoadMaster09 on May 31, 2019, 12:58:02 AM
The Great Arkansas River Flood of 2019 just made it that much more expensive to ever cross the Arkansas River with I-49 as they'll have to re-figure how high to make the bridge, approaches, and even the roadbed through the Kibler Bottoms because of this historic flood.  2040 would be a best-case scenario at this point, and the price tag has undoubtedly just jumped significantly.

I think the flood will magnify the need for the I-49 bridge. It would be a lot cheaper than retrofitting any of the existing bridges to continue through such an extreme river flood. It will need to go above the flood line from this flood though (at crest) with at least several feet to spare though, so that if a flood like this happens again at least I-49 will be an option.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on May 31, 2019, 01:02:14 AM
The Great Arkansas River Flood of 2019 just made it that much more expensive to ever cross the Arkansas River with I-49 as they'll have to re-figure how high to make the bridge, approaches, and even the roadbed through the Kibler Bottoms because of this historic flood.  2040 would be a best-case scenario at this point, and the price tag has undoubtedly just jumped significantly.
On the other hand, with the area cut in half by the bridge closings with no access, the need for an additional and secure crossing is made apparent, which could spur action.

They re-opened the 2 major closed bridges between Van Buren and Ft. Smith after 1 night as the river didn't crest as high as they anticipated and the bridges were in fine shape, so as long as the approaches don't swamp, the only major closing was the Garrison Ave. bridge into OK, only because the road a half mile into OK was flooded out.  As morbid as it is to say, there haven't been enough deaths to spur any major changes in funding or planning, and Arkansas isn't politically important enough to get much in the way of federal attention.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on May 31, 2019, 01:03:39 AM
The Great Arkansas River Flood of 2019 just made it that much more expensive to ever cross the Arkansas River with I-49 as they'll have to re-figure how high to make the bridge, approaches, and even the roadbed through the Kibler Bottoms because of this historic flood.  2040 would be a best-case scenario at this point, and the price tag has undoubtedly just jumped significantly.
On the other hand, with the area cut in half by the bridge closings with no access, the need for an additional and secure crossing is made apparent, which could spur action.

They re-opened the 2 major closed bridges between Van Buren and Ft. Smith after 1 night as the river didn't crest as high as they anticipated and the bridges were in fine shape, so as long as the approaches don't swamp, the only major closing was the Garrison Ave. bridge into OK, only because the road a half mile into OK was flooded out.  As morbid as it is to say, there (thankfully!) haven't been enough deaths to spur any major changes in funding or planning, and Arkansas isn't politically important enough to get much in the way of federal attention.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on May 31, 2019, 08:21:14 PM
The Great Arkansas River Flood of 2019 just made it that much more expensive to ever cross the Arkansas River with I-49 as they'll have to re-figure how high to make the bridge, approaches, and even the roadbed through the Kibler Bottoms because of this historic flood.  2040 would be a best-case scenario at this point, and the price tag has undoubtedly just jumped significantly.
On the other hand, with the area cut in half by the bridge closings with no access, the need for an additional and secure crossing is made apparent, which could spur action.

They re-opened the 2 major closed bridges between Van Buren and Ft. Smith after 1 night as the river didn't crest as high as they anticipated and the bridges were in fine shape, so as long as the approaches don't swamp, the only major closing was the Garrison Ave. bridge into OK, only because the road a half mile into OK was flooded out.  As morbid as it is to say, there haven't been enough deaths to spur any major changes in funding or planning, and Arkansas isn't politically important enough to get much in the way of federal attention.

I crossed the 540 bridge today. The roadway was dry, but the flood waters were very close to the pavement. I think I heard the flood waters are beginning to fall.

Luckily, my neighborhood didn't flood at all. I'm near the 540/271 junction and the flooding stopped about 4 miles north of me...THANK GOODNESS!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: KamKam on June 05, 2019, 11:24:06 PM
That's awesome! Definitely glad your area wasn't flooded!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Grzrd on June 14, 2019, 02:18:49 PM
This article (https://www.arkansasonline.com/news/2019/jun/13/road-panel-studies-wish-list-20190613/) about the proposed extension of the half-cent sales tax Shows ArDOT's "wish list" for the next twenty years:

Quote
.... Members of the Arkansas Highway Commission got their first look at the potential projects at their regular meeting Wednesday in Little Rock as they work to put together a plan of how they will spend the total federal and state highway money that will be available over the next 20 years.
Agency officials described it as a second Connecting Arkansas Program, which is the name of the $1.8 billion road construction program that is funded in large part by a temporary half-percent sales tax voters approved in 2012.
"To me, this is a very good map," said Robert Moore Jr., a member of the commission from Arkansas City. "I think we always have to keep in mind that we do not have enough money to do everything we want to do.
"More importantly, this is not going to be a regional vote to pass the half-cent sales tax. It would be a statewide vote. Of necessity, we have to make sure we're looking at the needs of everyone in Arkansas. You've done a reasonable and equitable job of doing that. There may be some tweaks on there ... but I think as a fundamental map, it's very good."....

Regarding I-49, it shows the "next step" after the Arkansas River bridge is built:

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/gallery/1615_14_06_19_2_14_52.png)

Looks like Greenwood has moved ahead of the Mena bypass.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Life in Paradise on June 14, 2019, 02:30:03 PM
Someone needs to tell the person who prepared the project map that US 67 goes between Little Rock and Pocahontas, and the project is for US 412 that is from Huntsville to Black Rock.  An ambitious list, but I'm wondering about why they are making such a fuss about US 82.  The interstates (49 and 69), once opened, will significantly increase their vehicle traffic over the current numbers, but doe you expect US 82 will as well?  I-69 would take a significant amount of traffic in Southern Arkansas that might travel on US 82 (even trucks from  Dallas would take I-20 to I-69 and go north rather than go to Texarkana and head over US 82.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: mvak36 on June 14, 2019, 04:17:55 PM
I found a more detailed map at https://www.arkansashighways.com/PowerPoints/2019/20190612%20AHC%20Meeting%20Slides.pdf (page 45)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on June 14, 2019, 06:09:08 PM
Quote from: Life in Paradise
An ambitious list, but I'm wondering about why they are making such a fuss about US 82.

My guess: US-82 has a relatively new Mississippi River bridge crossing that is up to current Interstate quality standards. Combine that with US-82 likely being the most busy East-West corridor in Southern Arkansas.

It's possible I-69 could shift some long distance traffic off of US-82. But that's only if I-69 can be built across the Mississippi River and well on into Northern Mississippi. The Great River Bridge and its giant $1 billion+ price tag (along with Mississippi not having any money to pay for its portion) creates a very serious problem for that goal. Improvements along US-82 will allow Southern Arkansas to make due best with what roads it already has, not what it wishes for in the possibly distant future.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on June 17, 2019, 01:54:23 PM
I found a more detailed map at https://www.arkansashighways.com/PowerPoints/2019/20190612%20AHC%20Meeting%20Slides.pdf (page 45)

From the looks of the projects on this listing, the I-49 segments proposed are for 2 lanes only (Super-2), so looks like the Bella Vista Bypass all over again until some federal funding comes into play.  Also, looks like the Springdale Bypass isn't fully funded by this either, just the western segment and from Lowell to AR-265, not all the way around Sonora.  I don't like the idea of the tax being permanent.  I'd rather have a sunset provision again like the first go around so that they don't get too cushy with the influx and continue expecting it.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on June 17, 2019, 11:42:38 PM
On the bright side, the temporary Super 2 configuration will at least secure the right of way and prevent jackass developers from putting new buildings in the way.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sprjus4 on June 18, 2019, 12:39:37 AM
Should just convert that new stretch of I-49 between US-71 and AK-255 into a local road, then route I-49 up the existing I-540. That $700 million could go to completing long rural stretches of I-49 instead, which are far more of a priority.

The new I-49 stretch would just become another one of those highways - built intended for an interstate, then re-routed instead and only serves local traffic.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on June 18, 2019, 03:35:22 PM
On the bright side, the temporary Super 2 configuration will at least secure the right of way and prevent jackass developers from putting new buildings in the way.

That part of Arkansas won't have issues with development encroaching for quite some time, but, yes, it'll be good to get ROW acquisition nailed ASAP.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on June 18, 2019, 04:53:44 PM
Has anyone seen any paving going on the north bound lanes of HWY 549, Bella Vista Bypass? I saw an article that the bridges were about finished.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on June 18, 2019, 04:59:03 PM
On the bright side, the temporary Super 2 configuration will at least secure the right of way and prevent jackass developers from putting new buildings in the way.

That part of Arkansas won't have issues with development encroaching for quite some time, but, yes, it'll be good to get ROW acquisition nailed ASAP.

Since it looks like much of the alignment from US 270 north to Greenwood will essentially follow the current facility, securing (ostensibly) a ROW accommodating 2+2, even though only initially constructing 2 of the 4, and maintaining limited access like any other Super-2, would go a long way (that's a big chunk of mileage!) toward getting I-49 built at all (baby steps!).  And -- IMO, if the Super-2 sits more or less atop the old US 71, it would be most appropriate just to retain the US 71 signage for the time being (avoiding the temptation to call it another "549" section) until such time as funding allows the 2nd carriageway to be constructed.  All in all, not a bad plan, considering the overall funding situation.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on June 18, 2019, 06:30:35 PM
Has anyone seen any paving going on the north bound lanes of HWY 549, Bella Vista Bypass? I saw an article that the bridges were about finished.

No paving yet, but lots of dirt work done and all but a couple of bridge decks about ready to go in the middle section.  The ends don't have any progress as of a month ago when I was there last and that's where lots of work remains to tie into existing I-49 and start progressing north of Rocky Dell Hollow Rd.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on June 18, 2019, 06:46:02 PM
Should just convert that new stretch of I-49 between US-71 and AK-255 into a local road, then route I-49 up the existing I-540. That $700 million could go to completing long rural stretches of I-49 instead, which are far more of a priority.

The new I-49 stretch would just become another one of those highways - built intended for an interstate, then re-routed instead and only serves local traffic.

I-540 would not be a very good replacement for any stretch of I-49 as it is already heavily loaded with traffic and adds almost 10 miles of distance through the heart of Ft. Smith with lots of exits.  That was one of the scenarios studied before coming up with the new alignment alternative after rejecting I-540 for those very reasons.

AR-549 currently has a northern termination at AR-22.  We have issues even building 200+ miles of freeway, but I'd love to be able to take an epic interstate journey to Alaska-255!  It'd be heavily traveled even for those destined to Idaho/Washington since there isn't much in the way of NW-SE diagonal Interstates.  Now I've dove off into fictional though.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: rte66man on June 18, 2019, 06:48:02 PM
Should just convert that new stretch of I-49 between US-71 and AK-255 into a local road, then route I-49 up the existing I-540.

No, a hundred times NO! 540 is bad enough. Put that much through traffic on it and it will become a nightmare.  There isn't nearly enough room to widen it. Besides there is no practical way to connect it with 49 going south. You would spend a hefty chunk of that $700 million just getting it all put together as you are suggesting.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on June 18, 2019, 10:24:32 PM
On the bright side, the temporary Super 2 configuration will at least secure the right of way and prevent jackass developers from putting new buildings in the way.

That part of Arkansas won't have issues with development encroaching for quite some time, but, yes, it'll be good to get ROW acquisition nailed ASAP.

Since it looks like much of the alignment from US 270 north to Greenwood will essentially follow the current facility, securing (ostensibly) a ROW accommodating 2+2, even though only initially constructing 2 of the 4, and maintaining limited access like any other Super-2, would go a long way (that's a big chunk of mileage!) toward getting I-49 built at all (baby steps!).  And -- IMO, if the Super-2 sits more or less atop the old US 71, it would be most appropriate just to retain the US 71 signage for the time being (avoiding the temptation to call it another "549" section) until such time as funding allows the 2nd carriageway to be constructed.  All in all, not a bad plan, considering the overall funding situation.

None of I-49 between Ft. Smith and Y City, which is the first section in the PDF to potentially receive funding for a Super-2 is concurrent with the current US-71 alignment.  Terrain between Y City and Acorn to the south will dictate having to be concurrent to make the S-curve around the 2 big mountains there for a few miles, but other than that, it's all new alignment throughout.  For the most part, other than slicing to the east of Mansfield, the highlighted Super-2 section is all to the west of US-71.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: roadman65 on June 18, 2019, 10:38:06 PM
I was on the I-49 completed section from US 71 to I-220 in La, I noticed at the north temporarily ending of the road a house sits across from the end of the ramp on the west side of both US 59 & 71.  Is that house going to be demolished?  Or is the alignment planned to miss it and once done, the house will be inside the interchange?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on June 19, 2019, 12:50:24 AM
On the bright side, the temporary Super 2 configuration will at least secure the right of way and prevent jackass developers from putting new buildings in the way.

That part of Arkansas won't have issues with development encroaching for quite some time, but, yes, it'll be good to get ROW acquisition nailed ASAP.

Since it looks like much of the alignment from US 270 north to Greenwood will essentially follow the current facility, securing (ostensibly) a ROW accommodating 2+2, even though only initially constructing 2 of the 4, and maintaining limited access like any other Super-2, would go a long way (that's a big chunk of mileage!) toward getting I-49 built at all (baby steps!).  And -- IMO, if the Super-2 sits more or less atop the old US 71, it would be most appropriate just to retain the US 71 signage for the time being (avoiding the temptation to call it another "549" section) until such time as funding allows the 2nd carriageway to be constructed.  All in all, not a bad plan, considering the overall funding situation.

None of I-49 between Ft. Smith and Y City, which is the first section in the PDF to potentially receive funding for a Super-2 is concurrent with the current US-71 alignment.  Terrain between Y City and Acorn to the south will dictate having to be concurrent to make the S-curve around the 2 big mountains there for a few miles, but other than that, it's all new alignment throughout.  For the most part, other than slicing to the east of Mansfield, the highlighted Super-2 section is all to the west of US-71.

Oops -- saw the blue dots on the map connected together with a thin line; looked like a proposed route atop an existing one (should have checked w/atlas -- would have seen the east Mansfield "cutoff").   That's what happens when your eyes get old!  So it's mostly new alignment; the segment using extant US 71 is a bit south and not addressed by this round of funding.  I'd still prefer that the new alignment simply use a shifted US 71 rather than the AR 549 designation, although the latter will likely prevail, partially because of the fact that it'll be several miles away from existing 71 in the Mansfield area, and partially because that's what ADOT did with the segment south of Texarkana until the portion of I-49 around the east side of that city was completed -- and it was a segment closely paralleling US 71. 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: edwaleni on June 19, 2019, 10:40:02 PM
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/48095534806_6b666db6fd_c.jpg)

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/48095537111_fb140cc363_c.jpg)

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/48095642177_6ba6ac0bca_c.jpg)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: The Ghostbuster on June 20, 2019, 04:50:27 PM
That's a lot of unfunded portions of the Four-Lane Grid System. Where is all the money going to come from to construct those unfunded corridors?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: -- US 175 -- on June 21, 2019, 04:19:15 AM
I'm not sure why the term "high-priority corridor" is used so widely (especially in unbuilt areas where I-49, I-57, and I-69 will go) there, yet the $$$$$ coming to them isn't exactly a high priority.  I guess the idea/need is the "high" part.   :-/ ;-)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: GreenLanternCorps on June 21, 2019, 07:30:06 AM
Has anyone seen any paving going on the north bound lanes of HWY 549, Bella Vista Bypass? I saw an article that the bridges were about finished.

No paving yet, but lots of dirt work done and all but a couple of bridge decks about ready to go in the middle section.  The ends don't have any progress as of a month ago when I was there last and that's where lots of work remains to tie into existing I-49 and start progressing north of Rocky Dell Hollow Rd.

I think the that the work on the connection to Missouri will probably not start until Missouri breaks ground early next year.  My uneducated guess is that the two states would coordinate their work on that stretch, because it is really a single section of roadway.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on June 21, 2019, 12:20:45 PM
The two remaining jobs for Arkansas, county road 34 to Missouri state line and Hwy. 71 interchange Connection to I49 are on the bid list for July 24th this year. Missouri has their part scheduled for spring of 2020. So Arkansas will start those 2 jobs sometime this fall.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on June 21, 2019, 09:57:23 PM
I'm not sure why the term "high-priority corridor" is used so widely (especially in unbuilt areas where I-49, I-57, and I-69 will go) there, yet the $$$$$ coming to them isn't exactly a high priority.  I guess the idea/need is the "high" part.   :-/ ;-)

High Priority Corridors are a very specific "thing" in the world of road transportation and the funding thereof.  They are Congressionally legislated, and placed in the U.S. Code as corridors of interest (often to specific representatives) and generally eligible for the maximum 80% Federal funding.  However, unlike the original chargeable Interstate mileage, there are no guaranteed funds attached; the list of corridors, now numbering 90, functions more as a "wish list" for future road projects.  Many of these have actually reached fruition; I-49 is on the books with two separate corridor listings: #1 and #72 (the southern LA section from NO to Lafayette is separately listed as #37 and #74).  With directed legislation written into the corridor description, they may, at authors' option, be designated as future Interstates -- with some, actual route numbers are attached as well.  For instance, the corridor that's the subject of this thread was originally outlined as "Corridor #1" (yes, the first to be listed); but the Interstate designation wasn't added until 2005, when the I-49 designation was appended to the Corridor #72 description (the corridors fully overlapped; the purpose of the latter was specifically to add the I-49 designation to the mix).  This also happened with I-22; while the original corridor, #10, had largely been built in MS and AL, it wasn't until 2004, when another overlapping corridor, #45, was added to the list -- and its language contained the I-22 designation.  That is an example of a HPC that actually reached full fruition, although it took over a decade before it was fully signed due to some substandard segments in MS and the lack of an eastern outlet (to I-65) north of Birmingham.  But most of the corridors reflect local or state projects and don't necessarily entail a new Interstate facility.  And there are designated future Interstates, like along HPC #54 in California, where no number has been attached, so a number would have to be finalized at a later time (likely when actual upgrade or building projects are let).  Some corridors address transit only (usually in urban areas); some are statewide "clusters" of routes (WI, MO, and GA feature these; it's a way to funnel what Federal funding becomes available into specific state arterials).

Nevertheless, it's clear the real purpose of the HPC's in general is to do an "end run" around Congressional rules prohibiting "earmarks" by individual representatives intending to direct funding to their districts and/or pet projects.  By placing these prospective projects in a single Federal "hopper", the representatives can claim to have "brought home the bacon" to their constituents without a shovelful of dirt being turned -- now, eventually inaction on these will catch up to them, particularly if they continue to tout the corridor as an accomplishment.  So there needs to eventually be some sort of follow-up or manifestation of the general corridor concept; this is what happened with 2015's HPC #84, a cross-Texas freeway concept with the I-14 designation attached.  Since a 25-mile portion of the corridor near Fort Hood, TX was already built to Interstate standards (and signed as US 190, which hosted much of the proposed corridor) -- and connected to I-35 at its eastern end, that section received signage in 2016 as I-14 -- sort of a "camel's nose through the tent door" approach -- implying that "we've got some of it done, so let's just go ahead and do the rest".  At this point, only time will tell whether that strategy will pay off.   But the Congressional folks see I-49, I-22, and the completed sections of I-69, I-73, and I-41 (among others) and are reassured that the methodology works -- so if local backers and their Congressional representatives are in agreement about a corridor, establishing a HPC with an Interstate designation attached has been the recent default method of Interstate expansion, for better or worse.   :-/
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: edwaleni on June 21, 2019, 11:19:08 PM
Just to tell you how some states view high priority road planning, here is the latest map.

Which states do you think abuse the "high priority" designation?

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/48106327423_ca7dbb496e_c.jpg)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sprjus4 on June 21, 2019, 11:41:34 PM
Which states do you think abuse the "high priority" designation?
Georgia. Just Georgia. Maybe Missouri, but Georgia. Definitely Georgia. No questions asked.

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/national_highway_system/high_priority_corridors/hiprimap_lg.jpg
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on June 22, 2019, 01:13:57 AM
Which states do you think abuse the "high priority" designation?
Georgia. Just Georgia. Maybe Missouri, but Georgia. Definitely Georgia. No questions asked.

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/national_highway_system/high_priority_corridors/hiprimap_lg.jpg

Georgia representatives essentially did what GADOT asked them to do:  encompass the entire GRIP system in one corridor definition (HPC #62).  Since that system functions as their "superhighway" connectivity system, it means that there's 80% federal contribution to that system -- which is how they got the Fall Line to its present status, as well as other projects on the very extensive state network.  They gamed the system and have been doing so since 2005's SAFETEA-LU act.  Sneaky but ultimately effective! :eyebrow:
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: roadman65 on June 22, 2019, 11:22:03 AM
https://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/48102746766/in/photostream/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/48102860212/in/photostream/

Some photos of I-49 I just took a few weeks ago.  I am surprised that Houston is a control city for I-49 South at I-30.  Even though Loop 151 links to US 59 which goes there, still seems a little odd.

Also Four State Fair is an unusual name for a road, but I assume there is ane event that takes place in Texarkana each year that is got the name four states for LA, AR, TX, and probably OK is the fourth state that is knock off state fair for all four states.

Correction:  I checked it out with Google and I am correct.  Its like the County Fair for Miller but under a more grandeur name, but its fairgrounds are located along the road that bears its name between both I-49 and I-30 and even has a rodeo when it takes place.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: -- US 175 -- on June 22, 2019, 03:05:50 PM
https://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/48102746766/in/photostream/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/48102860212/in/photostream/

Some photos of I-49 I just took a few weeks ago.  I am surprised that Houston is a control city for I-49 South at I-30.  Even though Loop 151 links to US 59 which goes there, still seems a little odd.

Also Four State Fair is an unusual name for a road, but I assume there is ane event that takes place in Texarkana each year that is got the name four states for LA, AR, TX, and probably OK is the fourth state that is knock off state fair for all four states.

Correction:  I checked it out with Google and I am correct.  Its like the County Fair for Miller but under a more grandeur name, but its fairgrounds are located along the road that bears its name between both I-49 and I-30 and even has a rodeo when it takes place.

They could have made the Four States Fair BGS just a little wider so the street name isn't chopped up on the sign like that.  Oh well, at least there is a sign.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on June 22, 2019, 04:23:40 PM
https://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/48102746766/in/photostream/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/48102860212/in/photostream/

Some photos of I-49 I just took a few weeks ago.  I am surprised that Houston is a control city for I-49 South at I-30.  Even though Loop 151 links to US 59 which goes there, still seems a little odd.

Also Four State Fair is an unusual name for a road, but I assume there is ane event that takes place in Texarkana each year that is got the name four states for LA, AR, TX, and probably OK is the fourth state that is knock off state fair for all four states.

Correction:  I checked it out with Google and I am correct.  Its like the County Fair for Miller but under a more grandeur name, but its fairgrounds are located along the road that bears its name between both I-49 and I-30 and even has a rodeo when it takes place.

From the pictures, it looks like neither the N-S section of US 59/I-369 nor Loop 151 have Interstate-standard inner shoulders; that would likely have to be corrected if and when either of those segments are fully incorporated into the Interstate system.   I for one am surprised that FHWA allowed signage for I-369 given this discrepancy -- might give credence to the notion that this I-369 segment is simply a "placeholder" for a different eventual alignment.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: edwaleni on June 22, 2019, 07:32:08 PM
Which states do you think abuse the "high priority" designation?
Georgia. Just Georgia. Maybe Missouri, but Georgia. Definitely Georgia. No questions asked.

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/national_highway_system/high_priority_corridors/hiprimap_lg.jpg

Georgia representatives essentially did what GADOT asked them to do:  encompass the entire GRIP system in one corridor definition (HPC #62).  Since that system functions as their "superhighway" connectivity system, it means that there's 80% federal contribution to that system -- which is how they got the Fall Line to its present status, as well as other projects on the very extensive state network.  They gamed the system and have been doing so since 2005's SAFETEA-LU act.  Sneaky but ultimately effective! :eyebrow:

On the flip side, only 2 states don't have a high priority designation within their boundaries.

Illinois and Hawaii.

The other oddity is the high priority route #3, which I assume is I-66. I will comment in another forum on that, but that is the only one that really sweeps across the country.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: roadman65 on June 23, 2019, 12:03:10 PM
I thought the section north of US 67 is all new and built with the intention of being full interstate?  I know south of US 67 all the way around was AR SH 549 and was not at the time it was constructed fully realized that an interstate(s) would some day come through the area.

Yes that sign is a little too much as it makes it harder to comprehend at high speeds or even the numeral 4 could have been used instead of spelling it out.

I do not know why I-349 is even signed for other reasons.  From what I saw the ramps leading to it have no shields.  Only on the highway itself and probably I-30 as I did not travel that road into its directional interchange at all.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: roadman65 on June 27, 2019, 11:43:36 AM
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/48138333791_01a28eb377_k_d.jpg)
Kentucky sign gantry in Arkansas.  I know there are a few of them outside of the Bluegrass State, but to me I find them most intriguing.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on June 29, 2019, 11:20:46 PM
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/48138333791_01a28eb377_k_d.jpg)
Kentucky sign gantry in Arkansas.  I know there are a few of them outside of the Bluegrass State, but to me I find them most intriguing.

Several have shown up along I-49
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: roadman65 on July 06, 2019, 12:55:54 AM
I read from Wikipedia that Arkansas has made into law a 75 mph maximum for speed limits on freeways.  If that is true why don't the state implement it anywhere especially on I-49 south of Texarkana?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on July 06, 2019, 02:01:36 AM
I read from Wikipedia that Arkansas has made into law a 75 mph maximum for speed limits on freeways.  If that is true why don't the state implement it anywhere especially on I-49 south of Texarkana?

There has been the ability granted to study and increase the speed limit in rural freeways, but none have happened anywhere in the state.  It was voted on this legislative session overwhelmingly to increase it to 75, but the act hasn't taken effect yet, and the areas that do go up to that will likely be fairly limited and not occur until after a traffic study.  I-30 and I-40 likely will never get that bump because of the sheer number of semis that travel them.  I could see US-67/I-57 in select areas between Jacksonville and its current freeway terminus, and probably I-49 outside of the NWA metroplex.  I haven't had reason to ever travel I-55 north of I-40, but the terrain in that part of the state would be conducive to an increase unless the semi volume is higher than I think it is.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sprjus4 on July 06, 2019, 02:22:43 AM
I-30 and I-40 likely will never get that bump because of the sheer number of semis that travel them.
Bumps up to 75 mph as soon as you get to Texas. I-40 jumps to 80 mph out west.

The speed limit should reflect the fact most people do 75 - 80 mph and the design speed of the roadway. Not the tractor trailer volume.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on July 06, 2019, 10:00:42 AM
I-30 and I-40 likely will never get that bump because of the sheer number of semis that travel them.
Bumps up to 75 mph as soon as you get to Texas. I-40 jumps to 80 mph out west.

The speed limit should reflect the fact most people do 75 - 80 mph and the design speed of the roadway. Not the tractor trailer volume.

But how many will use 80mph speed limit as justification to do 85 or 90? I believe Wyoming has strict tolerance.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sprjus4 on July 06, 2019, 01:47:22 PM
But how many will use 80mph speed limit as justification to do 85 or 90? I believe Wyoming has strict tolerance.
It gets to a point where most drivers are comfortable around 80 - 85 mph. Many don't exceed that in my experience.

If the speed limit is 70 mph, drivers do 75 - 85 mph
If the speed limit is 75 mph, drivers do 80 - 85 mph
If the speed limit is 80 mph, drivers do 80 - 85 mph

This is what I see ^

And usually when it's posted at 80 mph, it's safely designed to handle high speeds.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: rte66man on July 07, 2019, 08:28:26 PM
I-30 and I-40 likely will never get that bump because of the sheer number of semis that travel them.
Bumps up to 75 mph as soon as you get to Texas. I-40 jumps to 80 mph out west.

The speed limit should reflect the fact most people do 75 - 80 mph and the design speed of the roadway. Not the tractor trailer volume.

I would argue differently for the stretch between Little Rock and West Memphis.  The sheer volume of semis would mean a greater speed differential between the slowest and the fastest. That is what causes wrecks, not the top speed in isolation. I never enjoy driving that stretch like I do from Fort Smith to Little Rock because of that.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on July 08, 2019, 01:42:50 PM
I-30 and I-40 likely will never get that bump because of the sheer number of semis that travel them.
Bumps up to 75 mph as soon as you get to Texas. I-40 jumps to 80 mph out west.

The speed limit should reflect the fact most people do 75 - 80 mph and the design speed of the roadway. Not the tractor trailer volume.

I would argue differently for the stretch between Little Rock and West Memphis.  The sheer volume of semis would mean a greater speed differential between the slowest and the fastest. That is what causes wrecks, not the top speed in isolation. I never enjoy driving that stretch like I do from Fort Smith to Little Rock because of that.

As much as I like speeding as much (or better) than the next guy, I have to agree with this.  Governed trucks on the Interstates are a fact of life, and they decide with far too great regularity to pass each other, which seemingly often takes 4-5 miles to accomplish and plugs up the left lane until they do.  Just because something works in Texas doesn't mean that it works elsewhere.  I-40 and I-30 in Texas don't have close to the same amount of traffic that both do in Arkansas, and once you get east of Little Rock, I-40 is downright painful until you get past Memphis.  (https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/freight_analysis/nat_freight_stats/images/hi_res_jpg/nhslnghultrktraf2015.jpg)

Now, if they'd 6 lane I-40 east of Little Rock and ban semis in the leftmost lane, 75 would be groovy in my book.  I'm going to be pushing 80 in the opportunistic spots I can regardless.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on July 09, 2019, 02:47:18 PM
Wasn't there some plan to add a 3rd lane to I-40 in each direction between Little Rock and Memphis? I agree with others: that stretch of I-40 is chronically stuffed with heavy truck traffic. It's plainly visible in Google Earth. The I-55/I-40 multiplex in West Memphis is brutal, even with 3 lanes in each direction.

Also +1 about speed differential between two or more vehicles being a potentially more dangerous factor than a single vehicle driving too fast. Here in Oklahoma I can sort of relax when I'm driving on the turnpikes. When I'm driving on the regular roads around Lawton I'm far more on edge. We have LOTS of people driving 10-20 mph under the posted speed limit, along with others driving 5-10 mph over the limit. The speed differential alone causes a lot of sudden lane changes. Add inattentive driving to the mix (people on their phones while driving, eating, putting on makeup, etc). It all makes for a volatile, dangerous combination.

Quote from: sprjus4
It gets to a point where most drivers are comfortable around 80 - 85 mph. Many don't exceed that in my experience.

That's pretty much the deal in these parts. I'll see a few speed demons doing 90 mph or above on the turnpikes from time to time, and then see at least one of them up the road pulled over by OHP. 80mph is about the limit for most folks. Anyone driving a newer vehicle is bound to have in dash displays tracking things like gas mileage. I used to push it a few mph above the speed limit on the turnpikes. But with being able to see my calculated gas mileage going to hell at that speed I've backed off a bit and now usually don't go above 75 mph.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: inkyatari on July 09, 2019, 04:19:38 PM
I agree with others: that stretch of I-40 is chronically stuffed with heavy truck traffic.

Connecting 57 to Little Rock should help alleviate some of the traffic, I'd imagine.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on July 09, 2019, 04:57:09 PM
If I-57 was fully completed between Little Rock and Sikeston it would definitely pull a great deal of truck traffic off I-40.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on July 09, 2019, 05:40:17 PM
I agree with others: that stretch of I-40 is chronically stuffed with heavy truck traffic.

Connecting 57 to Little Rock should help alleviate some of the traffic, I'd imagine.

IIRC, one of the selling points of the center (Shreveport-Memphis) segment of I-69 was the potential to draw Texas-bound/originating traffic away from I-40's overused LR-Memphis section.  Now -- whether the benefits outweigh the costs (including, of course, the Great River bridge project) is certainly doubtful.  But I-57 NLR-Sikeston, which will probably see completion well before much is done on I-69, should help considerably with traffic to/from Chicago -- or even points east on I-70. 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on July 09, 2019, 10:05:30 PM
If I-57 was fully completed between Little Rock and Sikeston it would definitely pull a great deal of truck traffic off I-40.

One wonders of 57 will be completed first or 6-laning I-40 from Little Rock to West Memphis.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on July 09, 2019, 10:54:52 PM
 Hopefully they will Get this going when they pick the route and start the design of this project.                                                                         100512 Various 67 Walnut Ridge - Missouri State Line (Future I-57) Project Development
19,200
4,800
39.20 24,000 - TOTAL State 2022
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on July 09, 2019, 10:57:00 PM
If I-57 was fully completed between Little Rock and Sikeston it would definitely pull a great deal of truck traffic off I-40.

One wonders of 57 will be completed first or 6-laning I-40 from Little Rock to West Memphis.

There should not be that many new terrain miles in Arkansas/Missouri to link up I-57, but given the ridiculous amount of drama the states went through for the Bella Vista Bypass funding, I can't help but think that Arkansas would have better luck with 6 laning I-40.  There's some bridgework to be done for sure, but they are already working on a new White River bridge, and I'd almost guarantee that it'll be wide enough for 6 lanes already.  There's still a fair amount of dirtwork in the ricelands to build up for another 2 lanes, and I'm sure a fair amount of bridge/overpass work as well, but they're proposing to extend the half cent sales tax perpetually to fund both of these projects, US-412, and at least a Super-2 of I-49 where it currently isn't as well as throwing some bones to the other areas of the state to make the sale.  I don't know how I feel about perpetually extending the tax, but the Connecting Arkansas Program funded with the sunsetting tax has worked fairly well.  I can't help but think that it's mainly because it was a temporary tax that they were fairly good stewards of the money since there's no way it would be voted on for an extension otherwise, but I think another term of equal length with another sunset would be a better way to go.  Bureaucrats tend to get fat and happy when they don't have to rejustify expenses to the voters, so I don't mind voting on it every decade or so to keep them honest.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sprjus4 on July 09, 2019, 11:08:41 PM
they are already working on a new White River bridge, and I'd almost guarantee that it'll be wide enough for 6 lanes already.
That's correct.

Per Parsons (https://www.parsons.com/2017/01/parsons-to-replace-i40-white-river-bridge-in-arkansas/)...
Quote
The new bridge will have 18 spans comprising six travel lanes and will provide 321.5 ft of horizontal clearance between the two main river piers and 51.9 ft of vertical clearance above the flow line of the White River channel.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on July 09, 2019, 11:11:03 PM
I agree with others: that stretch of I-40 is chronically stuffed with heavy truck traffic.

Connecting 57 to Little Rock should help alleviate some of the traffic, I'd imagine.

I can't help but think a fairly large chunk of the traffic is Memphis bound/originating since it's such a major freight hub with FedEx, several Class I railroads, trans-modal facilities, and the big muddy river alongside it.  It just doesn't look like the traffic on the map I linked earlier fans out from there to the extent I would expect through traffic to indicate.  Literally more than half the traffic on that stretch of I-40 is trucks, and the counts are already over 31000 for every single segment between LR and Memphis when I checked AADTs, so that's a crap-ton of freight rolling through that stretch and lots of rolling roadblocks.  I'm of the mindset that both 6-laning I-40 and linking I-57 are needed at this rate, not to mention inevitable growth over the next couple of decades anyway.  I-69 is a pipe dream in our lifetimes.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: capt.ron on July 10, 2019, 11:42:22 AM
Without a doubt, I-40 from the LR metro area to West Memphis needs to be 6 laned, with the "Trucks use right 2 lanes only" enforced. Even going west on I-40 in that area is slow going at times. Going east is far worse. This should be the #1 project for Arkansas with Bella Vista #2 and the completion of I-57 #3.
Regarding I-57 (us 67), the 6 lanes needs to be extended to exit 19. Also, the concrete of US 67 (Future I-57) needs rehabilitation from around mile marker 26 to the new 6 lane section, and from mile marker 33 to 42. The road is buckling big time.
The powers at be passed a gas tax hike in the state, Now it's time for them to get to work!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: wdcrft63 on July 10, 2019, 06:37:54 PM
Without a doubt, I-40 from the LR metro area to West Memphis needs to be 6 laned, with the "Trucks use right 2 lanes only" enforced. Even going west on I-40 in that area is slow going at times. Going east is far worse. This should be the #1 project for Arkansas with Bella Vista #2 and the completion of I-57 #3.
Regarding I-57 (us 67), the 6 lanes needs to be extended to exit 19. Also, the concrete of US 67 (Future I-57) needs rehabilitation from around mile marker 26 to the new 6 lane section, and from mile marker 33 to 42. The road is buckling big time.
The powers at be passed a gas tax hike in the state, Now it's time for them to get to work!
Are you sure 6 lanes is enough? Better design for expansion to 8.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Wayward Memphian on July 10, 2019, 09:32:44 PM
Without a doubt, I-40 from the LR metro area to West Memphis needs to be 6 laned, with the "Trucks use right 2 lanes only" enforced. Even going west on I-40 in that area is slow going at times. Going east is far worse. This should be the #1 project for Arkansas with Bella Vista #2 and the completion of I-57 #3.
Regarding I-57 (us 67), the 6 lanes needs to be extended to exit 19. Also, the concrete of US 67 (Future I-57) needs rehabilitation from around mile marker 26 to the new 6 lane section, and from mile marker 33 to 42. The road is buckling big time.
The powers at be passed a gas tax hike in the state, Now it's time for them to get to work!
Are you sure 6 lanes is enough? Better design for expansion to 8.

The new bridge over the White River is designed for 6 as well as other new smaller bridges. It'll be six in about 30 years time.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: splashflash on July 26, 2019, 02:22:01 PM
The two remaining jobs for Arkansas, county road 34 to Missouri state line and Hwy. 71 interchange Connection to I49 are on the bid list for July 24th this year. Missouri has their part scheduled for spring of 2020. So Arkansas will start those 2 jobs sometime this fall.

A Missouri company will be paid $102 million to complete two sections of the Interstate 49 Bella Vista Bypass in Arkansas.  According to the Northwest Arkansas Council, Arkansas should be able to keep its promise of having the roadway open in 2022.

https://www.nwahomepage.com/news/arkansas-to-spend-over-100-million-on-bella-vista-bypass/
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sprjus4 on July 26, 2019, 03:04:09 PM
The two remaining jobs for Arkansas, county road 34 to Missouri state line and Hwy. 71 interchange Connection to I49 are on the bid list for July 24th this year. Missouri has their part scheduled for spring of 2020. So Arkansas will start those 2 jobs sometime this fall.

A Missouri company will be paid $102 million to complete two sections of the Interstate 49 Bella Vista Bypass in Arkansas.  According to the Northwest Arkansas Council, Arkansas should be able to keep its promise of having the roadway open in 2022.

https://www.nwahomepage.com/news/arkansas-to-spend-over-100-million-on-bella-vista-bypass/
Is the super-2 in Arkansas going to be dualized or is it currently being dualized now? I can't imagine it remaining 2-lanes.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on July 26, 2019, 06:36:19 PM
There is a job going on now that is adding the north bound lanes from Hwy 71 interchange to County road 34. so it will be all interstate standard on the Bella Vista bypass.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: mvak36 on July 26, 2019, 06:43:00 PM
The two remaining jobs for Arkansas, county road 34 to Missouri state line and Hwy. 71 interchange Connection to I49 are on the bid list for July 24th this year. Missouri has their part scheduled for spring of 2020. So Arkansas will start those 2 jobs sometime this fall.

A Missouri company will be paid $102 million to complete two sections of the Interstate 49 Bella Vista Bypass in Arkansas.  According to the Northwest Arkansas Council, Arkansas should be able to keep its promise of having the roadway open in 2022.

https://www.nwahomepage.com/news/arkansas-to-spend-over-100-million-on-bella-vista-bypass/

Have they already awarded the contract? This article (https://www.eagleobserver.com/news/2019/jul/25/state-opens-bids-for-i-49-connector-201-1/) says that they just opened the bids.

There is a job going on now that is adding the north bound lanes from Hwy 71 interchange to County road 34. so it will be all interstate standard on the Bella Vista bypass.

When is that job supposed to be completed?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: splashflash on July 26, 2019, 06:59:00 PM
The two remaining jobs for Arkansas, county road 34 to Missouri state line and Hwy. 71 interchange Connection to I49 are on the bid list for July 24th this year. Missouri has their part scheduled for spring of 2020. So Arkansas will start those 2 jobs sometime this fall.

A Missouri company will be paid $102 million to complete two sections of the Interstate 49 Bella Vista Bypass in Arkansas.  According to the Northwest Arkansas Council, Arkansas should be able to keep its promise of having the roadway open in 2022.

https://www.nwahomepage.com/news/arkansas-to-spend-over-100-million-on-bella-vista-bypass/

Have they already awarded the contract? This article (https://www.eagleobserver.com/news/2019/jul/25/state-opens-bids-for-i-49-connector-201-1/) says that they just opened the bids.

Construction should begin by November. The company has 90 days from the date the bids are awarded to start work.

The company said it will take about a year to finish the highway and about 700 days to do the interchange, which consists of about 2.7 miles of roadways and bridges.
There is a job going on now that is adding the north bound lanes from Hwy 71 interchange to County road 34. so it will be all interstate standard on the Bella Vista bypass.

When is that job supposed to be completed?
Again, the same article you quoted says completion will be 700 days versus 1000 for the runner-up but lower bid from a second company.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on July 26, 2019, 07:44:29 PM
The two remaining jobs for Arkansas, county road 34 to Missouri state line and Hwy. 71 interchange Connection to I49 are on the bid list for July 24th this year. Missouri has their part scheduled for spring of 2020. So Arkansas will start those 2 jobs sometime this fall.

A Missouri company will be paid $102 million to complete two sections of the Interstate 49 Bella Vista Bypass in Arkansas.  According to the Northwest Arkansas Council, Arkansas should be able to keep its promise of having the roadway open in 2022.

https://www.nwahomepage.com/news/arkansas-to-spend-over-100-million-on-bella-vista-bypass/

Have they already awarded the contract? This article (https://www.eagleobserver.com/news/2019/jul/25/state-opens-bids-for-i-49-connector-201-1/) says that they just opened the bids.

Construction should begin by November. The company has 90 days from the date the bids are awarded to start work.

The company said it will take about a year to finish the highway and about 700 days to do the interchange, which consists of about 2.7 miles of roadways and bridges.
There is a job going on now that is adding the north bound lanes from Hwy 71 interchange to County road 34. so it will be all interstate standard on the Bella Vista bypass.

When is that job supposed to be completed?
Again, the same article you quoted says completion will be 700 days versus 1000 for the runner-up but lower bid from a second company.

It's only money.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: mvak36 on July 26, 2019, 07:57:32 PM
The two remaining jobs for Arkansas, county road 34 to Missouri state line and Hwy. 71 interchange Connection to I49 are on the bid list for July 24th this year. Missouri has their part scheduled for spring of 2020. So Arkansas will start those 2 jobs sometime this fall.

A Missouri company will be paid $102 million to complete two sections of the Interstate 49 Bella Vista Bypass in Arkansas.  According to the Northwest Arkansas Council, Arkansas should be able to keep its promise of having the roadway open in 2022.

https://www.nwahomepage.com/news/arkansas-to-spend-over-100-million-on-bella-vista-bypass/

Have they already awarded the contract? This article (https://www.eagleobserver.com/news/2019/jul/25/state-opens-bids-for-i-49-connector-201-1/) says that they just opened the bids.

Construction should begin by November. The company has 90 days from the date the bids are awarded to start work.

The company said it will take about a year to finish the highway and about 700 days to do the interchange, which consists of about 2.7 miles of roadways and bridges.
There is a job going on now that is adding the north bound lanes from Hwy 71 interchange to County road 34. so it will be all interstate standard on the Bella Vista bypass.

When is that job supposed to be completed?
Again, the same article you quoted says completion will be 700 days versus 1000 for the runner-up but lower bid from a second company.
I was asking about the project where they’re paving the northbound lanes between hwy 71 and county road 34. As I understand it, that project has already been let and construction has started on it.


iPhone
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on July 26, 2019, 10:24:14 PM
Google Street View imagery along that part of AR-549 (dated April 2018) shows construction in progress. A lot of dirt work was taking place when the Google car made its pass through there. Ground must have been broken on that segment shortly after the satellite/aerial view was taken (3/13/2018). At this point the second set of lanes ought to be well along.

I'm wondering when ArDOT will start bulldozing I-49 North of County Road 34 toward the MO state line.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on July 26, 2019, 10:38:02 PM
Probably next week they will award the contracts for the 2 remaining jobs. Ardot said they would review the bids and then award so nothing is really awarded yet.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: mvak36 on July 26, 2019, 10:38:24 PM
Google Street View imagery along that part of AR-549 (dated April 2018) shows construction in progress. A lot of dirt work was taking place when the Google car made its pass through there. Ground must have been broken on that segment shortly after the satellite/aerial view was taken (3/13/2018). At this point the second set of lanes ought to be well along.

I'm wondering when ArDOT will start bulldozing I-49 North of County Road 34 toward the MO state line.

I found this article laying out what the contractor proposed: https://talkbusiness.net/2019/07/completion-of-bella-vista-bypass-in-arkansas-to-cost-102-million/
Quote
With regard to the single-point urban interchange, Emery Sapp & Sons is expected to complete the project in about two years. The bid was for $66.59 million, which is higher than the bid submitted by Kolb Grading LLC of St. Charles, Mo. Straessle explained that Emery Sapp & Sons was the apparent low bidder based on how many days it would take to complete the project. Kolb Grading submitted a bid for $60.92 million, but would complete the project in more than three years, the bid shows.

“To us, time is money,”  Straessle said. “And we may be paying in the neighborhood of $6 million more for that bid, but if they can do it in a years less time, then that’s worth it. That’s money well spent, or invested, if you will.”

Emery Sapp & Sons is expected to complete the 2.5-mile portion of the bypass to the state line in a year, according to the bid. Its bid for the project was $35.52 million. Kolb Grading submitted the second-lowest bid at $37.52 million, but would take more than a year to complete the project.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on July 26, 2019, 11:05:24 PM
That's a new article dated just 2 days ago (7/24/19). The article quoted ArDOT as saying if the bids are approved work could start less than 90 days from now. That could mean Arkansas' portion of the Belle Vista Bypass up to the MO state line could be complete in 2021.

One thing that is staggering: the $66 million cost for the SPUI interchange for I-49 and Business US-71. OTOH, that is a pretty complicated nut to crack. The existing intersection is very busy and has one heck of a convoluted roundabout intersection. It's going to be a whole lot of fun carefully orchestrating traffic movement over a 2 year construction period to replace the old interchange with a new SPUI. All the other remaining work on the project will be a cakewalk by comparison. From the article: "Emery Sapp & Sons is expected to complete the 2.5-mile portion of the bypass to the state line in a year, according to the bid."

The second set of lanes for Arkansas' part of the Belle Vista Bypass is well underway South of County Road 34. It will be relatively easy to extend the 4 lane highway up to the state line. Most of that part of the bypass may be complete in 2020. That will just leave people waiting for the I-49/Bus US-71 interchange to be finished.

Of course Missouri has to get on the stick and build its portion of the bypass.
 :-/
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on July 27, 2019, 12:30:01 AM
I just drove this road today.  The bridge south of the southern AR-72 exit already has the decking and barriers poured, and earthmovers and bulldozers were working on dirt this afternoon.  They are making good progress on the middle section.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on August 13, 2019, 09:54:34 AM
Should just convert that new stretch of I-49 between US-71 and AK-255 into a local road, then route I-49 up the existing I-540. That $700 million could go to completing long rural stretches of I-49 instead, which are far more of a priority.

The new I-49 stretch would just become another one of those highways - built intended for an interstate, then re-routed instead and only serves local traffic.

The problems with these ideas is the fact that a connector would have to be built connecting I-540 in south Fort Smith to the current I-49. US 71 cannot be upgraded to a freeway and building a connector would be very expensive. Also, the combined I-49/540 traffic would overwhelm that little 4 lane freeway and traffic would be awful through there. It's a much better idea to build a new bridge and route it from Barling to Alma.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on August 13, 2019, 10:01:27 AM
Since it looks like much of the alignment from US 270 north to Greenwood will essentially follow the current facility, securing (ostensibly) a ROW accommodating 2+2, even though only initially constructing 2 of the 4, and maintaining limited access like any other Super-2, would go a long way (that's a big chunk of mileage!) toward getting I-49 built at all (baby steps!).  And -- IMO, if the Super-2 sits more or less atop the old US 71, it would be most appropriate just to retain the US 71 signage for the time being (avoiding the temptation to call it another "549" section) until such time as funding allows the 2nd carriageway to be constructed.  All in all, not a bad plan, considering the overall funding situation.

There's no way US 71 between Greenwood and "Y" City could be upgraded to freeway status. It's just a typical Arkansas cowpath that was never relocated onto a better alignment (except for the Waldron bypass). There are hundreds and hundreds of driveways along that stretch and dozens of roads that branch off of US 71. It would be much more expensive to attempt to do this instead of just building a freeway on a new alignment.

However, the section through Foran Gap south of "Y" City near the Polk/Scott county line will be built on top of or right next to the current highway. Fourche Mountain is pretty tall so the freeway will pretty much have to run close to the current route to avoid building lengthy tunnels.

I thought I-49 was going to run a few miles west of US 71 in Scott County. Has this been changed?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on August 13, 2019, 10:33:01 AM
Since it looks like much of the alignment from US 270 north to Greenwood will essentially follow the current facility, securing (ostensibly) a ROW accommodating 2+2, even though only initially constructing 2 of the 4, and maintaining limited access like any other Super-2, would go a long way (that's a big chunk of mileage!) toward getting I-49 built at all (baby steps!).  And -- IMO, if the Super-2 sits more or less atop the old US 71, it would be most appropriate just to retain the US 71 signage for the time being (avoiding the temptation to call it another "549" section) until such time as funding allows the 2nd carriageway to be constructed.  All in all, not a bad plan, considering the overall funding situation.

There's no way US 71 between Greenwood and "Y" City could be upgraded to freeway status. It's just a typical Arkansas cowpath that was never relocated onto a better alignment (except for the Waldron bypass). There are hundreds and hundreds of driveways along that stretch and dozens of roads that branch off of US 71. It would be much more expensive to attempt to do this instead of just building a freeway on a new alignment.

However, the section through Foran Gap south of "Y" City near the Polk/Scott county line will be built on top of or right next to the current highway. Fourche Mountain is pretty tall so the freeway will pretty much have to run close to the current route to avoid building lengthy tunnels.

I thought I-49 was going to run a few miles west of US 71 in Scott County. Has this been changed?

I've seen some rough drafts of maps, but don't know if anything has changed.  Maybe once ARDOT gets serious we'll have a better idea (like when I-540 was going to continue north from I-40 in the 1960's )


Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on August 13, 2019, 07:37:06 PM
Since it looks like much of the alignment from US 270 north to Greenwood will essentially follow the current facility, securing (ostensibly) a ROW accommodating 2+2, even though only initially constructing 2 of the 4, and maintaining limited access like any other Super-2, would go a long way (that's a big chunk of mileage!) toward getting I-49 built at all (baby steps!).  And -- IMO, if the Super-2 sits more or less atop the old US 71, it would be most appropriate just to retain the US 71 signage for the time being (avoiding the temptation to call it another "549" section) until such time as funding allows the 2nd carriageway to be constructed.  All in all, not a bad plan, considering the overall funding situation.

There's no way US 71 between Greenwood and "Y" City could be upgraded to freeway status. It's just a typical Arkansas cowpath that was never relocated onto a better alignment (except for the Waldron bypass). There are hundreds and hundreds of driveways along that stretch and dozens of roads that branch off of US 71. It would be much more expensive to attempt to do this instead of just building a freeway on a new alignment.

However, the section through Foran Gap south of "Y" City near the Polk/Scott county line will be built on top of or right next to the current highway. Fourche Mountain is pretty tall so the freeway will pretty much have to run close to the current route to avoid building lengthy tunnels.

I thought I-49 was going to run a few miles west of US 71 in Scott County. Has this been changed?

Not in the most recent map I saw of the route, which is on Page 45 of 57 of the most recent publicly available presentation at https://www.arkansashighways.com/PowerPoints/2019/20190612%20AHC%20Meeting%20Slides.pdf (https://www.arkansashighways.com/PowerPoints/2019/20190612%20AHC%20Meeting%20Slides.pdf)

Still looks quite a few miles west in Scott County except for right next to the county line on the north end where Mansfield gets bypassed to the east.  Not until south of Y city does it have to closely follow 71, where the valley boxes it in around the mountain there.  Just had to drive that stretch with a 15-passenger church van and box trailer to take 2nd - 6th grade kids to church camp down at Bogg Springs.  Not nearly as fun to drive that road with that setup as my regular wheels.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on October 08, 2019, 10:13:26 PM
(Beginning of the end of) Groundbreaking ceremonies for the Bella Vista Bypass set for October 15:

The plan:

Arkansas BVP road finish: mid-2020

Seamless connector between I-49 BVP and I-49 at north Bentonville finish: 2021

Missouri-side BVP finish: 2022.

https://talkbusiness.net/2019/10/officials-to-celebrate-start-of-102-million-in-projects-for-bella-vista-bypass/?fbclid=IwAR34OwYdrOd5OQik3tHf6H6-_6YfkUaflcSDXjtZMSxWyu9KZPzD6_uMKD8
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on October 17, 2019, 07:28:33 PM
(Beginning of the end of) Groundbreaking ceremonies for the Bella Vista Bypass set for October 15:

The plan:

Arkansas BVP road finish: mid-2020

Seamless connector between I-49 BVP and I-49 at north Bentonville finish: 2021

Missouri-side BVP finish: 2022.

https://talkbusiness.net/2019/10/officials-to-celebrate-start-of-102-million-in-projects-for-bella-vista-bypass/?fbclid=IwAR34OwYdrOd5OQik3tHf6H6-_6YfkUaflcSDXjtZMSxWyu9KZPzD6_uMKD8

Actually, adding the additional two lanes between Bentonville and Bella Vista should be 2020, but finishing 49 to Missouri will likely be 2022, about the same time Missouri finishes up.    The media appears to have bollixed up some of the info, but I spoke directly to Danny Straessle, ARDOT's press spokesman
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on October 17, 2019, 09:51:21 PM
(Beginning of the end of) Groundbreaking ceremonies for the Bella Vista Bypass set for October 15:

The plan:

Arkansas BVP road finish: mid-2020

Seamless connector between I-49 BVP and I-49 at north Bentonville finish: 2021

Missouri-side BVP finish: 2022.

https://talkbusiness.net/2019/10/officials-to-celebrate-start-of-102-million-in-projects-for-bella-vista-bypass/?fbclid=IwAR34OwYdrOd5OQik3tHf6H6-_6YfkUaflcSDXjtZMSxWyu9KZPzD6_uMKD8

Actually, adding the additional two lanes between Bentonville and Bella Vista should be 2020, but finishing 49 to Missouri will likely be 2022, about the same time Missouri finishes up.    The media appears to have bollixed up some of the info, but I spoke directly to Danny Straessle, ARDOT's press spokesman

Add 9 months to a year for the inevitable weather (and assorted BS) delays, and the bypass should be completed in about 3 1/2 to 4 years.  Considering that only a couple of years back it was up in the air as to whether it would be completed within a decade or so this is reasonable progress, considering the two states involved.     
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on October 17, 2019, 10:06:48 PM
(Beginning of the end of) Groundbreaking ceremonies for the Bella Vista Bypass set for October 15:

The plan:

Arkansas BVP road finish: mid-2020

Seamless connector between I-49 BVP and I-49 at north Bentonville finish: 2021

Missouri-side BVP finish: 2022.

https://talkbusiness.net/2019/10/officials-to-celebrate-start-of-102-million-in-projects-for-bella-vista-bypass/?fbclid=IwAR34OwYdrOd5OQik3tHf6H6-_6YfkUaflcSDXjtZMSxWyu9KZPzD6_uMKD8

Actually, adding the additional two lanes between Bentonville and Bella Vista should be 2020, but finishing 49 to Missouri will likely be 2022, about the same time Missouri finishes up.    The media appears to have bollixed up some of the info, but I spoke directly to Danny Straessle, ARDOT's press spokesman

Add 9 months to a year for the inevitable weather (and assorted BS) delays, and the bypass should be completed in about 3 1/2 to 4 years.  Considering that only a couple of years back it was up in the air as to whether it would be completed within a decade or so this is reasonable progress, considering the two states involved.     

I have a little more faith in MoDOT.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: -- US 175 -- on October 18, 2019, 10:01:18 AM
(Beginning of the end of) Groundbreaking ceremonies for the Bella Vista Bypass set for October 15:

The plan:

Arkansas BVP road finish: mid-2020

Seamless connector between I-49 BVP and I-49 at north Bentonville finish: 2021

Missouri-side BVP finish: 2022.

https://talkbusiness.net/2019/10/officials-to-celebrate-start-of-102-million-in-projects-for-bella-vista-bypass/?fbclid=IwAR34OwYdrOd5OQik3tHf6H6-_6YfkUaflcSDXjtZMSxWyu9KZPzD6_uMKD8

Actually, adding the additional two lanes between Bentonville and Bella Vista should be 2020, but finishing 49 to Missouri will likely be 2022, about the same time Missouri finishes up.    The media appears to have bollixed up some of the info, but I spoke directly to Danny Straessle, ARDOT's press spokesman

Add 9 months to a year for the inevitable weather (and assorted BS) delays, and the bypass should be completed in about 3 1/2 to 4 years. 

Don't give anybody out there any ideas.  I'm sure enough of then want to fit in all the coffee/donut breaks they can, as it is.  ;-) :cool:
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on October 18, 2019, 12:45:32 PM
(Beginning of the end of) Groundbreaking ceremonies for the Bella Vista Bypass set for October 15:

The plan:

Arkansas BVP road finish: mid-2020

Seamless connector between I-49 BVP and I-49 at north Bentonville finish: 2021

Missouri-side BVP finish: 2022.

https://talkbusiness.net/2019/10/officials-to-celebrate-start-of-102-million-in-projects-for-bella-vista-bypass/?fbclid=IwAR34OwYdrOd5OQik3tHf6H6-_6YfkUaflcSDXjtZMSxWyu9KZPzD6_uMKD8

Actually, adding the additional two lanes between Bentonville and Bella Vista should be 2020, but finishing 49 to Missouri will likely be 2022, about the same time Missouri finishes up.    The media appears to have bollixed up some of the info, but I spoke directly to Danny Straessle, ARDOT's press spokesman

Add 9 months to a year for the inevitable weather (and assorted BS) delays, and the bypass should be completed in about 3 1/2 to 4 years. 

Don't give anybody out there any ideas.  I'm sure enough of then want to fit in all the coffee/donut breaks they can, as it is.  ;-) :cool:

I remember when one of the streets in my neighborhood was widened a couple years ago, there were 3 guys doing the work and 5 supervisors.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on October 18, 2019, 04:22:37 PM
(Beginning of the end of) Groundbreaking ceremonies for the Bella Vista Bypass set for October 15:

The plan:

Arkansas BVP road finish: mid-2020

Seamless connector between I-49 BVP and I-49 at north Bentonville finish: 2021

Missouri-side BVP finish: 2022.

https://talkbusiness.net/2019/10/officials-to-celebrate-start-of-102-million-in-projects-for-bella-vista-bypass/?fbclid=IwAR34OwYdrOd5OQik3tHf6H6-_6YfkUaflcSDXjtZMSxWyu9KZPzD6_uMKD8

Actually, adding the additional two lanes between Bentonville and Bella Vista should be 2020, but finishing 49 to Missouri will likely be 2022, about the same time Missouri finishes up.    The media appears to have bollixed up some of the info, but I spoke directly to Danny Straessle, ARDOT's press spokesman

Add 9 months to a year for the inevitable weather (and assorted BS) delays, and the bypass should be completed in about 3 1/2 to 4 years.  Considering that only a couple of years back it was up in the air as to whether it would be completed within a decade or so this is reasonable progress, considering the two states involved.     

I have a little more faith in MoDOT.

My skepticism/cynicism arises not so much from issues with either state's DOT, but the fact that they need to coordinate efforts with one another.  While the efforts to do so may be spelled out on paper, in the field things happen for a multitude of reasons, not necessarily attributable to the actions of one or another, but simple minor misunderstandings and miscommunication that can "snowball" into delay-causing problems.  I hope I'm being over-pessimistic, and that things will progress on or reasonably around schedule -- but heeding the axiom that states "if it can go wrong, it will go wrong", just in case!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on October 18, 2019, 08:50:05 PM

My skepticism/cynicism arises not so much from issues with either state's DOT, but the fact that they need to coordinate efforts with one another.  While the efforts to do so may be spelled out on paper, in the field things happen for a multitude of reasons, not necessarily attributable to the actions of one or another, but simple minor misunderstandings and miscommunication that can "snowball" into delay-causing problems.  I hope I'm being over-pessimistic, and that things will progress on or reasonably around schedule -- but heeding the axiom that states "if it can go wrong, it will go wrong", just in case!

At least they're not trying to blow a hole in a mountain only to have it cave in on itself ;)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on November 15, 2019, 01:33:39 PM
Granted, this is about 2 counties (around the Jasper/Newton line, I'm guessing) north of Arkansas, but a new interstate brings positive changes:

https://www.joplinglobe.com/news/updated-casey-s-announces-plan-to-build-distribution-center-in/article_3ea23f7c-06fd-11ea-b532-cbaaf8b6cc9a.html
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on November 15, 2019, 01:45:46 PM
Granted, this is about 2 counties (around the Jasper/Newton line, I'm guessing) north of Arkansas, but a new interstate brings positive changes:

https://www.joplinglobe.com/news/updated-casey-s-announces-plan-to-build-distribution-center-in/article_3ea23f7c-06fd-11ea-b532-cbaaf8b6cc9a.html

Contingent on corporate welfare tax incentives.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on November 15, 2019, 01:59:15 PM
Granted, this is about 2 counties (around the Jasper/Newton line, I'm guessing) north of Arkansas, but a new interstate brings positive changes:

https://www.joplinglobe.com/news/updated-casey-s-announces-plan-to-build-distribution-center-in/article_3ea23f7c-06fd-11ea-b532-cbaaf8b6cc9a.html

Contingent on corporate welfare tax incentives.

Indeed...occupational hazard nowadays, sadly.  That being said, this site is as close to the Interstate 44/49 junction as one can get without being foolish enough to stand on it.:  https://www.google.com/maps/search/2715+s.+prosperity+road+joplin+mo/@37.0598265,-94.4234508,17z/data=!3m1!4b1
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on November 15, 2019, 02:37:03 PM
Granted, this is about 2 counties (around the Jasper/Newton line, I'm guessing) north of Arkansas, but a new interstate brings positive changes:

https://www.joplinglobe.com/news/updated-casey-s-announces-plan-to-build-distribution-center-in/article_3ea23f7c-06fd-11ea-b532-cbaaf8b6cc9a.html

Contingent on corporate welfare tax incentives.

I'm sure the state and city have done the math and decided they'll get more than $3M in benefit and ancillary/support industries.  Can't fault either the industry for seeking tax deferment, or the state and city governments from offering as that's what's required to be competitive on both sides nowadays.  And as long as everyone does their diligence, I'm sure it works out for both sides.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on November 16, 2019, 08:02:34 PM
Granted, this is about 2 counties (around the Jasper/Newton line, I'm guessing) north of Arkansas, but a new interstate brings positive changes:

https://www.joplinglobe.com/news/updated-casey-s-announces-plan-to-build-distribution-center-in/article_3ea23f7c-06fd-11ea-b532-cbaaf8b6cc9a.html

Contingent on corporate welfare tax incentives.

I'm sure the state and city have done the math and decided they'll get more than $3M in benefit and ancillary/support industries.  Can't fault either the industry for seeking tax deferment, or the state and city governments from offering as that's what's required to be competitive on both sides nowadays.  And as long as everyone does their diligence, I'm sure it works out for both sides.

Fayetteville gave a bunch of tax breaks  for the old Mountain Inn downtown. It was to be razed and a new multi-story hotel built.  They got about half way to tearing it down when the new owner went bankrupt.

Of course, Fort Smith gave tax breaks to a local politician to build new softball fields and he took the money and did nothing.

So naturally, I'm skeptical of tax breaks/tax incentives. It seems like they are abused easily.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: 3467 on November 16, 2019, 09:13:42 PM
What is the current AADT on US 71 between 40 and 30?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on November 16, 2019, 09:37:43 PM
2018 AADT levels on US-71 between Fort Smith and Texarkana vary greatly depending on location. It's 28000 just South of the AR-549/US-71 junction South of Fort Smith. It drops to around 8300 close to Huntington. It dips to as little as 2800 going through the mountains between Waldron and Mena. AADT levels get back up over 10000 between Ashdown and Texarkana.
https://www.arkansashighways.com/System_Info_and_Research/traffic_info/2018_traffic.aspx (https://www.arkansashighways.com/System_Info_and_Research/traffic_info/2018_traffic.aspx)

Current AADT levels along US-71 are not really enough to say "NO'' to building I-49 between Fort Smith and Texarkana. It's very certain a great deal of long distance traffic moving through the region chooses other Interstate or 4-lane US highway corridors rather than taking that stretch of US-71. Much of that segment of US-71 is a 2 lane route. Forests run pretty thick along many parts of the route.

I think it's pretty likely AADT levels would jump quite a lot if I-49 was completed between Fort Smith and Texarkana. An existing 2 lane road isn't going to achieve AADT levels typical of a rural Interstate highway when the Interstate isn't built there yet.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: 3467 on November 16, 2019, 09:54:48 PM
Good points. I was just curious what the current traffic was like. I read the Highway commission report and saw a lot of unfunded projects. I also saw one picture of a road with 4 lanes and a yellow strip with a center lane that looked a little narrower than the driving lanes. Is that the Arkansas design for the non interstate 4 lanes it is building?
It's an interesting design. Does it save much money over a divided?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on November 16, 2019, 10:19:10 PM
I'm not a big fan of those 4-lane highways with a really skinny center "lane." That middle lane really isn't wide enough to properly function as a left turn lane. There is no barrier between opposing lanes of traffic. So it doesn't take much for someone having a sudden spaz moment or driving inattentively to cross that "median" into the opposing lanes. A true median or a Jersey/cable barrier would be a good idea.

To answer your question, yes, it is usually cheaper to build a single 4½ lane wide roadway on a single landscaped berm rather than build up two separated berms with their own 2-lane carriageways, shoulders, landscaping, drainage, etc.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sprjus4 on November 17, 2019, 02:33:30 AM
It's very certain a great deal of long distance traffic moving through the region chooses other Interstate or 4-lane US highway corridors rather than taking that stretch of US-71.
US-167 between Alexandria and Little Rock is mostly 4-lane divided highway, with the exception of a short stretch in southern Arkansas that is 3-lanes that has an alternating passing lane, and I-40 between Little Rock and Fort Smith is all interstate highway.

That routing is only about 10 miles slower than I-49 / US-71, and only a few minutes slower. It’s likely much truck traffic / long distance traffic utilizes US-167 / I-40 over I-49 / US-71 for these reasons.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: 3467 on November 17, 2019, 07:33:37 AM
Thanks Missouri is a fan of the 3 lane. They don't have the money for those either.I just went through Iowa after a snow and the narrow Interstate medians and those little fences don't help that much.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on November 19, 2019, 08:47:37 PM
As currently estimated, the new Bentonville Walmart headquarters (2024) and the I-49 Bella Vista Bypass (2022) are estimated to be completed within a couple of years of each other.  Don't quite know how each will affect the other, but watching the changes (and needs) thereafter will be quite interesting.:

https://www.curbed.com/2019/11/19/20970158/walmart-home-office-urbanism-corporate-hq-retail?fbclid=IwAR3kPXGW20OwzUGb0xCcIAFdr4yel1sgoWJqF-PmMkTKOJfTwEL9-tk-kC8

(https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/Fn5rUxIxaGvtP29ei-ca37sfQgU=/0x0:9000x5265/1720x0/filters:focal(0x0:9000x5265):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/19385834/view_1.jpg)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: M86 on December 18, 2019, 12:53:30 AM
Good points. I was just curious what the current traffic was like. I read the Highway commission report and saw a lot of unfunded projects. I also saw one picture of a road with 4 lanes and a yellow strip with a center lane that looked a little narrower than the driving lanes. Is that the Arkansas design for the non interstate 4 lanes it is building?
It's an interesting design. Does it save much money over a divided?
That's the infamous Arkansas expressway. ARDOT, in the past, seems to just do the bare minimum.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on December 18, 2019, 08:22:25 AM
As currently estimated, the new Bentonville Walmart headquarters (2024) and the I-49 Bella Vista Bypass (2022) are estimated to be completed within a couple of years of each other.  Don't quite know how each will affect the other, but watching the changes (and needs) thereafter will be quite interesting.:

https://www.curbed.com/2019/11/19/20970158/walmart-home-office-urbanism-corporate-hq-retail?fbclid=IwAR3kPXGW20OwzUGb0xCcIAFdr4yel1sgoWJqF-PmMkTKOJfTwEL9-tk-kC8

(https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/Fn5rUxIxaGvtP29ei-ca37sfQgU=/0x0:9000x5265/1720x0/filters:focal(0x0:9000x5265):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/19385834/view_1.jpg)

i'm sure Walmart consulted with ARDOT. Maybe even asked for a cheap piece of land.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on December 18, 2019, 08:25:03 AM
Good points. I was just curious what the current traffic was like. I read the Highway commission report and saw a lot of unfunded projects. I also saw one picture of a road with 4 lanes and a yellow strip with a center lane that looked a little narrower than the driving lanes. Is that the Arkansas design for the non interstate 4 lanes it is building?
It's an interesting design. Does it save much money over a divided?

Mena has a 4-Lane 71 that's been re-striped as a 5-Lane
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: -- US 175 -- on January 02, 2020, 01:41:57 PM
In the thread about US 71B's decommissioning in Fort Smith, was this link:

http://www.arkansashighways.com/minute_orders/2019/2019-12.pdf

It was mentioned elsewhere in that .pdf that the welcome center off US 71 in Bella Vista will revert to being a locally-run tourist/visitor center.  Meanwhile, its replacement will be built at the first SB exit south of the MO/AR state line on I-49.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on January 02, 2020, 04:27:30 PM
In the thread about US 71B's decommissioning in Fort Smith, was this link:

http://www.arkansashighways.com/minute_orders/2019/2019-12.pdf

It was mentioned elsewhere in that .pdf that the welcome center off US 71 in Bella Vista will revert to being a locally-run tourist/visitor center.  Meanwhile, its replacement will be built at the first SB exit south of the MO/AR state line on I-49.

Just south of where 549 currently ends. It was mentioned at the faux groundbreaking.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sprjus4 on January 02, 2020, 04:40:35 PM
In the thread about US 71B's decommissioning in Fort Smith, was this link:

http://www.arkansashighways.com/minute_orders/2019/2019-12.pdf

It was mentioned elsewhere in that .pdf that the welcome center off US 71 in Bella Vista will revert to being a locally-run tourist/visitor center.  Meanwhile, its replacement will be built at the first SB exit south of the MO/AR state line on I-49.
Is the welcome center planned to be a two-way welcome center located on a site off of the first exit, or a southbound only welcome center directly on the freeway?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on January 02, 2020, 04:57:06 PM
In the thread about US 71B's decommissioning in Fort Smith, was this link:

http://www.arkansashighways.com/minute_orders/2019/2019-12.pdf

It was mentioned elsewhere in that .pdf that the welcome center off US 71 in Bella Vista will revert to being a locally-run tourist/visitor center.  Meanwhile, its replacement will be built at the first SB exit south of the MO/AR state line on I-49.
Is the welcome center planned to be a two-way welcome center located on a site off of the first exit, or a southbound only welcome center directly on the freeway?

My guess is SB only. What I understood is it would be ON/along the highway.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Buck87 on January 02, 2020, 05:10:22 PM
In the thread about US 71B's decommissioning in Fort Smith, was this link:

http://www.arkansashighways.com/minute_orders/2019/2019-12.pdf

It was mentioned elsewhere in that .pdf that the welcome center off US 71 in Bella Vista will revert to being a locally-run tourist/visitor center.  Meanwhile, its replacement will be built at the first SB exit south of the MO/AR state line on I-49.
Is the welcome center planned to be a two-way welcome center located on a site off of the first exit, or a southbound only welcome center directly on the freeway?

My guess is SB only. What I understood is it would be ON/along the highway.

Is Missouri planning to build one for the NB lanes of the future new section on their side?

If so, it would make sense for Arkansas to build theirs as SB only.
If not, it would more sense to build it off the exit, so that traffic from both directions would be able to use it.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on January 02, 2020, 05:18:51 PM
In the thread about US 71B's decommissioning in Fort Smith, was this link:

http://www.arkansashighways.com/minute_orders/2019/2019-12.pdf

It was mentioned elsewhere in that .pdf that the welcome center off US 71 in Bella Vista will revert to being a locally-run tourist/visitor center.  Meanwhile, its replacement will be built at the first SB exit south of the MO/AR state line on I-49.
Is the welcome center planned to be a two-way welcome center located on a site off of the first exit, or a southbound only welcome center directly on the freeway?

My guess is SB only. What I understood is it would be ON/along the highway.

Is Missouri planning to build one for the NB lanes of the future new section on their side?

If so, it would make sense for Arkansas to build theirs as SB only.
If not, it would more sense to build it off the exit, so that traffic from both directions would be able to use it.

I have not heard, but there is a "satellite" info center in Pineville, though you have to drive into town to get to it.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Tomahawkin on January 07, 2020, 06:47:22 PM
Is there anything going on with 49 south of the Ft Smith area? IMO, it seems that this area is reluctant/against any interstate development in that area! That hinders future revenue. Having lived in NWA could not image what NWA would be like without 540/49 running through it...
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on January 07, 2020, 06:59:25 PM
Is there anything going on with 49 south of the Ft Smith area? IMO, it seems that this area is reluctant/against any interstate development in that area! That hinders future revenue. Having lived in NWA could not image what NWA would be like without 540/49 running through it...

From what I understand, the foremost problem with i-49 between Texarkana and Fort Smith is, simply, finding the funds to build the facility -- particularly through the more mountainous sections north of Mena.   Haven't heard of any significant organized local opposition to the upgrade -- although when the "overlay" portion around the US 270 junction is built, there will likely be a lot of grousing around road closures/delays along US 71 as construction commences.   Not a lot of problems in that regard with the NWA portion in the '90's, as the portion through the more densely populated areas was intact when even I-540 was commissioned, and the portion from Alma to Fayetteville was new-terrain construction requiring no US 71 traffic interruptions.  Unfortunately, the Ouachita mountain terrain isn't favorable to that sort of configuration, so some interim navigational difficulties are to be anticipated.  As the old saying goes, sometimes you gotta break some eggs..................  :-/
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Tomahawkin on January 07, 2020, 08:02:11 PM
That makes sense. What I dont get is that interchange 22 through Alabama and Mississippi was built in the same terrain and through one of the poorest areas in the country, per capita. 49, IMO would seem to be a bigger priority as a Canada to New Orleans corridor? I dont see that 200 plus mile section from FT Smith to Texarkana completed until 2035 or 2040??? Or maybe I'm exaggerating???
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Tomahawkin on January 07, 2020, 08:04:09 PM
And they could always build IH 49 in segments like IH 22 in Alabama was built during the 90s til 2010???
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on January 07, 2020, 08:23:23 PM
And they could always build IH 49 in segments like IH 22 in Alabama was built during the 90s til 2010???

That's what they did with the US 71 Freeway (now I-49) north of Fayetteville.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Tomahawkin on January 07, 2020, 10:42:52 PM
Yep I forgot about that. Wasnt US 71 in Fayetteville considered the bypass from the Fayetteville airport to Springdale long 30 years ago?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on January 08, 2020, 12:53:44 AM
From what I've heard to date, a bypass of Mena may well be the first segment to be developed, with the Red River-De Queen segment not too far behind.  Since the latter will likely feature a substantial amount of new-terrain routing west of present US 59/71, it won't incur the traffic problems that Mena-Waldron will likely see (although I'm led to believe that the Little River crossing will be a direct overlay of the bridge/causeway along the present facility).  But exactly when the latter segment will get underway is probably dependent upon TxDOT's schedule for their brief portion of I-49, particularly as regards the Red River bridge.   
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on January 08, 2020, 08:53:46 AM
Yep I forgot about that. Wasnt US 71 in Fayetteville considered the bypass from the Fayetteville airport to Springdale long 30 years ago?

The original bypass was built around 1970 between the airport and the NWA Mall.  Around 1980, construction was started on the 71 freeway between Fayetteville and Bentonville.  The first terminus was US 412, followed by 264 at Lowell,  71 at Rogers and 62 at Bentonville before it was finished to Bella Vista.

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on January 18, 2020, 01:41:35 PM
Quote
Missouri sweetening the pot for I-49 Bella Vista Bypass work

SPRINGDALE -- Missouri highway officials are putting another $7 million in the pot to build their portion of the Interstate 49 Bella Vista Bypass from Pineville to the state line.

The Northwest Arkansas Regional Planning Commission was asked to amend planning documents to reflect the additional money for the project, which is also known as the I-49 Missouri/Arkansas Connector. The project is within regional planning's jurisdiction. A committee Thursday recommended approval of the amendment.

Tim Conklin with regional planning said the change was needed to cover anticipated cost increases for the project, which sat dormant for several years. Missouri plans to open bids on the project in March, he said.

https://www.nwaonline.com/news/2020/jan/18/missouri-sweetening-the-pot-for-i-49-be/

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on January 18, 2020, 06:22:31 PM
Fort Smith/River Valley is not against I-49. It would be great for Chaffee Crossing.

The newest Highway Commissioner is from Lavaca, surely a big part of his selection was to keep the emphasis on I-49
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on January 18, 2020, 06:29:08 PM
Fort Smith/River Valley is not against I-49. It would be great for Chaffee Crossing.

The newest Highway Commissioner is from Lavaca, surely a big part of his selection was to keep the emphasis on I-49

Very possible, but Philip Taldo is also from NWA.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on January 18, 2020, 10:26:01 PM
It'll be interesting to see who the next governor is. NWA has enjoyed great newfound access in LR under Asa
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on January 22, 2020, 08:55:35 PM
There appears to be a delay (SURPRISE! --NOT!)

https://talkbusiness.net/2020/01/bella-vista-bypass-project-cost-rises-by-7-million-fayetteville-interchange-delayed/
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: edwaleni on January 24, 2020, 12:28:35 PM
There appears to be a delay (SURPRISE! --NOT!)

https://talkbusiness.net/2020/01/bella-vista-bypass-project-cost-rises-by-7-million-fayetteville-interchange-delayed/

No delay in I-49 Bella Vista Bypass.

The delay is with a set of ramp upgrades in Fayetteville.

The $7 million bump by MoDOT is because when they benchmarked the project against recent like builds nationally, they had underestimated certain  material costs. By bumping up the total allotted, this will ensure the bids don't exceed the budget.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on March 25, 2020, 08:34:54 PM
Drove the Bella Vista bypass twice today and noted a huge change from a month ago when I'd last went through there.  Much of the rock blasting is completed and it sure does look different coming down the hill where I-49 terminates currently northbound.  The construction sign says that it is estimated to be completed Oct. 2021, so here's hoping Missouri can get with the program.

I went to the Springdale 1/2 cent continuation proposal meeting that ARDOT was canvassing the state promoting (before COVID-19 shut them down) and they stated that the maps with the 2nd Connecting Arkansas Program that have a number of long-desired new terrain Interstates (at least 2 lanes of them) and 4-laning upgrades of US highways were not a 10 year horizon, but rather a 20 year horizon.  So it sounds like there's going to have to be a huge gift from Uncle Sam before anything substantive comes about in our lifetimes.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on March 25, 2020, 08:40:49 PM
Drove the Bella Vista bypass twice today and noted a huge change from a month ago when I'd last went through there.  Much of the rock blasting is completed and it sure does look different coming down the hill where I-49 terminates currently northbound.  The construction sign says that it is estimated to be completed Oct. 2021, so here's hoping Missouri can get with the program.

I went to the Springdale 1/2 cent continuation proposal meeting that ARDOT was canvassing the state promoting (before COVID-19 shut them down) and they stated that the maps with the 2nd Connecting Arkansas Program that have a number of long-desired new terrain Interstates (at least 2 lanes of them) and 4-laning upgrades of US highways were not a 10 year horizon, but rather a 20 year horizon.  So it sounds like there's going to have to be a huge gift from Uncle Sam before anything substantive comes about in our lifetimes.

MoDOT is aiming for mid-2022 to have their section of I-49 done. All that's left is to formally award the bid before construction begins.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: mvak36 on March 27, 2020, 02:32:41 AM
Drove the Bella Vista bypass twice today and noted a huge change from a month ago when I'd last went through there.  Much of the rock blasting is completed and it sure does look different coming down the hill where I-49 terminates currently northbound.  The construction sign says that it is estimated to be completed Oct. 2021, so here's hoping Missouri can get with the program.

I went to the Springdale 1/2 cent continuation proposal meeting that ARDOT was canvassing the state promoting (before COVID-19 shut them down) and they stated that the maps with the 2nd Connecting Arkansas Program that have a number of long-desired new terrain Interstates (at least 2 lanes of them) and 4-laning upgrades of US highways were not a 10 year horizon, but rather a 20 year horizon.  So it sounds like there's going to have to be a huge gift from Uncle Sam before anything substantive comes about in our lifetimes.

MoDOT is aiming for mid-2022 to have their section of I-49 done. All that's left is to formally award the bid before construction begins.
I think they’re planning on finishing the Missouri part by the end of next year as well. That might change if there are any construction delays due to this Covid19.


iPhone
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: AcE_Wolf_287 on March 29, 2020, 07:16:46 PM
I've heard that Progress in Arkansas is going to move Slowly because of Arkansas having Low funds, and that they have to make 2 new Bridges for Interstate, I-69/US 278 and I-49
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on March 29, 2020, 07:54:45 PM
I've heard that Progress in Arkansas is going to move Slowly because of Arkansas having Low funds, and that they have to make 2 new Bridges for Interstate, I-69/US 278 and I-49

I-49 south of Alma doesn't seem to be as high a priority as the US 67/I-57 upgrade.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: edwaleni on March 29, 2020, 08:31:59 PM
LITTLE ROCK, Ark.  – Gov. Asa Hutchinson’s priorities for the 2020 election season will focus on winning voter approval for a proposed constitutional amendment that would make Arkansas’ 0.5% sales tax for highways and roads permanent.

At Tuesday’s meeting of the Arkansas Good Roads Foundation, Hutchinson said the proposal is vital to the state’s future. Arkansas officials project the measure would raise about $205 million a year for highways.

Voters approved the tax in 2012 but it is set to expire after 10 years, the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette reported.

A Gilmore Strategy Group poll in October found 62% of 800 likely voters said they’re going to vote for Issue 1 or are likely to vote in favor of it, according to Hutchinson. The poll also showed 68.6% of people are more likely to vote for the amendment “if they are assured that it was going to be spent and invested in all four corners of the state.”

About 33% of the respondents indicated their major concern about the quality of roads is potholes damaging vehicles, while 18% are more concerned with congestion and delays, Hutchinson said.

A committee dubbed “Vote for Roads. Vote for Issue 1”  will promote the proposed amendment ahead of next year’s election.

Hutchinson said he’s delighted that highway commissioners and the Transportation Department will be hosting 12 public hearings across the state. The meetings will begin in Monticello on Jan. 21 and end April 2 in El Dorado, according to the agency.

Hutchinson said the meetings are critical because the public wants to know how the money will be used.

“They want to make sure that the divvying up and the allocation of those funds was not done simply behind a closed door, but that they had input into it, that they were able to express their views on it, they were able to see it on a map and to comment on it and help develop it and shape it,”  the governor said.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on March 29, 2020, 08:44:56 PM
LITTLE ROCK, Ark.  – Gov. Asa Hutchinson’s priorities for the 2020 election season will focus on winning voter approval for a proposed constitutional amendment that would make Arkansas’ 0.5% sales tax for highways and roads permanent.

At Tuesday’s meeting of the Arkansas Good Roads Foundation, Hutchinson said the proposal is vital to the state’s future. Arkansas officials project the measure would raise about $205 million a year for highways.

Voters approved the tax in 2012 but it is set to expire after 10 years, the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette reported.

A Gilmore Strategy Group poll in October found 62% of 800 likely voters said they’re going to vote for Issue 1 or are likely to vote in favor of it, according to Hutchinson. The poll also showed 68.6% of people are more likely to vote for the amendment “if they are assured that it was going to be spent and invested in all four corners of the state.”

About 33% of the respondents indicated their major concern about the quality of roads is potholes damaging vehicles, while 18% are more concerned with congestion and delays, Hutchinson said.

A committee dubbed “Vote for Roads. Vote for Issue 1”  will promote the proposed amendment ahead of next year’s election.

Hutchinson said he’s delighted that highway commissioners and the Transportation Department will be hosting 12 public hearings across the state. The meetings will begin in Monticello on Jan. 21 and end April 2 in El Dorado, according to the agency.

Hutchinson said the meetings are critical because the public wants to know how the money will be used.

“They want to make sure that the divvying up and the allocation of those funds was not done simply behind a closed door, but that they had input into it, that they were able to express their views on it, they were able to see it on a map and to comment on it and help develop it and shape it,”  the governor said.

The hearings are currently on hold due to the Corona virus outbreak.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bwana39 on March 29, 2020, 10:45:11 PM
I've heard that Progress in Arkansas is going to move Slowly because of Arkansas having Low funds, and that they have to make 2 new Bridges for Interstate, I-69/US 278 and I-49

I don't really think I-49 is going to be held up for I-69. The I-69 bridge is decades in the future if ever. Common sense is to take I-69 from south of US 82 (west of ElDorado) to the current US278 (US 82 Greenville) bridge, extend the future I-530 (US 425 / 278 or US-65) from Pine Bluff to Lake Village. A few miles more of freeway, but no half billion+dollar  bridge.

Here is what it takes to get the Dean bridge built.

1) I-69 in Louisiana.
2) I-69 in Arkansas.
3) I-530 Finished to Monticello AR
4) Missippi Coming up with money for their part of the bridge (which they may want in a different location or not at all.)
5) Arkansas having funding to build the bridge.

I-69 in LA doesn't start until AFTER I-69 is complete past Nacogdoches in Texas.  That is just the component from US-59 to US-71. The part north of I-20 may be 30 years in the future.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bwana39 on March 31, 2020, 02:38:59 PM
Quote from: sparker on Today at 06:51:14 AM
Quote from: sprjus4 on March 30, 2020, 11:38:26 PM
Quote from: sparker on March 30, 2020, 10:03:35 PM

But without that bridge project, completion of the remainder south to Texarkana is, in the larger sense, a bit pointless.
Can't say I would necessarily agree. I-540 could act as a "temporary" routing if the rest of I-49 is built south of Fort Smith while that bridge is still being worked out.

That's all this corridor needs -- to have US 71 between I-49 and I-540 become the western version of Breezewood!  In all likelihood, though, the bridge will be done well before most of the route's remainder south to Texarkana is even let.  The high level of regional need effectively renders that crossing it's own SIU independent of the full I-49 corridor -- even if it is tolled.


I say just build it as a toll bridge and call it a day.

******************************************************************

Building I-49 through with the bridge would be more like Breezewood than without it. (From looking at a map.)
As to a Toll bridge, I am not sure that getting around a fairly small town for minimally shorter distance and pay a toll is not going to play. The tolls will be minimal outside of peak (rush hour) traffic and Home UA football games.

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on March 31, 2020, 02:51:41 PM

I say just build it as a toll bridge and call it a day.

Currently, toll roads/bridges are not allowed on public highways in Arkansas.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: abqtraveler on March 31, 2020, 08:00:05 PM

I say just build it as a toll bridge and call it a day.

Currently, toll roads/bridges are not allowed on public highways in Arkansas.

ArDOT did a feasibility study about financing the Arkansas River brige with tolls. That study concluded that tolling the bridge would come nowhere near close to covering the cost of the bridge's construction. And so the main sticking point holding up construction that would link the orphaned section of I-49 to I-40 and the rest of I-49 is how to pay for it. No one can seem to figure that out.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on March 31, 2020, 11:41:17 PM
Quote from: bwana39
I don't really think I-49 is going to be held up for I-69. The I-69 bridge is decades in the future if ever. Common sense is to take I-69 from south of US 82 (west of ElDorado) to the current US278 (US 82 Greenville) bridge, extend the future I-530 (US 425 / 278 or US-65) from Pine Bluff to Lake Village. A few miles more of freeway, but no half billion+dollar  bridge.

The currently proposed I-69 path between Shreveport and Memphis sucks out loud bad enough for being a really crooked route, not in the slightest bit direct at all. But pulling the Mississippi River crossing farther South to US-82 would make I-69 even more of a joke not worth building out at all ever.

No one except for local regional traffic will ever use that route. Everyone else will stick to using I-30 and I-40 and just avoid that I-69 jerky, dog-leg ridden waste of time.

Interstate highways need to be built on paths direct as possible to save as much time and mileage as possible. Otherwise there is zero point in building them at all. One Interstate route should never be a disjointed Frankstein's monster of local routes stitched together.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sprjus4 on March 31, 2020, 11:50:24 PM
The currently proposed I-69 path between Shreveport and Memphis sucks out loud bad enough for being a really crooked route, not in the slightest bit direct at all. But pulling the Mississippi River crossing farther South to US-82 would make I-69 even more of a joke not worth building out at all ever.

No one except for local regional traffic will ever use that route. Everyone else will stick to using I-30 and I-40 and just avoid that I-69 jerky, dog-leg ridden waste of time.

Interstate highways need to be built on paths direct as possible to save as much time and mileage as possible. Otherwise there is zero point in building them at all. One Interstate route should never be a disjointed Frankstein's monster of local routes stitched together.
:paranoid:

You just keep ignoring the actual numbers, don't ya?

Quote
And then there's the matter of the I-69 route being so crooked. How much time/mileage will it save versus using the I-30/40 combo coming up from I-369? I really don't see the value of I-69 between the I-369 split in Texas all the way up to Indianapolis as being a primary highway to move traffic between Mexico and Canada.
Curious as well, I decided to draw the proposed routing as accurately as possible based on state maps and compared the distance / time of Future I-69 and I-269 to Future I-369, I-30, and I-40, for a routing between Tenaha and I-40 east of Memphis at I-269.

Tenaha -> Memphis
I-369 -> I-30 -> I-40 = 6 hours, 4 minutes; 426 miles
I-69 -> I-269 = 6 hours, 8 minutes; 430 miles

So ultimately, both routes would have about the same mileage and travel times, with I-69 also avoiding the Little Rock, Memphis, and Texarkana metros. The traffic load would additionally be split. I-69 would serve southeastern Texas traffic whereas I-40 and I-30 would serve Oklahoma and northern Texas traffic. If I-69 could reasonably get completed through Louisiana, Arkansas, and Mississippi, it indeed would take traffic off of I-40 and I-30 and relieve congestion, especially those high truck percentages, over 50% of the traffic volumes.

Additionally, Google's time calculations tend to assume a slightly higher speed than the actual speed limit, so I would have to go through each segment of I-40 and I-30, notably in the urban areas, and get an accurate time calculation based on the posted speed limit. The I-30 and I-40 time estimate could be ~5 minutes off. I assumed a consistent 70 mph speed limit on the I-69 route, whereas Google may have assumed a consistent 75 mph driving speed on I-30 / I-40.

It's not a crooked route... It's just as direct as I-30 / I-40, and will take southern Texas bound traffic off of the existing I-30 / I-40 corridor, leaving it open to northern Texas, Oklahoma, and beyond traffic, reducing congestion significantly if built to its full design.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on April 01, 2020, 12:02:57 AM
I-69 in Arkansas, as currently proposed, is indeed a crooked route. And shifting the Mississippi crossing farther South to US-82 will make it even more stupidly crooked. It will make I-69 in Arkansas a mostly East-West route and the path in Mississippi very much a North-South route. The path would be a stupid, giant backwards L-shape route. Just worthless.

The I-30/I-40 combo is a long established route with lots of services along its exits. I-69 doesn't have any guarantees of attracting similar amounts of development along its path, especially if it runs an even more out of the way angle to re-purpose the US-82 crossing. Most of the traffic will likely keep using I-30 and I-40.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sprjus4 on April 01, 2020, 12:06:45 AM
I-69 in Arkansas, as currently proposed, is indeed a crooked route. And shifting the Mississippi crossing farther South to US-82 will make it even more stupidly crooked. It will make I-69 in Arkansas a mostly East-West route and the path in Mississippi very much a North-South route. The path would be a stupid, giant backwards L-shape route. Just worthless.

The I-30/I-40 combo is a long established route with lots of services along its exits. I-69 doesn't have any guarantees of attracting similar amounts of development along its path, especially if it runs an even more out of the way angle to re-purpose the US-82 crossing. Most of the traffic will likely keep using I-30 and I-40.
There's no official proposal to re-route it to US-82.

For the existing proposed route, it's just as long as the current I-30 / I-40 routing. Look above.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: AcE_Wolf_287 on April 01, 2020, 12:35:43 AM
I-69 in Arkansas, as currently proposed, is indeed a crooked route. And shifting the Mississippi crossing farther South to US-82 will make it even more stupidly crooked. It will make I-69 in Arkansas a mostly East-West route and the path in Mississippi very much a North-South route. The path would be a stupid, giant backwards L-shape route. Just worthless.

The I-30/I-40 combo is a long established route with lots of services along its exits. I-69 doesn't have any guarantees of attracting similar amounts of development along its path, especially if it runs an even more out of the way angle to re-purpose the US-82 crossing. Most of the traffic will likely keep using I-30 and I-40.
There's no official proposal to re-route it to US-82.

For the existing proposed route, it's just as long as the current I-30 / I-40 routing. Look above.

yeah i Haven't seen anything of US 82 being the Bridge of I-69, But i do believe they might have to due to low funding for both Arkansas and Mississippi
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on April 01, 2020, 09:38:36 AM
Quote from: bwana39
I don't really think I-49 is going to be held up for I-69. The I-69 bridge is decades in the future if ever. Common sense is to take I-69 from south of US 82 (west of ElDorado) to the current US278 (US 82 Greenville) bridge, extend the future I-530 (US 425 / 278 or US-65) from Pine Bluff to Lake Village. A few miles more of freeway, but no half billion+dollar  bridge.

The currently proposed I-69 path between Shreveport and Memphis sucks out loud bad enough for being a really crooked route, not in the slightest bit direct at all. But pulling the Mississippi River crossing farther South to US-82 would make I-69 even more of a joke not worth building out at all ever.

No one except for local regional traffic will ever use that route. Everyone else will stick to using I-30 and I-40 and just avoid that I-69 jerky, dog-leg ridden waste of time.

Interstate highways need to be built on paths direct as possible to save as much time and mileage as possible. Otherwise there is zero point in building them at all. One Interstate route should never be a disjointed Frankstein's monster of local routes stitched together.

There's just as big a dogleg up I-369 off mainline I-69 as is currently proposed up to I-30/I-40 and back to the I-69 junction east of Memphis as I-69 itself would have in SE Arkansas.  It's a question of whether you want your dogleg to put you into a congested series of cities, at least 2 of which (LR and Memphis/West Memphis) have significant slowdowns at rush hours and would continue to even with additional lanes on I-30/I-40.  When I travel, I like to choose routes that don't feed me directly into large metroplexes if there are options with less than a 15 minute impact, because I hate to drive slowly and travel times through metros vary widely from rush hour (which can add more than the 15 minutes a reasonable alternate route might add) to middle of the night.  As far as services go, there's no way that I-69 in SE Arkansas wouldn't have at least a truck stop or two around Monticello within 2 years of it being built out.  They can slap those things up in amazingly quick fashion and capitalism has a wonderful way of fulfilling under-served demand.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on April 01, 2020, 04:03:08 PM
I-69 in Arkansas, as currently proposed, is indeed a crooked route. And shifting the Mississippi crossing farther South to US-82 will make it even more stupidly crooked. It will make I-69 in Arkansas a mostly East-West route and the path in Mississippi very much a North-South route. The path would be a stupid, giant backwards L-shape route. Just worthless.

The I-30/I-40 combo is a long established route with lots of services along its exits. I-69 doesn't have any guarantees of attracting similar amounts of development along its path, especially if it runs an even more out of the way angle to re-purpose the US-82 crossing. Most of the traffic will likely keep using I-30 and I-40.
There's no official proposal to re-route it to US-82.

For the existing proposed route, it's just as long as the current I-30 / I-40 routing. Look above.

yeah i Haven't seen anything of US 82 being the Bridge of I-69, But i do believe they might have to due to low funding for both Arkansas and Mississippi

As far as funding goes, while AR is certainly not an overly wealthy state, it does have a tax base that is considerably greater than neighboring MS due to several corporate HQ (including one major "big box" retailer whose name needs not be mentioned!) located within its borders.  Unfortunately for MS, most of its businesses don't, in the aggregate, provide the revenues needed for consistent public works progress; what's in the state are branches or subsidiaries, like the Tupelo Toyota plant;  while a major regional employer, even its USA corporate HQ, where most of the corporate revenue taxes are paid, is elsewhere.   And what local/state taxes are paid are certainly insufficient to support statwide expenditures. 

But while the US 82 bridge is Interstate-standard, it's not part of the corridor and has never been considered as an alternate routing (although it certainly will see some interim service albeit a bit out of the way).   
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: edwaleni on April 01, 2020, 05:34:00 PM

I say just build it as a toll bridge and call it a day.

Currently, toll roads/bridges are not allowed on public highways in Arkansas.

ArDOT did a feasibility study about financing the Arkansas River brige with tolls. That study concluded that tolling the bridge would come nowhere near close to covering the cost of the bridge's construction. And so the main sticking point holding up construction that would link the orphaned section of I-49 to I-40 and the rest of I-49 is how to pay for it. No one can seem to figure that out.

There is one problem right there. Expecting a toll to cover the *entire* cost of the bridge. Why not consider a toll as a cost reduction exercise? Price the tolls only to cover the gap between what ArDOT can come up with and the total cost of the bridge.

So if ArDOT can only come up with say $600 million, and the gap is $300 million, only sell toll revenue bonds on the $300 million. Toll the bridge based on a 30 year payback period for $300 million, not the $900 million to build it.

The tolls are less, the payback is less, the risk is more distributed. Seems like a win-win to me.

Per the FHA.

The Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21; P.L. 112-141), enacted in
2012, reinforced the encouragement of tolls on HOV lanes and congestion pricing. It allowed new
Interstate system routes or route extensions to be built as toll roads,
but continued to block tolling
of most existing Interstate Highway lane capacity. MAP-21 retained two pilot programs, one
encouraging the use of pricing to control congestion and another allowing Interstate route
segments in three states to be converted to tolling as part of their reconstruction.

The Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act (FAST Act; P.L. 114-94), enacted in December
2015, clarified that public authorities generally, as opposed to solely state agencies, may impose
tolls on single-occupant vehicles using HOV lanes. It modified the TEA-21 pilot program
allowing existing Interstate Highway segments in three states to be subject to tolls to finance
reconstruction by providing that federal approval lapses if the selected states have not started
construction within three years of approval.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on April 01, 2020, 07:53:41 PM
I believe it is state law, which isn't going to change
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sprjus4 on April 01, 2020, 08:57:19 PM
I believe it is state law, which isn't going to change
State law can be changed.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on April 01, 2020, 09:20:51 PM
I believe it is state law, which isn't going to change
State law can be changed.

Not overnight.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sprjus4 on April 01, 2020, 09:31:42 PM
I believe it is state law, which isn't going to change
State law can be changed.

Not overnight.
You can't build a toll bridge overnight. Not an effective one at least.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas / Tolling the Ft Smith Arkansas River Bridge
Post by: bwana39 on April 02, 2020, 10:04:15 AM
Toll roads being against the Arkansas Constitution is the first issue.  It is not very likely to change. It will take a constitutional amendment.

The second and just a pertinant detail is that this bridge is not a good candidate for tolls. The mileage saved is less than 10 miles and the traffic through Fort Smith outside a couple of one hour times morning and evening is not that significant.   Unless the tolls were insignificant, it gets skipped. People would follow a free route.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on April 02, 2020, 11:28:12 AM
You obviously aren't very familiar with how Arkansas works
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bwana39 on April 02, 2020, 12:14:58 PM
You obviously aren't very familiar with how Arkansas works

I think I am.

1) Arkansans will not pass a constitutional amendment to levy tolls.
2) If by some miracle the tolls passed a vote, Arkansans would skip the tolls and go the free route.
3) Frankly, I believe this bridge is going to be built sooner than later as a free bridge.

Arkansas habitually builds a road to the point that not building or building it somewhere else is out of the question.  They have done this.

One other point. Prior to a decade ago, EVERYTHING in Arkansas was about Pulaski County and metro Little Rock.  Northwest Arkansas has gained significant clout and if nothing else, the economics of NWA deserves it.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on April 02, 2020, 12:23:22 PM
Sorry, that was directed at sprjus4. I agree with you wholeheartedly
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas / Tolling the Ft Smith Arkansas River Bridge
Post by: edwaleni on April 02, 2020, 01:01:30 PM
Toll roads being against the Arkansas Constitution is the first issue.  It is not very likely to change. It will take a constitutional amendment.

The second and just a pertinant detail is that this bridge is not a good candidate for tolls. The mileage saved is less than 10 miles and the traffic through Fort Smith outside a couple of one hour times morning and evening is not that significant.   Unless the tolls were insignificant, it gets skipped. People would follow a free route.

Again, why I would make the amount financed by tolls very small, but the law is the law.

And for the local express bypass I usually suggest wouldn't work here, because the river crossing has little or no local population nearby.

So the bridge will be free, built someday in the future.



Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas / Tolling the Ft Smith Arkansas River Bridge
Post by: sprjus4 on April 02, 2020, 01:49:49 PM
The second and just a pertinant detail is that this bridge is not a good candidate for tolls. The mileage saved is less than 10 miles and the traffic through Fort Smith outside a couple of one hour times morning and evening is not that significant.   Unless the tolls were insignificant, it gets skipped. People would follow a free route.
Thru traffic is minimal through the area because there's no good access. Thru traffic currently bound to the north can follow other 4-lane routes to meet I-40 at Little Rock then follow it to I-49. The completion of I-49 between Fort Smith and Texarkana would likely draw a lot of that thru traffic, which would likely utilize a toll bridge with a lower cost. Yes, some would exit and re-enter to avoid it, though if you have a decent amount of thru traffic and a reasonable toll, it could be feasible.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on April 02, 2020, 03:58:02 PM
ARDOT: building for yesterday, sometime next week
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on April 02, 2020, 05:49:57 PM
The second and just a pertinant detail is that this bridge is not a good candidate for tolls. The mileage saved is less than 10 miles and the traffic through Fort Smith outside a couple of one hour times morning and evening is not that significant.   Unless the tolls were insignificant, it gets skipped. People would follow a free route.
Thru traffic is minimal through the area because there's no good access. Thru traffic currently bound to the north can follow other 4-lane routes to meet I-40 at Little Rock then follow it to I-49. The completion of I-49 between Fort Smith and Texarkana would likely draw a lot of that thru traffic, which would likely utilize a toll bridge with a lower cost. Yes, some would exit and re-enter to avoid it, though if you have a decent amount of thru traffic and a reasonable toll, it could be feasible.

In full concurrence with this -- if the tolls are kept at a less-than-exorbitant level (remember, this is AR, not the Bay Area in CA; $6-7 tolls won't cut it here; they should be maintained at half that level or less) then shunpiking, which would be something of a pain, even with the presence of I-540, would be minimized.  Remember that once completed I-49 will draw quite a bit of interregional commercial traffic, which tends to stay on the road and absorb sporadic tolls rather than try to save four bucks or less by adding an additional 15-20 minutes of travel time.  Tolls won't cover the full bridge cost for the near term, but they will offset some of that -- plus a sizeable part of the maintenance.  All this is assuming ORT or toll-by-plate is utilized; a cash/booth toll facility will likely yield less revenue due to expenses. 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on April 02, 2020, 07:00:05 PM
That's really my thinking on such a toll as well. Make it cheap enough that drivers will waste more money in spent fuel trying to go around the toll.

On the other hand, Oklahoma's turnpike tolls have been a bargain relative to other toll roads and toll bridges elsewhere in the country. Toll rates per mile on express lanes in Dallas are a lot higher than the rates per mile in Oklahoma. Nevertheless plenty of Okies here will blow more money in gasoline (and time) shunpiking than what the tolls cost. In the end it's an emotional issue for too many people.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: vdeane on April 02, 2020, 08:00:00 PM
That's really my thinking on such a toll as well. Make it cheap enough that drivers will waste more money in spent fuel trying to go around the toll.

On the other hand, Oklahoma's turnpike tolls have been a bargain relative to other toll roads and toll bridges elsewhere in the country. Toll rates per mile on express lanes in Dallas are a lot higher than the rates per mile in Oklahoma. Nevertheless plenty of Okies here will blow more money in gasoline (and time) shunpiking than what the tolls cost. In the end it's an emotional issue for too many people.
I wouldn't compare a long-distance toll road with something like tolled express lanes.  Tolls on urban express lanes tend to be higher on a per-mile basis because one of the points of the toll is to keep the lanes uncongested, since the point of the lanes is to pay to avoid congestion on the free lanes.  That is not the case with a rural turnpike.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on April 02, 2020, 08:00:47 PM
That's really my thinking on such a toll as well. Make it cheap enough that drivers will waste more money in spent fuel trying to go around the toll.

On the other hand, Oklahoma's turnpike tolls have been a bargain relative to other toll roads and toll bridges elsewhere in the country. Toll rates per mile on express lanes in Dallas are a lot higher than the rates per mile in Oklahoma. Nevertheless plenty of Okies here will blow more money in gasoline (and time) shunpiking than what the tolls cost. In the end it's an emotional issue for too many people.

There's also return on investment. Make it too cheap, you lose money in the long run.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on April 02, 2020, 09:33:14 PM
That's really my thinking on such a toll as well. Make it cheap enough that drivers will waste more money in spent fuel trying to go around the toll.

On the other hand, Oklahoma's turnpike tolls have been a bargain relative to other toll roads and toll bridges elsewhere in the country. Toll rates per mile on express lanes in Dallas are a lot higher than the rates per mile in Oklahoma. Nevertheless plenty of Okies here will blow more money in gasoline (and time) shunpiking than what the tolls cost. In the end it's an emotional issue for too many people.

There's also return on investment. Make it too cheap, you lose money in the long run.

I'm guesstimating that the tolls will need to be set at somewhere between 3 and 4 bucks per direction;  low enough to make the concept of shunpiking more time & trouble than it's worth to long-distance traffic, but high enough to ensure a reasonable rate of return (particularly if a dedicated bond issue is utilized to finance the project).  About the price of a couple of cups of decent coffee sounds about right (assuming the typical regional commercial driver doesn't regularly patronize Starbuck's or Peet's -- if they did there would likely be little if any problem at all with >$5 tolls!).  But it also needs to be low enough to entice those locals who have to cross the river to consider using I-49 for at least one direction!     
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sprjus4 on April 02, 2020, 10:07:26 PM
I'm guesstimating that the tolls will need to be set at somewhere between 3 and 4 bucks per direction;  low enough to make the concept of shunpiking more time & trouble than it's worth to long-distance traffic, but high enough to ensure a reasonable rate of return (particularly if a dedicated bond issue is utilized to finance the project).  About the price of a couple of cups of decent coffee sounds about right (assuming the typical regional commercial driver doesn't regularly patronize Starbuck's or Peet's -- if they did there would likely be little if any problem at all with >$5 tolls!).  But it also needs to be low enough to entice those locals who have to cross the river to consider using I-49 for at least one direction!     
To attract the most traffic, $2 or under would be the most optimal. Maybe $3, but nothing above.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on April 03, 2020, 01:44:16 AM
I'm guesstimating that the tolls will need to be set at somewhere between 3 and 4 bucks per direction;  low enough to make the concept of shunpiking more time & trouble than it's worth to long-distance traffic, but high enough to ensure a reasonable rate of return (particularly if a dedicated bond issue is utilized to finance the project).  About the price of a couple of cups of decent coffee sounds about right (assuming the typical regional commercial driver doesn't regularly patronize Starbuck's or Peet's -- if they did there would likely be little if any problem at all with >$5 tolls!).  But it also needs to be low enough to entice those locals who have to cross the river to consider using I-49 for at least one direction!     
To attract the most traffic, $2 or under would be the most optimal. Maybe $3, but nothing above.

If it's ORT, then it could be fixed as $2 for FastPass or maybe $3+ for toll-by-plate to cover the costs of collection.  That would certainly keep the truckers on the road -- and if the locals or other travelers don't have to try to fish three or four bucks out of their jeans pockets, the somewhat increased toll won't seem steep.  Just make sure that the agency responsible for the toll administration doesn't pull shit like extraneous "fees" or "surcharges" that show up on the bill weeks later, which has occurred with toll-by-plate situations.  Nothing turns off a population just getting used to tolls than BS like that!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on April 03, 2020, 09:51:05 AM
It also costs money to setup a tolling authority, which will not be done here until there are multiple areas that could support tolling in order to amortize the overhead of that authority in addition to the revenue for new construction and maintenance.  It won't be done until it can be done in several areas around the state, not just for a single river crossing.  And it won't be done unless it can be shown that much of the revenue will come from outside of the state.  Arkansas is a very poor state after all.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: edwaleni on April 03, 2020, 11:05:09 AM
That's really my thinking on such a toll as well. Make it cheap enough that drivers will waste more money in spent fuel trying to go around the toll.

On the other hand, Oklahoma's turnpike tolls have been a bargain relative to other toll roads and toll bridges elsewhere in the country. Toll rates per mile on express lanes in Dallas are a lot higher than the rates per mile in Oklahoma. Nevertheless plenty of Okies here will blow more money in gasoline (and time) shunpiking than what the tolls cost. In the end it's an emotional issue for too many people.
I wouldn't compare a long-distance toll road with something like tolled express lanes.  Tolls on urban express lanes tend to be higher on a per-mile basis because one of the points of the toll is to keep the lanes uncongested, since the point of the lanes is to pay to avoid congestion on the free lanes.  That is not the case with a rural turnpike.

I agree, for Okies its an emotional issue.  My uncle from Oklahoma completely resented cash tolls. He preferred the card system used by the Will Rogers at the time. My brother-in-law does too.

When driving through Illinois, he saw how many toll roads there were and how much cash it would take and drove a 2 lane US route on purpose to avoid them. Took him an hour longer to get where he was going, but he wanted to make a statement that pay-as-you-go cash tolling was unpatriotic.

I asked him how much he saved in total, about $3.50 he said. Arriving an hour late I said, well you just priced how much you are worth on an hourly basis. That didn't go over very well.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: CtrlAltDel on April 03, 2020, 11:56:52 AM
I asked him how much he saved in total, about $3.50 he said. Arriving an hour late I said, well you just priced how much you are worth on an hourly basis.

I'm not sure I agree. What it shows, in my opinion, is how much this shunpiking value of his is worth to him. I mean, if he had pulled over to, say, give someone CPR and was for that reason an hour late, then he wouldn't have saved any money at all, and so, in that sense, his hourly worth would be $0.00.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on April 03, 2020, 12:50:18 PM
Quote from: vdeane
I wouldn't compare a long-distance toll road with something like tolled express lanes.  Tolls on urban express lanes tend to be higher on a per-mile basis because one of the points of the toll is to keep the lanes uncongested, since the point of the lanes is to pay to avoid congestion on the free lanes.  That is not the case with a rural turnpike.

Even compared to some other rural toll roads, such as the Penn Turnpike or Florida's Turnpike the costs are substantially lower. Nevertheless, Oklahomans frequently gripe about the turnpikes, that the toll gates should be removed because "they're paid for." None of the complainers ever bother to think how much more they'll be paying for gasoline due to a big hike in fuel taxes if those 600+ miles of turnpike are added to Oklahoma's system of "free" roads.

Quote from: sprjus4
To attract the most traffic, $2 or under would be the most optimal. Maybe $3, but nothing above.

Yeah, I think the $1.50 to $2 range might be low enough to discourage shunpiking. I think anything above $2 is going to be too much.

From the South end of AR-549 at US-71 to the I-49 interchange in Alma it's about 22 miles going through Fort Smith. Going along the future I-49 path it's about 4 miles shorter. There are six traffic signal intersections along US-71 before it reaches I-540. That's going to burn up time and gas mileage. The speed limit of I-540 is 65mph its entire length. The short segment of AR-549 has a 65mph speed limit, but a completed I-49 to Alma could have the limit boosted to 70mph or 75mph.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sprjus4 on April 03, 2020, 02:36:36 PM
Even compared to some other rural toll roads, such as the Penn Turnpike or Florida's Turnpike the costs are substantially lower. Nevertheless, Oklahomans frequently gripe about the turnpikes, that the toll gates should be removed because "they're paid for." None of the complainers ever bother to think how much more they'll be paying for gasoline due to a big hike in fuel taxes if those 600+ miles of turnpike are added to Oklahoma's system of "free" roads.
I'd say a study should be completed on it. How much would it cost the state to pay for maintenance and operation along the roads, how much would a gas tax increase be needed, and if it's feasible, remove the tolls.

Kentucky scrapped the tolls on their 614 mile parkway system once they were paid off, and they seem to be doing just fine.

Quote from: sprjus4
To attract the most traffic, $2 or under would be the most optimal. Maybe $3, but nothing above.

The short segment of AR-549 has a 65mph speed limit, but a completed I-49 to Alma could have the limit boosted to 70mph or 75mph.
Beginning July 1, 2020, speed limits of 75 mph will be authorized in rural areas along controlled access highways.

The segment of I-49 may well be 75 mph once completed.

Between Texarkana and Shreveport, the LA I-49 segment is posted at 75 mph (the only highway in the state at 75 mph), though drops to 70 mph in Arkansas. It will be nice to have continuity here.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on April 03, 2020, 02:43:54 PM
They literally did this study you're asking for in 2019 and it was not close to being feasible

https://www.arkansashighways.com/I49/1-04-052b%20%20I-49%20Toll%20Feasibility%20Technical%20Report%20-%20FINAL%20with%20Appendices.pdf (https://www.arkansashighways.com/I49/1-04-052b%20%20I-49%20Toll%20Feasibility%20Technical%20Report%20-%20FINAL%20with%20Appendices.pdf)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on April 03, 2020, 03:08:41 PM
Since the AR state constitution presently forbids toll facilities, the first thing that would have to be done (pardon me for imitating Captain Obvious) is to deal with that by either deletion or carving out specific exceptions, such as "spot" projects such as the I-49 bridge (it has occurred to me that the I-69 "Great Bridge" may require a similar process).  Then some sort of authority needs to be set up; it'll have to be decided if that is an independent entity or embedded within ADOT.  Then, of course, actual determination of tolls for any facility falling under the authority's jurisdiction will have to be established -- from the various levels discussed in the previous few posts, there is some concurrence at a $2.00 maximum base level (likely the Fast Pass pricing), with other pricing structures, such as toll-by-plate, being hashed out using the base as a starting point. 

But if the state refuses to consider tolls, then the project seems to be back at "square one", despite the presence of the AR 549 southern approach road.   The speed at which the I-57 project has advanced from legislated concept to actual study (in both state venues) and planning seems to indicate a shift in priorities away from the I-49 corridor to the easterly diagonal -- possibly because much of it has already been completed, and, even pre-Interstate designation, that project has progressed farther and farther up US 67 prior to any plans to take it into MO, displaying a lot of official support for the concept in that part of the state.  Perhaps the prospect of actually finishing a corridor has rendered I-57 the "catbird" seat in state project hierarchy, since the southern half of I-49 seems to have always been surrounded by a "gloom and doom" atmosphere due to the enormity of the undertaking and the inability to fully rationalize the expense of a project that would likely benefit out-of-state commercial traffic more than local needs, particularly in a part of the state with relatively sparse and dispersed population.  At least the NWA portion of I-49 serves a sizeable and growing population base (the reason for the temporary I-540 designation back in the '90's).  But without some level of creativity regarding getting funding for I-49 in place (full-length tolling would be a non-starter) -- or at least the "keystone" piece, the river bridge -- expect the corridor to be developed with an extremely long schedule -- I'd guess 2045-50 or later for full completion.    :-( 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on April 03, 2020, 03:32:18 PM
They literally did this study you're asking for in 2019 and it was not close to being feasible

https://www.arkansashighways.com/I49/1-04-052b%20%20I-49%20Toll%20Feasibility%20Technical%20Report%20-%20FINAL%20with%20Appendices.pdf (https://www.arkansashighways.com/I49/1-04-052b%20%20I-49%20Toll%20Feasibility%20Technical%20Report%20-%20FINAL%20with%20Appendices.pdf)

Yeah, and a $2 toll for that stretch is all that they calculated would be feasible, and that never generated more than $20M/yr even 20+ years down the road.  Tolling isn't the answer and likely never will be here.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Life in Paradise on April 04, 2020, 12:44:33 PM
Looking  at the map of the country, the I-49 gap in Arkansas is visible, and to go around it on a trip New Orleans/Kansas City is either veer over to Little Rock or go through Oklahoma (where you would have a toll road closest).  If they would work out the toll road prohibition, it would be feasible to charge significantly more than $2.00 for the stretch from Texarkana to Fort Smith.  It wouldn't pay for the road over 40 years, but it might make it workable to add with the funds available.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on April 04, 2020, 01:26:18 PM
Looking  at the map of the country, the I-49 gap in Arkansas is visible, and to go around it on a trip New Orleans/Kansas City is either veer over to Little Rock or go through Oklahoma (where you would have a toll road closest).  If they would work out the toll road prohibition, it would be feasible to charge significantly more than $2.00 for the stretch from Texarkana to Fort Smith.  It wouldn't pay for the road over 40 years, but it might make it workable to add with the funds available.

The $2 is just for the 20 miles from Alma to AR-22.  Mainly the Arkansas River bridge and floodplain crossing.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on April 04, 2020, 03:41:19 PM
With an average $2.50 toll ($2 fast-pass/$3 pay-by-plate), you won't come close to paying for the bridge or a couple of decades of maintenance on the structure.  What could be paid is the interest on bonds floated for the bridge's construction and at least the first decade of maintenance.  If such an arrangement is doable in AR, it may be worth considering. 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bwana39 on April 06, 2020, 04:17:18 PM
  If such an arrangement is doable in AR, it may be worth considering.

It isn't....
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Life in Paradise on April 07, 2020, 12:27:09 PM
  If such an arrangement is doable in AR, it may be worth considering.

It isn't....
It may not be now, but who knows what could happen in 10 years.  I've seen laws in Indiana go away that I thought might never disappear.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on April 07, 2020, 12:55:49 PM
  If such an arrangement is doable in AR, it may be worth considering.

It isn't....
It may not be now, but who knows what could happen in 10 years.  I've seen laws in Indiana go away that I thought might never disappear.

I don't see Arkansas suddenly becoming better than 49th or 50th in everything other than teen pregnancy in 10 years.  But, hopefully I'm wrong.  We live in a crazy world right now.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on April 08, 2020, 04:02:12 PM
  If such an arrangement is doable in AR, it may be worth considering.

It isn't....
It may not be now, but who knows what could happen in 10 years.  I've seen laws in Indiana go away that I thought might never disappear.

I don't see Arkansas suddenly becoming better than 49th or 50th in everything other than teen pregnancy in 10 years.  But, hopefully I'm wrong.  We live in a crazy world right now.

And after all the public-sector economic impact of COVID-19 has been assessed, many jurisdictions are going to have to get considerably more creative regarding financing, including such things as floating bonds for projects -- even if the historical means was simply "pay-as-you-go", which might, at least in the near term, be an unworkable methodology.   Even the most conservative/staid of states will be affected -- and unless their politicos simply wish to sink back into the dark ages (or are even accepting of such), with the political fallout ensuing from that -- "alternate methods" will be explored. 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: splashflash on April 25, 2020, 01:44:17 PM
Bella Vista bypass construction:

https://www.5newsonline.com/mobile/article/traffic/construction-requires-new-traffic-patterns-at-i-49hwy-71-interchange-with-bella-vista-bypass/527-3951a267-21ab-4537-b69e-54e5d01b9ff2
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on April 25, 2020, 03:26:53 PM
Arkansas doesn't really do creative financing. It's more like periods of severe retrenchment when revenue stops
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on April 27, 2020, 01:56:09 PM
Had to go to western Bella Vista Friday for a job and had to take the Bella Vista Bypass (AR-549) for what is likely the last time for the next year as they are closing the off-ramp from northbound I-49 to AR-549 to reconfigure it.  Looks like they are pretty much done with the blasting, so took some quick pics on my way through northbound.

(https://i.imgur.com/iaHr23m.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/zhO6we3.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/dvOb4dy.jpg)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on April 27, 2020, 02:10:25 PM
Had to go to western Bella Vista Friday for a job and had to take the Bella Vista Bypass (AR-549) for what is likely the last time for the next year as they are closing the off-ramp from northbound I-49 to AR-549 to reconfigure it.  Looks like they are pretty much done with the blasting, so took some quick pics on my way through northbound.


Demo-Zette had a post last Thursday.

(https://media.tegna-media.com/assets/KFSM/images/871cda65-c690-49d2-afe7-d7b1f4634040/871cda65-c690-49d2-afe7-d7b1f4634040_750x422.jpg)

Quote
Monday, April 27: The northbound I-49 exit ramp to the existing roundabout (Exit 93) will be closed.

Quote
Friday, May 1 and Saturday, May 2: Northbound I-49 mainlane traffic will be shifted onto temporary pavement prior to Exit 93 to continue northbound on US 71
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on April 27, 2020, 02:18:58 PM
Had to go to western Bella Vista Friday for a job and had to take the Bella Vista Bypass (AR-549) for what is likely the last time for the next year as they are closing the off-ramp from northbound I-49 to AR-549 to reconfigure it.  Looks like they are pretty much done with the blasting, so took some quick pics on my way through northbound.


Demo-Zette had a post last Thursday.

(https://media.tegna-media.com/assets/KFSM/images/871cda65-c690-49d2-afe7-d7b1f4634040/871cda65-c690-49d2-afe7-d7b1f4634040_750x422.jpg)

Quote
Monday, April 27: The northbound I-49 exit ramp to the existing roundabout (Exit 93) will be closed.

Quote
Friday, May 1 and Saturday, May 2: Northbound I-49 mainlane traffic will be shifted onto temporary pavement prior to Exit 93 to continue northbound on US 71

I saw that. However, there isn't going to be access to/from I-49/US-71 to AR-549 for a year as the exit loop is permanently closing and alternate lanes fixing to open are going to US-71 only.  Access to AR-549 is going to come from the old US-71B/Walton Blvd.  That will certainly reduce traffic on AR-549 for the next year.

https://www.arkansashighways.com/news/2020_news/NR%2020-119-01.pdf (https://www.arkansashighways.com/news/2020_news/NR%2020-119-01.pdf)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on April 27, 2020, 02:41:42 PM
Had to go to western Bella Vista Friday for a job and had to take the Bella Vista Bypass (AR-549) for what is likely the last time for the next year as they are closing the off-ramp from northbound I-49 to AR-549 to reconfigure it.  Looks like they are pretty much done with the blasting, so took some quick pics on my way through northbound.


Demo-Zette had a post last Thursday.

(https://media.tegna-media.com/assets/KFSM/images/871cda65-c690-49d2-afe7-d7b1f4634040/871cda65-c690-49d2-afe7-d7b1f4634040_750x422.jpg)

Quote
Monday, April 27: The northbound I-49 exit ramp to the existing roundabout (Exit 93) will be closed.

Quote
Friday, May 1 and Saturday, May 2: Northbound I-49 mainlane traffic will be shifted onto temporary pavement prior to Exit 93 to continue northbound on US 71

I saw that. However, there isn't going to be access to/from I-49/US-71 to AR-549 for a year as the exit loop is permanently closing and alternate lanes fixing to open are going to US-71 only.  Access to AR-549 is going to come from the old US-71B/Walton Blvd.  That will certainly reduce traffic on AR-549 for the next year.

https://www.arkansashighways.com/news/2020_news/NR%2020-119-01.pdf (https://www.arkansashighways.com/news/2020_news/NR%2020-119-01.pdf)

Which, since they're in the process of finishing construction on it, is probably a good thing.  Those locals who need to use it during construction will find their way to it in any case. 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bwana39 on May 15, 2020, 12:52:04 PM
There is a huge discussion on the I-369 thread about the proposed I-49 sections between I-40 and Texarkana.

The I-49 spur onto Ft. Chaffee was built to insure Chaffee and its' many acres of redevelopment (industrial park) land weren't bypassed due to the expense of the Arkansas River Bridge. It may have even been all or partially paid for using BRACC or BRACC related funds. This forum tends to dismiss the effect of Military bases on Highway projects. Funds travel both ways. Military and BRACC funds for the local communities get used for upgrades to infrastructure and State / Local funds get spent to help retain military facilities.  To a lesser extent we do the same for major employers / potential employers. Generally for private employers, it tends to be tax abatements and surface street level improvements.

Eventually the bridge will get built.  Sooner or Later.  With this said, I-540 and US71 are not that terrible a route as it is.

While the stretch from Fort Smith to Fayetteville got built in a fairly direct manner. UA is in Fayetteville. Tyson is in Springdale, Wal*Mart is in Bentonville. Connecting those elements with I-40, Little Rock and points beyond was politically and economically expedient.

As to the stretch from Ft Smith to Mena,  It goes through a rural MOUNTAINOUS route.  The route chosen to minimize the grade is a bit circumnavigous (it is basically the same route chose for US71 nearly a century ago.).  The oft discussed OKLAHOMA routing (that has never been significantly considered beyond theory) is of similar length at what has been said to be a lesser grade / elevation.

The local communities south of Ft Smith are not really in any hurry to bring in economic change. There is at best mixed local support.  This is going to be a slow EXPENSIVE process. My thinking is 2050 at the earliest absent some enhanced federal funding scheme.

If Arkansas could build 1 big bridge (I-49 Arkansas River or I-69 Mississippi River) and 1 stretch of road across predominately flat terrain (I-69) it would all work out.  The problem is the urgency is on I-49 and I-69 is caught behind it on the priorities list.

I still am not a fan of the proposed routing for I-69 in Arkansas and to a lesser extent Louisiana too.

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on May 15, 2020, 03:58:04 PM
Quote from: bwana39
While the stretch from Fort Smith to Fayetteville got built in a fairly direct manner. UA is in Fayetteville. Tyson is in Springdale, Wal*Mart is in Bentonville. Connecting those elements with I-40, Little Rock and points beyond was politically and economically expedient.

Wasn't the freeway that is now I-49 in Northwest Arkansas originally built 30 or more years ago? For the longest time it was a Northern extension of I-540. IIRC, that segment of freeway was getting completed back when the original I-49 segment in Louisiana between Lafayette and Shreveport was being built. The 1980's and earlier was an era where freeway building was considerably easier and far less costly.

I don't have any serious problems with the proposed routing of I-49 between Texarkana and Fort Smith, other than the tiny segment that clips a corner of Texas. IMHO, they should have keep the entire route within Arkansas to prevent potential bureaucratic & political headaches. I don't see TX DOT being in any rush to prioritize that segment of I-49 and a Red River bridge crossing to go with it. Not when they have so many other fish to fry in terms of highway projects. But it is what it is. The arguments about the routing farther North are moot. The road has to go around mountains for any alternative. None of really any better than the currently proposed route. No one is going to spend billions of dollars on tunnels to make the route more straight. 30 years ago tunnels might have been possible. Not now. We price ourselves out of those possibilities.

I think any ideas of routing I-49 through the Eastern edge of Oklahoma are silly. Just like that little segment of I-49 going over the Red River is a low priority for Texas, an I-49 segment on the far East edge would be a very low priority for Oklahoma to fund. The US-69 and US-75 corridors in Eastern OK are in far greater need of improvement. I-49 in the same area would be another expensive mouth to feed.

Once the Bentonville Bypass is complete the Alma to Barling segment and its expensive bridge over the Arkansas River has to move to the front of the line for I-49 projects. Elsewhere the various towns along the proposed corridor need to be doing all they can to preserve future ROW and even start building their local bypasses, even if they just start out in Super 2 configuration.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on May 15, 2020, 05:08:23 PM

Wasn't the freeway that is now I-49 in Northwest Arkansas originally built 30 or more years ago? For the longest time it was a Northern extension of I-540. IIRC, that segment of freeway was getting completed back when the original I-49 segment in Louisiana between Lafayette and Shreveport was being built. The 1980's and earlier was an era where freeway building was considerably easier and far less costly.

The Fayetteville 71 bypass was built circa 1970 as a two lane mostly at-grade loop. It was upgraded in the late 70's to a 4 lane expressway.  The 71 Freeway from Fayetteville to Bentonville was built piecemeal starting around 1980.

I'll have to look when AR 245 at Texarkana was created. Around 2000, it was going to be I-130 which was going to be a temp designation until I-49 was finished, but that never happened. It became AR 549 circa 2005.

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on May 15, 2020, 07:32:10 PM
There is a huge discussion on the I-369 thread about the proposed I-49 sections between I-40 and Texarkana.

The I-49 spur onto Ft. Chaffee was built to insure Chaffee and its' many acres of redevelopment (industrial park) land weren't bypassed due to the expense of the Arkansas River Bridge. It may have even been all or partially paid for using BRACC or BRACC related funds. This forum tends to dismiss the effect of Military bases on Highway projects. Funds travel both ways. Military and BRACC funds for the local communities get used for upgrades to infrastructure and State / Local funds get spent to help retain military facilities.  To a lesser extent we do the same for major employers / potential employers. Generally for private employers, it tends to be tax abatements and surface street level improvements.

Eventually the bridge will get built.  Sooner or Later.  With this said, I-540 and US71 are not that terrible a route as it is.

While the stretch from Fort Smith to Fayetteville got built in a fairly direct manner. UA is in Fayetteville. Tyson is in Springdale, Wal*Mart is in Bentonville. Connecting those elements with I-40, Little Rock and points beyond was politically and economically expedient.

As to the stretch from Ft Smith to Mena,  It goes through a rural MOUNTAINOUS route.  The route chosen to minimize the grade is a bit circumnavigous (it is basically the same route chose for US71 nearly a century ago.).  The oft discussed OKLAHOMA routing (that has never been significantly considered beyond theory) is of similar length at what has been said to be a lesser grade / elevation.

The local communities south of Ft Smith are not really in any hurry to bring in economic change. There is at best mixed local support.  This is going to be a slow EXPENSIVE process. My thinking is 2050 at the earliest absent some enhanced federal funding scheme.

If Arkansas could build 1 big bridge (I-49 Arkansas River or I-69 Mississippi River) and 1 stretch of road across predominately flat terrain (I-69) it would all work out.  The problem is the urgency is on I-49 and I-69 is caught behind it on the priorities list.

I still am not a fan of the proposed routing for I-69 in Arkansas and to a lesser extent Louisiana too.



Any discussion of a partial OK routing for I-49 was dropped 20+ years ago; it was only brought up for historical reference rather than a currently viable alternative.  From what I've managed to gather, when actual construction commences on Texarkana-Ft. Smith, it'll in all probability initially assume the form of bypasses of the major towns along the route (De Queen, Mena, Waldron) -- likely full Interstate-grade -- but if fiscal matters turn dismal, a series of 2-lane facilities similar to the nascent Monticello I-69/US 278 bypass wouldn't be out of the question -- to secure ROW if little else.   
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on May 15, 2020, 07:43:29 PM
In 2020, ArDOT has 9.7 million for preliminary Engineering and  after the toll study that the environmental was done so they were going ahead and doing a 2 lane from I 40 to Hwy.22 in Barling. That is in the proposal for 1/2 cent tax being extended. The Bridge was not mentioned but they have some Idea how it will be built. Maybe if they get the engineering done and if the Federal gov. does a infrastructure bill it will get built.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sprjus4 on May 15, 2020, 07:49:14 PM
In 2020, ArDOT has 9.7 million for preliminary Engineering and  after the toll study that the environmental was done so they were going ahead and doing a 2 lane from I 40 to Hwy.22 in Barling. That is in the proposal for 1/2 cent tax being extended. The Bridge was not mentioned but they have some Idea how it will be built. Maybe if they get the engineering done and if the Federal gov. does a infrastructure bill it will get built.
Hopefully this decade, the government does some sort of large infrastructure bill that can finally complete the hundreds of miles of future interstate highways that have yet to be built. I-11, I-42, I-49, I-57 extension, I-69, I-73, I-87, I-530 extension, etc. along with thousands of miles of needed 6 lane widenings on many rural 4 lane interstate highways that cannot handle current traffic volumes, I-81, I-95, I-85, I-10, I-64, I-75, are just a few examples that come to mind, there's of course plenty more that need it.

Unfortunately, any large scale bill will likely include toll financing, but if it could somehow be done without large scale tolling being implemented on every corridor, such as a nationwide gas tax increase to the needed amount, I would be in favor of that if paying extra means major progress nationwide.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on May 15, 2020, 09:47:20 PM
I just hope infrastructure bill will be for needed Interstate projects and not pet projects like a lot of government bills that pass.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bwana39 on May 16, 2020, 02:09:09 AM
Quote from: bwana39
While the stretch from Fort Smith to Fayetteville got built in a fairly direct manner. UA is in Fayetteville. Tyson is in Springdale, Wal*Mart is in Bentonville. Connecting those elements with I-40, Little Rock and points beyond was politically and economically expedient.


I don't have any serious problems with the proposed routing of I-49 between Texarkana and Fort Smith, other than the tiny segment that clips a corner of Texas. IMHO, they should have keep the entire route within Arkansas to prevent potential bureaucratic & political headaches. I don't see TX DOT being in any rush to prioritize that segment of I-49 and a Red River bridge crossing to go with it. Not when they have so many other fish to fry in terms of highway projects. But it is what it is. The arguments about the routing farther North are moot. The road has to go around mountains for any alternative. None of really any better than the currently proposed route. No one is going to spend billions of dollars on tunnels to make the route more straight. 30 years ago tunnels might have been possible. Not now. We price ourselves out of those possibilities.

I think any ideas of routing I-49 through the Eastern edge of Oklahoma are silly. Just like that little segment of I-49 going over the Red River is a low priority for Texas, an I-49 segment on the far East edge would be a very low priority for Oklahoma to fund. The US-69 and US-75 corridors in Eastern OK are in far greater need of improvement. I-49 in the same area would be another expensive mouth to feed.



I think you gravely underestimate the local comttment in Texarkana and Bowie County to 1-49 and I-369. Texarkana sees a major intersection out North of Leary with TWO interstates intersecting; not just one running through the River bottoms then crossing the river. You have to look at the existing bridges on US-59/71 across the Red River.  The Southbound bridge leaves Little River County Arkansas and lands in Bowie county TX. Texas paid for the cash portion of the local funds for the  construction costs Arkansas paid in "IN-kind funding".   The Northbound bridge leaves Miller County AR and lands in Little River County AR. Partially Paid by TXDOT.  Arkansas WANTS this rural stretch through Bowie County so Texas will help pay for the bridges and not have significant access for in-town businesses. As soon as digging gets started in Little River County it will also in Bowie County.

While I suggested an Eastern Oklahoma route had been discussed. I also noted that it (..."has never been significantly considered beyond theory)"   I see nothing short of JFK standing on that rock out side Big Cedar again making it happen. (Big Cedar is actually further south than US59). Yes, Oklahoma has bigger fish to fry. US 69 or US75 clearly are higher priorities for OKLAHOMA. This said, The US59 Corridor is a world away from US-69.  Any reference to this route going into Oklahoma is PURELY based on building on a blank slate with no political realities. It might be a better route purely from a road building perspective, but it does go into OKLAHOMA and OKLAHOMA doesn't want it and would choose to spend their money elsewhere. So I am done kicking the dead horse.

As to the chosen route: I pointed out it loops way east to minimize the mountain problems.  Arkansas made the same decision for US-71 nearly 100 years ago. Absent tunnelling, it is what it is. There really doesn't seem to be a better Arkansas route. The same mountains are there that were centuries ago.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sprjus4 on May 16, 2020, 07:46:47 AM
Couldn’t Oklahoma build such a conceptual section as one of their many toll Turnpikes?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: ibthebigd on May 16, 2020, 10:46:45 AM
I wish Congress would do an Infrastructure bill based on the 538 electoral college so 1 Billion per electoral vote and pay with a gas tax increase.

SM-G950U

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sprjus4 on May 16, 2020, 11:21:49 AM
They want to spend trillions of dollars on a lot of things, yet infrastructure seems nowhere to be found.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on May 16, 2020, 12:32:51 PM
Couldn’t Oklahoma build such a conceptual section as one of their many toll Turnpikes?

Not likely; any I-49 corridor alternative that loops through OK still begins and ends in AR -- and to date all OK turnpikes have at least, trajectory-wise, aimed at the population/commercial center (the I-44 corridor) of the state.  One that hugs the eastern state line and would provide financial benefits to only a small portion of OK residents while providing outsized benefits to both out-of-state/commercial drivers -- and begins and ends in adjoining AR -- would garner virtually no political support from OK political circles -- the reason the idea was discarded well before the turn of the century.  AR is the only state that actually wants to pursue this corridor -- but just doesn't have the fiscal wherewithal to develop it as a singular project -- which means any actual development will probably be eked out over the next few decades. 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sprjus4 on May 16, 2020, 12:44:27 PM
Couldn’t Oklahoma build such a conceptual section as one of their many toll Turnpikes?

Not likely; any I-49 corridor alternative that loops through OK still begins and ends in AR -- and to date all OK turnpikes have at least, trajectory-wise, aimed at the population/commercial center (the I-44 corridor) of the state.  One that hugs the eastern state line and would provide financial benefits to only a small portion of OK residents while providing outsized benefits to both out-of-state/commercial drivers -- and begins and ends in adjoining AR -- would garner virtually no political support from OK political circles -- the reason the idea was discarded well before the turn of the century.  AR is the only state that actually wants to pursue this corridor -- but just doesn't have the fiscal wherewithal to develop it as a singular project -- which means any actual development will probably be eked out over the next few decades.
It would provide access from the eastern part of the state towards the I-40 and Muskogee Turnpike corridors towards Tulsa and Oklahoma City.

Almost a similar concept to the Indian Nation Turnpike but further east. Yes, it would tie into Arkansas on either end, but connections could also be built to I-40 West on the northern end as well.

I suppose if that Indian Nation Turnpike did not exist, there would be more desire.

Obviously, the corridor would ideally be fully in Arkansas. This is merely a conceptual idea.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on May 16, 2020, 12:54:38 PM
They want to spend trillions of dollars on a lot of things, yet infrastructure seems nowhere to be found.

Well, you KNOW tax cuts for the wealthy are more important. /sarc
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on May 16, 2020, 02:59:38 PM
Quote from: sprjus4
Couldn’t Oklahoma build such a conceptual section as one of their many toll Turnpikes?

Just in terms of Oklahoma-based traffic an I-49 route along the East edge of the state would be a big waste of money. It probably wouldn't generate enough toll revenue to prevent the OTA from bleeding a lot of red ink. Tulsa-Texarakana is the only traffic play I see with that concept and it would still be a fairly crooked concept at that. Motorists in Arkansas would likely shun-pike the thing via US-71 as an alternative.

I think OKC to Texarkana would be a far more worthy conceptual turnpike corridor to develop in that OKC is at a major crossroads of the Interstate system. A high speed turnpike along or near OK-3 could connect into I-49 and basically create a different yet effective Ports to Plains corridor.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: rte66man on May 17, 2020, 03:18:41 PM
Quote from: sprjus4
Couldn’t Oklahoma build such a conceptual section as one of their many toll Turnpikes?

Just in terms of Oklahoma-based traffic an I-49 route along the East edge of the state would be a big waste of money. It probably wouldn't generate enough toll revenue to prevent the OTA from bleeding a lot of red ink. Tulsa-Texarakana is the only traffic play I see with that concept and it would still be a fairly crooked concept at that. Motorists in Arkansas would likely shun-pike the thing via US-71 as an alternative.

Authorization for the Webbers Falls to Poteau and south turnpike is still listed in the statutes. I'll be Governor before it ever gets built. The intent was for it to tie into I-49 somewhere south of Mena. It was hoped by the members pimping it that a road from Tulsa to I-49 would 'create jobs'.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bwana39 on May 17, 2020, 03:19:23 PM
I wish Congress would do an Infrastructure bill based on the 538 electoral college so 1 Billion per electoral vote and pay with a gas tax increase.

SM-G950U

Boy TEXAS would come out sweet on that one.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: edwaleni on May 17, 2020, 10:14:50 PM
Quote from: sprjus4
Couldn’t Oklahoma build such a conceptual section as one of their many toll Turnpikes?

Just in terms of Oklahoma-based traffic an I-49 route along the East edge of the state would be a big waste of money. It probably wouldn't generate enough toll revenue to prevent the OTA from bleeding a lot of red ink. Tulsa-Texarakana is the only traffic play I see with that concept and it would still be a fairly crooked concept at that. Motorists in Arkansas would likely shun-pike the thing via US-71 as an alternative.

Authorization for the Webbers Falls to Poteau and south turnpike is still listed in the statutes. I'll be Governor before it ever gets built. The intent was for it to tie into I-49 somewhere south of Mena. It was hoped by the members pimping it that a road from Tulsa to I-49 would 'create jobs'.

I agree. I can't see this happening ever.

Oklahoma needs to stick to updating the US-75/US-69 corridor between DFW and KCMO.  NAFTA traffic is looking to avoid OKC and Tulsa while heading north.

Tulsa already has one of the more expensive inland ports thanks to us taxpayers and the Corp of Engineers. If they want to reach ports on the gulf, they can send it down the Arkansas River.

Building a tollroad through the Kiamichi is a waste.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: rte66man on May 21, 2020, 09:48:39 AM
Tulsa already has one of the more expensive inland ports thanks to us taxpayers and the Corp of Engineers. If they want to reach ports on the gulf, they can send it down the Arkansas River.

You can thank Robert S. Kerr for that. He and John McClellan had a LOT of stroke in the Senate in the late 50's and early 60's to get that boondoggle built.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on May 21, 2020, 08:14:30 PM
Tulsa already has one of the more expensive inland ports thanks to us taxpayers and the Corp of Engineers. If they want to reach ports on the gulf, they can send it down the Arkansas River.

You can thank Robert S. Kerr for that. He and John McClellan had a LOT of stroke in the Senate in the late 50's and early 60's to get that boondoggle built.

And.....that big old lake/reservoir in eastern OK on the Arkansas River is named for him.  One of the arms of that lake is where the I-40 bridge collapsed (w/loss of life) after being struck by a barge not quite 20 years ago. 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on May 21, 2020, 08:17:13 PM
Tulsa already has one of the more expensive inland ports thanks to us taxpayers and the Corp of Engineers. If they want to reach ports on the gulf, they can send it down the Arkansas River.

You can thank Robert S. Kerr for that. He and John McClellan had a LOT of stroke in the Senate in the late 50's and early 60's to get that boondoggle built.

And.....that big old lake/reservoir in eastern OK on the Arkansas River is named for him.  One of the arms of that lake is where the I-40 bridge collapsed (w/loss of life) after being struck by a barge not quite 20 years ago. 

Has it been that long? Seems like just a few years ago.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on May 21, 2020, 08:30:05 PM
Tulsa already has one of the more expensive inland ports thanks to us taxpayers and the Corp of Engineers. If they want to reach ports on the gulf, they can send it down the Arkansas River.

You can thank Robert S. Kerr for that. He and John McClellan had a LOT of stroke in the Senate in the late 50's and early 60's to get that boondoggle built.

And.....that big old lake/reservoir in eastern OK on the Arkansas River is named for him.  One of the arms of that lake is where the I-40 bridge collapsed (w/loss of life) after being struck by a barge not quite 20 years ago. 

Has it been that long? Seems like just a few years ago.

Coming up on 18 years -- May 26, 2002.  I had come through WB in a Penske rental with the last of my GF's furniture about 2 weeks before it happened.  IIRC, was raining like crazy all the way from Little Rock to well west of OKC.  Tornado watch was out as well; fortunately didn't run into any of those that trip! 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on May 23, 2020, 11:52:44 AM

Coming up on 18 years -- May 26, 2002.  I had come through WB in a Penske rental with the last of my GF's furniture about 2 weeks before it happened.  IIRC, was raining like crazy all the way from Little Rock to well west of OKC.  Tornado watch was out as well; fortunately didn't run into any of those that trip! 

Gods, I feel old now :(
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Ned Weasel on May 25, 2020, 03:58:29 PM
Oklahoma needs to stick to updating the US-75/US-69 corridor between DFW and KCMO.  NAFTA traffic is looking to avoid OKC and Tulsa while heading north.

Serious question, and I've actually been wondering this for a long time:  Why not just use I-35 for DFW-to-KC traffic?  Isn't that what it's there for?  Is OKC traffic really that bad?  Are trucking companies that hard up to avoid the Kansas Turnpike tolls?  And if the latter is a concern, is Oklahoma really going to do this without building a new turnpike and letting US 69 be a side road, if they ever do it at all?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: JREwing78 on May 25, 2020, 04:54:50 PM
Oklahoma needs to stick to updating the US-75/US-69 corridor between DFW and KCMO.  NAFTA traffic is looking to avoid OKC and Tulsa while heading north.

Serious question, and I've actually been wondering this for a long time:  Why not just use I-35 for DFW-to-KC traffic?  Isn't that what it's there for?  Is OKC traffic really that bad?  Are trucking companies that hard up to avoid the Kansas Turnpike tolls?  And if the latter is a concern, is Oklahoma really going to do this without building a new turnpike and letting US 69 be a side road, if they ever do it at all?

Not everything is headed to Kansas City (though US-69 and I-49 certainly gives them a *mostly* toll-free route). St. Louis and Chicago-bound traffic, for example, has a more direct route via US-75/69 than following I-35, or following I-30 to I-40, then up I-55. If Arkansas and Missouri finish their I-57 extension to Little Rock, that might change.

As far as Oklahoma building out the US-75/69 corridor as a toll road, that would be the smart thing to do, but they should have done that years ago as part of the 4-lane buildout. They *could* obliterate the 2nd carriageway and put the toll road aside the remaining 2 lanes, but that's a lot of money and displacements simply in the name of sticking it to long-haul truck traffic.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on May 25, 2020, 05:13:04 PM
Oklahoma needs to stick to updating the US-75/US-69 corridor between DFW and KCMO.  NAFTA traffic is looking to avoid OKC and Tulsa while heading north.

Serious question, and I've actually been wondering this for a long time:  Why not just use I-35 for DFW-to-KC traffic?  Isn't that what it's there for?  Is OKC traffic really that bad?  Are trucking companies that hard up to avoid the Kansas Turnpike tolls?  And if the latter is a concern, is Oklahoma really going to do this without building a new turnpike and letting US 69 be a side road, if they ever do it at all?

Not everything is headed to Kansas City (though US-69 and I-49 certainly gives them a *mostly* toll-free route). St. Louis and Chicago-bound traffic, for example, has a more direct route via US-75/69 than following I-35, or following I-30 to I-40, then up I-55. If Arkansas and Missouri finish their I-57 extension to Little Rock, that might change.

As far as Oklahoma building out the US-75/69 corridor as a toll road, that would be the smart thing to do, but they should have done that years ago as part of the 4-lane buildout. They *could* obliterate the 2nd carriageway and put the toll road aside the remaining 2 lanes, but that's a lot of money and displacements simply in the name of sticking it to long-haul truck traffic.

If OK were actually engaging in intelligent corridor planning, the US 69/75 corridor would have been eked out as a full freeway over the years (screw the speedtrap towns!) while the iron was hot -- i.e., well before AR could try to identify funds to fully complete I-49 in their state.  Since '91 they've had the federal OK (unfortunately with no funds attached as per policy for the last several decades) to designate an Interstate along the 69 and 69/75 composite corridor from the TX state line to I-40.  Again, they should have pounced on this years ago.  That would allow them the opportunity to do the remainder of the corridor north of there to I-44/Big Cabin as a toll facility, giving NB drivers an option -- either save the fifteen bucks or so and schlep over I-40 to I-49 and up to get to MO points or spend it and save miles and time -- a classic long-distance shunpike concept.  But the low tax/limited service atmosphere pervading OK over the last few decades has for all intents & purposes put a damper on planning efforts that eventually involve significant expenditure.  So they let development activities flourish (or at least try to) in adjoining states, apparently content to be mere observers.  In a side-but-related note actually concerning another thread topic -- it'll be interesting to see how OK handles the issue if the proposed Port-to-Plains northern extension heads up US 287 across the Panhandle -- whether it'll actually be internalized into the budget process or whether ODOT and their handlers try to squeeze developmental funds out of TX and/or CO, since it won't connect to the heart of their state and would only provide benefit to outflung Boise City.   
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: edwaleni on May 25, 2020, 08:40:49 PM
Oklahoma needs to stick to updating the US-75/US-69 corridor between DFW and KCMO.  NAFTA traffic is looking to avoid OKC and Tulsa while heading north.

Serious question, and I've actually been wondering this for a long time:  Why not just use I-35 for DFW-to-KC traffic?  Isn't that what it's there for?  Is OKC traffic really that bad?  Are trucking companies that hard up to avoid the Kansas Turnpike tolls?  And if the latter is a concern, is Oklahoma really going to do this without building a new turnpike and letting US 69 be a side road, if they ever do it at all?


As far as Oklahoma building out the US-75/69 corridor as a toll road, that would be the smart thing to do, but they should have done that years ago as part of the 4-lane buildout. They *could* obliterate the 2nd carriageway and put the toll road aside the remaining 2 lanes, but that's a lot of money and displacements simply in the name of sticking it to long-haul truck traffic.

Not sure why, but the traveling public seems to get offended when a 'truck only' route is proposed.

When the original CHI-KCMO route (now called CKC) lost planning dollars, several proposals for a trucks only toll route were proposed. ISTHA was all over it for a little while until Missouri said we don't do tolls.

The 2 unique proposals for a private toll road appeared, one financed by a conglomerate of banks supported by major trucking firms and another by a private firm.

But when it came to giving these entities the same powers and rights as a public highway authority, then the house came down. People screamed (with a little prodding perhaps from some highway lobbies) and the whole thing was dropped.

Seems getting a condemnation notice from some corporate entity can't be swayed by a local politico.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: rte66man on May 26, 2020, 01:51:52 PM
If OK were actually engaging in intelligent corridor planning, the US 69/75 corridor would have been eked out as a full freeway over the years (screw the speedtrap towns!) while the iron was hot -- i.e., well before AR could try to identify funds to fully complete I-49 in their state. 

Ooh, that's a good one. I have 2 words for you, Gene Stipe. Google him and then come back and tell me ODOT could ignore "the speedtrap towns". Was NEVER gonna happen.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on May 26, 2020, 04:29:55 PM
If OK were actually engaging in intelligent corridor planning, the US 69/75 corridor would have been eked out as a full freeway over the years (screw the speedtrap towns!) while the iron was hot -- i.e., well before AR could try to identify funds to fully complete I-49 in their state. 

Arkansas got most of their initial funding through John Paul Hammerschmidt, who was one of the kings of pork in his day.

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on May 26, 2020, 05:06:42 PM
If OK were actually engaging in intelligent corridor planning, the US 69/75 corridor would have been eked out as a full freeway over the years (screw the speedtrap towns!) while the iron was hot -- i.e., well before AR could try to identify funds to fully complete I-49 in their state. 

Ooh, that's a good one. I have 2 words for you, Gene Stipe. Google him and then come back and tell me ODOT could ignore "the speedtrap towns". Was NEVER gonna happen.


Didn't have to google him -- my Broken Bow cousins (principally one in particular who is a perennial candidate for office) were bitching about him in the mid-80's.  Apparently somewhere in that time period his wife was ticketed in Stringtown for speeding (although she vehemently denied it), and Stipe himself contacted the Stringtown mayor's office to try to get it dismissed.  At that time there was talk that the speed trap actually constituted an organized criminal conspiracy, and investigations had begun, with the added presence of lawsuits by commercial trucking companies against the town.  According to regional lore, Stipe negotiated an agreement whereby his wife's ticket would be dismissed and he would "go to bat" as necessary for the town and its continued over-the-road revenue stream.  While purportedly a "champion of transportation", he effectively blockaded any bypass plans for Stringtown, Kiowa, and Atoka for the remainder of his term, which ended with his resignation -- under indictment -- in 2003 (he died in 2012).  But he did direct funding to the US 69 (75) corridor during his term -- just as long as what was done maintained the status quo of the stretch between Bryan County and McAlester (which is why the freeway sections end at those locations). 

But my cousins' beef with Stipe was largely based on the fact that he was able to direct funds toward his district (McAlester, Checotah, etc.) at the expense of other SE OK regions (they've been trying to get US 70 twinned all the way from Durant to the AR state line for decades).  All that being said, the man's been effectively gone for 17 years -- but his replacement(s), affected by term limits instituted largely because of Stipe's 30+ year term of office, have invariably come from the anti "tax-and-spend" crowd -- so to them it's not a personal promise but a general demeanor.  Either way, corridors don't get developed in any effectual fashion.   X-(

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on May 26, 2020, 06:38:21 PM
We built a lot of "truck only corridors" between these major cities circa 1860-80.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on May 26, 2020, 07:04:58 PM
We built a lot of "truck only corridors" between these major cities circa 1860-80.

1860?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: BrandonC_TX on May 26, 2020, 07:22:35 PM
I am assuming bjrush is talking about railroads here.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on May 26, 2020, 07:58:05 PM
I am assuming bjrush is talking about railroads here.

Shifting gears without a clutch?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on May 27, 2020, 03:17:07 AM
I am assuming bjrush is talking about railroads here.

Shifting gears without a clutch?

Yeah -- diesel locomotives have been doing just that (via a device termed "automatic transition") since the late 1940's.  But seriously, the only reason there is a relatively straight corridor down US 69 is the old MKT (Missouri-Kansas-Texas) railroad's choice of path along the Ozark and Ouachita west side fall line at the end of the 19th century. 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on May 27, 2020, 04:24:49 AM
Mena has a 4-Lane 71 that's been re-striped as a 5-Lane

The part of 59-71 in the center of Mena was always a 5 lane after they widened it from 2 lanes.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on May 27, 2020, 04:28:00 AM
Is there anything going on with 49 south of the Ft Smith area? IMO, it seems that this area is reluctant/against any interstate development in that area! That hinders future revenue. Having lived in NWA could not image what NWA would be like without 540/49 running through it...

From what I understand, the foremost problem with i-49 between Texarkana and Fort Smith is, simply, finding the funds to build the facility -- particularly through the more mountainous sections north of Mena.   Haven't heard of any significant organized local opposition to the upgrade -- although when the "overlay" portion around the US 270 junction is built, there will likely be a lot of grousing around road closures/delays along US 71 as construction commences.   Not a lot of problems in that regard with the NWA portion in the '90's, as the portion through the more densely populated areas was intact when even I-540 was commissioned, and the portion from Alma to Fayetteville was new-terrain construction requiring no US 71 traffic interruptions.  Unfortunately, the Ouachita mountain terrain isn't favorable to that sort of configuration, so some interim navigational difficulties are to be anticipated.  As the old saying goes, sometimes you gotta break some eggs..................  :-/

The mountains south of Mena are just as rugged, if not more so, than the ones north of town. The interstate will run several miles east of 59-71 and will go through what is right now rather secluded territory.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: rte66man on May 27, 2020, 10:09:28 AM
If OK were actually engaging in intelligent corridor planning, the US 69/75 corridor would have been eked out as a full freeway over the years (screw the speedtrap towns!) while the iron was hot -- i.e., well before AR could try to identify funds to fully complete I-49 in their state. 

Ooh, that's a good one. I have 2 words for you, Gene Stipe. Google him and then come back and tell me ODOT could ignore "the speedtrap towns". Was NEVER gonna happen.


Didn't have to google him -- my Broken Bow cousins (principally one in particular who is a perennial candidate for office) were bitching about him in the mid-80's.  Apparently somewhere in that time period his wife was ticketed in Stringtown for speeding (although she vehemently denied it), and Stipe himself contacted the Stringtown mayor's office to try to get it dismissed.  At that time there was talk that the speed trap actually constituted an organized criminal conspiracy, and investigations had begun, with the added presence of lawsuits by commercial trucking companies against the town.  According to regional lore, Stipe negotiated an agreement whereby his wife's ticket would be dismissed and he would "go to bat" as necessary for the town and its continued over-the-road revenue stream.  While purportedly a "champion of transportation", he effectively blockaded any bypass plans for Stringtown, Kiowa, and Atoka for the remainder of his term, which ended with his resignation -- under indictment -- in 2003 (he died in 2012).  But he did direct funding to the US 69 (75) corridor during his term -- just as long as what was done maintained the status quo of the stretch between Bryan County and McAlester (which is why the freeway sections end at those locations). 

But my cousins' beef with Stipe was largely based on the fact that he was able to direct funds toward his district (McAlester, Checotah, etc.) at the expense of other SE OK regions (they've been trying to get US 70 twinned all the way from Durant to the AR state line for decades).  All that being said, the man's been effectively gone for 17 years -- but his replacement(s), affected by term limits instituted largely because of Stipe's 30+ year term of office, have invariably come from the anti "tax-and-spend" crowd -- so to them it's not a personal promise but a general demeanor.  Either way, corridors don't get developed in any effectual fashion.   X-(


When I worked in the Legislature in the 90's, Gene was still around.  I could share some stories but that's WAY off topic.

There was a legislator named M.C. Leist from Morris. He would stand up in the House once a week and give the "Stringtown speedtrap report". He would read off statistics on # of tickets, etc. He HATED this and was trying to get rid of it. Personally, I wish he would have done the same for Rush Springs.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: edwaleni on May 27, 2020, 12:08:46 PM
Oklahoma needs to stick to updating the US-75/US-69 corridor between DFW and KCMO.  NAFTA traffic is looking to avoid OKC and Tulsa while heading north.

Serious question, and I've actually been wondering this for a long time:  Why not just use I-35 for DFW-to-KC traffic?  Isn't that what it's there for?  Is OKC traffic really that bad?  Are trucking companies that hard up to avoid the Kansas Turnpike tolls?  And if the latter is a concern, is Oklahoma really going to do this without building a new turnpike and letting US 69 be a side road, if they ever do it at all?

It's an honest question.

For the most part, most logistics using trucks do use the I-35 routing.

However at many times I-35 south of OKC gets congested.  In the last few years there have been many truck accidents where the northbound side gets closed for hours at a time causing several miles of backups.

A recent UPS order I made was sourced in the DFW metro. I followed its path and I thought it would interchange in OKC to go east.  Instead they took it all the way from DFW to KCMO in a single day's drive.  Looking at time to arrive, they had to have used I-35.

Today I-35 is the fastest way to go if no obstacles come into play.  If OK does upgrade the 69-75 corridor and remove the local speed traps and increase the grade separations, it will be possible to cut the time by 30 to 45 minutes.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bwana39 on May 27, 2020, 10:21:14 PM
Oklahoma needs to stick to updating the US-75/US-69 corridor between DFW and KCMO.  NAFTA traffic is looking to avoid OKC and Tulsa while heading north.

Serious question, and I've actually been wondering this for a long time:  Why not just use I-35 for DFW-to-KC traffic?  Isn't that what it's there for?  Is OKC traffic really that bad?  Are trucking companies that hard up to avoid the Kansas Turnpike tolls?  And if the latter is a concern, is Oklahoma really going to do this without building a new turnpike and letting US 69 be a side road, if they ever do it at all?

It's an honest question.

For the most part, most logistics using trucks do use the I-35 routing.

However at many times I-35 south of OKC gets congested.  In the last few years there have been many truck accidents where the northbound side gets closed for hours at a time causing several miles of backups.

A recent UPS order I made was sourced in the DFW metro. I followed its path and I thought it would interchange in OKC to go east.  Instead they took it all the way from DFW to KCMO in a single day's drive.  Looking at time to arrive, they had to have used I-35.

Today I-35 is the fastest way to go if no obstacles come into play.  If OK does upgrade the 69-75 corridor and remove the local speed traps and increase the grade separations, it will be possible to cut the time by 30 to 45 minutes.

No they didn't. It followed the US 69 corridor on the UPRR.  Very few UPS trucks do longhaul. Most of the trailers are put on rail cars for long segments. Your package almost surely went via rail.

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sprjus4 on May 27, 2020, 10:43:55 PM
Per Google Maps, between Dallas and Kansas City.

US-75 / US-69 / I-44 / I-49 - 8 hours 2 minutes, 508 miles
I-35E / I-35 - 8 hours 16 minutes, 552 miles
I-35E / I-35 / I-335 / I-470 / I-70 - 8 hours 19 minutes, 556 miles

Using a 70 mph speed limit, the US-75 routing would be reduced to 7 hours 15 minutes. Considering Oklahoma will begin posting 75 mph on interstate highways in the near future, this would likely be reduced further. An interstate upgrade of US-75 and US-69 between I-45 and I-44 would be a logical extension of I-45.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: armadillo speedbump on May 28, 2020, 12:47:04 PM

No they didn't. It followed the US 69 corridor on the UPRR.

I'm curious how you know this, since the Union Pacific railroad doesn't offer intermodal service from Texas to Kansas City.  And in the distant past when it did, that was routed via St. Louis because of low volumes and took more than a day's transit time.   



Quote
few UPS trucks do longhaul. Most of the trailers are put on rail cars for long segments. Your package almost surely went via rail.

There are plenty of UPS truck long hauls.  While they use railroad intermodal in some lanes, there aren't that many market pairs that railroads even offer intermodal.  Mostly long distance and high volume lanes.  Transit times, reliability issues, and once a day (or less) schedules are also limiting factors to rail use.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on May 28, 2020, 01:59:47 PM
I am assuming bjrush is talking about railroads here.

Indeed. I know it's heretical on this forum, but rail is much more fuel efficient, less labor intensive, more reliable, and cheaper than truck if they're going to the same place. Especially when you factor in the need to build billion dollar roadways which will never in a million years pay for themselves. Spend 1/10 of those billions and add parallel tracks and replace at grade crossings and you will improve commerce for much cheaper
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Plutonic Panda on May 28, 2020, 03:03:48 PM
I am assuming bjrush is talking about railroads here.

Indeed. I know it's heretical on this forum, but rail is much more fuel efficient, less labor intensive, more reliable, and cheaper than truck if they're going to the same place. Especially when you factor in the need to build billion dollar roadways which will never in a million years pay for themselves. Spend 1/10 of those billions and add parallel tracks and replace at grade crossings and you will improve commerce for much cheaper
By what measure are you concluding roads will never pay for themselves? You posted some perfectly valid points about the benefits of rail and then shift to an anti road vibe where make half true statements. Rail projects costs in the billions as well so how do those pay for themselves if roads don’t?

I was always under the impression roads and rail, well basically all infrastructure, pays for itself in the way of allowing society to function and prosper.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on May 28, 2020, 07:03:13 PM
I am assuming bjrush is talking about railroads here.

Indeed. I know it's heretical on this forum, but rail is much more fuel efficient, less labor intensive, more reliable, and cheaper than truck if they're going to the same place. Especially when you factor in the need to build billion dollar roadways which will never in a million years pay for themselves. Spend 1/10 of those billions and add parallel tracks and replace at grade crossings and you will improve commerce for much cheaper
By what measure are you concluding roads will never pay for themselves? You posted some perfectly valid points about the benefits of rail and then shift to an anti road vibe where make half true statements. Rail projects costs in the billions as well so how do those pay for themselves if roads don’t?

I was always under the impression roads and rail, well basically all infrastructure, pays for itself in the way of allowing society to function and prosper.

The UPS/rail joint operation works just like any other "hub and spoke" system; air freight functions much the same.  Trucks handle the short haul, but rail is used to get the goods between widely-spaced metro areas.  But that all depends upon the railroad following a strict scheduling regimen regarding these particular movements.  DFW-KC is ideal, because the UP (former MKT and MP) trackage it uses (and, yes, it goes up the 69/75 corridor) isn't on their transcontinental container routes, which tend to clog up rail traffic.  But on those transcontinental routes (in UP's case, either L.A.-El Paso-DFW or Oakland-Salt Lake-Omaha-Chicago) where UPS trains have to queue between cargo coming out of West Coast ports, the service is parsed out into stuff that has to "be there yesterday", which will be, size permitting, placed on over-the-road trucks, and other less time-sensitive cargo will go by rail.  Generally speaking, by and large the majority of UPS cargo on N-S corridors tends to go by rail regardless of time sensitivity, while E-W corridors receive the "split mode" approach.  The only general N-S rail corridors that regularly exhibit the issues endemic to E-W corridors in general are those paralleling I-85 and/or I-95 on the East Coast (CSX or NS); split-mode is largely utilized there as well.     
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Plutonic Panda on May 28, 2020, 07:13:53 PM
I am assuming bjrush is talking about railroads here.

Indeed. I know it's heretical on this forum, but rail is much more fuel efficient, less labor intensive, more reliable, and cheaper than truck if they're going to the same place. Especially when you factor in the need to build billion dollar roadways which will never in a million years pay for themselves. Spend 1/10 of those billions and add parallel tracks and replace at grade crossings and you will improve commerce for much cheaper
By what measure are you concluding roads will never pay for themselves? You posted some perfectly valid points about the benefits of rail and then shift to an anti road vibe where make half true statements. Rail projects costs in the billions as well so how do those pay for themselves if roads don’t?

I was always under the impression roads and rail, well basically all infrastructure, pays for itself in the way of allowing society to function and prosper.

The UPS/rail joint operation works just like any other "hub and spoke" system; air freight functions much the same.  Trucks handle the short haul, but rail is used to get the goods between widely-spaced metro areas.  But that all depends upon the railroad following a strict scheduling regimen regarding these particular movements.  DFW-KC is ideal, because the UP (former MKT and MP) trackage it uses (and, yes, it goes up the 69/75 corridor) isn't on their transcontinental container routes, which tend to clog up rail traffic.  But on those transcontinental routes (in UP's case, either L.A.-El Paso-DFW or Oakland-Salt Lake-Omaha-Chicago) where UPS trains have to queue between cargo coming out of West Coast ports, the service is parsed out into stuff that has to "be there yesterday", which will be, size permitting, placed on over-the-road trucks, and other less time-sensitive cargo will go by rail.  Generally speaking, by and large the majority of UPS cargo on N-S corridors tends to go by rail regardless of time sensitivity, while E-W corridors receive the "split mode" approach.  The only general N-S rail corridors that regularly exhibit the issues endemic to E-W corridors in general are those paralleling I-85 and/or I-95 on the East Coast (CSX or NS); split-mode is largely utilized there as well.   
Thank you for the information. That is very interesting and if you don’t mind me asking, how do you know this? Did you have a career in this field or just a hobby?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on May 28, 2020, 08:37:42 PM
^^^^^^^^^
My academic training is in the field of public policy; specifically transportation policy -- including a sub-specialty in freight movement in and between metro areas (not too many of us out there plowing that particular field!).  The evolution of UPS over the years has always been intriguing, particularly after about 1996, when FedEx made a major effort to carve out a big slice of the package-delivery world for themselves (FE has a much greater reliance on long-distance trucks -- usually by contract -- than does UPS).  I'm pretty much retired from the field, but occasionally I'll write position paper(s) on a case-by-case basis.  Got a few other irons in the fire in a largely unrelated field (that utilizes UPS and FedEx regularly -- so I try to keep up with what's going on with them at any given time). 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bjrush on May 31, 2020, 09:51:32 AM
I am assuming bjrush is talking about railroads here.

Indeed. I know it's heretical on this forum, but rail is much more fuel efficient, less labor intensive, more reliable, and cheaper than truck if they're going to the same place. Especially when you factor in the need to build billion dollar roadways which will never in a million years pay for themselves. Spend 1/10 of those billions and add parallel tracks and replace at grade crossings and you will improve commerce for much cheaper
By what measure are you concluding roads will never pay for themselves? You posted some perfectly valid points about the benefits of rail and then shift to an anti road vibe where make half true statements. Rail projects costs in the billions as well so how do those pay for themselves if roads don’t?

I was always under the impression roads and rail, well basically all infrastructure, pays for itself in the way of allowing society to function and prosper.

Diminishing returns. I don't think the incremental improvements from a new interstate roughly paralleling an existing interstate-quality facility just a few dozen miles to the east or west had the same economic impact as when the first one was put in (thinking specifically of all the proposals fanning out from DFW, but many other examples available). You can drive between any major US city on an interstate. While adding a few more lanes here and there is likely justified, adding new interstates between cities that aren't directly connected likely doesn't pass economic muster given the costs are extremely high and benefits low. Conversely building parallel tracks is still expensive, but an order of magnitude cheaper than interstate construction, and would likely bring similar benefits via efficiency.

Much infrastructure doesn't pay for itself. Think of the water line running down a cul-de-sac to serve 4 houses. That's why the holy grail of PPP has largely gone quiet. Investors don't see a return on investment. Connecting places is fine, but we shouldn't pretend it's on an economic basis. Just like we don't build city parks based on a ROI approach, we build them because we've decided they are an important amenity. That's more of a justification for I-49 between TXK and Ft Smith than a sliced and diced economic analysis. Those can say anything, it's all in the assumptions.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: rte66man on May 31, 2020, 01:46:23 PM
I am assuming bjrush is talking about railroads here.

Indeed. I know it's heretical on this forum, but rail is much more fuel efficient, less labor intensive, more reliable, and cheaper than truck if they're going to the same place. Especially when you factor in the need to build billion dollar roadways which will never in a million years pay for themselves. Spend 1/10 of those billions and add parallel tracks and replace at grade crossings and you will improve commerce for much cheaper

Emphasis added.  That statement is only true for intermodal hauls to/from major terminals. I can speak from experience that UPRR is not especially interested in mixed short hauls.  They have raised their per car rates so high that my company has been forced to return to trucking product in some markets. They've also discontinued our 3/week unit trains in favor of a daily pickup. Better for them, not as good for us.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: mvak36 on June 11, 2020, 10:26:50 AM
https://www.constructionequipmentguide.com/construction-on-bella-vista-bypass-i-49-interchange-still-on-track-near-bentonville/48660

Apparently they stopped construction for a few weeks on the SPUI project because an employee tested positive for COVID. Other than that, the rest of the article didn't give any new information.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on June 11, 2020, 11:11:01 AM
https://www.constructionequipmentguide.com/construction-on-bella-vista-bypass-i-49-interchange-still-on-track-near-bentonville/48660

Apparently they stopped construction for a few weeks on the SPUI project because an employee tested positive for COVID. Other than that, the rest of the article didn't give any new information.

Everything is back to what passes for normal.  I'm hoping to get up that way soon to update the I-49 Fakebook page.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: mvak36 on June 11, 2020, 11:13:30 AM
https://www.constructionequipmentguide.com/construction-on-bella-vista-bypass-i-49-interchange-still-on-track-near-bentonville/48660

Apparently they stopped construction for a few weeks on the SPUI project because an employee tested positive for COVID. Other than that, the rest of the article didn't give any new information.

Everything is back to what passes for normal.  I'm hoping to get up that way soon to update the I-49 Fakebook page.

Yes you are right. I probably should have worded my post better. The article did say they started work on the project again after the Memorial Day weekend.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on July 24, 2020, 11:47:28 PM
I don't know if this Build I-49 FB setting will allow public viewing, but here is a view north of Rocky Hollow (old Gun Range Road) at the paving that is now going on NORTH of that crossing all the way to the MO state line.

(https://scontent-ort2-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/116154901_10158635912673624_1043883607020873233_o.jpg?_nc_cat=108&_nc_sid=8024bb&_nc_ohc=yVeUYhi0sHgAX8_J704&_nc_ht=scontent-ort2-2.xx&oh=7da5a84a8179f4bd5fe88c9f35fd3997&oe=5F408BB1)

https://www.facebook.com/288089113623/photos/pcb.10158635920753624/10158635912668624/?type=3&theater
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: cjk374 on July 25, 2020, 02:16:34 PM
I don't know if this Build I-49 FB setting will allow public viewing, but here is a view north of Rocky Hollow (old Gun Range Road) at the paving that is now going on NORTH of that crossing all the way to the MO state line.

(https://scontent-ort2-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/116154901_10158635912673624_1043883607020873233_o.jpg?_nc_cat=108&_nc_sid=8024bb&_nc_ohc=yVeUYhi0sHgAX8_J704&_nc_ht=scontent-ort2-2.xx&oh=7da5a84a8179f4bd5fe88c9f35fd3997&oe=5F408BB1)

https://www.facebook.com/288089113623/photos/pcb.10158635920753624/10158635912668624/?type=3&theater

They have put up an exit gore sign already?? 😮😮😮
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on July 25, 2020, 02:18:49 PM


They have put up an exit gore sign already?? 😮😮😮

But not Northbound.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Tomahawkin on July 25, 2020, 10:13:26 PM
I taking it to the Bank that the 49 corridor doesn't get started til 2025. I wish they would build it in segments like IH 22 in Alabama was done. There was hilly terrain there but they committed to it. Not to mention I have been ad nauseam in saying that make it rolled. 50 cents to a dollar for all the snowbirds and spring breakers
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: edwaleni on July 26, 2020, 01:32:06 AM
I don't know if this Build I-49 FB setting will allow public viewing, but here is a view north of Rocky Hollow (old Gun Range Road) at the paving that is now going on NORTH of that crossing all the way to the MO state line.

(https://scontent-ort2-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/116154901_10158635912673624_1043883607020873233_o.jpg?_nc_cat=108&_nc_sid=8024bb&_nc_ohc=yVeUYhi0sHgAX8_J704&_nc_ht=scontent-ort2-2.xx&oh=7da5a84a8179f4bd5fe88c9f35fd3997&oe=5F408BB1)

https://www.facebook.com/288089113623/photos/pcb.10158635920753624/10158635912668624/?type=3&theater

They have put up an exit gore sign already?? 😮😮😮

It's a "Warning, Powerline Overhead" sign.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Scott5114 on July 27, 2020, 09:12:05 PM
On two posts? That'd be pretty weird.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on July 27, 2020, 09:34:25 PM
I taking it to the Bank that the 49 corridor doesn't get started til 2025. I wish they would build it in segments like IH 22 in Alabama was done. There was hilly terrain there but they committed to it. Not to mention I have been ad nauseam in saying that make it rolled. 50 cents to a dollar for all the snowbirds and spring breakers

You mean the Arkansas River Bridge or south of Ft Smith?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on July 28, 2020, 02:13:15 AM
I taking it to the Bank that the 49 corridor doesn't get started til 2025. I wish they would build it in segments like IH 22 in Alabama was done. There was hilly terrain there but they committed to it. Not to mention I have been ad nauseam in saying that make it rolled. 50 cents to a dollar for all the snowbirds and spring breakers

You mean the Arkansas River Bridge or south of Ft Smith?

If work on that bridge is let as soon as 2025, I for one would be surprised (I figured somewhere closer to 2030).  But a few years back the speculation was that the Texarkana-Ft. Smith section would likely be done in small sections, with a Mena bypass the first to be tackled, and the DeQueen-area segment the next on the agenda; the Arkansas River bridge would be done -- more or less -- as its own SIU as a Fort Smith bypass (and to make the AR 549 freeway south of there less of a speculative anomaly).  But, AFAIK, there's been no significant expenditures to date toward ROW acquisition or even structure design; it seems as if that particular can has been kicked down the road as far as possible. 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on July 28, 2020, 02:25:30 PM
I think AR DOT will have to shift priorities on the Fort Smith to Texarkana leg of I-49.

Obviously completion of the Belle Vista Bypass is the current priority. But once that's done focus will shift South. In the past the Alma to Barling segment, with its expensive Arkansas River bridge, was seen as the next project to build. Then progress would slowly extend South. Due to all the funding issues that game plan just isn't going to work.

I think the next steps for I-49 should be building the bypasses for Waldron, Mena, DeQueen and Ashdown. Maybe build them initially as Super 2 routes just to secure the ROW. Then start working on filling in the gaps where it's feasible. Those segments of I-49 are going to be less expensive to build and may get completed faster, especially if the state has to work on its own to at least flesh out the basics of the route segments. AR DOT can build those segments without having to worry about what happens in Fort Smith or what Texas does or does not do with its short segment of I-49.

The only thing that can be done with the Alma-Barling segment is securing ROW. Everything else is going to be pricey and, likely, postponed. The existing I-40/I-49 interchange has to be modified significantly, if not completely re-built for I-49 to extend South. Then there's all the grading work and bridge building needed to raise I-49 out of the flood plain near the river. I think AR DOT will need a lot of funding help from some future national infrastructure package via the US Congress to get the Fort Smith section completed.

The most difficult project farther South is the mountain pass between Mena and Waldron. But that's not a road block to just getting the town bypasses built in Super 2 or 4-lane configuration. The upshot to tackling some of the rural and small town segments first is it may give off the illusion of overall progress happening faster. Nothing is going to happen at all anytime soon if all progress must wait until the Alma to Barling segment is built.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on July 28, 2020, 04:41:50 PM
Like the old cliche' goes, the best way to eat an elephant is one bite at a time!  But it's also wise not to start with trying to digest the tusks!  If scarce available funds are to be allocated all over the state, a single project such as the remainder of I-49 is best tackled in a way, as stated in the previous post, that publicly shows progress on the corridor, regardless of how limited (like an initial Super-2 around Mena or De Queen).  Enough of them, and for the most part it'll be a matter of connecting the dots except for the mountainous segment that'll essentially overlay US 71 between Mena and Waldron. 

But the Arkansas River bridge is a whole 'nuther thing -- a high-level structure over a navigable waterway with significant floodplain crossing on either side!  If anything calls for a SIU-type independent approach, Alma-Barling does!  I'm guessing tolls are still somewhere on the discussion table; it's probably a matter of deciding just how much the market will bear vs. how long it'll take to make a dent in the initial bridge cost.  But the saving grace of all of AR's share of I-49 is that the competing routes are I-44/35, which adds considerable miles to a commercial trip, or US 69 -- and I'd simply refer you to that thread to flesh out what's happening (or, more succinctly, not happening) there.  If built -- and if TX comes close to completing the I-69/369 continuum at roughly the same time, I-49 will invariably be the N-S corridor of choice for regional travel.  A few bucks in tolls won't deter commercial traffic, especially with ORT (although some subsidized structure will likely be politically necessary for locals).  But the upshot is that the bridge project needs to be "broken out" into a separately addressed issue -- possibly with a dedicated funding/development/operating authority within the AR administrative structure.  If I were ADOT, I'd start serious planning and ROW inquiries for whatever the initial non-bridge projects along I-49 will be -- it'll get the locals' interest up and potentially clamoring for funds for "their" segment(s) -- making them the proverbial "squeaky wheel".  It's worked before; and worth at least a shot!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bwana39 on July 29, 2020, 12:06:37 AM
Tolls are not in the offerings for Arkansas.  Simply, if it needs to be tolled, it just will not be built.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sprjus4 on July 29, 2020, 12:48:13 AM
Tolls are not in the offerings for Arkansas.  Simply, if it needs to be tolled, it just will not be built.
Would rather see a toll bridge than no bridge.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on July 29, 2020, 07:58:22 AM
Tolls are not in the offerings for Arkansas.  Simply, if it needs to be tolled, it just will not be built.
Would rather see a toll bridge than no bridge.

The law would have to be changed.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: GreenLanternCorps on July 29, 2020, 08:05:57 AM
Like the old cliche' goes, the best way to eat an elephant is one bite at a time!  But it's also wise not to start with trying to digest the tusks!  If scarce available funds are to be allocated all over the state, a single project such as the remainder of I-49 is best tackled in a way, as stated in the previous post, that publicly shows progress on the corridor, regardless of how limited (like an initial Super-2 around Mena or De Queen).  Enough of them, and for the most part it'll be a matter of connecting the dots except for the mountainous segment that'll essentially overlay US 71 between Mena and Waldron. 

But the Arkansas River bridge is a whole 'nuther thing -- a high-level structure over a navigable waterway with significant floodplain crossing on either side!  If anything calls for a SIU-type independent approach, Alma-Barling does!  I'm guessing tolls are still somewhere on the discussion table; it's probably a matter of deciding just how much the market will bear vs. how long it'll take to make a dent in the initial bridge cost.  But the saving grace of all of AR's share of I-49 is that the competing routes are I-44/35, which adds considerable miles to a commercial trip, or US 69 -- and I'd simply refer you to that thread to flesh out what's happening (or, more succinctly, not happening) there.  If built -- and if TX comes close to completing the I-69/369 continuum at roughly the same time, I-49 will invariably be the N-S corridor of choice for regional travel.  A few bucks in tolls won't deter commercial traffic, especially with ORT (although some subsidized structure will likely be politically necessary for locals).  But the upshot is that the bridge project needs to be "broken out" into a separately addressed issue -- possibly with a dedicated funding/development/operating authority within the AR administrative structure.  If I were ADOT, I'd start serious planning and ROW inquiries for whatever the initial non-bridge projects along I-49 will be -- it'll get the locals' interest up and potentially clamoring for funds for "their" segment(s) -- making them the proverbial "squeaky wheel".  It's worked before; and worth at least a shot!

There is one other advantage to completing I-49 between US 71 at Texarkana and AR 255 in Fort Smith.  It will create a need that does not exist yet (at least in regards to the general public's view).

Right now the I-49 Bridge doesn't connect to anything, at least in the view of a layman.  By completing the rest of the Interstate you now have a visible reason to connect the gap
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on July 29, 2020, 08:59:36 AM

There is one other advantage to completing I-49 between US 75 at Texarkana and AR 255 in Fort Smith.  It will create a need that does not exist yet (at least in regards to the general public's view).

Right now the I-49 Bridge doesn't connect to anything, at least in the view of a layman.  By completing the rest of the Interstate you now have a visible reason to connect the gap

75 doesn't go through Texarkana. :)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sprjus4 on July 29, 2020, 12:38:54 PM
^ US-71
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: GreenLanternCorps on August 01, 2020, 07:06:30 AM

There is one other advantage to completing I-49 between US 75 at Texarkana and AR 255 in Fort Smith.  It will create a need that does not exist yet (at least in regards to the general public's view).

Right now the I-49 Bridge doesn't connect to anything, at least in the view of a layman.  By completing the rest of the Interstate you now have a visible reason to connect the gap

75 doesn't go through Texarkana. :)

DOH!  Fixed it.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Revive 755 on August 01, 2020, 11:21:39 AM
The existing I-40/I-49 interchange has to be modified significantly, if not completely re-built for I-49 to extend South.

Unless I-49 becomes the top level for a stack; Texas has a similar design for the President George Bush Turnpike at US 75 (Streetview (https://goo.gl/maps/MsKvZE4XVGeK8qKz7)).  A complete rebuild to a cloverstack would probably be cheaper than going for a full stack though.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on August 03, 2020, 04:36:45 PM
In a directional stack arrangement, yes, the main lanes of I-49 would have to be built on the fourth level above the existing ramps of the existing interchange. The problem with the ramps in the existing interchange is they're all single lane. Most stack interchanges in Texas have 2 lane wide directional ramps that leave the main roadway, rise up and then split into 2 ramps. Various partial stacks have stubs at the split for adding additional ramps later. The ramps for the I-40/I-49 interchange in Alma don't have any of that stuff. Plus, IIRC, the interchange is around 30 years old.

There's really no telling what the final design may be for that remodeled interchange. But it's a safe bet it won't be built any time soon.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: GreenLanternCorps on August 05, 2020, 01:55:48 PM
I found this picture on the Build I-49 Facebook page.  It is from the future I-49 - US 71 interchange.  It appears to be looking Northwest, AR 549 (Future I-49) is on the left of the photo.

(https://scontent-ort2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/116156298_10158635930993624_1430017286064492791_o.jpg?_nc_cat=110&_nc_sid=8024bb&_nc_ohc=awfcLu_OmAMAX-gdIZY&_nc_ht=scontent-ort2-1.xx&oh=c7fde6ab0bb9530b3c6092233119c47f&oe=5F4EE109)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on August 31, 2020, 06:37:29 AM
I was always under the impression roads and rail, well basically all infrastructure, pays for itself in the way of allowing society to function and prosper.

This is what conservatives don't understand. They think everything that the government and society do must be for a profit, and they shouldn't do things just for the betterment of society. That is why the ones who actually understand the meaning of "socialism" oppose it so much. They get it wrong because without government investment, we would have no services and no modern society. And they also don't seem to understand that public roads and services are examples of socialism. The majority of conservatives believe "socialism" means "Stalinist communism" and think anybody to the left of Mussolini is a communist, even though they don't know the meaning of that word, either. We need a mass education effort in this country to straighten out the false beliefs and delusions that are so common today.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on August 31, 2020, 11:10:19 AM
I was always under the impression roads and rail, well basically all infrastructure, pays for itself in the way of allowing society to function and prosper.

This is what conservatives don't understand. They think everything that the government and society do must be for a[profit, and they shouldn't do things just for the betterment of society. That is why the ones who actually understand the meaning of "socialism" oppose it so much. They get it wrong because without government investment, we would have no services and no modern society. And they also don't seem to understand that public roads and services are examples of socialism. The majority of conservatives believe "socialism" means "Stalinist communism" and think anybody to the left of Mussolini is a communist, even though they don't know the meaning of that word, either. We need a mass education effort in this country to straighten out the false beliefs and delusions that are so common today.

They've been brainwashed by the Reich Wing
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bwana39 on August 31, 2020, 03:19:14 PM
I was always under the impression roads and rail, well basically all infrastructure, pays for itself in the way of allowing society to function and prosper.

This is what conservatives don't understand. They think everything that the government and society do must be for a[profit, and they shouldn't do things just for the betterment of society. That is why the ones who actually understand the meaning of "socialism" oppose it so much. They get it wrong because without government investment, we would have no services and no modern society. And they also don't seem to understand that public roads and services are examples of socialism. The majority of conservatives believe "socialism" means "Stalinist communism" and think anybody to the left of Mussolini is a communist, even though they don't know the meaning of that word, either. We need a mass education effort in this country to straighten out the false beliefs and delusions that are so common today.

No I disagree. The things government and society do should profit the whole of the society. I think the rub is that there remains questions over if given projects benefit society in general or just select members. This question rubs both ways.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: kphoger on August 31, 2020, 03:35:57 PM
Socialism means non-privately-owned means of production.  It doesn't really pertain all that much to highways.

Conservatives are ones who tend strongly to keeping the status quo.  One can be both a conservative and a liberal (free speech being one example of an ideal of both), but generally one cannot be both a conservative and left-wing.  Politically, conservatives tend to be warm to things being "for profit" because they believe profit drives economic growth, while taking profit out of the equation leads to inflated costs and inferior results.  As such, they believe that things being "for a profit" is "for the betterment of society".  When it comes to infrastructure, then, their natural reaction to a potential project would be:  If nobody is already building it for profit, then I remain skeptical that it's the most beneficial use of our resources.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: chays on September 01, 2020, 03:24:47 PM
Bing maps is now showing in their roads layer that the Bella Vista Bypass is complete. However, it is not currently routable.

https://www.bing.com/maps?osid=44214785-7ea6-4981-84ec-a934a2e8df39&cp=36.516305~-94.330104&lvl=12&v=2&sV=2&form=S00027
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on September 01, 2020, 03:26:57 PM
Bing maps is now showing in their roads layer that the Bella Vista Bypass is complete. However, it is not currently routable.

https://www.bing.com/maps?osid=44214785-7ea6-4981-84ec-a934a2e8df39&cp=36.516305~-94.330104&lvl=12&v=2&sV=2&form=S00027

I see the map is co-signed I-49 and AR 549.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on September 01, 2020, 06:45:18 PM
Bing maps is now showing in their roads layer that the Bella Vista Bypass is complete. However, it is not currently routable.

https://www.bing.com/maps?osid=44214785-7ea6-4981-84ec-a934a2e8df39&cp=36.516305~-94.330104&lvl=12&v=2&sV=2&form=S00027

I see the map is co-signed I-49 and AR 549.

I'd take that "completion" with a shaker -- rather than a simple grain -- of salt!  And it looks like the only "mapped" I-49 signage is at the ends of the project at the termini of each state's completed segment.  At least they didn't continue the 549 designation into MO, which doesn't follow ARDOT's "temporary" numbering idiom.  Bing Maps is certainly jumping the gun a bit with this one!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Plutonic Panda on September 01, 2020, 06:47:51 PM
Looks like a couple developers got excited!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sprjus4 on September 01, 2020, 06:48:53 PM
^

Somebody also peaked at the design plans enough to realize while the Arkansas section has a 60 foot median, the Missouri section has a concrete barrier and narrow footprint. This is accurately represented by the lines they drew.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on September 01, 2020, 10:43:09 PM
Looks like Missouri really has to finish their part of the BVP now!

I just hope none of this premature data is migrated into any automobile GPS systems. You might have people driving off into the wild blue yonder. The situation reminds me of the movie Speed (jeez, is that movie really 26 years old now?). There's the scene where they find out there's a gap in the freeway ahead:
Norwood: "Sir we have a serious problem."
Capt. McMahon: "What?"
Norwood: "This freeway isn't finished!"
Capt. McMahon: "What are you talking about?"
Norwood: "The aerial unit caught it about 3 miles ahead. There's a section missing!"
Capt. McMahon: "Section missing?" (grabs a map out of his vest)
Capt. McMahon: "But it's on the map! It's finished on the Goddamn map!"
Norwood: "I guess they fell behind!"
Capt. McMahon: "Fuck. You're fired. Everybody's fuckin' fired!"

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on September 01, 2020, 10:50:38 PM
Looks like Missouri really has to finish their part of the BVP now!

I just hope none of this premature data is migrated into any automobile GPS systems. You might have people driving off into the wild blue yonder. The situation reminds me of the movie Speed (jeez, is that movie really 26 years old now?). There's the scene where they find out there's a gap in the freeway ahead:
Norwood: "Sir we have a serious problem."
Capt. McMahon: "What?"
Norwood: "This freeway isn't finished!"
Capt. McMahon: "What are you talking about?"
Norwood: "About 3 miles ahead there's a section missing!"
Capt. McMahon: "Section missing?" (reaches for map)
Capt. McMahon: "But it's on the map! It's finished! On the Goddamn map!"
Norwood: "I guess they fell behind!"
Capt. McMahon: "Fuck. You're fired. Everybody's fucking fired!"



They are working on it. MoDOT has been doing blasting in the vicinity of the 49/71 split near Pineville.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bwana39 on September 02, 2020, 02:59:59 PM
Bing maps is now showing in their roads layer that the Bella Vista Bypass is complete. However, it is not currently routable.

https://www.bing.com/maps?osid=44214785-7ea6-4981-84ec-a934a2e8df39&cp=36.516305~-94.330104&lvl=12&v=2&sV=2&form=S00027

This reminds me of my first significant trip using GPS on my phone.  We missed a turn at Merced. When we looked at what the GPS suggested, it took us out across nowhere. We wound up in Raymond. I don't think it was Raymond Road. It started out as a fair paved road. Then it turned to rock. The GPS was still routing us along. There were wooden signs at intersections. That pointed one way or another. Then it turned to a maintained dirt road.  At some point, we are on a dirt trail. Once, I had to get out and herd the cows out of the "road". We lost phone signal (and the phone based maps). We came to another intersection. There were no legible signs, no GPS signal, just a guess.  I guessed right. The next intersection (a mile or less away) was a paved road.

It was an adventure, but it felt a little hairy for a while.  I learned something. I had thought cool weather agriculture (fresh vegetables) and some dairy cattle was the the limits of significant farming and ranching in California. I saw thousands heads of  beef cattle and some soybeans.

I digress, just because your GPS says, doe NOT mean it is what you should do. 

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: edwaleni on September 03, 2020, 09:48:49 AM
Yes, there is also the story of the couple in their rental SUV who followed their GPS blindly which took them up what was essentially a logging road and they got caught in a blizzard on a pass and nearly froze to death.

Google Maps is not a common sense replacement.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on September 03, 2020, 12:14:34 PM
Yes, there is also the story of the couple in their rental SUV who followed their GPS blindly which took them up what was essentially a logging road and they got caught in a blizzard on a pass and nearly froze to death.

Google Maps is not a common sense replacement.

I thought that was common sense? :p
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: ozarkman417 on September 03, 2020, 02:01:31 PM
It's not good that Bing added it so early, but who actually uses Bing Maps? I'd think most people would have the common sense to not crash through a ROAD CLOSED sign.

That said, is it better (or worse) to add a road months ahead of time, or months after it is done? Given our reliance on those programs, I would say after.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: I-55 on September 03, 2020, 02:20:29 PM
It's not good that Bing added it so early, but who actually uses Bing Maps? I'd think most people would have the common sense to not crash through a ROAD CLOSED sign.

That said, is it better (or worse) to add a road months ahead of time, or months after it is done? Given our reliance on those programs, I would say after.

Probably the latter. I remember when Rand McNally had I-269 complete on maps 2 full years before the road was completed (I want to say it was the 2017 and 2018 versions, I don't remember clearly). At least I-269 ended on a 4 lane highway (MS-302) unlike I-49 on some small two lane road.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: The Ghostbuster on September 03, 2020, 02:23:15 PM
The Bella Vista Bypass was planned to be a toll road: http://www.arkansashighways.com/BVB/Copy%20of%20bellavista.aspx. I assume plans to make it a toll road were abandoned long ago, right?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on September 03, 2020, 03:55:59 PM
The Bella Vista Bypass was planned to be a toll road: http://www.arkansashighways.com/BVB/Copy%20of%20bellavista.aspx. I assume plans to make it a toll road were abandoned long ago, right?

Long ago.  This was funded by the sales tax Arkansas passed about 8 years ago to fund road projects around the state.  Toll roads have consistently been shown in studies to not pay back bonds in Arkansas.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on September 03, 2020, 04:49:28 PM
The Bella Vista Bypass was planned to be a toll road: http://www.arkansashighways.com/BVB/Copy%20of%20bellavista.aspx. I assume plans to make it a toll road were abandoned long ago, right?

Long ago.  This was funded by the sales tax Arkansas passed about 8 years ago to fund road projects around the state.  Toll roads have consistently been shown in studies to not pay back bonds in Arkansas.

If my remembrances are correct, state highway law would have had to be changed to allow a public toll road.

OTOH, XNA was going to build a privately owned toll road from the 412 Bypass to the regional airport....emphasis WAS. They have since sweet-talked ARDOT into building a publicly funded access road for them.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on September 03, 2020, 06:58:42 PM
The Bella Vista Bypass was planned to be a toll road: http://www.arkansashighways.com/BVB/Copy%20of%20bellavista.aspx. I assume plans to make it a toll road were abandoned long ago, right?

Long ago.  This was funded by the sales tax Arkansas passed about 8 years ago to fund road projects around the state.  Toll roads have consistently been shown in studies to not pay back bonds in Arkansas.

If my remembrances are correct, state highway law would have had to be changed to allow a public toll road.

OTOH, XNA was going to build a privately owned toll road from the 412 Bypass to the regional airport....emphasis WAS. They have since sweet-talked ARDOT into building a publicly funded access road for them.

There is actually an Arkansas Turnpike Authority website (https://portal.arkansas.gov/agency/arkansas-turnpike-authority/).  Not much content there, but apparently they've got a placeholder if tolls ever do take off here.  I thought they actually did change the law to allow tolls many years ago, but that doesn't mean they're actually feasible for any projects here.

The road to XNA isn't very long from the junction with AR-612 once it's constructed in the area.  Pretty much every other airport in the state has an AR-980 going to it, so it likely didn't take much sweet talking to do a publicly funded connector.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: CtrlAltDel on September 08, 2020, 09:39:48 PM
It's not good that Bing added it so early, but who actually uses Bing Maps?

I used to, back when the freeways were purple and the tollways were green, since it was much easier to "read" an area with those distinctions. Now, all the roads are various shades of yellow, although it's not as bad as Google Maps has become.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on September 09, 2020, 03:29:34 AM
It's not good that Bing added it so early, but who actually uses Bing Maps?

I used to, back when the freeways were purple and the tollways were green, since it was much easier to "read" an area with those distinctions. Now, all the roads are various shades of yellow, although it's not as bad as Google Maps has become.

Sounds like Bing simply cut & pasted the McNally atlas colors (purple=freeway, chartreuse-green=toll road) but didn't follow through onto surface facilities.  Perhaps because the online maps use outlined formats for streets in order to accommodate zooming in that pastel colors like yellow are used so they don't mask ID details. 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: razorback0308 on October 11, 2020, 09:50:55 PM
I was surprised to see the NB lanes of the BV bypass will be asphalt instead of concrete, which would have matched the existing SB lanes. I even emailed ARDOT to confirm it as they started the asphalt.

I’m sure it was all for cost reasons, but it still seems like such an Arkansas thing to do. I can’t think of many, if any interstates in Arkansas, at least, that have different surfaces on the parallel lanes of the interstate.

Oh well, at least it will be a fully functioning interstate in roughly a year from now.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on October 12, 2020, 08:08:27 AM
I was surprised to see the NB lanes of the BV bypass will be asphalt instead of concrete, which would have matched the existing SB lanes. I even emailed ARDOT to confirm it as they started the asphalt.

I’m sure it was all for cost reasons, but it still seems like such an Arkansas thing to do. I can’t think of many, if any interstates in Arkansas, at least, that have different surfaces on the parallel lanes of the interstate.

Oh well, at least it will be a fully functioning interstate in roughly a year from now.

Looks like AR is joining the asphalt/concrete "combo" club that has membership including WA (US 395 from Pasco to I-90) and even CA -- although much of the CA "split carriageway" types are simply one direction having been converted to asphalt while the other direction will eventually be revamped likewise in a future fiscal term.  But this I-49 segment seems like the only instance of a completely new facility on new alignment being constructed in this manner; some of the others (including the US 395 segment cited above) were the result of decisions made during the "twinning" process.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on October 12, 2020, 09:12:42 AM
I was surprised to see the NB lanes of the BV bypass will be asphalt instead of concrete, which would have matched the existing SB lanes. I even emailed ARDOT to confirm it as they started the asphalt.

I’m sure it was all for cost reasons, but it still seems like such an Arkansas thing to do. I can’t think of many, if any interstates in Arkansas, at least, that have different surfaces on the parallel lanes of the interstate.

Oh well, at least it will be a fully functioning interstate in roughly a year from now.

Based on what I have seen, it's likely an asphalt base topped with concrete. 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: capt.ron on October 12, 2020, 12:39:44 PM
I was surprised to see the NB lanes of the BV bypass will be asphalt instead of concrete, which would have matched the existing SB lanes. I even emailed ARDOT to confirm it as they started the asphalt.

I’m sure it was all for cost reasons, but it still seems like such an Arkansas thing to do. I can’t think of many, if any interstates in Arkansas, at least, that have different surfaces on the parallel lanes of the interstate.

Oh well, at least it will be a fully functioning interstate in roughly a year from now.
The new lanes of US 67 by Jacksonville featured the same technique but the asphalt is for the base. They will have a thick layer of concrete on top of the asphalt.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bwana39 on October 12, 2020, 01:14:10 PM
I was surprised to see the NB lanes of the BV bypass will be asphalt instead of concrete, which would have matched the existing SB lanes. I even emailed ARDOT to confirm it as they started the asphalt.

I’m sure it was all for cost reasons, but it still seems like such an Arkansas thing to do. I can’t think of many, if any interstates in Arkansas, at least, that have different surfaces on the parallel lanes of the interstate.

Oh well, at least it will be a fully functioning interstate in roughly a year from now.
The new lanes of US 67 by Jacksonville featured the same technique but the asphalt is for the base. They will have a thick layer of concrete on top of the asphalt.

Have seen this in Texas as well. It is supposed to prevent the concrete from floating when the earth becomes saturated.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: kphoger on October 12, 2020, 01:40:25 PM
So it's basically like whitetopping from Day 1, then?  Or is there a fundamental difference?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on October 12, 2020, 05:04:08 PM
I was surprised to see the NB lanes of the BV bypass will be asphalt instead of concrete, which would have matched the existing SB lanes. I even emailed ARDOT to confirm it as they started the asphalt.

I’m sure it was all for cost reasons, but it still seems like such an Arkansas thing to do. I can’t think of many, if any interstates in Arkansas, at least, that have different surfaces on the parallel lanes of the interstate.

Oh well, at least it will be a fully functioning interstate in roughly a year from now.

Based on what I have seen, it's likely an asphalt base topped with concrete.
That should be correct. Once they’re ready to lay concrete, they’ll put in the rebar first. Then they’ll bring in the Gomaco and start putting in the final surface.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: J N Winkler on October 12, 2020, 07:11:22 PM
So it's basically like whitetopping from Day 1, then?  Or is there a fundamental difference?

The latter--it is full-depth concrete that goes on top of the base.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: cjk374 on October 12, 2020, 09:35:46 PM
So it's basically like whitetopping from Day 1, then?  Or is there a fundamental difference?

The latter--it is full-depth concrete that goes on top of the base.

For Arkansas that should be an 18" thick slab.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on October 13, 2020, 08:41:24 PM
Just drove AR-549 2 directions for a job today.  They are laying the concrete.  Didn't see any asphalt up to the southern AR-72 exit.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on October 14, 2020, 03:28:13 PM
Just drove AR-549 2 directions for a job today.  They are laying the concrete.  Didn't see any asphalt up to the southern AR-72 exit.

North of CR 34 (the current end)  there was asphalt back in July, but probably just the base and not the driving surface.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50152614567_5b845d9e9a_z_d.jpg)

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on October 24, 2020, 01:21:35 AM
Question, as I don't know how these things work:

In the next (hopefully) year or two when the Bella Vista Bypass is finished, would the AHTD change the sign at I-40 to I-49 from "Alma Fayetteville" (which is what I remember it being) to "Fayetteville Kansas City" given the new direct path from metro Fort Smith to one of America's largest metro areas?  Or would KC be too far away for them to do that?  I know that the current U S 67 signage had the mileage to St. Louis somewhere in the NLR limits or just above (Sherwood, Jacksonville) as I recall, so I'd guess there'll be a "Kansas City 200 miles" sign somewhere on Arkansas I-49 northbound above Alma.

Thank you in advance. ">)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on October 24, 2020, 08:05:54 AM
Question, as I don't know how these things work:

In the next (hopefully) year or two when the Bella Vista Bypass is finished, would the AHTD change the sign at I-40 to I-49 from "Alma Fayetteville" (which is what I remember it being) to "Fayetteville Kansas City" given the new direct path from metro Fort Smith to one of America's largest metro areas?  Or would KC be too far away for them to do that?  I know that the current U S 67 signage had the mileage to St. Louis somewhere in the NLR limits or just above (Sherwood, Jacksonville) as I recall, so I'd guess there'll be a "Kansas City 200 miles" sign somewhere on Arkansas I-49 northbound above Alma.

Thank you in advance. ">)

Wouldn't be a bit surprised to see Joplin show up as a control city for NB I-49 either from the I-40 junction or some other point in NWA.  If limited to 2 control cities on a BGS pull-through, it's possible that from I-40 the controls would be "Fayetteville/Joplin" (with KC showing up on NB I-49 mileage signs) until past Fayetteville; since most states prefer at least one in-state reference, possibly "Bentonville/Joplin" after that -- and finally "Joplin/Kansas City" once heading north from Bentonville. 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on October 24, 2020, 09:50:02 AM
Question, as I don't know how these things work:

In the next (hopefully) year or two when the Bella Vista Bypass is finished, would the AHTD change the sign at I-40 to I-49 from "Alma Fayetteville" (which is what I remember it being) to "Fayetteville Kansas City" given the new direct path from metro Fort Smith to one of America's largest metro areas?  Or would KC be too far away for them to do that?  I know that the current U S 67 signage had the mileage to St. Louis somewhere in the NLR limits or just above (Sherwood, Jacksonville) as I recall, so I'd guess there'll be a "Kansas City 200 miles" sign somewhere on Arkansas I-49 northbound above Alma.

Thank you in advance. ">)

Wouldn't be a bit surprised to see Joplin show up as a control city for NB I-49 either from the I-40 junction or some other point in NWA.  If limited to 2 control cities on a BGS pull-through, it's possible that from I-40 the controls would be "Fayetteville/Joplin" (with KC showing up on NB I-49 mileage signs) until past Fayetteville; since most states prefer at least one in-state reference, possibly "Bentonville/Joplin" after that -- and finally "Joplin/Kansas City" once heading north from Bentonville. 

(https://live.staticflickr.com/4665/38701135615_6f496db465_z_d.jpg)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Tomahawkin on October 24, 2020, 11:36:39 AM
If it has been signed as IH 49? would't that rouute receive federal funding for future projects? IMO that should be a high priority corridor with Wal Mart, JB Hunt and Tyson located there. 49 could be a huge economic north/south corridor from Canada (not directly but as a plan) to Texas. This alleviate travel from IH 35, which im sure gets congested in peak travel months
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sprjus4 on October 24, 2020, 11:56:33 AM
All routes apart of the National Highway System get federal funding. There hasn't been a dedicated funding source for interstate highway projects in decades, and unfortunately, the federal government seems to have little incentive to produce an infrastructure package to accelerate funding toward improving existing interstate highways (bridge replacements, rehabilitation projects, major widening on certain routes, etc.) and construction / completion of newer corridors.

With the completion of the Belle Vista Bypass, I-49 will be complete between Fort Smith, AR and Kansas City, MO, connecting to I-29 and I-35 North. The biggest, most notable gap is obviously Fort Smith to Texarkana.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on October 24, 2020, 12:05:38 PM
All routes apart of the National Highway System get federal funding. There hasn't been a dedicated funding source for interstate highway projects in decades, and unfortunately, the federal government seems to have little incentive to produce an infrastructure package to accelerate funding toward improving existing interstate highways (bridge replacements, rehabilitation projects, major widening on certain routes, etc.) and construction / completion of newer corridors.

With the completion of the Belle Vista Bypass, I-49 will be complete between Fort Smith, AR and Kansas City, MO, connecting to I-29 and I-35 North. The biggest, most notable gap is obviously Fort Smith to Texarkana.

IMO, ARDOT doesn't have a lot of incentive like Walmart/Tyson/JB Hunt breathing down their necks to get it done.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on October 24, 2020, 01:11:30 PM
Thank you for the responses, all.  It seems like I remember at West Memphis the I-55 northbound signs used to say "Blytheville St Louis" as the destination rather than "Cape Girardeau", so that's also why I wondered about the potential "Kansas City" I-49 counterparts in Alma.  (Apologies, I don't have time in Google to go "drive" that route at WM to see what the signs indicate today.)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Revive 755 on October 24, 2020, 01:31:01 PM
Thank you for the responses, all.  It seems like I remember at West Memphis the I-55 northbound signs used to say "Blytheville St Louis" as the destination rather than "Cape Girardeau", so that's also why I wondered about the potential "Kansas City" I-49 counterparts in Alma.  (Apologies, I don't have time in Google to go "drive" that route at WM to see what the signs indicate today.)

Streetview still has NB I-55 with Blytheville and St. Louis in West Memphis. (https://goo.gl/maps/bs4eNqqkdrjG8MNL6).  I don't recall Cape Girardeau being mentioned much on I-55 except on the sections to Cape from Sikeston and St. Louis.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on October 24, 2020, 04:58:04 PM
Thank you for the responses, all.  It seems like I remember at West Memphis the I-55 northbound signs used to say "Blytheville St Louis" as the destination rather than "Cape Girardeau", so that's also why I wondered about the potential "Kansas City" I-49 counterparts in Alma.  (Apologies, I don't have time in Google to go "drive" that route at WM to see what the signs indicate today.)

Streetview still has NB I-55 with Blytheville and St. Louis in West Memphis. (https://goo.gl/maps/bs4eNqqkdrjG8MNL6).  I don't recall Cape Girardeau being mentioned much on I-55 except on the sections to Cape from Sikeston and St. Louis.

Revive 755, it may not happen this time, but knowing how every section of I-49 completed now is like replacing a new hose on a radiator that has had several other old hoses, and will put ever more pressure to finish the big Alma-to-Texarkana section...this highway will someday be as key of a trucking corridor as I-57 is, so I do expect to see a "Kansas City" turnoff sign some day at Alma.  BTW, thanks also for the response.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on October 24, 2020, 05:11:36 PM
Thank you for the responses, all.  It seems like I remember at West Memphis the I-55 northbound signs used to say "Blytheville St Louis" as the destination rather than "Cape Girardeau", so that's also why I wondered about the potential "Kansas City" I-49 counterparts in Alma.  (Apologies, I don't have time in Google to go "drive" that route at WM to see what the signs indicate today.)

Streetview still has NB I-55 with Blytheville and St. Louis in West Memphis. (https://goo.gl/maps/bs4eNqqkdrjG8MNL6).  I don't recall Cape Girardeau being mentioned much on I-55 except on the sections to Cape from Sikeston and St. Louis.

Revive 755, it may not happen this time, but knowing how every section of I-49 completed now is like replacing a new hose on a radiator that has had several other old hoses, and will put ever more pressure to finish the big Alma-to-Texarkana section...this highway will someday be as key of a trucking corridor as I-57 is, so I do expect to see a "Kansas City" turnoff sign some day at Alma.  BTW, thanks also for the response.

The last overhead for 49 at Bentonville has Joplin as the Control City

Kansas City doesn't appear until 49 gets to Joplin.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on October 24, 2020, 07:03:51 PM
Thank you for the responses, all.  It seems like I remember at West Memphis the I-55 northbound signs used to say "Blytheville St Louis" as the destination rather than "Cape Girardeau", so that's also why I wondered about the potential "Kansas City" I-49 counterparts in Alma.  (Apologies, I don't have time in Google to go "drive" that route at WM to see what the signs indicate today.)

Streetview still has NB I-55 with Blytheville and St. Louis in West Memphis. (https://goo.gl/maps/bs4eNqqkdrjG8MNL6).  I don't recall Cape Girardeau being mentioned much on I-55 except on the sections to Cape from Sikeston and St. Louis.

Revive 755, it may not happen this time, but knowing how every section of I-49 completed now is like replacing a new hose on a radiator that has had several other old hoses, and will put ever more pressure to finish the big Alma-to-Texarkana section...this highway will someday be as key of a trucking corridor as I-57 is, so I do expect to see a "Kansas City" turnoff sign some day at Alma.  BTW, thanks also for the response.

The last overhead for 49 at Bentonville has Joplin as the Control City

Kansas City doesn't appear until 49 gets to Joplin.

Joplin is certainly growing, post-horrific 2011 tornado and now that it's the crossroads of two busy interstates. I'll hang loose and see what happens (as if I can do anything else about it ">) .
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on October 24, 2020, 07:12:46 PM
Thank you for the responses, all.  It seems like I remember at West Memphis the I-55 northbound signs used to say "Blytheville St Louis" as the destination rather than "Cape Girardeau", so that's also why I wondered about the potential "Kansas City" I-49 counterparts in Alma.  (Apologies, I don't have time in Google to go "drive" that route at WM to see what the signs indicate today.)

Streetview still has NB I-55 with Blytheville and St. Louis in West Memphis. (https://goo.gl/maps/bs4eNqqkdrjG8MNL6).  I don't recall Cape Girardeau being mentioned much on I-55 except on the sections to Cape from Sikeston and St. Louis.

Revive 755, it may not happen this time, but knowing how every section of I-49 completed now is like replacing a new hose on a radiator that has had several other old hoses, and will put ever more pressure to finish the big Alma-to-Texarkana section...this highway will someday be as key of a trucking corridor as I-57 is, so I do expect to see a "Kansas City" turnoff sign some day at Alma.  BTW, thanks also for the response.

The last overhead for 49 at Bentonville has Joplin as the Control City

Kansas City doesn't appear until 49 gets to Joplin.

Joplin is certainly growing, post-horrific 2011 tornado and now that it's the crossroads of two busy interstates. I'll hang loose and see what happens (as if I can do anything else about it ">) .

They are also getting a Casey's Distribution Center.  Joplin also pulls in the roadies following old US 66.  Plus Mercy built a band new hospital to replace the one that was skragged by the tornado
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: I-55 on October 24, 2020, 08:56:20 PM
Thank you for the responses, all.  It seems like I remember at West Memphis the I-55 northbound signs used to say "Blytheville St Louis" as the destination rather than "Cape Girardeau", so that's also why I wondered about the potential "Kansas City" I-49 counterparts in Alma.  (Apologies, I don't have time in Google to go "drive" that route at WM to see what the signs indicate today.)

Streetview still has NB I-55 with Blytheville and St. Louis in West Memphis. (https://goo.gl/maps/bs4eNqqkdrjG8MNL6).  I don't recall Cape Girardeau being mentioned much on I-55 except on the sections to Cape from Sikeston and St. Louis.

A similar phenomenon to I-57 in Illinois: Chicago and Memphis at interstate junctions, smaller cities (Champaign, Effingham, etc.) at arterial interchanges.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on October 24, 2020, 09:44:49 PM
Just surprised that, considering the prominence of Wal-Mart and Bentonville in the general NWA area, the NB BGS shown above (in reply #2669) doesn't have Bentonville as a nearfield control city.   
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on October 24, 2020, 09:54:43 PM
Just surprised that, considering the prominence of Wal-Mart and Bentonville in the general NWA area, the NB BGS shown above (in reply #2669) doesn't have Bentonville as a nearfield control city.   

IIRC, before the signs were updated at the new Exit 67, Springdale & Rogers were control for 49 North
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: galador on October 26, 2020, 09:13:40 AM
There's an article in the Southwest Times Record (https://www.swtimes.com/news/20201026/ardot-looks-to-issue-1-for-i-49-funds?rssfeed=true) (Fort Smith paper) saying that if Issue 1 is approved, then ARDOT will begin work on the bridge between Fort Smith and Alma:

Quote
Arkansas State Highway Commissioner Keith Gibson of Fort Smith said Issue 1 funds, if approved by voters, would give the state enough money to begin construction on I-49 between Alma and Chaffee Crossing.

Gibson said funds from the proposed 0.5% sales tax for Issue 1 would secure $270 million for a two-lane stretch of the interstate from Alma to Chaffee Crossing to be constructed over the next 10 years. If approved, the Arkansas State Highway Commission would vote on the project with hopes of securing federal funding as well.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: mvak36 on October 26, 2020, 03:00:54 PM
I wonder how they're going to do the Arkansas River bridge. Are they going to build a two lane bridge now and build a new one once they get funding or will they just build a four lane bridge? IMO, it seems like building the 4 lane bridge now would save money since the construction costs will just keep going up.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on October 26, 2020, 03:50:11 PM
I wonder how they're going to do the Arkansas River bridge. Are they going to build a two lane bridge now and build a new one once they get funding or will they just build a four lane bridge? IMO, it seems like building the 4 lane bridge now would save money since the construction costs will just keep going up.

If it's anything like (future) I-49 north if Bentonville, it will be built as 2 lanes, but right of way for 4.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bwana39 on October 26, 2020, 06:08:25 PM
I wonder how they're going to do the Arkansas River bridge. Are they going to build a two lane bridge now and build a new one once they get funding or will they just build a four lane bridge? IMO, it seems like building the 4 lane bridge now would save money since the construction costs will just keep going up.

I didn't see where they were gonna build a bridge at all. What It read was the roads. Build the road then dare someone to not BRIDGE the gap.

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: mvak36 on October 26, 2020, 06:12:14 PM
I wonder how they're going to do the Arkansas River bridge. Are they going to build a two lane bridge now and build a new one once they get funding or will they just build a four lane bridge? IMO, it seems like building the 4 lane bridge now would save money since the construction costs will just keep going up.

I didn't see where they were gonna build a bridge at all. What It read was the roads. Build the road then dare someone to not BRIDGE the gap.

In the article when they said "I-49 between Alma and Chaffee Crossing", I figured it would include the bridge since Chaffee Crossing is south of the river.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on October 26, 2020, 08:01:39 PM

Quote
The proposed I-49 route would cross Arkansas 162 near Hamer Road, then cross Frog Bayou near Waterfront Road before skirting the east side of Kibler at New Town Road, then proceed south and west over Thornhill Street, Westville Road and Gun Club Road before crossing the Arkansas River at Springhill Park into Barling, then connecting with I-549 at Arkansas 22.

https://www.swtimes.com/news/20180330/ardots-sneak-peek-of-i-49-extension-includes-toll-system (Southwest Times Record Mar 30, 2018 )
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on October 26, 2020, 08:27:43 PM
It's going to take them 10 years to build a 2-lane chunk of highway between Alma and Chaffee Crossing? Geez that's pathetic.

The extreme costs and slower than glacier pace rate of road building in the US completely contradicts the BS about "infrastructure plans" floated by politicians on the campaign trail. Their boasts don't seem to be connected to reality. Or maybe when they talk about "infrastructure" they mean something entirely different from roads or even rail. Maybe it just means giving money to telcos to put up 5G towers faster or some nonsense similar to it.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on October 26, 2020, 08:34:47 PM
What I don't like about the 1/2 cent tax is there is a lot the money spent in the Little rock area so it is not to help other areas with less population. The I30 crossing is over 600 million and they have a phase 2 planned also. Our commissioners need to see that the money is for projects that will help create jobs and growth like I49 will when finished.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on October 26, 2020, 08:55:27 PM
What I don't like about the 1/2 cent tax is there is a lot the money spent in the Little rock area so it is not to help other areas with less population. The I30 crossing is over 600 million and they have a phase 2 planned also. Our commissioners need to see that the money is for projects that will help create jobs and growth like I49 will when finished.

That is how Arkansas works, sadly. Littlr Rock and NWA get the bulk of the money, everyone else fights over what's left.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: edwaleni on October 27, 2020, 12:24:26 AM
What I don't like about the 1/2 cent tax is there is a lot the money spent in the Little rock area so it is not to help other areas with less population. The I30 crossing is over 600 million and they have a phase 2 planned also. Our commissioners need to see that the money is for projects that will help create jobs and growth like I49 will when finished.

That is how Arkansas works, sadly. Little Rock and NWA get the bulk of the money, everyone else fights over what's left.

In Arkansas, Little Rock and NWA produce more of the money. Therefore they tend to get more.

Unless you think finishing I-57 was a fight for "what's left". There are no major population centers between Little Rock and the Missouri/Arkansas border. Jonesboro is not even on the route. Yet the US-67 corridor has done pretty darn good getting funding.

Don't let Arkansas become Illinois, building more interstate highway than they can afford to maintain.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on October 27, 2020, 04:16:57 AM
I wonder how they're going to do the Arkansas River bridge. Are they going to build a two lane bridge now and build a new one once they get funding or will they just build a four lane bridge? IMO, it seems like building the 4 lane bridge now would save money since the construction costs will just keep going up.

If it's anything like (future) I-49 north if Bentonville, it will be built as 2 lanes, but right of way for 4.

Can't really see a 2-lane bridge structure that would have to be twinned at some future point.  More than likely the bridge itself will be 4 lanes (maybe initially striped for 2), but the approaches might well be constructed, like the original AR 549 along the Bella Vista bypass,  as 2 lanes on a 4-lane ROW.  If a DOT is for various reasons intent on kicking the proverbial can down the road re eking out the funding, that's about the only rational way to do so. 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: mvak36 on October 27, 2020, 08:52:55 AM
I wonder how they're going to do the Arkansas River bridge. Are they going to build a two lane bridge now and build a new one once they get funding or will they just build a four lane bridge? IMO, it seems like building the 4 lane bridge now would save money since the construction costs will just keep going up.

If it's anything like (future) I-49 north if Bentonville, it will be built as 2 lanes, but right of way for 4.

Can't really see a 2-lane bridge structure that would have to be twinned at some future point.  More than likely the bridge itself will be 4 lanes (maybe initially striped for 2), but the approaches might well be constructed, like the original AR 549 along the Bella Vista bypass,  as 2 lanes on a 4-lane ROW.  If a DOT is for various reasons intent on kicking the proverbial can down the road re eking out the funding, that's about the only rational way to do so.
That's what I'm hoping it will be as well, but who knows what ARDOT has planned.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on October 27, 2020, 05:29:56 PM
This was the proposal when they did the toll study.                                                                                                                                             
 "Tom responded and said with the 2-lane option, one of the future two bridges at
proposed grade separation and interchanges would be built. He also stated that at
the Arkansas River, options could be a full build of a 4-lane bridge, or build just a
2-lane bridge and sub structure that lies in the river, to minimize future impacts to
the river and navigation channel. "
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Henry on October 28, 2020, 10:43:31 AM
I do hope that the four-lane bridge will be built. As it is, it really doesn't make sense to build one with two lanes, and then delay the other bridge until a determined date.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on October 28, 2020, 12:15:06 PM
Quote from: sparker
Can't really see a 2-lane bridge structure that would have to be twinned at some future point.

A lot of new Interstate highway bridges are built as twin span structures, even seemingly non-descript bridges without suspension towers, truss structures or other decorative features. Maybe one bridge will be built for the initial 2 lanes and then a second bridge for the second set of lanes will be built later.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on October 28, 2020, 05:13:51 PM
Quote from: sparker
Can't really see a 2-lane bridge structure that would have to be twinned at some future point.

A lot of new Interstate highway bridges are built as twin span structures, even seemingly non-descript bridges without suspension towers, truss structures or other decorative features. Maybe one bridge will be built for the initial 2 lanes and then a second bridge for the second set of lanes will be built later.

That is what was done on current 549: build 2 lane, but ROW for 2 additional. In the case of 549 going UNDER another road, short sections of ALL lanes were built (you can see this at Hwy 72)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on October 28, 2020, 05:30:16 PM
Quote from: sparker
Can't really see a 2-lane bridge structure that would have to be twinned at some future point.

A lot of new Interstate highway bridges are built as twin span structures, even seemingly non-descript bridges without suspension towers, truss structures or other decorative features. Maybe one bridge will be built for the initial 2 lanes and then a second bridge for the second set of lanes will be built later.

Somehow I doubt ADOT will employ this approach; the cost -- particularly with inevitable inflation raising the cost of a 2nd bridge -- of doing two individual bridges would be substantially more than a single 4-lane structure.  Unless there's a major near-term local clamoring for a Fort Smith bypass -- and the presence of I-540 mitigates against that -- there's no reason to opt for a partial solution that will need to be twinned at a later date at extra expense.  I'm guessing that ADOT will have to grit their teeth, browbeat the state legislature, and modify the stance on floating bonds for projects such as this if the project is to actually get off the starting blocks.   
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on October 28, 2020, 05:48:35 PM
What I don't like about the 1/2 cent tax is there is a lot the money spent in the Little rock area so it is not to help other areas with less population. The I30 crossing is over 600 million and they have a phase 2 planned also. Our commissioners need to see that the money is for projects that will help create jobs and growth like I49 will when finished.

That is how Arkansas works, sadly. Littlr Rock and NWA get the bulk of the money, everyone else fights over what's left.

In a Pay As You Go state like Arkansas, the Pay Goes where the money is.  Have to have funds to invest with at the end of the day.  Uncle Sam doesn't "make it rain" like he used to after all.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on October 28, 2020, 07:14:21 PM
Well, if Issue 1 is going to help finance the Interstate 49 Arkansas River Bridge between completed I-49 sections at Alma and Barling, polls appear to indicate that bridge will be built (and it's a pity that the late Ivy Owen of Chaffee Crossing didn't get to drive that bridge as he thought he might):

https://talkbusiness.net/2020/10/arkansas-poll-looks-good-for-trump-cotton-highway-tax/

BTW, talking about other sections of Arkansas benefitting, given that I-30 is having extra lanes added in Texarkana in advance of Texas I-369's linkage to that highway, it's inevitable that southwest Arkansas, at least, will see some significant things happening in the future.  The pressure WILL grow to complete I-49 Arkansas.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sprjus4 on October 28, 2020, 07:37:37 PM
given that I-30 is having extra lanes added in Texarkana
FTFY
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on October 28, 2020, 07:39:40 PM
given that I-30 is having extra lanes added in Texarkana
FTFY

Ecch...I ALWAYS make that mistake.  TY. ">) :pan:
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on November 15, 2020, 01:38:49 PM
Looks like full speed ahead  for Future 49  (https://talkbusiness.net/2020/11/interstate-49-projects-in-benton-county-still-on-track[/})in NW Arkansas.

Weather permitting, I may do a drive-by this next week or check on Missouri.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on December 14, 2020, 02:17:06 PM
Now the attention turns to the I-49 bridge at the Arkansas River:

Quote
I-49, possible truck reroute bridge costs estimated in hundreds of millions

...

The estimated cost of the I-49 bridge on the other end of the city is at least $30 million greater than the total amount of sales tax revenue the state expects for the entire route from Chaffee to Alma in the next 10 years. But the Department of Transportation also receives money from the state diesel and gas taxes, Gibson explained.

Gibson said the state plans to construct a two-lane extension of the highway with the state funds in hopes that federal money will be sent their way after the project has begun. They would then extend it to four lanes, he said.

Adams used the Garrison Bridge, which is technically two bridges next to each other, as an example of how a bridge could be expanded from two lanes to four.

Gibson said he is "very optimistic" that I-49 will be constructed.

"We have the support of the governor, our legislative delegation, probably a majority of the state legislature. I can’t predict the future, but that’s the plan. The plan is to do it," Gibson said. "We have the funding for it now that’s in place."

https://www.swtimes.com/story/news/2020/12/12/i-49-bridge-and-possible-bridge-reroute-traffic-not-cheap/3868773001/

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: The Ghostbuster on December 14, 2020, 07:13:08 PM
Is this the next section of future Interstate 49 that will be constructed? From AR 255 and across the Arkansas River, en route to Interstate 40?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on December 14, 2020, 08:16:25 PM
The Alma to Barling segment of I-49 (from the I-49/I-40 interchange down across the Arkansas River to connect to the currently orphaned freeway segment by Fort Chaffee) is supposed to be the next big priority after the Belle Vista Bypass is completed to the Missouri border. But the price tag is huge. I guess it can't be too surprising AR DOT is planning on building this segment 2 lanes at a time.

There are multiple ways how AR DOT can go about building I-49 between Texarkana and Fort Smith. They don't necessarily have to build the Alma to Barling segment first. Although it might be the best choice considering the ongoing price inflation of road construction -build it now for one price or build it later for far more.

AR DOT might be able to stretch the budget farther by starting work on the bypass segments in/near Mansfield, Waldron, Mena, DeQueen or Ashdown. They have to secure the ROW in those towns at some point. Better sooner than later. Just establishing a basic Super-2 road with at-grade intersections wouldn't be all that expensive. It would also give those towns a head start on growing into those new highway segments. By the time I-49 would be fully complete there would likely be a decent amount of businesses and services near the Interstate exits.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: edwaleni on December 14, 2020, 09:49:07 PM
I would surmise that the Alma to Barling section will be paid for as part of a defense reauthorization bill due to its proximity to Fort Chaffee.

Fort Chaffee will need some sort of "upgrade" and the road money will be buried in there.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on December 14, 2020, 11:09:02 PM
That all depends on how important Fort Chaffee remains to the armed forces. New rounds of Base Realignment And Closure (aka "BRAC") are in the works. Fort Chaffee currently operates as a post for the Arkansas National Guard. It was formerly a full time US Army post, but was set to close in the 1995 round of BRAC meetings. Most of the post's original field artillery training missions were transferred over to Fort Sill (over here in SW OK) in the late 1950's.

Much of the former Army post property is being converted to residential and commercial development as part of "Chaffee Crossing." A completed I-49 highway from I-40 down farther South would likely help in that redevelopment effort.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on December 14, 2020, 11:17:45 PM
I would surmise that the Alma to Barling section will be paid for as part of a defense reauthorization bill due to its proximity to Fort Chaffee.

Fort Chaffee will need some sort of "upgrade" and the road money will be buried in there.

Fort Chaffee isn't a very high priority for the Dept. of Defense.  They've tried to shut it down a few times over the past couple of decades now (BRAC, Base Realignment And Closure), but it continues to live on as a training base for the National Guard, with some Canadian troops popping down periodically for some warm weather training.  It's actually the reason a good portion of the existing section of I-49 in Barling/Ft. Smith is complete, as they got the land basically donated.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: abqtraveler on December 15, 2020, 03:40:05 PM
I would surmise that the Alma to Barling section will be paid for as part of a defense reauthorization bill due to its proximity to Fort Chaffee.

Fort Chaffee will need some sort of "upgrade" and the road money will be buried in there.

Fort Chaffee isn't a very high priority for the Dept. of Defense.  They've tried to shut it down a few times over the past couple of decades now (BRAC, Base Realignment And Closure), but it continues to live on as a training base for the National Guard, with some Canadian troops popping down periodically for some warm weather training.  It's actually the reason a good portion of the existing section of I-49 in Barling/Ft. Smith is complete, as they got the land basically donated.

The section through Fort Chaffee was completed using funds from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA). It was the only segment between Fort Smith and Texarkana that was deemed "shovel ready" and thus met the requirements to get funded.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on December 15, 2020, 04:42:28 PM
I would surmise that the Alma to Barling section will be paid for as part of a defense reauthorization bill due to its proximity to Fort Chaffee.

Fort Chaffee will need some sort of "upgrade" and the road money will be buried in there.

Fort Chaffee isn't a very high priority for the Dept. of Defense.  They've tried to shut it down a few times over the past couple of decades now (BRAC, Base Realignment And Closure), but it continues to live on as a training base for the National Guard, with some Canadian troops popping down periodically for some warm weather training.  It's actually the reason a good portion of the existing section of I-49 in Barling/Ft. Smith is complete, as they got the land basically donated.

The section through Fort Chaffee was completed using funds from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA). It was the only segment between Fort Smith and Texarkana that was deemed "shovel ready" and thus met the requirements to get funded.

True.  But the right-of-way was donated, which is a fairly big reason it was "shovel ready."

“Those are interstates, major arteries, routes of regional significance. And there are some areas where we’ve had to do capacity upgrades, like we just got finished widening I-49 to three lanes in both directions. With a project like this – we were able to build the stretch across Chaffee Crossing relatively cheaply in terms of construction because the federal government gave us the land. We did not have to purchase right-of-way. Right-of-way purchase, utility relocation costs – those tremendously add to the cost of a project.”
https://talkbusiness.net/2018/04/ardot-dusts-off-600-million-future-i-49-barling-to-alma-stretch/ (https://talkbusiness.net/2018/04/ardot-dusts-off-600-million-future-i-49-barling-to-alma-stretch/)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on December 15, 2020, 06:46:42 PM
I'm in agreement on the Arkansas River bridge. Bite the bullet now and build the segment in full. It will be far cheaper now than it will be in 10 to 20 years. Plus it'll be on the back burner after Leslie Rutledge or someone else who is non-NWA is elected the next governor.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on December 16, 2020, 01:32:40 PM
I'm in agreement on the Arkansas River bridge. Bite the bullet now and build the segment in full. It will be far cheaper now than it will be in 10 to 20 years. Plus it'll be on the back burner after Leslie Rutledge or someone else who is non-NWA is elected the next governor.

I second that.  I have family down in Charleston, 20 miles east of Barling and would use it regularly.  The current route used is AR-59, which is 2 lanes currently, adds 7 miles over what I-49 will ultimately enable, and crosses the river a half mile upstream over L&D 13.  It isn't particularly packed with traffic at this point, but with further development in Chaffee Crossing, that will change.  Also, I would almost guarantee that there are industrial interests that are holding out on development plans in Chaffee Crossing until there is a completed I-49, at least to US-71 south of Rye Hill.  That will increase the amount of traffic crossing the river going to I-40 or up I-49 north of Alma.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on December 16, 2020, 02:26:27 PM
I wonder if ArDOT are making progress on the engineering development which started this year to have it shovel ready in case our congress decides to pass another highway bill. That is key to be ready if any fed money becomes available.   
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Tomahawkin on December 16, 2020, 03:34:02 PM
Any word on a future highway deal. IMO its imperative for Arkansas to get one passed given both 49 and 57 need to get going and 30 SW of Little Rock needs a total overhaul, and I didn't even mention 69 because its probably 20 years away...
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on December 16, 2020, 04:16:32 PM
It's a drop in the bucket, but ARDOT could remove a few highways from the system.  They have way too many that don't go anywhere.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on December 16, 2020, 05:27:29 PM
Any word on a future highway deal. IMO its imperative for Arkansas to get one passed given both 49 and 57 need to get going and 30 SW of Little Rock needs a total overhaul, and I didn't even mention 69 because its probably 20 years away...

As far as a fully-constructed Interstate-standard section of I-69 goes (at least the main trunk, not the AR 530 "adjunct"), I'd say closer to 25-30 years minimum.  Not only does ADOT have too much on its plate to juggle that project among the more pressing ones, but there appears to be little pressure to advance beyond the 2-lane initial alignment between Monticello and McGehee, which would, for all intents and purposes, be an expandable project to address local needs.  The reality is that Shreveport-Memphis is the proverbial "red-headed stepchild" of the I-69 corridor; it'll be dealt with well after more vital stuff is behind the various states' agencies -- if funding happens to be available when that occurs.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: CoreySamson on December 16, 2020, 07:41:56 PM
Not only does ADOT have too much on its plate to juggle that project among the more pressing ones, but there appears to be little pressure to advance beyond the 2-lane initial alignment between Monticello and McGehee, which would, for all intents and purposes, be an expandable project to address local needs.  The reality is that Shreveport-Memphis is the proverbial "red-headed stepchild" of the I-69 corridor; it'll be dealt with well after more vital stuff is behind the various states' agencies -- if funding happens to be available when that occurs.

Yeah I'd say the Arkansas part of 69 is the least important section; traffic wanting to follow the 69 corridor could just use 30, 40, and 49 to get from Memphis to Shreveport. In fact, I feel that that route should be designated Temporary I-69.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: I-39 on December 16, 2020, 08:49:00 PM
Not only does ADOT have too much on its plate to juggle that project among the more pressing ones, but there appears to be little pressure to advance beyond the 2-lane initial alignment between Monticello and McGehee, which would, for all intents and purposes, be an expandable project to address local needs.  The reality is that Shreveport-Memphis is the proverbial "red-headed stepchild" of the I-69 corridor; it'll be dealt with well after more vital stuff is behind the various states' agencies -- if funding happens to be available when that occurs.

Yeah I'd say the Arkansas part of 69 is the least important section; traffic wanting to follow the 69 corridor could just use 30, 40, and 49 to get from Memphis to Shreveport. In fact, I feel that that route should be designated Temporary I-69.

You could make a case for the entire corridor being unnecessary. The I-70/57/30/35 routing could cover what I-69 is doing from Indianapolis to Mexico.

Arkansas needs to completely finish I-49/57 before even touching I-69 again.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on December 16, 2020, 09:38:54 PM
The Great River Bridge cost boondoggle and Mississippi's budget woes are the two things that make I-69 in Arkansas not worth addressing other than adding pieces of Super-2 route in some key areas just to preserve ROW. I-49 and I-57 are more worthwhile projects. Let's not forget about the need to expand I-40 East of Little Rock.

I'm curious to see what the incoming federal administration will manage to do regarding roads. There is talk about a big infrastructure project. But the whole thing is going to suck if the project amounts to installing thousands of hybrid car charging stations and funneling a bunch of money into high speed rail projects that will never materialize. The feds need to get back to basics on the roads and bridges stuff.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: I-39 on December 16, 2020, 10:03:24 PM
I'm curious to see what the incoming federal administration will manage to do regarding roads. There is talk about a big infrastructure project.

We hear this every time a new President comes in, and nothing ever comes of it.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: kphoger on December 16, 2020, 11:11:14 PM

I'm curious to see what the incoming federal administration will manage to do regarding roads. There is talk about a big infrastructure project.

We hear this every time a new President comes in, and nothing ever comes of it.

You noticed that too, huh?  It doesn't seem to matter what political party the President is from, either.  Same story.  They enter office with big infrastructure plans, and then that's the last you ever hear of it.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Plutonic Panda on December 17, 2020, 04:52:06 AM

I'm curious to see what the incoming federal administration will manage to do regarding roads. There is talk about a big infrastructure project.

We hear this every time a new President comes in, and nothing ever comes of it.

You noticed that too, huh?  It doesn't seem to matter what political party the President is from, either.  Same story.  They enter office with big infrastructure plans, and then that's the last you ever hear of it.
It is infuriating. For some odd reason I do feel like Biden will follow through with it but then again I was sure Trump was going to go big on infrastructure and nothing. Pretty soon we’re going to have major problems.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: ibthebigd on December 17, 2020, 05:12:57 AM
My idea is do a 10 cent gas tax hike and give every state 1 Billion per electoral vote.

SM-G950U

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: kphoger on December 17, 2020, 09:25:54 AM
My idea is do a 10 cent gas tax hike and give every state 1 Billion per electoral vote.

Well, with this thread supposedly being about Arkansas specifically... good luck getting the voters in Arkansas to go along with that proposal!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on December 19, 2020, 12:44:24 PM
My idea is do a 10 cent gas tax hike and give every state 1 Billion per electoral vote.

Well, with this thread supposedly being about Arkansas specifically... good luck getting the voters in Arkansas to go along with that proposal!

As long as that states taxes "somebody else".
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: I-39 on January 24, 2021, 08:35:44 AM
Are they going to renumber the exits between I-40 and Bella Vista once the bypass is complete?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Scott5114 on January 25, 2021, 12:29:35 AM

I'm curious to see what the incoming federal administration will manage to do regarding roads. There is talk about a big infrastructure project.

We hear this every time a new President comes in, and nothing ever comes of it.

You noticed that too, huh?  It doesn't seem to matter what political party the President is from, either.  Same story.  They enter office with big infrastructure plans, and then that's the last you ever hear of it.

That's mostly because the President can plan until they're blue in the face, but the power of the purse is with Congress. And there are enough penny-pinchers in Congress that any sort of project that spends money is laughably impossible.

That, and the big Transportation Equity Acts used to allow members of Congress to write in specific projects. It's a lot harder to vote against a bill that would specifically build a new freeway in your district. Now, earmarks are against the rules, so nobody has any incentive to get things done–you just vote against the infrastructure bill, crow to the poor deluded saps back home that you're "curbing wasteful spending," and hope to God they don't check what you actually voted down.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: abqtraveler on January 25, 2021, 08:11:31 AM

I'm curious to see what the incoming federal administration will manage to do regarding roads. There is talk about a big infrastructure project.

We hear this every time a new President comes in, and nothing ever comes of it.

You noticed that too, huh?  It doesn't seem to matter what political party the President is from, either.  Same story.  They enter office with big infrastructure plans, and then that's the last you ever hear of it.

That's mostly because the President can plan until they're blue in the face, but the power of the purse is with Congress. And there are enough penny-pinchers in Congress that any sort of project that spends money is laughably impossible.


Yet the same "penny-pinchers" have no problem voting for trillions of dollars in handouts, as we've seen during the past year with COVID-19. Seems hypocritical to me.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: edwaleni on January 25, 2021, 10:45:32 AM

I'm curious to see what the incoming federal administration will manage to do regarding roads. There is talk about a big infrastructure project.

We hear this every time a new President comes in, and nothing ever comes of it.

You noticed that too, huh?  It doesn't seem to matter what political party the President is from, either.  Same story.  They enter office with big infrastructure plans, and then that's the last you ever hear of it.

That's mostly because the President can plan until they're blue in the face, but the power of the purse is with Congress. And there are enough penny-pinchers in Congress that any sort of project that spends money is laughably impossible.


Yet the same "penny-pinchers" have no problem voting for trillions of dollars in handouts, as we've seen during the past year with COVID-19. Seems hypocritical to me.

Funding for highways, can take 5-7 years before the first shovel is overturned. When Obama did the "shovel ready", states now spend a lot on studies of getting shovel ready so if there is a windfall.

Funding for transit, airlines and public services are to maintain operations of the existing.

I am not a fan of handouts either, but a pandemic is a little different than a politically derived spending bill.

I personally know several families who have had to switch to working 2 or 3 jobs to not be on the federal dole. They hate handouts simply on principle.

I am also aware of a company that got a payroll protection loan and the economy recovered so quickly they paid it all back plus interest already.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on January 25, 2021, 11:48:15 PM
Quote from: Scott5114
Now, earmarks are against the rules, so nobody has any incentive to get things done–you just vote against the infrastructure bill, crow to the poor deluded saps back home that you're "curbing wasteful spending," and hope to God they don't check what you actually voted down.

Getting rid of earmarks turned out to be a really stupid thing. First, the rule has done virtually nothing to slow down ballooning growth of federal debt. And this is prior to the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic and its stimulus legislation. Earmarks were an easy, "feel good" scapegoat but pretty insignificant compared to much larger drivers of the deficit. Interest on the federal debt is a giant budgetary cost just on its own.

Perhaps the more costly consequence of banning earmarks: it radically inflamed political polarization. There is very little incentive for Republicans and Democrats to work across party lines on anything substantial because very little REAL deal-making can be done. Cooperating across the aisle is now seen as weak or even an act of betrayal. It's easier to preach to the "base" extremists in a partisan echo-chamber. Both sides now play a zero sum game, treating members of the rival party as an enemy. 40 years ago Republicans and Democrats didn't like each other very much, but the tone (at least in public) was substantially more civil.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: rte66man on January 26, 2021, 10:37:20 AM
Quote from: Scott5114
Now, earmarks are against the rules, so nobody has any incentive to get things done–you just vote against the infrastructure bill, crow to the poor deluded saps back home that you're "curbing wasteful spending," and hope to God they don't check what you actually voted down.

Getting rid of earmarks turned out to be a really stupid thing. First, the rule has done virtually nothing to slow down ballooning growth of federal debt. And this is prior to the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic and its stimulus legislation. Earmarks were an easy, "feel good" scapegoat but pretty insignificant compared to much larger drivers of the deficit. Interest on the federal debt is a giant budgetary cost just on its own.

Perhaps the more costly consequence of banning earmarks: it radically inflamed political polarization. There is very little incentive for Republicans and Democrats to work across party lines on anything substantial because very little REAL deal-making can be done. Cooperating across the aisle is now seen as weak or even an act of betrayal. It's easier to preach to the "base" extremists in a partisan echo-chamber. Both sides now play a zero sum game, treating members of the rival party as an enemy. 40 years ago Republicans and Democrats didn't like each other very much, but the tone (at least in public) was substantially more civil.

I can't emphasize how correct this is. I used to work for the OK Legislature and saw first hand how it all worked. Without the pork barrel horse trading, nothing ever got done when the balance was roughly 50-50.  I never saw the kind of rhetoric that I see today.  Sometimes I despair for our system.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: I-39 on January 26, 2021, 10:56:54 AM
Quote from: Scott5114
Now, earmarks are against the rules, so nobody has any incentive to get things done–you just vote against the infrastructure bill, crow to the poor deluded saps back home that you're "curbing wasteful spending," and hope to God they don't check what you actually voted down.

Getting rid of earmarks turned out to be a really stupid thing. First, the rule has done virtually nothing to slow down ballooning growth of federal debt. And this is prior to the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic and its stimulus legislation. Earmarks were an easy, "feel good" scapegoat but pretty insignificant compared to much larger drivers of the deficit. Interest on the federal debt is a giant budgetary cost just on its own.

Perhaps the more costly consequence of banning earmarks: it radically inflamed political polarization. There is very little incentive for Republicans and Democrats to work across party lines on anything substantial because very little REAL deal-making can be done. Cooperating across the aisle is now seen as weak or even an act of betrayal. It's easier to preach to the "base" extremists in a partisan echo-chamber. Both sides now play a zero sum game, treating members of the rival party as an enemy. 40 years ago Republicans and Democrats didn't like each other very much, but the tone (at least in public) was substantially more civil.

I can't emphasize how correct this is. I used to work for the OK Legislature and saw first hand how it all worked. Without the pork barrel horse trading, nothing ever got done when the balance was roughly 50-50.  I never saw the kind of rhetoric that I see today.  Sometimes I despair for our system.

I'd say bring back earmarks, but make them more transparent. The issue before was not so much earmarks themselves, but the corruption surrounding them. Another thing that would help is a constitutional amendment that requires the federal government to enact a full FY budget into law every year, no more of these "continuing appropriations resolutions" that have been running the government more or less for the last 12 years.

*Political rant over*
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on January 26, 2021, 12:28:11 PM
Quote from: I-39
I'd say bring back earmarks, but make them more transparent. The issue before was not so much earmarks themselves, but the corruption surrounding them. Another thing that would help is a constitutional amendment that requires the federal government to enact a full FY budget into law every year, no more of these "continuing appropriations resolutions" that have been running the government more or less for the last 12 years.

It's exceedingly difficult for congress to pass a straight budget rather than an easier continuing resolution. That's all thanks to the hyper-partisan @$$holes on the far left and far right obstructing the process at any opportunity so they can publicly grand-stand and whore themselves to the gullible idiots in the extremes of their "base."

I'm all for making earmarks more transparent as well. But if we're going to make "transparent" budget reforms in one area it needs to be fiercely targeted to some others.

America's health care industrial complex knows no equal when it comes to corruption and wasting taxpayer money. How many hospitals and clinics in this fake free market system actually advertise any prices? The cost of one specific procedure can change radically from one hospital to the next or even one patient to the next in the same hospital. Let's not forget about all the add-on items that get tucked into a medical bill. I think all that stuff should be made public. Health care is a vital necessity. Yet there are no controls at all over what hospitals and clinics can charge to patients, insurance companies and taxpayers. The runaway costs are making programs like Medicare and Medicaid unsustainable. Meanwhile if a utility company like AEP wants to increase electricity prices for Oklahomans they have to make a case for it in front of the Oklahoma Corporation Commission. They can't just push through the price hike.

Higher education is another industry that has been horribly abusing American taxpayers. The cost inflation rate is nearly as bad in that industry as it is in health care. And that's despite many universities, both "public" and "private" getting giant amounts of funding from taxpayers. Costs for attending a decent college have become so absurd that many universities have become increasingly dependent on attracting foreign-born students from parents with deep pockets. What's really bad is so many fields of study aren't worth the cost of the degree. Meanwhile wage levels for non-college skilled trades like mechanics, electricians, plumbers, etc are rising and even shooting past the earnings levels of some degreed fields.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: I-39 on January 26, 2021, 01:16:34 PM
Quote from: I-39
I'd say bring back earmarks, but make them more transparent. The issue before was not so much earmarks themselves, but the corruption surrounding them. Another thing that would help is a constitutional amendment that requires the federal government to enact a full FY budget into law every year, no more of these "continuing appropriations resolutions" that have been running the government more or less for the last 12 years.

It's exceedingly difficult for congress to pass a straight budget rather than an easier continuing resolution. That's all thanks to the hyper-partisan @$$holes on the far left and far right obstructing the process at any opportunity so they can publicly grand-stand and whore themselves to the gullible idiots in the extremes of their "base."

I'm all for making earmarks more transparent as well. But if we're going to make "transparent" budget reforms in one area it needs to be fiercely targeted to some others.

America's health care industrial complex knows no equal when it comes to corruption and wasting taxpayer money. How many hospitals and clinics in this fake free market system actually advertise any prices? The cost of one specific procedure can change radically from one hospital to the next or even one patient to the next in the same hospital. Let's not forget about all the add-on items that get tucked into a medical bill. I think all that stuff should be made public. Health care is a vital necessity. Yet there are no controls at all over what hospitals and clinics can charge to patients, insurance companies and taxpayers. The runaway costs are making programs like Medicare and Medicaid unsustainable. Meanwhile if a utility company like AEP wants to increase electricity prices for Oklahomans they have to make a case for it in front of the Oklahoma Corporation Commission. They can't just push through the price hike.

Higher education is another industry that has been horribly abusing American taxpayers. The cost inflation rate is nearly as bad in that industry as it is in health care. And that's despite many universities, both "public" and "private" getting giant amounts of funding from taxpayers. Costs for attending a decent college have become so absurd that many universities have become increasingly dependent on attracting foreign-born students from parents with deep pockets. What's really bad is so many fields of study aren't worth the cost of the degree. Meanwhile wage levels for non-college skilled trades like mechanics, electricians, plumbers, etc are rising and even shooting past the earnings levels of some degreed fields.

Good points. I wish I could say more, but it would venture too off into politics.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on January 26, 2021, 01:24:21 PM
Yeah, I try to stay as neutral as possible and keep it based on the dollars and cents financial math rather than start sipping the right wing or left wing flavors of the kool-aid.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: kphoger on January 26, 2021, 02:12:23 PM
so they can publicly grand-stand and whore themselves to the gullible idiots in the extremes of their "base."

Gee, but how do you really feel about it?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: msunat97 on January 26, 2021, 02:23:15 PM
So...back to the roadway itself....is there any activity planned in 2021 to move forward with studies or ROW acquisitions to move the project forward from Texarkana to Fort Smith?  Also, what is the plan to connect the segment in Barling to the I-49 / I-40 interchange?  That Barling segment seems very out-of-place.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on January 26, 2021, 02:28:34 PM
So...back to the roadway itself....is there any activity planned in 2021 to move forward with studies or ROW acquisitions to move the project forward from Texarkana to Fort Smith?  Also, what is the plan to connect the segment in Barling to the I-49 / I-40 interchange?  That Barling segment seems very out-of-place.

Nothing concrete for either segment at this point until funds come about.  Both have been considered for Super-2 after 4 lane ROW acquisition, but I would suspect that bypasses around Waldron, Mena, and DeQueen happen before the Super-2 construction starts, ala Fayetteville.  Hope they don't design them in such as way as they need to be rearchitected like Fayetteville's northern one was.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on January 26, 2021, 06:19:00 PM
So...back to the roadway itself....is there any activity planned in 2021 to move forward with studies or ROW acquisitions to move the project forward from Texarkana to Fort Smith?  Also, what is the plan to connect the segment in Barling to the I-49 / I-40 interchange?  That Barling segment seems very out-of-place.

Nothing concrete for either segment at this point until funds come about.  Both have been considered for Super-2 after 4 lane ROW acquisition, but I would suspect that bypasses around Waldron, Mena, and DeQueen happen before the Super-2 construction starts, ala Fayetteville.  Hope they don't design them in such as way as they need to be rearchitected like Fayetteville's northern one was.

The Fayetteville Bypass was built circa 1970. By the time they got done, they were adding 2 more lanes, plus building north.

ARDOT : building for yesterday, tomorrow .
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: abqtraveler on January 26, 2021, 06:26:42 PM
Quote from: I-39

America's health care industrial complex knows no equal when it comes to corruption and wasting taxpayer money. How many hospitals and clinics in this fake free market system actually advertise any prices? The cost of one specific procedure can change radically from one hospital to the next or even one patient to the next in the same hospital. Let's not forget about all the add-on items that get tucked into a medical bill. I think all that stuff should be made public. Health care is a vital necessity. Yet there are no controls at all over what hospitals and clinics can charge to patients, insurance companies and taxpayers. The runaway costs are making programs like Medicare and Medicaid unsustainable. Meanwhile if a utility company like AEP wants to increase electricity prices for Oklahomans they have to make a case for it in front of the Oklahoma Corporation Commission. They can't just push through the price hike.

Higher education is another industry that has been horribly abusing American taxpayers. The cost inflation rate is nearly as bad in that industry as it is in health care. And that's despite many universities, both "public" and "private" getting giant amounts of funding from taxpayers. Costs for attending a decent college have become so absurd that many universities have become increasingly dependent on attracting foreign-born students from parents with deep pockets. What's really bad is so many fields of study aren't worth the cost of the degree. Meanwhile wage levels for non-college skilled trades like mechanics, electricians, plumbers, etc are rising and even shooting past the earnings levels of some degreed fields.

Good points. I wish I could say more, but it would venture too off into politics.

To your point, when my wife delivered our two kids, I recall the nurses coming into the hospital room each morning to inventory everything in the room:  bedsheets, paper towels, toilet paper, you name it, it was counted. They took that inventory and added it to our bill that was sent to insurance. Can you imagine spending four days in the hospital and being charged $3.00 four times for the same roll of toilet paper that you didn't even use?! That's the kind of crap the hospitals are getting away with, and it blows my mind that no one throws the BS flag on them.

Might I say that defense contractors are just as bad, if not worse. In my nearly 20 years of combined civil and military service, I've seen contractors charge the Government $400 per hour for one of their employees doing work at $25 per hour. You look at the total lifecycle cost for the F-35 has now skyrocketed to $1.3 trillion. To put that into perspective, the entire interstate highway system--all 47,000 miles of it--was built at a cost of $425 billion. What the Air Force is spending on the F-35 program could build and rebuild the interstate highway system three times over!

I apologize for the political rant, and now I'm going to get off my soapbox.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: I-39 on January 26, 2021, 06:52:26 PM
ARDOT : building for yesterday, tomorrow .

I expect nothing less from an organization that can’t even bother to build a modern website.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bwana39 on January 27, 2021, 11:46:17 AM
Not only does ADOT have too much on its plate to juggle that project among the more pressing ones, but there appears to be little pressure to advance beyond the 2-lane initial alignment between Monticello and McGehee, which would, for all intents and purposes, be an expandable project to address local needs.  The reality is that Shreveport-Memphis is the proverbial "red-headed stepchild" of the I-69 corridor; it'll be dealt with well after more vital stuff is behind the various states' agencies -- if funding happens to be available when that occurs.

Yeah I'd say the Arkansas part of 69 is the least important section; traffic wanting to follow the 69 corridor could just use 30, 40, and 49 to get from Memphis to Shreveport. In fact, I feel that that route should be designated Temporary I-69.

Temporary routing... That is such a can of worms. Back in the 1920's and 30's when the US Highway system was getting numbered. US-59 initially had a gap from Boston Tx (The then Bowie County Seat today it is just a part of New Boston, the current county seat) to Page OK because there was no Red River Bridge on what is currently TX-8 and AR-41.. In the thirties, they approved a "temporary routing" following US-67 from Maud to Texarkana, US-71 to Mena, and US-270 to Page OK.  The only change since then was to follow then SH-47 from Linden to Texarkana via Atlanta. This temporary routing is still in place a century later more or less.  Temporary routings create excuses to never build the permanent one.

I am not sure what the originally proposed routing was. I have heard AR-41 to DeQueen AR and US-70 to Broken Bow OK. Then following the approximate US-259 route to Page OK.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: edwaleni on January 28, 2021, 09:24:31 AM
Having worked with health care (and yes, I am falling off the roadway here), hospitals can't advertise because employer based health care insurance conglomerates negotiate the rates and the contract does not permit them to advertise that rate. That is why you see an EOB with the hospital "cost", then you see a bill with what the insurance paid.

For those without insurance, you *can* call around and ask for a price from different health providers. I know people who have done quite well by it. You ask for the cost first. Then you tell them you are paying cash and you want the cash price. Then you call them back in 48 hours with a competitive price and ask if they can do better.

If you are a hardship case, you can ask for a payment plan. The health care provider has to provide one or they will sell your receivable to a company who specializes in it. If you meet the income requirements, you can get financial aid, just like they do for college.

As for the stuff in your hospital room. You paid for it, its yours.  The TP, the jamas, the sheets, just not the bed and if you have one the TV.

Ok, wheels are back over the shoulder now and headed down the road again.

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on January 28, 2021, 08:54:37 PM
Having worked with health care (and yes, I am falling off the roadway here), hospitals can't advertise because employer based health care insurance conglomerates negotiate the rates and the contract does not permit them to advertise that rate. That is why you see an EOB with the hospital "cost", then you see a bill with what the insurance paid.

For those without insurance, you *can* call around and ask for a price from different health providers. I know people who have done quite well by it. You ask for the cost first. Then you tell them you are paying cash and you want the cash price. Then you call them back in 48 hours with a competitive price and ask if they can do better.

If you are a hardship case, you can ask for a payment plan. The health care provider has to provide one or they will sell your receivable to a company who specializes in it. If you meet the income requirements, you can get financial aid, just like they do for college.

As for the stuff in your hospital room. You paid for it, its yours.  The TP, the jamas, the sheets, just not the bed and if you have one the TV.

Ok, wheels are back over the shoulder now and headed down the road again.
Must depend on the state you're in. In Texas, hospitals advertise freely in print and broadcast. In fact they're some of the more lucrative advertisers.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on January 29, 2021, 10:52:24 AM
Quote from: edwaleni
Having worked with health care (and yes, I am falling off the roadway here), hospitals can't advertise because employer based health care insurance conglomerates negotiate the rates and the contract does not permit them to advertise that rate. That is why you see an EOB with the hospital "cost", then you see a bill with what the insurance paid.

For those without insurance, you *can* call around and ask for a price from different health providers. I know people who have done quite well by it. You ask for the cost first. Then you tell them you are paying cash and you want the cash price. Then you call them back in 48 hours with a competitive price and ask if they can do better.

The price difference between what a hospital prints on a bill versus what insurance companies negotiate can be staggering. The insurance companies still pay out a fortune. But the price without insurance is an entirely different magnitude, which (again) varies widely from one medical facility to the next and one patient to the next. Mere individual patients have very little bargaining power to bring down those prices. Individuals have nowhere near the amount of clout as a big insurer. And individuals rarely have a lot of cash just laying around to get a reduced cash price for an emergency medical treatment.

Patients can only call around to compare prices for elective/non-emergency medical procedures. A person can't exactly call around to compare prices if he gets injured in a car accident or thinks me might be about to have a heart attack. But if hospitals and clinics are more publicly open with their pricing and advertise them then that would influence a patient's decision where to go in an emergency.

Last summer I badly injured one of my fingers in a lawn care accident and wound up having to spend a night in the hospital getting pumped with IV antibiotics following orthopedic surgery. I have health insurance through my employer. It's not a great policy, but better than nothing. The full bill was over $30,000. My share to pay was about $8000. I was able to reduce the bill by 30% by paying cash. I was lucky I had a good bit of savings in the bank.

One of my female friends had emergency gall bladder surgery about 2 years ago. She works in retail and is uninsured. She has a high school age son that has some mental disabilities. Her financial situation is not great. Even with some "charity" write-downs she was still stuck with a bill over $60,000. There is no way she'll ever be able to pay off that debt on her own. Nevertheless she gets hounded by collections people all the time. I wouldn't be surprised if the situation has totally trashed her credit rating.

Quote from: Road Hog
Must depend on the state you're in. In Texas, hospitals advertise freely in print and broadcast. In fact they're some of the more lucrative advertisers.

I don't see anything like that in North Texas. Wichita Falls is part of our viewing market.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: edwaleni on January 29, 2021, 01:09:24 PM
Quote from: edwaleni
Having worked with health care (and yes, I am falling off the roadway here), hospitals can't advertise because employer based health care insurance conglomerates negotiate the rates and the contract does not permit them to advertise that rate. That is why you see an EOB with the hospital "cost", then you see a bill with what the insurance paid.

For those without insurance, you *can* call around and ask for a price from different health providers. I know people who have done quite well by it. You ask for the cost first. Then you tell them you are paying cash and you want the cash price. Then you call them back in 48 hours with a competitive price and ask if they can do better.

The price difference between what a hospital prints on a bill versus what insurance companies negotiate can be staggering. The insurance companies still pay out a fortune. But the price without insurance is an entirely different magnitude, which (again) varies widely from one medical facility to the next and one patient to the next. Mere individual patients have very little bargaining power to bring down those prices. Individuals have nowhere near the amount of clout as a big insurer. And individuals rarely have a lot of cash just laying around to get a reduced cash price for an emergency medical treatment.

Patients can only call around to compare prices for elective/non-emergency medical procedures. A person can't exactly call around to compare prices if he gets injured in a car accident or thinks me might be about to have a heart attack. But if hospitals and clinics are more publicly open with their pricing and advertise them then that would influence a patient's decision where to go in an emergency.

Last summer I badly injured one of my fingers in a lawn care accident and wound up having to spend a night in the hospital getting pumped with IV antibiotics following orthopedic surgery. I have health insurance through my employer. It's not a great policy, but better than nothing. The full bill was over $30,000. My share to pay was about $8000. I was able to reduce the bill by 30% by paying cash. I was lucky I had a good bit of savings in the bank.

One of my female friends had emergency gall bladder surgery about 2 years ago. She works in retail and is uninsured. She has a high school age son that has some mental disabilities. Her financial situation is not great. Even with some "charity" write-downs she was still stuck with a bill over $60,000. There is no way she'll ever be able to pay off that debt on her own. Nevertheless she gets hounded by collections people all the time. I wouldn't be surprised if the situation has totally trashed her credit rating.

Quote from: Road Hog
Must depend on the state you're in. In Texas, hospitals advertise freely in print and broadcast. In fact they're some of the more lucrative advertisers.

I don't see anything like that in North Texas. Wichita Falls is part of our viewing market.

Agreed. Elective is what i was referring to. If you have an emergency, that is a totally different matter completely. I saw an appendectomy get talked down from $26k to $4200. Everyone is different.

Now if only I can get the ambulance to move faster up I-49 around Bella Vista. Hopefully soon.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: debragga on February 01, 2021, 12:25:09 PM
I don't see anything like that in North Texas. Wichita Falls is part of our viewing market.

https://www.dmagazine.com/publications/d-ceo/2008/march/how-to-cure-bad-hospital-ads/
https://www.texmed.org/template.aspx?id=2092
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bwana39 on February 01, 2021, 09:34:46 PM
The medical mess is out of place on this thread, even this regional board.

This said, the point is that yes, there is advertising, but it is all brand placement. You cannot compare prices. It only touches the tip of the iceberg as to what the range of services they provide.

There is no real way to determine  the quality of the care they provide. I realize that trying to determine this results in  very objective numbers, that no way resemble a true appraisal of what they actually do in reality. Even "ratings" can be inflated. My wife could say my husband is the best husband I ever had. (in a poll conducted on February 1, 2021 from among all the wives who live in our house.) Ratings are comparative. What was the product being advertised compared to. In this case, I am not just the de-facto winner, I would be the default winner. We got married in our teens.  Even with a greater field of comparison; Stale Pepsi wins against dish soap in a taste test every time.

I remember a candidate for congress  decades ago said that as District Attorney, that he never lost a case.  It was true. As far as that goes, his staff had lost very few. Did it mean he was a great prosecutor? Probably not. It likely meant that he settled every case that was not a slam dunk.  So how does this apply to doctors? If a doctor only takes the easy surgeries, his mortality rate will be far lower than a doctor who takes on the patients that are being passed upon by other physicians because they are too risky.  That is the kind of data that
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Scott5114 on February 02, 2021, 03:40:31 AM
For those without insurance, you *can* call around and ask for a price from different health providers. I know people who have done quite well by it. You ask for the cost first. Then you tell them you are paying cash and you want the cash price. Then you call them back in 48 hours with a competitive price and ask if they can do better.

I'll be sure to do that if I'm ever bleeding out on the side of the road from a car crash.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: GreenLanternCorps on February 03, 2021, 10:38:31 AM
Getting back to I-49 in Arkansas, Google Maps has Satellite images of the construction.

It shows the right of way, but doesn't show the paving.  It is however, better than nothing.

(I wonder what the lead time is from the photo being taken to the image being posted on their website...)

https://www.google.com/maps/@36.4901318,-94.3927597,7373m/data=!3m1!1e3

Edit: If you work your way south on future I-49, Google also has shots of the construction of the new Northbound lanes for I-49 almost all the way to the US-71 interchange.  Not much imagery of the interchange construction itself, however.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: I-39 on February 03, 2021, 10:52:19 AM
Getting back to I-49 in Arkansas, Google Maps has Satellite images of the construction.

It shows the right of way, but doesn't show the paving.  It is however, better than nothing.

(I wonder what the lead time is from the photo being taken to the image being posted on their website...)

https://www.google.com/maps/@36.4901318,-94.3927597,7373m/data=!3m1!1e3

When the imagery taken?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Wayward Memphian on February 03, 2021, 12:02:21 PM
I keep hearing how Arkansas is broke, lol. Hey...here's the Bridge money, lol.


https://talkbusiness.net/2021/02/arkansas-net-available-tax-revenue-surplus-tops-400-million/

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: I-39 on February 03, 2021, 01:03:19 PM
I keep hearing how Arkansas is broke, lol. Hey...here's the Bridge money, lol.


https://talkbusiness.net/2021/02/arkansas-net-available-tax-revenue-surplus-tops-400-million/

It can't all go to building the I-49 bridge though.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Wayward Memphian on February 03, 2021, 02:00:17 PM
I keep hearing how Arkansas is broke, lol. Hey...here's the Bridge money, lol.


https://talkbusiness.net/2021/02/arkansas-net-available-tax-revenue-surplus-tops-400-million/

It can't all go to building the I-49 bridge though.

It was a joke but Arkansas is making a habit of running surpluses. Now, even in pandemics.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on February 03, 2021, 05:10:12 PM
I keep hearing how Arkansas is broke, lol. Hey...here's the Bridge money, lol.


https://talkbusiness.net/2021/02/arkansas-net-available-tax-revenue-surplus-tops-400-million/

It can't all go to building the I-49 bridge though.

It was a joke but Arkansas is making a habit of running surpluses. Now, even in pandemics.

Bet there's several blue states that would trade places right now.  There's something to be said for  "Pay As You Go", especially in times of crisis.  May make for some slow road building, but at least we do prioritize infrastructure with what we do spend.  The Arkansas jokes really will become hollow in about another decade anyway, at least in the part northwest of I-30/I-57.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on February 03, 2021, 05:14:40 PM
I keep hearing how Arkansas is broke, lol. Hey...here's the Bridge money, lol.


https://talkbusiness.net/2021/02/arkansas-net-available-tax-revenue-surplus-tops-400-million/



Not quite. As I've mentioned before, ARDOT likes to waste money on "pet" projects. They always have more plans then finances.

Don't get me started on state maintained "driveways".   

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on February 03, 2021, 05:30:53 PM
Getting back to I-49 in Arkansas, Google Maps has Satellite images of the construction.

It shows the right of way, but doesn't show the paving.  It is however, better than nothing.

(I wonder what the lead time is from the photo being taken to the image being posted on their website...)

https://www.google.com/maps/@36.4901318,-94.3927597,7373m/data=!3m1!1e3

When the imagery taken?


I know for a fact that, although it may state 2021 at the bottom, that it was at least 3 months ago as all of the northbound bridges past the new tie-in are decked, the roadbed prepared along the entire stretch you can currently drive, and there's asphalt base from where you get on AR-549 northbound all the way until the 2nd AR-72 exit and has been for a couple of months now.  The image also shows the roundabout still in use.  That hasn't been the case since May, so the entire area was likely imaged before May of last year.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on February 03, 2021, 05:51:15 PM
Getting back to I-49 in Arkansas, Google Maps has Satellite images of the construction.

It shows the right of way, but doesn't show the paving.  It is however, better than nothing.

(I wonder what the lead time is from the photo being taken to the image being posted on their website...)

https://www.google.com/maps/@36.4901318,-94.3927597,7373m/data=!3m1!1e3

When the imagery taken?


I know for a fact that, although it may state 2021 at the bottom, that it was at least 3 months ago as all of the northbound bridges past the new tie-in are decked, the roadbed prepared along the entire stretch you can currently drive, and there's asphalt base from where you get on AR-549 northbound all the way until the 2nd AR-72 exit and has been for a couple of months now.  The image also shows the roundabout still in use.  That hasn't been the case since May, so the entire area was likely imaged before May of last year.

My last visit was in July and the lanes north of the current terminus were being paved.

https://flic.kr/p/2jpPg2a
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: kphoger on February 04, 2021, 09:05:38 AM
ARDOT ... always have more plans then finances.

Well, I should hope so!  Hopefully that's true of every agency.  Otherwise, at some point they say to themselves, Well, we finished all our projects and we still have all this money left over, so what would you like to build next, Earl?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: msunat97 on February 04, 2021, 09:37:45 AM
Getting back to I-49 in Arkansas, Google Maps has Satellite images of the construction.

It shows the right of way, but doesn't show the paving.  It is however, better than nothing.

(I wonder what the lead time is from the photo being taken to the image being posted on their website...)

https://www.google.com/maps/@36.4901318,-94.3927597,7373m/data=!3m1!1e3

When the imagery taken?


I know for a fact that, although it may state 2021 at the bottom, that it was at least 3 months ago as all of the northbound bridges past the new tie-in are decked, the roadbed prepared along the entire stretch you can currently drive, and there's asphalt base from where you get on AR-549 northbound all the way until the 2nd AR-72 exit and has been for a couple of months now.  The image also shows the roundabout still in use.  That hasn't been the case since May, so the entire area was likely imaged before May of last year.

My last visit was in July and the lanes north of the current terminus were being paved.

https://flic.kr/p/2jpPg2a

Thanks for posting this.  It's good to see the progress
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Henry on February 04, 2021, 10:04:17 AM
So after Bella Vista is done, my guess is that they'll focus on building south of Fort Smith, even if it's in small increments. Hey, better than nothing...
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on February 04, 2021, 10:18:41 AM
So after Bella Vista is done, my guess is that they'll focus on building south of Fort Smith, even if it's in small increments. Hey, better than nothing...

IF they can get the Arkansas River Bridge built.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: abqtraveler on February 04, 2021, 10:24:46 AM
So after Bella Vista is done, my guess is that they'll focus on building south of Fort Smith, even if it's in small increments. Hey, better than nothing...

IF they can get the Arkansas River Bridge built.

Even so, ArDOT might decide to go for some of the low-hanging fruit between Texarkana and Fort Smith, such as bypasses around some of the larger towns along the way. I would surmise they would take the same approach they've taken in other places: initially build the bypasses out to 2 lanes, and then expand to 4 lanes later on when additional funding becomes available.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: mvak36 on February 04, 2021, 10:31:44 AM
I'm still waiting to see what new projects they will select for the next round of the CAP. I haven't heard anything since November when the ballot measure passed.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bwana39 on February 04, 2021, 12:42:10 PM
So after Bella Vista is done, my guess is that they'll focus on building south of Fort Smith, even if it's in small increments. Hey, better than nothing...

IF they can get the Arkansas River Bridge built.

Even so, ArDOT might decide to go for some of the low-hanging fruit between Texarkana and Fort Smith, such as bypasses around some of the larger towns along the way. I would surmise they would take the same approach they've taken in other places: initially build the bypasses out to 2 lanes, and then expand to 4 lanes later on when additional funding becomes available.

South of DeQueen, the projected route is through the countryside. That stretch is pretty much one big swatch that crosses neither US-71 nor AR-41. Through the mountains is a big deal too.  I heard it said that a tunnel might be less expensive than the current US-71 route.  They could likely go around several of the towns but others are just as incompatible with piecemeal building as the southernmost part.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Wayward Memphian on February 04, 2021, 12:50:40 PM
I figure construction on the bridge will be announced before ASA! leaves office. I also figure that the west end of the 412 bypass/access road to XNA gets green lit as soon as Bella Vista wraps up this will magically include it stretching eastward to US 71B as well. If traffic snaps back quick after Covid, XNA's ambitious expansion should be wrapping up 2025/2026. They want up to 26 gates.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on February 04, 2021, 01:03:04 PM
I figure construction on the bridge will be announced before ASA! leaves office. I also figure that the west end of the 412 bypass/access road to XNA gets green lit as soon as Bella Vista wraps up this will magically include it stretching eastward to US 71B as well. If traffic snaps back quick after Covid, XNA's ambitious expansion should be wrapping up 2025/2026. They want up to 26 gates.

I've seen a diagram showing a connection to 71B, but don't remember if it entirely a new road or an extension of something already there. Theoretically,  264 could be straightened and widened.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: edwaleni on February 04, 2021, 02:11:54 PM
I figure construction on the bridge will be announced before ASA! leaves office. I also figure that the west end of the 412 bypass/access road to XNA gets green lit as soon as Bella Vista wraps up this will magically include it stretching eastward to US 71B as well. If traffic snaps back quick after Covid, XNA's ambitious expansion should be wrapping up 2025/2026. They want up to 26 gates.

I've seen a diagram showing a connection to 71B, but don't remember if it entirely a new road or an extension of something already there. Theoretically,  264 could be straightened and widened.

XNA with 26 gates? That has to be a joke.

But the land around it is getting developed pretty quick.

I still remember laughing when I drove through Cave Springs to get to the airport. My cousin was like "are you sure its out here?"
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on February 04, 2021, 02:26:33 PM
I figure construction on the bridge will be announced before ASA! leaves office. I also figure that the west end of the 412 bypass/access road to XNA gets green lit as soon as Bella Vista wraps up this will magically include it stretching eastward to US 71B as well. If traffic snaps back quick after Covid, XNA's ambitious expansion should be wrapping up 2025/2026. They want up to 26 gates.

I've seen a diagram showing a connection to 71B, but don't remember if it entirely a new road or an extension of something already there. Theoretically,  264 could be straightened and widened.

XNA with 26 gates? That has to be a joke.

But the land around it is getting developed pretty quick.

I still remember laughing when I drove through Cave Springs to get to the airport. My cousin was like "are you sure its out here?"

Land was cheap.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bwana39 on February 04, 2021, 02:39:35 PM
I figure construction on the bridge will be announced before ASA! leaves office. I also figure that the west end of the 412 bypass/access road to XNA gets green lit as soon as Bella Vista wraps up this will magically include it stretching eastward to US 71B as well. If traffic snaps back quick after Covid, XNA's ambitious expansion should be wrapping up 2025/2026. They want up to 26 gates.

I've seen a diagram showing a connection to 71B, but don't remember if it entirely a new road or an extension of something already there. Theoretically,  264 could be straightened and widened.

XNA with 26 gates? That has to be a joke.

But the land around it is getting developed pretty quick.

I still remember laughing when I drove through Cave Springs to get to the airport. My cousin was like "are you sure its out here?"

Land was cheap.

Won't be that way for too long anywhere in that area. Projections show as many as many as a million people in Benton and Washington Counties by mid-century.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Wayward Memphian on February 04, 2021, 03:24:04 PM
I figure construction on the bridge will be announced before ASA! leaves office. I also figure that the west end of the 412 bypass/access road to XNA gets green lit as soon as Bella Vista wraps up this will magically include it stretching eastward to US 71B as well. If traffic snaps back quick after Covid, XNA's ambitious expansion should be wrapping up 2025/2026. They want up to 26 gates.

I've seen a diagram showing a connection to 71B, but don't remember if it entirely a new road or an extension of something already there. Theoretically,  264 could be straightened and widened.

XNA with 26 gates? That has to be a joke.

But the land around it is getting developed pretty quick.

I still remember laughing when I drove through Cave Springs to get to the airport. My cousin was like "are you sure its out here?"

The design is to be 'modular' for the concourse. So,  they aren't going for it all at once. But here's an informal list of thing either already in design work or to be in design work by the end of the  year

Skywalk out for bid very soon.

New Parking deck /car rental center design work done but on hold till rental demand rebounds.


2nd floor Terninal reno work waiting on Concourse design work to start this year


Concourse design work to start this year. Two additional gates in A. Rebuild of B with 12 gates for a total of 26.
 configuration to be determined  for between 2 and 3 million enplanements a year.

Baggage claim rebuild out for design this year

New ATC Tower out for design this year

New taxiway design work done waiting for the ok.

Commercial apron expansion out for design this year.

Pursue an onsite hotel of around 80 rooms.

XNA overnights a lot of planes when it was normal times hence the apron expansion and hotel


XNA had broken into the top 100 in enplanements after 2019 and was within less than 200k of overtaking LIT. It was the second fastest growing airport in percent of passenger wise in the US  only being out done by Sarasota Fl.

The MSA is expected to double in the next 20 years. So off of 2019 numbers and the average enplanememt growth rate of the past 5 years that projects out to 2 million enplanements.

What that doesn't take into account is upgauging to mainline planes but still those need larger holding areas than what's currently available which were definitely geared for 76 seaters after the original gates were for the old Saabs, Dashs, E135s, E145s and CRJ200s 36 to 50 seaters.  Suspect we'll see lots of A220s, A319s and 737s from the legacies iF the growth continues once thingS come back online. I don't know how Southwest avoids XNA much longer. It has become its own market not to be confused with being part of Tulsa's catchment area for them any longer. I can easily see them with 2x to DAL, 1x Den, 1x BNA/ATL, 1x Houston , 1x STL/MDW


They recently added back Jackson MS and entered Fresno CA. Both smaller airports at the time.

And... I could see Allegiant making it a base like they have Knoxville and Des Moines. Check out the frequencies to Nashville and Destin this summer from XNA (see apron space)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: abqtraveler on February 04, 2021, 08:02:41 PM
I'm still waiting to see what new projects they will select for the next round of the CAP. I haven't heard anything since November when the ballot measure passed.

That vote made Arkansas' transportation sales tax permanent. Is that correct?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: mvak36 on February 04, 2021, 08:08:25 PM
I'm still waiting to see what new projects they will select for the next round of the CAP. I haven't heard anything since November when the ballot measure passed.

That vote made Arkansas' transportation sales tax permanent. Is that correct?
Yes. There’s no sunset on that half cent sales tax now.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: edwaleni on February 04, 2021, 09:29:01 PM

And... I could see Allegiant making it a base like they have Knoxville and Des Moines. Check out the frequencies to Nashville and Destin this summer from XNA (see apron space)

Don't be fooled by Allegiant Air.  They only have 3 "hubs". Las Vegas, Orlando Sanford and Tampa St Pete.

If you mean by "hub" in that they serve more than 1 destination, that would be about a third of the cities they serve and in many of those, they are the only provider or 1 of 2.

Allegiant is designed to pick up their tent and leave quickly when required, which they do often. They are strictly a point to point operator and provide no connections.

XNA is fortunate in that Allegiant serves both the west and the south vacation spots. But they arrive and leave at different intervals to keep the gate costs down.

St Louis-MidAmerica (Belleville) is a 2 gate airport only served by Allegiant and they produce way more landings there than they do at XNA. And Allegiant would leave that location at the drop of a hat if they had to.

My benefit with XNA is that they have a rental car exchange agreement with Springfield-Branson. You can fly into XNA and leave via Springfield and they won't dump a drop charge on you.

Lastly, with Allegiant, they charge you a web booking fee when using the online store. A fee that can only be avoided if you buy your ticket from a gate agent in advance at any desk Allegiant staffs (if you can catch them at the right time). But watch those gate agents try and squirm out of selling you a ticket for a future flight. They are trained to avoid selling you a future ticket at all costs. Even saying they can't do it (they can). They go to great lengths to get that ticket price appear low.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on February 05, 2021, 10:44:17 AM
Air travel totally sucks anymore. The experience isn't any better than riding on an old Greyhound bus. It's just a lot more expensive for all the nickle and dime fees they pile on to that "low" ticket price.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on February 05, 2021, 11:34:30 AM
I figure construction on the bridge will be announced before ASA! leaves office. I also figure that the west end of the 412 bypass/access road to XNA gets green lit as soon as Bella Vista wraps up this will magically include it stretching eastward to US 71B as well. If traffic snaps back quick after Covid, XNA's ambitious expansion should be wrapping up 2025/2026. They want up to 26 gates.

I've seen a diagram showing a connection to 71B, but don't remember if it entirely a new road or an extension of something already there. Theoretically,  264 could be straightened and widened.

XNA with 26 gates? That has to be a joke.

But the land around it is getting developed pretty quick.

I still remember laughing when I drove through Cave Springs to get to the airport. My cousin was like "are you sure its out here?"

Land was cheap.

Won't be that way for too long anywhere in that area. Projections show as many as many as a million people in Benton and Washington Counties by mid-century.

It's starting to develop away from the I-49 corridor along the intersecting roads now with all of the out-of-state Covid transplants.  Still lots within city limits with cranes and red dirt everywhere, but also everything is getting snapped up literally within a week of going on sale on the outskirts.  My folks just sold their place and are looking for land to build on not more than 30 minutes from the VA in Fayetteville.  Every time they send me something to go take a look at for them since they're in Florida visiting family right now, it goes off market before my cheap stepfather even has the chance to find a reason to say No to it.  At this rate, they'll be in Missouri, Oklahoma, Winslow, AR, or halfway across Madison County, AR before they return in March.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Rothman on February 05, 2021, 01:11:16 PM


Air travel totally sucks anymore. The experience isn't any better than riding on an old Greyhound bus. It's just a lot more expensive for all the nickle and dime fees they pile on to that "low" ticket price.

It's all about the time savings.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on February 05, 2021, 01:22:26 PM


Air travel totally sucks anymore. The experience isn't any better than riding on an old Greyhound bus. It's just a lot more expensive for all the nickle and dime fees they pile on to that "low" ticket price.

It's all about the time savings.

Which explains why XNA is so expensive.  Flying to Tulsa and renting a car is actually cheaper
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Wayward Memphian on February 05, 2021, 02:51:14 PM

And... I could see Allegiant making it a base like they have Knoxville and Des Moines. Check out the frequencies to Nashville and Destin this summer from XNA (see apron space)

Don't be fooled by Allegiant Air.  They only have 3 "hubs". Las Vegas, Orlando Sanford and Tampa St Pete.

If you mean by "hub" in that they serve more than 1 destination, that would be about a third of the cities they serve and in many of those, they are the only provider or 1 of 2.

Allegiant is designed to pick up their tent and leave quickly when required, which they do often. They are strictly a point to point operator and provide no connections.

XNA is fortunate in that Allegiant serves both the west and the south vacation spots. But they arrive and leave at different intervals to keep the gate costs down.

St Louis-MidAmerica (Belleville) is a 2 gate airport only served by Allegiant and they produce way more landings there than they do at XNA. And Allegiant would leave that location at the drop of a hat if they had to.

My benefit with XNA is that they have a rental car exchange agreement with Springfield-Branson. You can fly into XNA and leave via Springfield and they won't dump a drop charge on you.

Lastly, with Allegiant, they charge you a web booking fee when using the online store. A fee that can only be avoided if you buy your ticket from a gate agent in advance at any desk Allegiant staffs (if you can catch them at the right time). But watch those gate agents try and squirm out of selling you a ticket for a future flight. They are trained to avoid selling you a future ticket at all costs. Even saying they can't do it (they can). They go to great lengths to get that ticket price appear low.

I said base, not hub.  Allegiant ain't offering connections anytime soon, you know that. Allegiant has been establishing pilot bases at various places for several years now. Des Moines is next up.  It consists of basing at least two Airbuses there and staffing them local as they never overnight anywhere like Southwest does.  It has become a trend as their fleet continues to grow and they simply can't put all their horses in the SFB/LAS/PIE barns. There's like dozens of them now. Frontier is the ones that starts and drops routes left and right. Much more so than Allegiant.

Allegiant is running BNA and VPS at 4x weekly this summer from XNA.  Shoot the are near daily on MEM-LAX/LAS this summer. Allegiant's performance has greatly improved over the past couple of years and they were doing quite well. Retiring those old Mad Dogs helped along with new labor contracts(imagine that).

I don't see them leaving Belleville anytime soon. That is ideal for them.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Wayward Memphian on February 05, 2021, 02:58:54 PM


Air travel totally sucks anymore. The experience isn't any better than riding on an old Greyhound bus. It's just a lot more expensive for all the nickle and dime fees they pile on to that "low" ticket price.

It's all about the time savings.

Which explains why XNA is so expensive.  Flying to Tulsa and renting a car is actually cheaper

Not so much on a connecting flight, only on direct flights and you are talking to someone that flys Southwest a lot from Tulsa. New York and Chicago from XNA was cheap. Kinda like Denver from TUL due to United and Southwest.

My son and I are looking at going to LA for in the fall for Hollywood Haunted Nights at Universal because our trip last fall was Covided.  On our dates as of right now for Nonstop on AA from XNA is 35 bucks per passenger cheaper than it is from Tulsa $252 to $287 on the same equipment(E175).
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: msunat97 on February 05, 2021, 03:03:05 PM
My wife is from NW Arkansas.  She wants to get back there.  I've started spying homes on Realtor & Zillow.  Properties are moving fast.  Makes me wonder how sustainable the growth is and if the infrastructure plans can keep up with the growth. 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Plutonic Panda on February 05, 2021, 03:33:03 PM
Is there any movement on upgrading 412 corridor to a freeway? Oklahoma also needs to get its ass in gear and upgrade their portion to a freeway from Tulsa to Arkansas state line. Arkansas needs to at least connect that with a freeway to I-49.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on February 05, 2021, 04:39:39 PM
My wife is from NW Arkansas.  She wants to get back there.  I've started spying homes on Realtor & Zillow.  Properties are moving fast.  Makes me wonder how sustainable the growth is and if the infrastructure plans can keep up with the growth.

The downtowns and around Beaver Lake/White River get snapped up almost as quick as they are posted, unless they are asking well above Zillow's estimate.  If you're looking to come here, I recommend sooner rather than later.  Area is becoming a tourist mecca for mountain biking, so it's not just Wal-Mart/Tyson/JB Hunt anymore, although their money is what's funding the amenities to draw in the younger workforce.  The growth has been consistent and has accelerated over the last 10 years.  No end in sight.  Infrastructure keeping up is certainly a real concern.  The streets of pretty much all of the cities up here are terrible with all of the trenching and patching for utility work.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on February 05, 2021, 04:44:26 PM
Is there any movement on upgrading 412 corridor to a freeway? Oklahoma also needs to get its ass in gear and upgrade their portion to a freeway from Tulsa to Arkansas state line. Arkansas needs to at least connect that with a freeway to I-49.

No plans to do anything further with US-412 other than completing the Springdale Bypass and a future Harrison Bypass and sporadic climb lanes across the state.  They blew the only reasonable shot of doing a limited access facility when they 6 laned US-412 through Siloam Springs rather than bypass it to the north like they should have.  Now it's developing that direction, and the terrain to the south with the Illinois River and all of the creeks and hollows that empty into it would be rather rough going.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Plutonic Panda on February 05, 2021, 04:50:22 PM
Is there any movement on upgrading 412 corridor to a freeway? Oklahoma also needs to get its ass in gear and upgrade their portion to a freeway from Tulsa to Arkansas state line. Arkansas needs to at least connect that with a freeway to I-49.

No plans to do anything further with US-412 other than completing the Springdale Bypass and a future Harrison Bypass and sporadic climb lanes across the state.  They blew the only reasonable shot of doing a limited access facility when they 6 laned US-412 through Siloam Springs rather than bypass it to the north like they should have.  Now it's developing that direction, and the terrain to the south with the Illinois River and all of the creeks and hollows that empty into it would be rather rough going.
*if* Tulsa ever gets it act together along with Oklahoma and decent growth happens in the metro NWA will have no choice to build some kind of East to west freeway connection from 412 in Oklahoma to I-49. Arkansas is dropping the ball big time on this. If they don’t that area will become notorious for bad traffic by 2050.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on February 05, 2021, 08:26:37 PM
Drove 49 between Bentonville nd Bella Vista today.  Northbound lanes are in various stages of construction from fully paved to awaiting final paving.

All NB 49 traffic has to exit at US 71 North. To go north on 549 or south on old 71, one has to make a U Turn at Peach Orchard Rd. It is, as one would say a clusterf*ck.

Exit signs are finally up at CR 34 (current terminus)

EXIT 289
County RD 34
Highlands Rd
(One sign says Highlands Blvd.)

From there, the road looks complete.

I ran out of time so didn't get to Missouri to check their progress.

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Wayward Memphian on February 05, 2021, 08:51:36 PM
Is there any movement on upgrading 412 corridor to a freeway? Oklahoma also needs to get its ass in gear and upgrade their portion to a freeway from Tulsa to Arkansas state line. Arkansas needs to at least connect that with a freeway to I-49.

No plans to do anything further with US-412 other than completing the Springdale Bypass and a future Harrison Bypass and sporadic climb lanes across the state.  They blew the only reasonable shot of doing a limited access facility when they 6 laned US-412 through Siloam Springs rather than bypass it to the north like they should have.  Now it's developing that direction, and the terrain to the south with the Illinois River and all of the creeks and hollows that empty into it would be rather rough going.
*if* Tulsa ever gets it act together along with Oklahoma and decent growth happens in the metro NWA will have no choice to build some kind of East to west freeway connection from 412 in Oklahoma to I-49. Arkansas is dropping the ball big time on this. If they don’t that area will become notorious for bad traffic by 2050.

I've suggested the US 412 Corridor as an extention of I-22 from Memphis to Tulsa using I-555 as well. I like pipe dreams, lol.
My wife is from NW Arkansas.  She wants to get back there.  I've started spying homes on Realtor & Zillow.  Properties are moving fast.  Makes me wonder how sustainable the growth is and if the infrastructure plans can keep up with the growth.

The downtowns and around Beaver Lake/White River get snapped up almost as quick as they are posted, unless they are asking well above Zillow's estimate.  If you're looking to come here, I recommend sooner rather than later.  Area is becoming a tourist mecca for mountain biking, so it's not just Wal-Mart/Tyson/JB Hunt anymore, although their money is what's funding the amenities to draw in the younger workforce.  The growth has been consistent and has accelerated over the last 10 years.  No end in sight.  Infrastructure keeping up is certainly a real concern.  The streets of pretty much all of the cities up here are terrible with all of the trenching and patching for utility work.

Speaking of bikes

https://talkbusiness.net/2021/02/fayetteville-becomes-first-u-s-city-to-receive-bike-city-label/
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Plutonic Panda on February 05, 2021, 09:14:46 PM
Maybe it’s a pipe dream but what isn’t is a real traffic issue resulting from no freeway. They should at the very least secure ROW and lease out any homes and businesses until they become closer to being shovel ready.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: rickmastfan67 on February 05, 2021, 09:22:41 PM
EXIT 284
County RD 34
Highlands Rd
(One sign says Highlands Blvd.)

284?  OSM has that exit shown as 289, while 284 is the first interchange with AR-72.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on February 05, 2021, 09:36:57 PM
EXIT 284
County RD 34
Highlands Rd
(One sign says Highlands Blvd.)

284?  OSM has that exit shown as 289, while 284 is the first interchange with AR-72.

Couldn't read my handwriting.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: I-39 on February 05, 2021, 10:58:08 PM


Air travel totally sucks anymore. The experience isn't any better than riding on an old Greyhound bus. It's just a lot more expensive for all the nickle and dime fees they pile on to that "low" ticket price.

It's all about the time savings.

Which explains why XNA is so expensive.  Flying to Tulsa and renting a car is actually cheaper

Not so much on a connecting flight, only on direct flights and you are talking to someone that flys Southwest a lot from Tulsa. New York and Chicago from XNA was cheap. Kinda like Denver from TUL due to United and Southwest.

My son and I are looking at going to LA for in the fall for Hollywood Haunted Nights at Universal because our trip last fall was Covided.  On our dates as of right now for Nonstop on AA from XNA is 35 bucks per passenger cheaper than it is from Tulsa $252 to $287 on the same equipment(E175).

Southwest needs to get to XNA ASAP. With all their recent adds, it’s got to be a low hanging fruit.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Wayward Memphian on February 05, 2021, 11:12:54 PM


Air travel totally sucks anymore. The experience isn't any better than riding on an old Greyhound bus. It's just a lot more expensive for all the nickle and dime fees they pile on to that "low" ticket price.

It's all about the time savings.

Which explains why XNA is so expensive.  Flying to Tulsa and renting a car is actually cheaper

Not so much on a connecting flight, only on direct flights and you are talking to someone that flys Southwest a lot from Tulsa. New York and Chicago from XNA was cheap. Kinda like Denver from TUL due to United and Southwest.

My son and I are looking at going to LA for in the fall for Hollywood Haunted Nights at Universal because our trip last fall was Covided.  On our dates as of right now for Nonstop on AA from XNA is 35 bucks per passenger cheaper than it is from Tulsa $252 to $287 on the same equipment(E175).

Southwest needs to get to XNA ASAP. With all their recent adds, it’s got to be a low hanging fruit.

They easily have 7 daily flights on their 737-700s just sitting there with the connections they offer. 7 seems to be the minimum Southwest wants to start a station.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: I-39 on February 05, 2021, 11:14:18 PM


Air travel totally sucks anymore. The experience isn't any better than riding on an old Greyhound bus. It's just a lot more expensive for all the nickle and dime fees they pile on to that "low" ticket price.

It's all about the time savings.

Which explains why XNA is so expensive.  Flying to Tulsa and renting a car is actually cheaper

Not so much on a connecting flight, only on direct flights and you are talking to someone that flys Southwest a lot from Tulsa. New York and Chicago from XNA was cheap. Kinda like Denver from TUL due to United and Southwest.

My son and I are looking at going to LA for in the fall for Hollywood Haunted Nights at Universal because our trip last fall was Covided.  On our dates as of right now for Nonstop on AA from XNA is 35 bucks per passenger cheaper than it is from Tulsa $252 to $287 on the same equipment(E175).

Southwest needs to get to XNA ASAP. With all their recent adds, it’s got to be a low hanging fruit.

They easily have 7 daily flights on their 737-800s just sitting there with the connections they offer. 7 seems to be the minimum Southwest wants to start a station.

I could see BWI, BNA, MDW, DEN and DAL started easily.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: rickmastfan67 on February 06, 2021, 01:32:26 AM
EXIT 284
County RD 34
Highlands Rd
(One sign says Highlands Blvd.)

284?  OSM has that exit shown as 289, while 284 is the first interchange with AR-72.

Couldn't read my handwriting.

All good.  Just wanted to make sure they hadn't changed the numbering scheme completely for AR-549 there and then we had to change it on TM to match. ;)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: mvak36 on February 06, 2021, 02:01:42 AM
Speaking of the airport, I found this page for the XNA Access Road: https://xnaaccess.transportationplanroom.com/

Looks like they already have a preferred alternative, according to the video at https://xnaaccess.transportationplanroom.com/introduction-video. Estimated cost of $85.6 million.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Wayward Memphian on February 06, 2021, 09:21:09 AM
Speaking of the airport, I found this page for the XNA Access Road: https://xnaaccess.transportationplanroom.com/

Looks like they already have a preferred alternative, according to the video at https://xnaaccess.transportationplanroom.com/introduction-video. Estimated cost of $85.6 million.

They'll be moving this right along now. I can see them extending the the bypass as far as needed to build this to the east and them extending it east from I-49 to US 71B. Supposedly a new Amazon DC will be built along that routing. I'm thinking they be a new Dixieland exchange in between US 71 B and I-49.


Air travel totally sucks anymore. The experience isn't any better than riding on an old Greyhound bus. It's just a lot more expensive for all the nickle and dime fees they pile on to that "low" ticket price.

It's all about the time savings.

Which explains why XNA is so expensive.  Flying to Tulsa and renting a car is actually cheaper

Not so much on a connecting flight, only on direct flights and you are talking to someone that flys Southwest a lot from Tulsa. New York and Chicago from XNA was cheap. Kinda like Denver from TUL due to United and Southwest.

My son and I are looking at going to LA for in the fall for Hollywood Haunted Nights at Universal because our trip last fall was Covided.  On our dates as of right now for Nonstop on AA from XNA is 35 bucks per passenger cheaper than it is from Tulsa $252 to $287 on the same equipment(E175).

Southwest needs to get to XNA ASAP. With all their recent adds, it’s got to be a low hanging fruit.

They easily have 7 daily flights on their 737-800s just sitting there with the connections they offer. 7 seems to be the minimum Southwest wants to start a station.

I could see BWI, BNA, MDW, DEN and DAL started easily.


We agree that DAL and DEN are no brainers. I know that Southwest flys STL over MDW from Tulsa, Wichita and Little Rock. MDW would be a nice difference in the middle of those two but leads me to believe it would be STL.  As for the Southeast, ATL actually offers a few more southeastern connections than BNA at moment.  Southwest has been growing ATL recently but either would suffice. I don't see BWI from the start but in time. I believe XNA would get either PHX or LAS as well based on TUL, ICT and LIT patterns. I can see Houston Hobby as a  year round or seasonal route due to the Latin America connectionsand Orlando Sat only service be nice but neither  LIT ot TUL has that, so it's a longshot.


As just an observation, Southwest either needs to buyout Alaska or add Anchorage to their map as well.


Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: rte66man on February 06, 2021, 01:47:09 PM
Maybe it’s a pipe dream but what isn’t is a real traffic issue resulting from no freeway. They should at the very least secure ROW and lease out any homes and businesses until they become closer to being shovel ready.

PluPan, you do know the Cherokee Turnpike was built from just east of Chouteau to about 10 miles west of Siloam Springs.  The part between the turnpike end and about 2 miles from the State line could easily be made into a freeway as it was built on a new alignment in the late 70's. Same goes for 412 from Catoosa to the western end of the turnpike. Easy upgrade.  They already have interchanges at OK88 (Inola) and US69 (Chouteau). However, ODOT is moving slower than a snail in upgrading. 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Plutonic Panda on February 06, 2021, 02:40:17 PM
Maybe it’s a pipe dream but what isn’t is a real traffic issue resulting from no freeway. They should at the very least secure ROW and lease out any homes and businesses until they become closer to being shovel ready.

PluPan, you do know the Cherokee Turnpike was built from just east of Chouteau to about 10 miles west of Siloam Springs.  The part between the turnpike end and about 2 miles from the State line could easily be made into a freeway as it was built on a new alignment in the late 70's. Same goes for 412 from Catoosa to the western end of the turnpike. Easy upgrade.  They already have interchanges at OK88 (Inola) and US69 (Chouteau). However, ODOT is moving slower than a snail in upgrading.
Haven’t driven it but I did see that on Google maps. It would be nice to see tolls removed but if tolls are what gets it built then I’m all for it as long as a non tolled road parallels it. Oklahoma seems to be fine as long as West Siloam Springs doesn’t see some kind of an unexpected development boom.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on February 06, 2021, 05:22:08 PM
Speaking of the airport, I found this page for the XNA Access Road: https://xnaaccess.transportationplanroom.com/

Looks like they already have a preferred alternative, according to the video at https://xnaaccess.transportationplanroom.com/introduction-video. Estimated cost of $85.6 million.

I remember when they were going to build a private toll road, before they decided to have taxpayers fund the road. They have the friggin money.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: I-39 on February 06, 2021, 05:22:24 PM
We agree that DAL and DEN are no brainers. I know that Southwest flys STL over MDW from Tulsa, Wichita and Little Rock. MDW would be a nice difference in the middle of those two but leads me to believe it would be STL.  As for the Southeast, ATL actually offers a few more southeastern connections than BNA at moment.  Southwest has been growing ATL recently but either would suffice. I don't see BWI from the start but in time. I believe XNA would get either PHX or LAS as well based on TUL, ICT and LIT patterns. I can see Houston Hobby as a  year round or seasonal route due to the Latin America connectionsand Orlando Sat only service be nice but neither  LIT ot TUL has that, so it's a longshot.


As just an observation, Southwest either needs to buyout Alaska or add Anchorage to their map as well.

I think Southwest would just add Anchorage to the map. Buying Alaska wouldn't work, it's more sophisticated than AirTran was.

I said BNA over ATL because while they have grown the latter a bit, they have grown the former even more. Flight wise, Nashville is bit bigger and other than a few destinations like Jackson and Richmond, they are pretty even in the same destinations. I fully expect Southwest at Nashville to get much bigger in the coming years (unless in the unlikely event Delta goes out of business). 

I almost said PHX as well, but I didn't know if that was a popular destination from NWA.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on February 06, 2021, 08:12:07 PM
Getting back to I-49 in Arkansas, Google Maps has Satellite images of the construction.

It shows the right of way, but doesn't show the paving.  It is however, better than nothing.

(I wonder what the lead time is from the photo being taken to the image being posted on their website...)

https://www.google.com/maps/@36.4901318,-94.3927597,7373m/data=!3m1!1e3

Edit: If you work your way south on future I-49, Google also has shots of the construction of the new Northbound lanes for I-49 almost all the way to the US-71 interchange.  Not much imagery of the interchange construction itself, however.

Checked on Google Earth Pro, which is the same view, and the date is 3/4/2020, so almost a year old at this point.  Much has been done since then.  Google really needs more than annual refreshes in this area or it's almost useless with the rate of development.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on February 06, 2021, 08:25:34 PM
From CR 34 (current terminus) north, it appears fully paved and much of the signage is in place,  I almost drove it, but didn't want to get caught.  :pan:

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Wayward Memphian on February 07, 2021, 04:03:26 PM
From CR 34 (current terminus) north, it appears fully paved and much of the signage is in place,  I almost drove it, but didn't want to get caught.  :pan:

My roommate in College who was becoming Civil Engineer interned with the ADHT back then and not only could he get by with driving on incomplete I-49? He deer hunted it too.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: I-39 on February 07, 2021, 11:24:08 PM
Getting back to I-49 in Arkansas, Google Maps has Satellite images of the construction.

It shows the right of way, but doesn't show the paving.  It is however, better than nothing.

(I wonder what the lead time is from the photo being taken to the image being posted on their website...)

https://www.google.com/maps/@36.4901318,-94.3927597,7373m/data=!3m1!1e3

Edit: If you work your way south on future I-49, Google also has shots of the construction of the new Northbound lanes for I-49 almost all the way to the US-71 interchange.  Not much imagery of the interchange construction itself, however.

Checked on Google Earth Pro, which is the same view, and the date is 3/4/2020, so almost a year old at this point.  Much has been done since then.  Google really needs more than annual refreshes in this area or it's almost useless with the rate of development.

I wish Google would update more often, but it’s hard to get every area of the country annually.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on February 08, 2021, 09:53:57 AM
Getting back to I-49 in Arkansas, Google Maps has Satellite images of the construction.

It shows the right of way, but doesn't show the paving.  It is however, better than nothing.

(I wonder what the lead time is from the photo being taken to the image being posted on their website...)

https://www.google.com/maps/@36.4901318,-94.3927597,7373m/data=!3m1!1e3

Edit: If you work your way south on future I-49, Google also has shots of the construction of the new Northbound lanes for I-49 almost all the way to the US-71 interchange.  Not much imagery of the interchange construction itself, however.

Checked on Google Earth Pro, which is the same view, and the date is 3/4/2020, so almost a year old at this point.  Much has been done since then.  Google really needs more than annual refreshes in this area or it's almost useless with the rate of development.

I wish Google would update more often, but it’s hard to get every area of the country annually.

I would agree with that.  However, it's not exactly unknown which areas are rapidly developing and thus could use a more frequent refresh.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Wayward Memphian on February 08, 2021, 02:33:21 PM
More timeline given here. It does line up with any concourse work


Quote
The total project is expected to cost $85.6 million, which includes $5.8 million for right-of-way acquisition, English said. The Arkansas Highway Commission recently released the Statewide Transportation Improvement Program for 2021-2024, and it shows project development would be funded in federal fiscal year 2023, which starts Oct. 1, 2022. Project development for the 3.6-mile project would cost a total of $11 million, according to the program.

The overall project is expected to be paid for with receipts from the half-cent sales tax that voters permanently extended in November. Also, XNA has about $14 million in federal money reserved for the project, English said.


https://talkbusiness.net/2021/02/garver-ardot-to-host-virtual-meeting-for-xna-connector-road-to-seek-public-feedback/


Quite honestly, this will be a backdoor to Centerton/Gravette/Gentry/West Bentonville unless there is zero access to Ark 264
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: msunat97 on March 02, 2021, 02:16:21 PM
Does anyone have a link to the future US71 / I49 interchange design?  I haven't seen any graphics or simulations of the traffic flow once this work is complete.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sprjus4 on March 02, 2021, 06:44:30 PM
(https://i.prcdn.co/img?regionKey=J8ZeLiSH6hvjvO4SUVBaCA%3D%3D)
Low resolution, but you get the idea.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: I-39 on March 02, 2021, 09:09:20 PM
(https://i.prcdn.co/img?regionKey=J8ZeLiSH6hvjvO4SUVBaCA%3D%3D)
Low resolution, but you get the idea.

Has it started to take shape yet from what you can see on the ground?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: msunat97 on March 03, 2021, 07:52:34 AM
Looking at the idrivearkansas.com traffic cameras, I can't see too much shape yet.  once they finish the work to control the flow of the creek, then things might begin to resemble the drawing.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on March 03, 2021, 09:42:55 AM
(https://i.prcdn.co/img?regionKey=J8ZeLiSH6hvjvO4SUVBaCA%3D%3D)
Low resolution, but you get the idea.

Has it started to take shape yet from what you can see on the ground?

The beams for the bridges and overpasses for the main carriageway and northbound onramp are in place and over US-71, but no deck yet or approaches.  Still lots of fill to be done before the approaches can be done, and still have all of the concrete work on the bridge decking and railing to be done.  Going northbound into Bella Vista, it's starting to look like an Interstate is going through there now, though.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: msunat97 on March 03, 2021, 02:12:07 PM
Watching the traffic cams on iDriveArkansas, the construction crews are starting to lay dirt on the concrete culvert for the branch of McKisic Creek.  That should enable them to get the road bed built from the existing road to the new overpass over US71.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: GreenLanternCorps on March 03, 2021, 08:52:17 PM
I’m wondering now which end will get done first, the Missouri end or the Arkansas end?

I think the Highway between the ends of the project will be ready well before the two US 71 interchanges...
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: edwaleni on March 04, 2021, 07:40:49 AM
I’m wondering now which end will get done first, the Missouri end or the Arkansas end?

I think the Highway between the ends of the project will be ready well before the two US 71 interchanges...

I vote Arkansas. Even though the exit with US-71 is large, they were simply farther along with their planning and engineering than Missouri was when the money dropped in their lap.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: msunat97 on March 04, 2021, 09:15:35 AM
I’m wondering now which end will get done first, the Missouri end or the Arkansas end?

I think the Highway between the ends of the project will be ready well before the two US 71 interchanges...

I vote Arkansas. Even though the exit with US-71 is large, they were simply farther along with their planning and engineering than Missouri was when the money dropped in their lap.

I agree with edwaleni.  Missouri still has to complete the intersection with current I49.  That's a lot of concrete supports & closing the interstate to hang beams over the southbound roadway.  Plus they have to cut the road base & begin paving south towards the state line.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on March 04, 2021, 10:21:33 AM
I’m wondering now which end will get done first, the Missouri end or the Arkansas end?

I think the Highway between the ends of the project will be ready well before the two US 71 interchanges...

I vote Arkansas. Even though the exit with US-71 is large, they were simply farther along with their planning and engineering than Missouri was when the money dropped in their lap.

Theoretically, they are supposed to finish around the same time.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: edwaleni on March 04, 2021, 11:02:52 AM
I’m wondering now which end will get done first, the Missouri end or the Arkansas end?

I think the Highway between the ends of the project will be ready well before the two US 71 interchanges...

I vote Arkansas. Even though the exit with US-71 is large, they were simply farther along with their planning and engineering than Missouri was when the money dropped in their lap.

Theoretically, they are supposed to finish around the same time.

If Missouri builds from the border north and does the US-71 ramps last and Arkansas finishes their ramps last, then yes, I could see this happening. But I still think ArDOT will finish their ramps before Missouri does.

Either way, they can't open the route until both are done anyway.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on March 04, 2021, 02:13:17 PM
I just checked MoDOT's website:  https://www.modot.org/i-49-missouriarkansas-connector

They are saying completion is scheduled for Sept. 30, 2021 

I'm sure if the weather continues to be relatively mild, it may be sooner.

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: KamKam on March 04, 2021, 11:50:52 PM
Oh my gosh that's great news!!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: abqtraveler on March 05, 2021, 09:29:29 AM
I just checked MoDOT's website:  https://www.modot.org/i-49-missouriarkansas-connector

They are saying completion is scheduled for Sept. 30, 2021 

I'm sure if the weather continues to be relatively mild, it may be sooner.

It would be nice if they had some progress photos on their website. Also, not sure how much impact to the construction schedule February's "polar vortex" had on completing I-49. A lot of construction activity couldn't happen with subfreezing temperatures and snow.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on March 05, 2021, 10:30:58 AM
I just checked MoDOT's website:  https://www.modot.org/i-49-missouriarkansas-connector

They are saying completion is scheduled for Sept. 30, 2021 

I'm sure if the weather continues to be relatively mild, it may be sooner.

It would be nice if they had some progress photos on their website. Also, not sure how much impact to the construction schedule February's "polar vortex" had on completing I-49. A lot of construction activity couldn't happen with subfreezing temperatures and snow.

Luckily the "Polar Vortex" only lasted about a week here.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Henry on March 05, 2021, 10:49:44 AM
About time they get it done!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on March 05, 2021, 04:27:07 PM
I’m wondering now which end will get done first, the Missouri end or the Arkansas end?

I think the Highway between the ends of the project will be ready well before the two US 71 interchanges...

I vote Arkansas. Even though the exit with US-71 is large, they were simply farther along with their planning and engineering than Missouri was when the money dropped in their lap.

Theoretically, they are supposed to finish around the same time.

If Missouri builds from the border north and does the US-71 ramps last and Arkansas finishes their ramps last, then yes, I could see this happening. But I still think ArDOT will finish their ramps before Missouri does.

Either way, they can't open the route until both are done anyway.

The same contractor is doing Arkansas and Missouri, other than the interchange in Bentonville.  The Arkansas side will be likely see more headway as that contractor started on the Arkansas side first before Missouri was gifted with their funding.  Now that doesn't mean that they can't pull another crew in to work from the north southward, but I can't see them pulling the crew they have in Arkansas working until they get to a logical stopping place for that phase of the work to move into Missouri.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on March 05, 2021, 05:08:05 PM

The same contractor is doing Arkansas and Missouri, other than the interchange in Bentonville.  The Arkansas side will be likely see more headway as that contractor started on the Arkansas side first before Missouri was gifted with their funding.  Now that doesn't mean that they can't pull another crew in to work from the north southward, but I can't see them pulling the crew they have in Arkansas working until they get to a logical stopping place for that phase of the work to move into Missouri.

I'm sure they have plenty of manpower for both projects plus several others.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: mvak36 on March 06, 2021, 12:20:37 PM

The same contractor is doing Arkansas and Missouri, other than the interchange in Bentonville.  The Arkansas side will be likely see more headway as that contractor started on the Arkansas side first before Missouri was gifted with their funding.  Now that doesn't mean that they can't pull another crew in to work from the north southward, but I can't see them pulling the crew they have in Arkansas working until they get to a logical stopping place for that phase of the work to move into Missouri.

I'm sure they have plenty of manpower for both projects plus several others.

Yeah I would think they would. Along with the I-49 projects, they're currently working on the I-70 Climbing Lanes project. I believe they were also the contractor on the I-70/I-435 interchange and the I-44 Bridges project in SW Missouri that were completed last year.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on March 06, 2021, 12:51:53 PM

The same contractor is doing Arkansas and Missouri, other than the interchange in Bentonville.  The Arkansas side will be likely see more headway as that contractor started on the Arkansas side first before Missouri was gifted with their funding.  Now that doesn't mean that they can't pull another crew in to work from the north southward, but I can't see them pulling the crew they have in Arkansas working until they get to a logical stopping place for that phase of the work to move into Missouri.

I'm sure they have plenty of manpower for both projects plus several others.

Yeah I would think they would. Along with the I-49 projects, they're currently working on the I-70 Climbing Lanes project. I believe they were also the contractor on the I-70/I-435 interchange and the I-44 Bridges project in SW Missouri that were completed last year.

APAC is a large company They've been around seemingly forever.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: mvak36 on March 06, 2021, 01:39:45 PM

The same contractor is doing Arkansas and Missouri, other than the interchange in Bentonville.  The Arkansas side will be likely see more headway as that contractor started on the Arkansas side first before Missouri was gifted with their funding.  Now that doesn't mean that they can't pull another crew in to work from the north southward, but I can't see them pulling the crew they have in Arkansas working until they get to a logical stopping place for that phase of the work to move into Missouri.

I'm sure they have plenty of manpower for both projects plus several others.

Yeah I would think they would. Along with the I-49 projects, they're currently working on the I-70 Climbing Lanes project. I believe they were also the contractor on the I-70/I-435 interchange and the I-44 Bridges project in SW Missouri that were completed last year.

APAC is a large company They've been around seemingly forever.

Oh I was thinking it was Emery Sapp and Sons. They won the Missouri Bella Vista Bypass project so when I saw that they were doing the Arkansas side, I thought it was them.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on March 06, 2021, 02:16:08 PM

The same contractor is doing Arkansas and Missouri, other than the interchange in Bentonville.  The Arkansas side will be likely see more headway as that contractor started on the Arkansas side first before Missouri was gifted with their funding.  Now that doesn't mean that they can't pull another crew in to work from the north southward, but I can't see them pulling the crew they have in Arkansas working until they get to a logical stopping place for that phase of the work to move into Missouri.

I'm sure they have plenty of manpower for both projects plus several others.

Yeah I would think they would. Along with the I-49 projects, they're currently working on the I-70 Climbing Lanes project. I believe they were also the contractor on the I-70/I-435 interchange and the I-44 Bridges project in SW Missouri that were completed last year.

APAC is a large company They've been around seemingly forever.

Oh I was thinking it was Emery Sapp and Sons. They won the Missouri Bella Vista Bypass project so when I saw that they were doing the Arkansas side, I thought it was them.

Sapp IS doing Missouri (looked it up).  Not sure where I got APAC, unless they're a sub-contractor?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on March 06, 2021, 06:09:18 PM
Why are climbing lanes needed on I-70 in Missouri? I figured no climbing lanes would've been needed anywhere between Denver and Breezewood.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: mvak36 on March 06, 2021, 07:07:27 PM
Why are climbing lanes needed on I-70 in Missouri? I figured no climbing lanes would've been needed anywhere between Denver and Breezewood.

There's a steep section of I-70 in Montgomery County (I'm not sure of the grade). Here's the project site (https://www.modot.org/mineola-hill-climbing-lanes-design-build) if you're interested.

EDIT: The grade is 4 to 6 percent according to the RFQ document (https://www.modot.org/sites/default/files/documents/RFQ.pdf) for the project.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: I-55 on March 06, 2021, 08:49:42 PM
Why are climbing lanes needed on I-70 in Missouri? I figured no climbing lanes would've been needed anywhere between Denver and Breezewood.

The fact that there are no climbing lanes on I-470 near the Ohio River is nothing less than surprising to me.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sprjus4 on March 07, 2021, 02:01:17 AM
Why are climbing lanes needed on I-70 in Missouri? I figured no climbing lanes would've been needed anywhere between Denver and Breezewood.

The fact that there are no climbing lanes on I-470 near the Ohio River is nothing less than surprising to me.
There are climbing lanes on I-470 though?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on March 23, 2021, 12:58:57 AM
Arkansas: almost finished on its side of the BVB "Arkansas-Missouri connector".
Missouri expects the entire project to be complete by the end of September, this year.  :wow:

Dig the video footage (with new signage on the Arkansas side, just south of the line).:  https://www.4029tv.com/article/missouri-portion-of-bella-vista-bypass-on-schedule/35906021
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on March 23, 2021, 03:29:08 AM
Arkansas: almost finished on its side of the BVB "Arkansas-Missouri connector".
Missouri expects the entire project to be complete by the end of September, this year.  :wow:

Dig the video footage (with new signage on the Arkansas side, just south of the line).:  https://www.4029tv.com/article/missouri-portion-of-bella-vista-bypass-on-schedule/35906021

Unless there's going to be a significant separation of the carriageways, it looks like at least part of the MO portion of the Bella Vista bypass will feature narrow medians, particularly through the cuts.  One of the overpasses depicted in the newscast further indicates this type of design.  Considering the rock formations along the alignment, keeping the ROW at a minimal width isn't surprising.

Hopefully the worst of COVID will be over later this year; it would be nice to visit my family in SE OK and clinch the AR portion of I-49 (even Shreveport to Texarkana) while I'm in the area -- all the way up to KC, once this segment is opened. 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sprjus4 on March 23, 2021, 07:29:59 AM
^

The design plans for the Missouri portion of the project did indicate a narrow median from the state line to I-49. This is reasonable, given the terrain in the area.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: mvak36 on March 23, 2021, 10:08:09 AM
^

The design plans for the Missouri portion of the project did indicate a narrow median from the state line to I-49. This is reasonable, given the terrain in the area.

So do those design plans have cable barriers in the median then? I don't know how to read these design plans otherwise I'd look for myself.

EDIT: I guess I answered my own question. I found this on the project site: https://www.modot.org/sites/default/files/documents/Typical%20Section.pdf. It looks like a concrete barrier in the median.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on March 23, 2021, 07:02:46 PM
^

The design plans for the Missouri portion of the project did indicate a narrow median from the state line to I-49. This is reasonable, given the terrain in the area.

So do those design plans have cable barriers in the median then? I don't know how to read these design plans otherwise I'd look for myself.

EDIT: I guess I answered my own question. I found this on the project site: https://www.modot.org/sites/default/files/documents/Typical%20Section.pdf. It looks like a concrete barrier in the median.

Makes sense -- looks a lot like I-80 here in CA between Auburn and Yuba Gap, much of CA 58 over the Tehachapis, and I-5 south of Dunsmuir.   Generally good for 65 mph -- but at least there's not narrow canyons to negotiate (like out here) that necessitate 55 mph-posted curvature, much of that serial reverse curves.  Should be just fine as a commercial corridor.   
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: 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.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: rickmastfan67 on March 23, 2021, 10:00:44 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.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: GreenLanternCorps on March 23, 2021, 10:05:20 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.

Beat me to it, I was just gonna post that...
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sprjus4 on March 23, 2021, 10:14:49 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.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Tomahawkin on March 24, 2021, 02:07:46 AM
Can we get IH 49 (between Ft Smith and Texarkana built in segments like IH 22 was built in NW Alabama? Im guessing that is the best route to go fundingwise? With that said, land clearing should have started 10+ years ago
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: mvak36 on March 24, 2021, 09:31:33 AM
Can we get IH 49 (between Ft Smith and Texarkana built in segments like IH 22 was built in NW Alabama? Im guessing that is the best route to go fundingwise? With that said, land clearing should have started 10+ years ago

There were a few I-49 projects that were listed as potential projects for the next round of the Connecting Arkansas program. But they were only for two lanes and I don't know which projects got selected.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/gallery/12408_29_01_20_5_30_10.jpeg)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on March 24, 2021, 05:56:06 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.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on March 24, 2021, 06:05:03 PM
Can we get IH 49 (between Ft Smith and Texarkana built in segments like IH 22 was built in NW Alabama? Im guessing that is the best route to go fundingwise? With that said, land clearing should have started 10+ years ago

Next projects will likely be (IMO) extending the 412 Bypass and building a south access road to XNA.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on March 24, 2021, 06:57:36 PM
Can we get IH 49 (between Ft Smith and Texarkana built in segments like IH 22 was built in NW Alabama? Im guessing that is the best route to go fundingwise? With that said, land clearing should have started 10+ years ago

There were a few I-49 projects that were listed as potential projects for the next round of the Connecting Arkansas program. But they were only for two lanes and I don't know which projects got selected.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/gallery/12408_29_01_20_5_30_10.jpeg)

At least two initial lanes are better than no project at all -- especially if they're built on a 4-lane ROW (or with plans to rebuild the existing 2 lanes of US 71 where feasible).  At least the project as depicted on the map addresses a sizeable chunk of the overall corridor mileage.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Wayward Memphian on March 29, 2021, 11:42:54 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.

75 to 79 mph will be the standard for the half that know the Troopers won't bother you for up to 9 over in this state. I have over 25 years of driving back and forth to know this fact. I also know most still won't go over 80  in the 75mph zones, most that do are out of staters.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bwana39 on March 30, 2021, 08:15:12 AM
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.

75 to 79 mph will be the standard for the half that know the Troopers won't bother you for up to 9 over in this state. I have over 25 years of driving back and forth to know this fact. I also know most still won't go over 80  in the 75mph zones, most that do are out of staters.

You are spot on. I drive I-49 in Miller county very frequently. My 81 mph in the 75 is among the faster ones. The ones going faster than me usually have plates from outside the nearby states (AR, LA, TX, OK). A few Texas pickups or Louisiana Cars, but hardly ever an Arkansas plated vehicle is among the 85 mph crowd.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on March 31, 2021, 02:09:15 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 (https://ibb.co/LSnvCtg)
Rocky Dell Hollow exit southbound (https://ibb.co/QQrvzbT)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: The Ghostbuster on April 01, 2021, 11:22:21 AM
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.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: CtrlAltDel on April 01, 2021, 01:55:02 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 (https://app.photobucket.com/u/mttrace05/a/2dd33b0f-e66b-4503-8a17-25834896458a/p/abaafc9d-d278-4716-910b-74ff2b663c12)
Rocky Dell Hollow exit southbound (https://app.photobucket.com/u/mttrace05/a/2dd33b0f-e66b-4503-8a17-25834896458a/p/212b1b4e-6604-4504-becc-68514a7623aa)

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

(https://i.imgur.com/aooDMzH.png)

(https://i.imgur.com/54OtQAb.png)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: 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?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: rickmastfan67 on April 01, 2021, 08:09:17 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.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: abqtraveler on April 01, 2021, 08:55:27 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.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on April 01, 2021, 09:34:19 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.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: 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?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: abqtraveler on April 02, 2021, 08:41:35 AM
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.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Wayward Memphian on April 02, 2021, 03:17:28 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.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: abqtraveler on April 02, 2021, 03:23:08 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!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on April 02, 2021, 11:13:51 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.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on April 02, 2021, 11:36:05 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.
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49516299553_42d12623e6_d.jpg)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on April 03, 2021, 04:18:42 AM
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.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on April 04, 2021, 01:36:56 AM
Quote
Earmarks 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/

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: edwaleni on April 05, 2021, 09:06:11 AM
Quote
Earmarks 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.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: silverback1065 on April 05, 2021, 10:27:04 AM
Quote
Earmarks 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!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sprjus4 on April 05, 2021, 10:34:57 AM
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.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bwana39 on April 05, 2021, 12:48:39 PM
Quote
Earmarks 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.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Scott5114 on April 05, 2021, 03:51:16 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?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: I-55 on April 05, 2021, 04:04:09 PM
Quote
Earmarks 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.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: 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.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: I-55 on April 05, 2021, 04:35:08 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) (https://www.statista.com/statistics/764486/cost-construction-lines-lgv-by-kilometer-la-france/)

For a US example, the price tag on California's High speed rail was $80 million per mile. (source) (https://reason.org/commentary/on-high-speed-rail-look-at-the-costs-and-results-before-you-leap/)

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.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on April 05, 2021, 08:29:35 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.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on April 05, 2021, 08:37:49 PM
Quote
Earmarks 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.)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: silverback1065 on April 05, 2021, 09:16:58 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) (https://www.statista.com/statistics/764486/cost-construction-lines-lgv-by-kilometer-la-france/)

For a US example, the price tag on California's High speed rail was $80 million per mile. (source) (https://reason.org/commentary/on-high-speed-rail-look-at-the-costs-and-results-before-you-leap/)

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.

I'm thinking bullet trains, and I don't understand why it costs so much to build it here vs. other countries. But honestly why not have an interstate highway system for trains? regionally it could work, nationally probably not, especially out west (flyover country)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bwana39 on April 05, 2021, 10:14:53 PM
That is BASICALLY what the Rail component of the Trans Texas Corridor was supposed to be.

Two way higher speed rail would make the railroads move faster.   Even the so-called flyover regions one or two mainlines.

Just like freeways, get them out of the business of cross traffic.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: I-55 on April 06, 2021, 02:13:56 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) (https://www.statista.com/statistics/764486/cost-construction-lines-lgv-by-kilometer-la-france/)

For a US example, the price tag on California's High speed rail was $80 million per mile. (source) (https://reason.org/commentary/on-high-speed-rail-look-at-the-costs-and-results-before-you-leap/)

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.

I'm thinking bullet trains, and I don't understand why it costs so much to build it here vs. other countries. But honestly why not have an interstate highway system for trains? regionally it could work, nationally probably not, especially out west (flyover country)

https://www.quora.com/Why-is-a-high-speed-rail-line-so-expensive-in-California-when-it-has-been-done-in-other-places-like-Europe-and-Japan

As I figured would be a problem, cost estimates are different depending on which site you use, but in general Europe is cheaper than the US, and usually the US is cheaper than Japan.

Something else to consider is that the cultures in Europe and Japan are much more favorable to passenger rail than the United States, so the bureaucratic and political obstacles that high speed rail face in the US aren't as big of a problem elsewhere. These could include politically favorable routings, delays due to opposition, regulations, etc.

California also has the challenge of making their line resistant to earthquakes, otherwise a break in the line could shut everything down (especially if its electric and the power cables break).

The northeast corridor most likely has to deal with a lot of property acquisition in markets where land isn't nearly as cheap as it is elsewhere, and there's probably a load of noise and other "interference with society" regulations that have to be followed. I originally thought Amtrak just wanted to upgrade the existing line on existing property but for a 500 million per mile cost that seems preposterous. It is more likely that some line will be utilized but also new land will be needed to accommodate wider curves.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on April 06, 2021, 02:25:20 PM
Arkansas briefly discussed high speed rail in the 80's, but the idea didn't go very far because people were concerned for how much it would cost.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: msunat97 on April 06, 2021, 02:59:49 PM
Update from Mo DOT about the Pineville intersection
https://www.modot.org/node/22413 (https://www.modot.org/node/22413)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on April 15, 2021, 04:39:27 PM
Drove AR-549 southbound yesterday from the Gravette AR-72 entrance ramp, and most of the new northbound asphalt lanes have rumble strips etched, so they are mostly done other than striping and signing.  The cable barrier posts are all done all the way to the jersey barrier section in the southern end, but no cable strung yet.  They are still working on the US-71 intersection/overpass and don't have approaches or decking/railing yet.

AR-549 BVB Current Southern Terminus 4-14-21 (https://ibb.co/FxPgscC)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: msunat97 on April 15, 2021, 05:58:02 PM
Drove AR-549 southbound yesterday from the Gravette AR-72 entrance ramp, and most of the new northbound asphalt lanes have rumble strips etched, so they are mostly done other than striping and signing.  The cable barrier posts are all done all the way to the jersey barrier section in the southern end, but no cable strung yet.  They are still working on the US-71 intersection/overpass and don't have approaches or decking/railing yet.

AR-549 BVB Current Southern Terminus 4-14-21 (https://ibb.co/FxPgscC)

Thanks for the update Mikie.  I've been watching the ArDOT traffic cams to see the progress on the 49/71 interchange.  I looks like they will start adding concrete to the 71 overpass soon, but the approach from the Bentonville side is still dirt with most of the wall blocks up to shape the approach.  Still a good bit of dirt work to do before they start paving the new roadway.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on April 16, 2021, 12:46:11 PM
Drove AR-549 southbound yesterday from the Gravette AR-72 entrance ramp, and most of the new northbound asphalt lanes have rumble strips etched, so they are mostly done other than striping and signing.  The cable barrier posts are all done all the way to the jersey barrier section in the southern end, but no cable strung yet.  They are still working on the US-71 intersection/overpass and don't have approaches or decking/railing yet.

AR-549 BVB Current Southern Terminus 4-14-21 (https://ibb.co/FxPgscC)

Thanks for the update Mikie.  I've been watching the ArDOT traffic cams to see the progress on the 49/71 interchange.  I looks like they will start adding concrete to the 71 overpass soon, but the approach from the Bentonville side is still dirt with most of the wall blocks up to shape the approach.  Still a good bit of dirt work to do before they start paving the new roadway.

And I wonder how long before they start work on the SPUI under the overpass as well for US-71/71B.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: msunat97 on April 20, 2021, 10:25:57 AM
Drove AR-549 southbound yesterday from the Gravette AR-72 entrance ramp, and most of the new northbound asphalt lanes have rumble strips etched, so they are mostly done other than striping and signing.  The cable barrier posts are all done all the way to the jersey barrier section in the southern end, but no cable strung yet.  They are still working on the US-71 intersection/overpass and don't have approaches or decking/railing yet.

AR-549 BVB Current Southern Terminus 4-14-21 (https://ibb.co/FxPgscC)

Thanks for the update Mikie.  I've been watching the ArDOT traffic cams to see the progress on the 49/71 interchange.  I looks like they will start adding concrete to the 71 overpass soon, but the approach from the Bentonville side is still dirt with most of the wall blocks up to shape the approach.  Still a good bit of dirt work to do before they start paving the new roadway.

And I wonder how long before they start work on the SPUI under the overpass as well for US-71/71B.

Per the ArDOT cameras, the crews are starting the dirt work for the new on-ramp from US71 to I49 SB.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on April 20, 2021, 03:16:53 PM
Drove AR-549 southbound yesterday from the Gravette AR-72 entrance ramp, and most of the new northbound asphalt lanes have rumble strips etched, so they are mostly done other than striping and signing.  The cable barrier posts are all done all the way to the jersey barrier section in the southern end, but no cable strung yet.  They are still working on the US-71 intersection/overpass and don't have approaches or decking/railing yet.

AR-549 BVB Current Southern Terminus 4-14-21 (https://ibb.co/FxPgscC)

Thanks for the update Mikie.  I've been watching the ArDOT traffic cams to see the progress on the 49/71 interchange.  I looks like they will start adding concrete to the 71 overpass soon, but the approach from the Bentonville side is still dirt with most of the wall blocks up to shape the approach.  Still a good bit of dirt work to do before they start paving the new roadway.

And I wonder how long before they start work on the SPUI under the overpass as well for US-71/71B.

Per the ArDOT cameras, the crews are starting the dirt work for the new on-ramp from US71 to I49 SB.

Bet they aren't making much headway today with all of the snowing.  I'm so over winter...
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on April 20, 2021, 05:38:32 PM

Bet they aren't making much headway today with all of the snowing.  I'm so over winter...

So who made Hell freeze over?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: rte66man on April 20, 2021, 10:55:52 PM

Bet they aren't making much headway today with all of the snowing.  I'm so over winter...

So who made Hell freeze over?

The Eagles of course  :bigass:
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: msunat97 on May 03, 2021, 08:53:54 AM
news release from ArDOT about some lane closures overnight in Bella Vista over the next 2 weeks
https://www.ardot.gov/news/21-119/ (https://www.ardot.gov/news/21-119/)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: msunat97 on May 07, 2021, 11:07:10 AM
Bella Vista interchange update from 40-29TV https://www.4029tv.com/article/the-end-is-near-bella-vista-bypass-ahead-of-schedule/36357026?utm_campaign=snd-autopilot (https://www.4029tv.com/article/the-end-is-near-bella-vista-bypass-ahead-of-schedule/36357026?utm_campaign=snd-autopilot)

thanks to the Build I-49 Facebook page for the post https://www.facebook.com/Build-I-49-288089113623/ (https://www.facebook.com/Build-I-49-288089113623/)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: msunat97 on May 14, 2021, 08:11:57 AM
Looks like the overpass surface over US71 has been fully poured per the ArDOT traffic cams.  It's getting closer to being completed.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Wayward Memphian on May 18, 2021, 07:33:23 PM
Look at what Arkansas wants to connect to it

https://talkbusiness.net/2021/05/new-highway-west-of-interstate-49-would-connect-2-bypasses/

I Imagine this is the greater vision of the airport Connector from 412 bypass.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on May 18, 2021, 07:57:45 PM
Look at what Arkansas wants to connect to it

https://talkbusiness.net/2021/05/new-highway-west-of-interstate-49-would-connect-2-bypasses/

I Imagine this is the greater vision of the airport Connector from 412 bypass.

That's been discussed off and on for several months.  The XNA access would be state maintained instead of a private toll road.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Wayward Memphian on May 20, 2021, 02:22:13 PM
Look at what Arkansas wants to connect to it

https://talkbusiness.net/2021/05/new-highway-west-of-interstate-49-would-connect-2-bypasses/

I Imagine this is the greater vision of the airport Connector from 412 bypass.

That's been discussed off and on for several months.  The XNA access would be state maintained instead of a private toll road.

I seem to have missed the connecting to the Bella Vista Bypass part.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on May 20, 2021, 05:26:34 PM
Look at what Arkansas wants to connect to it

https://talkbusiness.net/2021/05/new-highway-west-of-interstate-49-would-connect-2-bypasses/

I Imagine this is the greater vision of the airport Connector from 412 bypass.

That's been discussed off and on for several months.  The XNA access would be state maintained instead of a private toll road.

I seem to have missed the connecting to the Bella Vista Bypass part.

You didn't.  The road is connecting to the Springdale Bypass that he's referring to.  The project in question is actually the beginnings of a western beltway for NWA, although it's initially just planned for a 2-lane connection between the bypasses.  It wouldn't stay that way for long as much traffic is already on I-49 and AR-112 now.  They're about to start moving on widening AR-112 as they've had virtual meetings, so the ROW acquisition and utility moving should start in a year or so.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Wayward Memphian on May 21, 2021, 03:46:33 PM
I figure the Access road will be the southern leg of that bypass and run to the west if the airport from there.

Anhoo, XNA landed Breeze. The LCC start up from JetBlue's founder David Neeleman. Insanely great fares for nonstops to TPA, MSY and SAT can be had now.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: GreenLanternCorps on May 28, 2021, 07:37:53 AM
Per the IDrive Arkansas Traffic Cameras at the I-49 - US 71 interchange, they are now paving the approach to the bridge on the North end of the interchange.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Avalanchez71 on May 28, 2021, 07:39:35 AM
Bella Vista should be the Breezewood of AR.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on May 28, 2021, 09:50:54 AM
Bella Vista should be the Breezewood of AR.

Sorry, not quite as dysfunctional here as Pennsylvania, but still have several other areas around the state that'll make you wonder!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: The Ghostbuster on May 28, 2021, 03:32:16 PM
Bella Vista is definitely not the Breezewood of Arkansas. At least the Bella Vista Bypass will be completed. The Breezewood gap will never be "completed".
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: msunat97 on June 03, 2021, 02:33:10 PM
Per iDriveArkansas traffic cams, the crews are laying down some asphalt on US-71 where the SB traffic on 71 will enter ramp onto I-49.  it's slowly taking shape!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: edwaleni on June 03, 2021, 04:11:04 PM
Bella Vista is definitely not the Breezewood of Arkansas. At least the Bella Vista Bypass will be completed. The Breezewood gap will never be "completed".

Thank goodness! I never knew about the Breezewood Gap until I looked it up now.  What a total foobar.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on June 04, 2021, 10:02:57 PM
Per iDriveArkansas traffic cams, the crews are laying down some asphalt on US-71 where the SB traffic on 71 will enter ramp onto I-49.  it's slowly taking shape!

I may be up there this weekend so I'll have to look.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: msunat97 on June 05, 2021, 08:20:02 PM
they also added more asphalt for the I-49NB exit ramp onto US71. 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on June 05, 2021, 08:33:11 PM
Except for the 49.71 junction, the road is ready to go in Arkansas. Missouri, no so much. The road is still unpaved, plus the flyover from NB 49 to NB 71 at Pineville is still under construction.

ARDOT has upgraded to larger signage on 549/49 and many of the 549 signs have been replaced with I-49 shields.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: yakra on June 06, 2021, 03:17:40 PM
Stupid question but, is I-49 gonna be TOTSO? (https://www.google.com/maps/@36.5686742,-94.3858087,3a,27.2y,152.53h,90.18t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s1XGzcbgh4TIGoZ1JCB5CSg!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3D1XGzcbgh4TIGoZ1JCB5CSg%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D183.80063%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sprjus4 on June 06, 2021, 03:31:46 PM
Stupid question but, is I-49 gonna be TOTSO? (https://www.google.com/maps/@36.5686742,-94.3858087,3a,27.2y,152.53h,90.18t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s1XGzcbgh4TIGoZ1JCB5CSg!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3D1XGzcbgh4TIGoZ1JCB5CSg%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D183.80063%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192)
No, I-49 will be the straight movement, US-71 will be a left exit. It will be adequately signed so that I-49 is not an “exit”  itself just because it’s to the right.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: yakra on June 06, 2021, 03:46:08 PM
*shrug* Fair enough.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on June 06, 2021, 03:58:15 PM
Stupid question but, is I-49 gonna be TOTSO? (https://www.google.com/maps/@36.5686742,-94.3858087,3a,27.2y,152.53h,90.18t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s1XGzcbgh4TIGoZ1JCB5CSg!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3D1XGzcbgh4TIGoZ1JCB5CSg%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D183.80063%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192)
No, I-49 will be the straight movement, US-71 will be a left exit. It will be adequately signed so that I-49 is not an “exit”  itself just because it’s to the right.

71 at 49 (Bentonville) will be a Diverging Diamond along "old" 71. 49 traffic will be straight through.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bwana39 on June 06, 2021, 10:20:11 PM
Stupid question but, is I-49 gonna be TOTSO? (https://www.google.com/maps/@36.5686742,-94.3858087,3a,27.2y,152.53h,90.18t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s1XGzcbgh4TIGoZ1JCB5CSg!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3D1XGzcbgh4TIGoZ1JCB5CSg%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D183.80063%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192)
No, I-49 will be the straight movement, US-71 will be a left exit. It will be adequately signed so that I-49 is not an “exit”  itself just because it’s to the right.


Per the rules that the straight through or major element through ALWAYS uses the leftmost lane(s), yes it would be TOTSO.
I manage to mess up I-20 EB at I-635 in southeast Dallas because you execute to the left to take a right turn.  For some years, I-20 turned off of LBJ Freeway(**)  to the right. At some point, they completely rebuilt the intersection to eliminate the I-20 exit and create an exit to the right for I-635.  Now, it is counterintuitive to me and I wind up going on to US-80 freeway to make the turn to the east.  That said, we no longer turn off to stay on....

** Originally LBJ Freeway was signed as IH-635 from I-35 to I-35. To the north, I-635 (LBJ) has since extended to SH-121 north of DFW Airport. I-20 was rerouted around the south of Dallas along LBJ and I-635 was truncated at I-20.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on June 06, 2021, 10:29:31 PM
US 71/I-49 split at Pineville.

(https://scontent-dfw5-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.6435-9/160014219_10159223871043624_2849692658310435489_n.jpg?_nc_cat=105&ccb=1-3&_nc_sid=973b4a&_nc_ohc=VNUpsULcS0cAX8cFgek&_nc_ht=scontent-dfw5-1.xx&oh=819a7da600668c1487ff5fad61281a89&oe=60E1A9A7)

I'll have more on the I-49 Fakebook page in a day or two.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sprjus4 on June 06, 2021, 10:54:18 PM
Per the rules that the straight through or major element through ALWAYS uses the leftmost lane(s), yes it would be TOTSO.
I wouldn’t consider merely a left exit as being a TOTSO for the mainline. The mainline isn’t exiting.

I-49 at I-44 is a TOTSO.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: yakra on June 07, 2021, 12:38:40 AM
It is and is not. 🐐
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Avalanchez71 on June 07, 2021, 08:15:15 AM
US 71/I-49 split at Pineville.

(https://scontent-dfw5-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.6435-9/160014219_10159223871043624_2849692658310435489_n.jpg?_nc_cat=105&ccb=1-3&_nc_sid=973b4a&_nc_ohc=VNUpsULcS0cAX8cFgek&_nc_ht=scontent-dfw5-1.xx&oh=819a7da600668c1487ff5fad61281a89&oe=60E1A9A7)

I'll have more on the I-49 Fakebook page in a day or two.

So how long before Fritz Owl and the gang proposes a I-249 around NWA?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on June 07, 2021, 11:25:50 AM


So how long before Fritz Owl and the gang proposes a I-249 around NWA?

That has been brought up in passing by the regional development commission.  No current plans, but it has been discussed in passing for the future.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bwana39 on June 07, 2021, 11:31:27 AM
Per the rules that the straight through or major element through ALWAYS uses the leftmost lane(s), yes it would be TOTSO.
I wouldn’t consider merely a left exit as being a TOTSO for the mainline. The mainline isn’t exiting.

I-49 at I-44 is a TOTSO.

I agree that The I-49 at I-44 is TOTSO. I also would say that  the TOTSO (I-49) flows better than  the (corrected) I-20 @I-635 in Dallas. It is a natural right curve. There is freeway continuing in the straight direction.  I far prefer the way it is handled in Joplin to the (corrected) version in Dallas.

As to left exits. Where the left exit leads to a local or even lesser arterial, I indeed hate them.

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: roadman65 on June 07, 2021, 11:51:42 AM
Stupid question but, is I-49 gonna be TOTSO? (https://www.google.com/maps/@36.5686742,-94.3858087,3a,27.2y,152.53h,90.18t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s1XGzcbgh4TIGoZ1JCB5CSg!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3D1XGzcbgh4TIGoZ1JCB5CSg%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D183.80063%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192)


Better question. Is US 71 going to stay on its arterial alignment? Or will it follow I-49 into AR with a state route number be given present US 71?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Avalanchez71 on June 07, 2021, 12:11:47 PM


So how long before Fritz Owl and the gang proposes a I-249 around NWA?

That has been brought up in passing by the regional development commission.  No current plans, but it has been discussed in passing for the future.

Looks like in the picture that US 71 is sufficient and I-49 is superfluous.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on June 07, 2021, 12:18:40 PM
Stupid question but, is I-49 gonna be TOTSO? (https://www.google.com/maps/@36.5686742,-94.3858087,3a,27.2y,152.53h,90.18t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s1XGzcbgh4TIGoZ1JCB5CSg!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3D1XGzcbgh4TIGoZ1JCB5CSg%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D183.80063%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192)


Better question. Is US 71 going to stay on its arterial alignment? Or will it follow I-49 into AR with a state route number be given present US 71?

71 will not change (at least for now). 49 will run solo to Bentonville where it will join 71 to Fayettevile before splitting off.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: -- US 175 -- on June 07, 2021, 02:06:08 PM
Stupid question but, is I-49 gonna be TOTSO? (https://www.google.com/maps/@36.5686742,-94.3858087,3a,27.2y,152.53h,90.18t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s1XGzcbgh4TIGoZ1JCB5CSg!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3D1XGzcbgh4TIGoZ1JCB5CSg%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D183.80063%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192)
No, I-49 will be the straight movement, US-71 will be a left exit. It will be adequately signed so that I-49 is not an “exit”  itself just because it’s to the right.


Per the rules that the straight through or major element through ALWAYS uses the leftmost lane(s), yes it would be TOTSO.
I manage to mess up I-20 EB at I-635 in southeast Dallas because you execute to the left to take a right turn.  For some years, I-20 turned off of LBJ Freeway(**)  to the right. At some point, they completely rebuilt the intersection to eliminate the I-20 exit and create an exit to the right for I-635.  Now, it is counterintuitive to me and I wind up going on to US-80 freeway to make the turn to the east.  That said, we no longer turn off to stay on....

** Originally LBJ Freeway was signed as IH-635 from I-35 to I-35. To the north, I-635 (LBJ) has since extended to SH-121 north of DFW Airport. I-20 was rerouted around the south of Dallas along LBJ and I-635 was truncated at I-20.

bwana, I put your I-20/I-635 comment in the DFW Projects thread with a potential answer.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: The Ghostbuster on June 08, 2021, 12:26:40 PM
If US 71 is eventually rerouted along the Bella Vista Bypass with Interstate 49, maybe existing 71 through Bella Vista and into Missouri could become Business Route 49.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on June 08, 2021, 12:29:47 PM
If US 71 is eventually rerouted along the Bella Vista Bypass with Interstate 49, maybe existing 71 through Bella Vista and into Missouri could become Business Route 49.

Maybe, Arkansas had Business I-30 at one time, but it was decommissioned. I think 71 is safe for now due to all businesses along it
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on June 15, 2021, 02:43:18 PM
If US 71 is eventually rerouted along the Bella Vista Bypass with Interstate 49, maybe existing 71 through Bella Vista and into Missouri could become Business Route 49.

Been working in Bella Vista a few times the last week and used AR-549 a few times.  The CAP construction job sign in the middle section north of the US-71 interchange construction project has a completion date of July 2021, and the project lacks only striping the northbound carriageway, putting the diagonally striped bridge edge warning signs on the northbound carriageway, the cable barrier for most of the way, and the mileage markers on both carriageways.  I took the time to drive all the way up to the Gordon Hollow interchange, the last in AR where it's currently forcing the exit northbound.  The BGS's and I-49 shields are already up, even on the intersecting roads.  I-49 is all that's signed on any of it, in fact I didn't even see AR-549 shields anymore yesterday and the day before when I travelled it.  The only work that needs to be done on the southbound lanes is removing the northbound facing signage and restriping for 4 lane operation, and closing off the ramps that cross the median at each exit.

So, I don't believe that US-71 is intended to be routed on the BVB given what I saw this week.  Arkansas' portion according to the CAP construction job sign on the south end of the BVB currently states a completion of Oct. 2021.  Now we just wait and see how Missouri progresses.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Avalanchez71 on June 15, 2021, 04:15:04 PM
This project will save what 5 minutes of travel time?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on June 15, 2021, 04:29:00 PM
This project will save what 5 minutes of travel time?

Compared to what?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sprjus4 on June 15, 2021, 05:03:36 PM
This project will save what 5 minutes of travel time?

Compared to what?
Don’t even waste your time questioning. He’s just trolling, he’s virtually anti-anything expansion/growth with seemingly no personal experience with the area in question, despite how much it’s needed.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on June 15, 2021, 06:08:26 PM
This project will save what 5 minutes of travel time?

Compared to what?
Don’t even waste your time questioning. He’s just trolling, he’s virtually anti-anything expansion/growth with seemingly no personal experience with the area in question, despite how much it’s needed.

I might need to change my avatar.  But, the more I think about it, US-412 has more relevance in my area than almost any other.  So, I guess I'll keep it and post relevant, useful information about the area I live in that others in other areas might still care about.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on June 15, 2021, 07:58:25 PM
This project will save what 5 minutes of travel time?

Compared to what?
Don’t even waste your time questioning. He’s just trolling, he’s virtually anti-anything expansion/growth with seemingly no personal experience with the area in question, despite how much it’s needed.

I might need to change my avatar.  But, the more I think about it, US-412 has more relevance in my area than almost any other.  So, I guess I'll keep it and post relevant, useful information about the area I live in that others in other areas might still care about.

You could always change it to 68 (or 16) ;)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on June 15, 2021, 08:08:50 PM
This project will save what 5 minutes of travel time?

Compared to what?
Don’t even waste your time questioning. He’s just trolling, he’s virtually anti-anything expansion/growth with seemingly no personal experience with the area in question, despite how much it’s needed.

I might need to change my avatar.  But, the more I think about it, US-412 has more relevance in my area than almost any other.  So, I guess I'll keep it and post relevant, useful information about the area I live in that others in other areas might still care about.

If you're still posting here a few years down the road, you just may have a shiny red, white, and blue shield occupying or paralleling the section of US 412 nearest your residence, with an equally new number on it.  That could conceivably be your new avatar -- one that you don't have to share with our own Dr. No!   
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on June 15, 2021, 08:23:27 PM
This project will save what 5 minutes of travel time?

Compared to what?
Don’t even waste your time questioning. He’s just trolling, he’s virtually anti-anything expansion/growth with seemingly no personal experience with the area in question, despite how much it’s needed.

I might need to change my avatar.  But, the more I think about it, US-412 has more relevance in my area than almost any other.  So, I guess I'll keep it and post relevant, useful information about the area I live in that others in other areas might still care about.

If you're still posting here a few years down the road, you just may have a shiny red, white, and blue shield occupying or paralleling the section of US 412 nearest your residence, with an equally new number on it.  That could conceivably be your new avatar -- one that you don't have to share with our own Dr. No!   

I don't see that happening anytime soon.  John Paul Hammerschmidt "built" I-49 in NW Arkansas, but there is no one of his caliber in Arkansas today,
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sprjus4 on June 15, 2021, 09:03:40 PM
It could be simply when a number is established, even if it’s not built for another 20 years.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on June 16, 2021, 12:25:37 PM
It could be simply when a number is established, even if it’s not built for another 20 years.

I'm surprised they didn't just go ahead and put the number in the legislation like they did for I-57.  I guess because it isn't extending a pre-existing Interstate.  Still, seems like an oversight to not just go ahead and get I-50 on the books and make Lowell/Springdale the "crossroads" of the Interstate Highway System with I-49 being as close to the middle of the numbering as it is.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on June 16, 2021, 12:29:15 PM
Drove Future I-49 again yesterday for some follow-up work and noted that they did put some of the guardrail end signage on the middle section due in July, and have a stretch of the cable barrier strung with cable, but only about half of it at this point.  Still, daily progress is evident.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: msunat97 on June 16, 2021, 02:03:32 PM
The 71/49 intersection is shaping up nicely.  there are even new light poles & traffic lites installed.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on June 16, 2021, 02:36:18 PM
The 71/49 intersection is shaping up nicely.  there are even new light poles & traffic lites installed.

They started that yesterday.  Had to swing around that bucket truck yesterday evening on what will become the southbound US-71 offramp turning south on US-71.  Still have the lights under the overpass to start on, but it shouldn't take long at this point.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on June 16, 2021, 04:31:11 PM
It could be simply when a number is established, even if it’s not built for another 20 years.

I'm surprised they didn't just go ahead and put the number in the legislation like they did for I-57.  I guess because it isn't extending a pre-existing Interstate.  Still, seems like an oversight to not just go ahead and get I-50 on the books and make Lowell/Springdale the "crossroads" of the Interstate Highway System with I-49 being as close to the middle of the numbering as it is.

It's possible that the yearly USDOT outlay bill hasn't been marked up yet -- possibly awaiting some resolution of the larger infrastructure proposals.  That's where any legislation regarding establishing a new Interstate corridor would end up.  East of Tulsa, the US 412 corridor is also HPC #8; since that's where virtually all of the new construction would be located, the section from Tulsa to Springdale would be parsed out and designated as an Interstate via an amendment to the original 1991 ISTEA corridor authorization.   If a specific number is selected prior to the insertion of such an amendment, it would be added to the FHWA Interstate list with a cross-reference to the "future Interstate" designation in this year's bill (that's how I-11 was added to a portion of HPC #26 in AZ and NV and later to HPC #68 for the extension to I-80).  If anyone wants I-50 (or another number), now's the time to contact the authors of the general corridor legislation and put your two cents in (particularly if you're a constituent)!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on June 16, 2021, 05:31:48 PM
It could be simply when a number is established, even if it’s not built for another 20 years.

I'm surprised they didn't just go ahead and put the number in the legislation like they did for I-57.  I guess because it isn't extending a pre-existing Interstate.  Still, seems like an oversight to not just go ahead and get I-50 on the books and make Lowell/Springdale the "crossroads" of the Interstate Highway System with I-49 being as close to the middle of the numbering as it is.

It's possible that the yearly USDOT outlay bill hasn't been marked up yet -- possibly awaiting some resolution of the larger infrastructure proposals.  That's where any legislation regarding establishing a new Interstate corridor would end up.  East of Tulsa, the US 412 corridor is also HPC #8; since that's where virtually all of the new construction would be located, the section from Tulsa to Springdale would be parsed out and designated as an Interstate via an amendment to the original 1991 ISTEA corridor authorization.   If a specific number is selected prior to the insertion of such an amendment, it would be added to the FHWA Interstate list with a cross-reference to the "future Interstate" designation in this year's bill (that's how I-11 was added to a portion of HPC #26 in AZ and NV and later to HPC #68 for the extension to I-80).  If anyone wants I-50 (or another number), now's the time to contact the authors of the general corridor legislation and put your two cents in (particularly if you're a constituent)!

In fact I am a constituent of 2 of the co-authors.  And I just did given the same arguments about the "crossroads of the IHS".  Either that, or Missouri will end up with it in the Neosho area.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: msunat97 on June 17, 2021, 07:19:28 PM
Looks like SB 49 has the asphalt base laid down today
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on June 17, 2021, 07:31:16 PM
Looks like SB 49 has the asphalt base laid down today

Still rolling it at this very moment!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on June 17, 2021, 11:39:59 PM
Looks like SB 49 has the asphalt base laid down today

Still rolling it at this very moment!
Will it be topped by concrete? They will lay the rebar on top of the base and will then bring one of those Gomaco concrete setters. At that point you can start the 4-month timer for opening.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: msunat97 on June 18, 2021, 07:56:40 AM
Looks like SB 49 has the asphalt base laid down today

Still rolling it at this very moment!
Will it be topped by concrete? They will lay the rebar on top of the base and will then bring one of those Gomaco concrete setters. At that point you can start the 4-month timer for opening.

Based on how the rest of the area looks, i would assume a concrete layer is coming.  They did lay down a concrete curb in the middle of the roadway from the overpass to existing I49.  That makes it more likely that the surface will be concrete.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on June 18, 2021, 11:06:33 AM
Looks like SB 49 has the asphalt base laid down today

Still rolling it at this very moment!
Will it be topped by concrete? They will lay the rebar on top of the base and will then bring one of those Gomaco concrete setters. At that point you can start the 4-month timer for opening.

Based on how the rest of the area looks, i would assume a concrete layer is coming.  They did lay down a concrete curb in the middle of the roadway from the overpass to existing I49.  That makes it more likely that the surface will be concrete.

Being that this is a separate project from the rest of the remaining Arkansas mileage, they may put concrete on top.  However, on the project that's wrapping up next month to the north has the northbound lanes in asphalt even though the southbound lanes were done in concrete years ago.  They haven't striped them yet, but already have done the rumble strip all the way up to Rocky Dell Hollow, so it isn't likely to be overlaid with concrete at this late stage.  In a nutshell, we likely won't know until we either start seeing rebar laid over the top, or rumble strip cut.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on June 21, 2021, 09:36:08 PM
Temporary routing... That is such a can of worms. Back in the 1920's and 30's when the US Highway system was getting numbered. US-59 initially had a gap from Boston Tx (The then Bowie County Seat today it is just a part of New Boston, the current county seat) to Page OK because there was no Red River Bridge on what is currently TX-8 and AR-41.. In the thirties, they approved a "temporary routing" following US-67 from Maud to Texarkana, US-71 to Mena, and US-270 to Page OK.  The only change since then was to follow then SH-47 from Linden to Texarkana via Atlanta. This temporary routing is still in place a century later more or less.  Temporary routings create excuses to never build the permanent one.

I am not sure what the originally proposed routing was. I have heard AR-41 to DeQueen AR and US-70 to Broken Bow OK. Then following the approximate US-259 route to Page OK.

Do you have a cite for this? The only evidence I have ever found is in a document from Oklahoma that vaguely mentioned a temporary routing. Following 259 to 70 to 41/8 would make less sense of a routing than the current route does. And OK 103 (modern US 259) between Octavia and Smithville wasn't completed until the 1960s. If they were going to reroute it, they would have done it in 1963 when OK 103 and parts of OK 21 were renumbered as US 259.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: msunat97 on June 22, 2021, 11:51:33 AM
Looks like the SB lane of I49 is going to be asphalt per traffic cams.  they are laying the 3rd layer today.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Avalanchez71 on June 22, 2021, 12:54:50 PM
What is the price tag per mile for this pork project?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sprjus4 on June 22, 2021, 12:57:43 PM
What is the price tag per mile for this pork project?
Have you ever driven through the area at peak hours?

Prediction: you won’t respond to this.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Avalanchez71 on June 22, 2021, 01:19:49 PM
What is the price tag per mile for this pork project?
Have you ever driven through the area at peak hours?

Prediction: you won’t respond to this.

Yes
Every MSA has traffic.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sprjus4 on June 22, 2021, 01:21:39 PM
What is the price tag per mile for this pork project?
Have you ever driven through the area at peak hours?

Prediction: you won’t respond to this.

Yes
Every MSA has traffic.
Wow, I'm surprised you acknowledged it.

Now, the DOT is building a bypass of the congested area to provide a free-flowing route to link two unjoined portions of interstates to provide a continuous route for regional and through traffic. How is this a bad thing?

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on June 22, 2021, 04:00:48 PM
What is the price tag per mile for this pork project?
Have you ever driven through the area at peak hours?

Prediction: you won’t respond to this.

Yes
Every MSA has traffic.
Wow, I'm surprised you acknowledged it.

Now, the DOT is building a bypass of the congested area to provide a free-flowing route to link two unjoined portions of interstates to provide a continuous route for regional and through traffic. How is this a bad thing?


"Every MSA has traffic".  Is that statement intended to provide justification for inaction to relieve it?  Maybe there's a world view floating around out there that states or implies that people are supposed to endure obstacles and hardships without attempting to do something about them -- and that somehow collective action toward relief is untoward/unwarranted/blasphemy?  NWA's been growing by leaps and bounds for at least the past three decades; getting it efficiently connected to the rest of the country would by any measure be in the top three list of regional "things to do"; the fact that it took this long just goes to show the sorry state transportation funding is in these days -- in fact, I was originally surprised that Wal Mart didn't step up with some sort of private financing package when both states were scrambling to come up with the bypass funding, just to have a free-flow path from their HQ area north to I-44 and KC (but in retrospect not really shocked, as their business plan calls for as little unsecured outflow as possible). 

Despite naysayers, eventually identified and sufficiently warranted projects to address unfulfilled needs on a local and/or regional (and occasionally national) basis will be undertaken.  Nobody really wants to wear that hair shirt for any length of time! 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on June 22, 2021, 09:29:11 PM
I noticed today tat MoDOT is starting to pave their section of I-49
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: GreenLanternCorps on June 22, 2021, 10:15:51 PM
I noticed today tat MoDOT is starting to pave their section of I-49

Which part of I-49 did you see, the Northern interchange with US 71, the MO 90 interchange, or something else?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on June 22, 2021, 10:20:07 PM
I noticed today tat MoDOT is starting to pave their section of I-49

Which part of I-49 did you see, the Northern interchange with US 71, the MO 90 interchange, or something else?

North interchange at the 71/49 split
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Avalanchez71 on June 23, 2021, 07:45:20 AM
What is the price tag per mile for this pork project?
Have you ever driven through the area at peak hours?

Prediction: you won’t respond to this.

Yes
Every MSA has traffic.
Wow, I'm surprised you acknowledged it.

Now, the DOT is building a bypass of the congested area to provide a free-flowing route to link two unjoined portions of interstates to provide a continuous route for regional and through traffic. How is this a bad thing?


"Every MSA has traffic".  Is that statement intended to provide justification for inaction to relieve it?  Maybe there's a world view floating around out there that states or implies that people are supposed to endure obstacles and hardships without attempting to do something about them -- and that somehow collective action toward relief is untoward/unwarranted/blasphemy?  NWA's been growing by leaps and bounds for at least the past three decades; getting it efficiently connected to the rest of the country would by any measure be in the top three list of regional "things to do"; the fact that it took this long just goes to show the sorry state transportation funding is in these days -- in fact, I was originally surprised that Wal Mart didn't step up with some sort of private financing package when both states were scrambling to come up with the bypass funding, just to have a free-flow path from their HQ area north to I-44 and KC (but in retrospect not really shocked, as their business plan calls for as little unsecured outflow as possible). 

Despite naysayers, eventually identified and sufficiently warranted projects to address unfulfilled needs on a local and/or regional (and occasionally national) basis will be undertaken.  Nobody really wants to wear that hair shirt for any length of time!

Walmart knows better.  They know that the government will bend over backwards for them.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on June 23, 2021, 11:37:23 AM
What is the price tag per mile for this pork project?
Have you ever driven through the area at peak hours?

Prediction: you won’t respond to this.

Yes
Every MSA has traffic.
Wow, I'm surprised you acknowledged it.

Now, the DOT is building a bypass of the congested area to provide a free-flowing route to link two unjoined portions of interstates to provide a continuous route for regional and through traffic. How is this a bad thing?


"Every MSA has traffic".  Is that statement intended to provide justification for inaction to relieve it?  Maybe there's a world view floating around out there that states or implies that people are supposed to endure obstacles and hardships without attempting to do something about them -- and that somehow collective action toward relief is untoward/unwarranted/blasphemy?  NWA's been growing by leaps and bounds for at least the past three decades; getting it efficiently connected to the rest of the country would by any measure be in the top three list of regional "things to do"; the fact that it took this long just goes to show the sorry state transportation funding is in these days -- in fact, I was originally surprised that Wal Mart didn't step up with some sort of private financing package when both states were scrambling to come up with the bypass funding, just to have a free-flow path from their HQ area north to I-44 and KC (but in retrospect not really shocked, as their business plan calls for as little unsecured outflow as possible). 

Despite naysayers, eventually identified and sufficiently warranted projects to address unfulfilled needs on a local and/or regional (and occasionally national) basis will be undertaken.  Nobody really wants to wear that hair shirt for any length of time!

Walmart knows better.  They know that the government will bend over backwards for them.

*DING*

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on June 23, 2021, 04:43:58 PM
What is the price tag per mile for this pork project?
Have you ever driven through the area at peak hours?

Prediction: you won’t respond to this.

Yes
Every MSA has traffic.
Wow, I'm surprised you acknowledged it.

Now, the DOT is building a bypass of the congested area to provide a free-flowing route to link two unjoined portions of interstates to provide a continuous route for regional and through traffic. How is this a bad thing?


"Every MSA has traffic".  Is that statement intended to provide justification for inaction to relieve it?  Maybe there's a world view floating around out there that states or implies that people are supposed to endure obstacles and hardships without attempting to do something about them -- and that somehow collective action toward relief is untoward/unwarranted/blasphemy?  NWA's been growing by leaps and bounds for at least the past three decades; getting it efficiently connected to the rest of the country would by any measure be in the top three list of regional "things to do"; the fact that it took this long just goes to show the sorry state transportation funding is in these days -- in fact, I was originally surprised that Wal Mart didn't step up with some sort of private financing package when both states were scrambling to come up with the bypass funding, just to have a free-flow path from their HQ area north to I-44 and KC (but in retrospect not really shocked, as their business plan calls for as little unsecured outflow as possible). 

Despite naysayers, eventually identified and sufficiently warranted projects to address unfulfilled needs on a local and/or regional (and occasionally national) basis will be undertaken.  Nobody really wants to wear that hair shirt for any length of time!

Walmart knows better.  They know that the government will bend over backwards for them.

But it wasn't doing that for a long period of time!  Back in the early 2010's the funding shortfalls seemed to be volleying back and forth between AR and MO, with the latter having the deepest and most protracted problems.  AR was able to advance at least grading right to the state line well before MO had any more than survey stakes in the ground.  Still, in the interim they were able to cobble up sufficient funds to upgrade I-49 from I-44 north to the KC area, which tends to illustrate in-state priorities (the fact that US 71 was already in reasonably good shape -- and had little if any instances of private access issues -- undoubtedly helped in the matter).  Still, addressing traffic from the I-44 corridor north to KC was clearly a longstanding goal; a connection that would primarily benefit NWA could be kicked down the road until push came to shove and something concrete (or asphalt) needed to occur.   Whether Wal Mart or its hordes of state and federal lobbyists had something to do with the project finally materializing is likely something that's not available for public perusal -- but certainly well within the realm of possibility.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on June 23, 2021, 08:00:18 PM
Walmart has distribution centers scattered to the four winds today, and execs and MVPs will fly in via XNA.The only reasons they would push for improved traffic in NWA is for altruistic ones unrelated to their business model.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on June 23, 2021, 09:00:50 PM
Walmart has distribution centers scattered to the four winds today, and execs and MVPs will fly in via XNA.The only reasons they would push for improved traffic in NWA is for altruistic ones unrelated to their business model.

XNA turned into a nice little cargo airport, as it was intended to be.   :pan:

As for I-49, Walmart, Tyson and JB Hunt  all had a certain amount of influence.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: GreenLanternCorps on June 24, 2021, 08:01:17 AM
I noticed today tat MoDOT is starting to pave their section of I-49

Which part of I-49 did you see, the Northern interchange with US 71, the MO 90 interchange, or something else?

North interchange at the 71/49 split

Thanks!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Avalanchez71 on June 24, 2021, 08:29:30 AM
Walmart has distribution centers scattered to the four winds today, and execs and MVPs will fly in via XNA.The only reasons they would push for improved traffic in NWA is for altruistic ones unrelated to their business model.

XNA turned into a nice little cargo airport, as it was intended to be.

As for I-49, Walmart, Tyson and JB Hunt  all had a certain amount of influence.

Bingo

Nashville bent over backwards for Dell, Titans, and a slew of other companies.  Dell was a near flop and a shell of what it once was.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: msunat97 on June 28, 2021, 11:39:04 AM
Looks like the concrete barrier between the NB & SB lanes is going in today at the I-49 / 71 interchange.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: edwaleni on June 28, 2021, 05:31:25 PM
Walmart has distribution centers scattered to the four winds today, and execs and MVPs will fly in via XNA.The only reasons they would push for improved traffic in NWA is for altruistic ones unrelated to their business model.

XNA turned into a nice little cargo airport, as it was intended to be.

As for I-49, Walmart, Tyson and JB Hunt  all had a certain amount of influence.

Bingo

Nashville bent over backwards for Dell, Titans, and a slew of other companies.  Dell was a near flop and a shell of what it once was.

Like this?

https://www.tennessean.com/story/money/2019/06/30/dell-nashville-tech-sector-jobs/1498729001/ (https://www.tennessean.com/story/money/2019/06/30/dell-nashville-tech-sector-jobs/1498729001/)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on July 02, 2021, 08:22:14 PM
There are abandoned mainline railroads, but are there abandoned interstates?

I used to joke that Bentonville would some day be "the Orlando of the business world". It is said Walt Disney chose Orlando for his Disney World site when he saw, during an aerial tour, how the then-future interstate through Orlando would link it with the rest of America.  NWA will be almost squarely in the middle of the corridor between Winnipeg/Twin Cities and Houston-Mexico/New Orleans some day, the most direct North American International corridor of all.  More importantly, many are saying NWA is turning into a metropolitan entity (not only with its corporate headquarters but also the burgeoning arts scene and nature attractions) that no one can quite define, except to say it's getting bigger and bigger. 

Now that area is about more things than business.  And I feel certain the more I-49 Arkansas is completed the more profound its effects on NWA will be in ways we can't yet predict.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on July 02, 2021, 10:53:49 PM
There are abandoned mainline railroads, but are there abandoned interstates?

I used to joke that Bentonville would some day be "the Orlando of the business world". It is said Walt Disney chose Orlando for his Disney World site when he saw, during an aerial tour, how the then-future interstate through Orlando would link it with the rest of America.  NWA will be almost squarely in the middle of the corridor between Winnipeg/Twin Cities and Houston-Mexico/New Orleans some day, the most direct North American International corridor of all.  More importantly, many are saying NWA is turning into a metropolitan entity (not only with its corporate headquarters but also the burgeoning arts scene and nature attractions) that no one can quite define, except to say it's getting bigger and bigger. 

Now that area is about more things than business.  And I feel certain the more I-49 Arkansas is completed the more profound its effects on NWA will be in ways we can't yet predict.

Funny you mention Disney World.  That's basically what the mountain biking scene is being compared to now.  I don't think people realize just how much has been invested in the trail systems in NWA.  It's in the tens of millions of dollars and is generating hundreds of millions in tourism dollars now along with the museums and culinary scene development.  My wife's father and brother came to Bentonville today with their families to see our upcoming AirBnB and were shocked at all of the changes in town.  Wal-Mart isn't necessarily the main reason people come to Bentonville anymore.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on July 03, 2021, 12:20:15 AM
There are abandoned mainline railroads, but are there abandoned interstates?

I used to joke that Bentonville would some day be "the Orlando of the business world". It is said Walt Disney chose Orlando for his Disney World site when he saw, during an aerial tour, how the then-future interstate through Orlando would link it with the rest of America.  NWA will be almost squarely in the middle of the corridor between Winnipeg/Twin Cities and Houston-Mexico/New Orleans some day, the most direct North American International corridor of all.  More importantly, many are saying NWA is turning into a metropolitan entity (not only with its corporate headquarters but also the burgeoning arts scene and nature attractions) that no one can quite define, except to say it's getting bigger and bigger. 

Now that area is about more things than business.  And I feel certain the more I-49 Arkansas is completed the more profound its effects on NWA will be in ways we can't yet predict.

Unfortunately there are limits to how much NWA will build out. Some of them are physical, i.e. the presence of Beaver Lake to the east and the mountainous terrain to the south. Others are political, i.e. the state lines with Oklahoma and Missouri to the west and north respectively. NWA will eventually be boxed-in by the middle of this century and credit for growth will accrue to neighboring states.

The biggest drawback is the lack of a dominant city in the mix. Springdale, Rogers and Bentonville are all destined to be about the same size. Fayetteville should be the big dog with the university, but is already landlocked by surrounding cities. Springdale has some room, but won't grow enough to be an identifiable center.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on July 03, 2021, 04:50:23 AM
There are abandoned mainline railroads, but are there abandoned interstates?

I used to joke that Bentonville would some day be "the Orlando of the business world". It is said Walt Disney chose Orlando for his Disney World site when he saw, during an aerial tour, how the then-future interstate through Orlando would link it with the rest of America.  NWA will be almost squarely in the middle of the corridor between Winnipeg/Twin Cities and Houston-Mexico/New Orleans some day, the most direct North American International corridor of all.  More importantly, many are saying NWA is turning into a metropolitan entity (not only with its corporate headquarters but also the burgeoning arts scene and nature attractions) that no one can quite define, except to say it's getting bigger and bigger. 

Now that area is about more things than business.  And I feel certain the more I-49 Arkansas is completed the more profound its effects on NWA will be in ways we can't yet predict.

Unfortunately there are limits to how much NWA will build out. Some of them are physical, i.e. the presence of Beaver Lake to the east and the mountainous terrain to the south. Others are political, i.e. the state lines with Oklahoma and Missouri to the west and north respectively. NWA will eventually be boxed-in by the middle of this century and credit for growth will accrue to neighboring states.

The biggest drawback is the lack of a dominant city in the mix. Springdale, Rogers and Bentonville are all destined to be about the same size. Fayetteville should be the big dog with the university, but is already landlocked by surrounding cities. Springdale has some room, but won't grow enough to be an identifiable center.

It's a linear metro area arrayed along a spine; a dominant city isn't vital unless trying to attract a major pro sports team, which is probably not in the short-term cards for NWA.  Each city has been built up around a recognized entity; Fayetteville has UA, Springdale has Hunt, and of course Bentonville has the 800-pound retail gorilla.  The region can work together for common goals as well as each individual city pursuing its own internal agenda.  Put it this way -- the three "core" cities have their own exurbs, or, in the case of Bentonville & Rogers, a sibling.  Lowell serves that role for both Rogers and Springdale, while Farmington does so for Fayetteville.  It was only a half-century ago that the only town of note in the area was Fayetteville and its university; the growth of Wal Mart and JB Hunt have, among other things, precipitated the corresponding regional housing expansion.  NWA is doing just fine without a "shining star"; establishment of such would likely create regional friction and ego issues that aren't presently there to any degree.  Of course I-49 and perhaps the nascent E-W Interstate corridor along US 412 can only enhance the region at large.  Siloam Springs is already a retirement destination; it's likely that spillover from the I-49 and 71B spines will eventually result in infill; US 62 to the northeast toward Gateway is likely to be a major commercial "strip" before long.  If there's enough in the way of attractants, the region will expand even if there are a few obstacles. 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on July 03, 2021, 11:51:13 AM

The biggest drawback is the lack of a dominant city in the mix. Springdale, Rogers and Bentonville are all destined to be about the same size. Fayetteville should be the big dog with the university, but is already landlocked by surrounding cities. Springdale has some room, but won't grow enough to be an identifiable center.

Fayetteville can grow west along AR 16 towards Wedington Woods. In theory, they could absorb one of bedroom communities like they did Baldwin. There is also a 5-ish mile stretch along AR 45 that is Fayetteville Rural Route, but not officially part of the town.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Tomahawkin on July 03, 2021, 12:18:39 PM
If I'm not mistaking? Isn't the NWA one of the fastest growing areas in the country especially among retirees? And this has been going on for 20 years. Keep in mind a lot of people from California and the Northeast will continue to move there because of the low cost of living. Add that to whenever someone's house gets destroyed by California wildfires. One of the first places they relocate to is NWA
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on July 03, 2021, 05:44:26 PM
If I'm not mistaking? Isn't the NWA one of the fastest growing areas in the country especially among retirees? And this has been going on for 20 years. Keep in mind a lot of people from California and the Northeast will continue to move there because of the low cost of living. Add that to whenever someone's house gets destroyed by California wildfires. One of the first places they relocate to is NWA

I have a neighbor who moved from Minnesota to Arkansas because it's cheaper.  HOWEVER: home prices appear to be climbing with no end in sight. Supply can't keep up with demand.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on July 03, 2021, 06:05:24 PM
If I'm not mistaking? Isn't the NWA one of the fastest growing areas in the country especially among retirees? And this has been going on for 20 years. Keep in mind a lot of people from California and the Northeast will continue to move there because of the low cost of living. Add that to whenever someone's house gets destroyed by California wildfires. One of the first places they relocate to is NWA

If the influx into NWA continues unabated, you can bet your last dollar that housing costs will at least steadily rise if not shoot up dramatically!  As far as CA outflow is concerned, NWA is just one of the regions, along with Boise, the I-35 corridor between San Antonio and Austin, and the upper Mississippi Valley between La Crosse and the Twin Cities that have become desirable relocation spots.  The availability of appropriate jobs is a prime factor driving those other than retirees; but occasionally the prevailing attitudes of a region become a deciding factor.  Back about 1992 a business colleague, who is gay, bought, with his partner, a house on a sizeable piece of land outside Rogers, AR primarily to take advantage of the difference in the cost of living compared to the South Bay area.  They were back in Sunnyvale by 1995; they never felt welcomed or even accepted by the local population at large.  Granted that their experience might have been something of an anomaly -- but nevertheless some regions may be more accommodating and even desirable to those who share similar sociopolitical views with a region's dominant paradigm.   Of course continued influx may result in something of a shift in that paradigm, but that's something that would come about over time -- even decades!   
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: edwaleni on July 03, 2021, 08:14:58 PM
https://findingnwa.com/incentive/ (https://findingnwa.com/incentive/)

Northwest Arkansas is a great place to work, live and play: for recent grads, families, career changers, entrepreneurs, artists and more. We’re offering top remote working talent — maybe you? — a $10,000 cash incentive to move to the region. The funds will help with everything you need to set up your new life in Northwest Arkansas.

In addition to $10,000, incentive recipients will be gifted a street or mountain bicycle to help you take advantage of the 162 miles of paved trails, the 37-mile Razorback Regional Greenway and the 322 miles of world-class mountain biking trails that has made outdoor enthusiasts flock to the area. Alternatively, participants can choose an annual membership to one of our world-class arts and cultural institutions.

https://www.nwahomepage.com/northwest-arkansas-news/more-than-26000-people-applied-for-10000-cash-incentive-to-move-to-nwa/ (https://www.nwahomepage.com/northwest-arkansas-news/more-than-26000-people-applied-for-10000-cash-incentive-to-move-to-nwa/)

According to a press release from the Northwest Arkansas Council on Monday, the Life Works Here program drew more than 26,000 applications from people in more than 115 countries and all 50 states.

The first 25 recipients of the $10,000 incentive have been selected, according to the Northwest Arkansas Council. They include:

An executive chef and James Beard Foundation Impact Fellow from Atlanta
A digital marketing manager from Denver
A music producer and creative community curator from Los Angeles
A gaming producer from Los Angeles
And a cloud technology manager from San Francisco


https://www.arkansasonline.com/news/2020/apr/13/planners-consider-how-to-fit-1-milllion/ (https://www.arkansasonline.com/news/2020/apr/13/planners-consider-how-to-fit-1-milllion/)

New projections by the Arkansas Economic Development Institute at the University of Arkansas at Little Rock are predicting 974,275 residents in Benton and Washington counties in 25 years. Benton County is predicted to have 545,893 and Washington County 428,382.

U.S. 412 is the only major highway and truck route from Tulsa to northeastern Arkansas, and it cuts right through the city. The 412 Bypass is being built in stages on the northern edge of town.

"East and west was always a challenge, with 412 going through the middle of Springdale. One of the things I think will help traffic congestion is to get the bypass all the way over to Highway 265 so a lot of that truck traffic that's just going through the region doesn't have to come through Springdale," Christie said.

The city is adding another overpass across Interstate 49 to continue to move traffic across the interstate to the ever-growing west side. Residential and commercial developments are regularly being approved by the city near Arvest Ballpark and Arkansas Children's Northwest hospital, both west of the interstate.


I am still looking for some recent demographics on where these people are coming from.



Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on July 06, 2021, 04:25:40 PM
https://findingnwa.com/incentive/ (https://findingnwa.com/incentive/)

Northwest Arkansas is a great place to work, live and play: for recent grads, families, career changers, entrepreneurs, artists and more. We’re offering top remote working talent — maybe you? — a $10,000 cash incentive to move to the region. The funds will help with everything you need to set up your new life in Northwest Arkansas.

In addition to $10,000, incentive recipients will be gifted a street or mountain bicycle to help you take advantage of the 162 miles of paved trails, the 37-mile Razorback Regional Greenway and the 322 miles of world-class mountain biking trails that has made outdoor enthusiasts flock to the area. Alternatively, participants can choose an annual membership to one of our world-class arts and cultural institutions.

https://www.nwahomepage.com/northwest-arkansas-news/more-than-26000-people-applied-for-10000-cash-incentive-to-move-to-nwa/ (https://www.nwahomepage.com/northwest-arkansas-news/more-than-26000-people-applied-for-10000-cash-incentive-to-move-to-nwa/)

According to a press release from the Northwest Arkansas Council on Monday, the Life Works Here program drew more than 26,000 applications from people in more than 115 countries and all 50 states.

The first 25 recipients of the $10,000 incentive have been selected, according to the Northwest Arkansas Council. They include:

An executive chef and James Beard Foundation Impact Fellow from Atlanta
A digital marketing manager from Denver
A music producer and creative community curator from Los Angeles
A gaming producer from Los Angeles
And a cloud technology manager from San Francisco


https://www.arkansasonline.com/news/2020/apr/13/planners-consider-how-to-fit-1-milllion/ (https://www.arkansasonline.com/news/2020/apr/13/planners-consider-how-to-fit-1-milllion/)

New projections by the Arkansas Economic Development Institute at the University of Arkansas at Little Rock are predicting 974,275 residents in Benton and Washington counties in 25 years. Benton County is predicted to have 545,893 and Washington County 428,382.

U.S. 412 is the only major highway and truck route from Tulsa to northeastern Arkansas, and it cuts right through the city. The 412 Bypass is being built in stages on the northern edge of town.

"East and west was always a challenge, with 412 going through the middle of Springdale. One of the things I think will help traffic congestion is to get the bypass all the way over to Highway 265 so a lot of that truck traffic that's just going through the region doesn't have to come through Springdale," Christie said.

The city is adding another overpass across Interstate 49 to continue to move traffic across the interstate to the ever-growing west side. Residential and commercial developments are regularly being approved by the city near Arvest Ballpark and Arkansas Children's Northwest hospital, both west of the interstate.


I am still looking for some recent demographics on where these people are coming from.

The most common out-of-state plates I see in the area are the ever present Texas, Missouri, Oklahoma, and Kansas, but in much larger quantities now.  I have also seen a large number of Illinois, Florida, California :-o, and Washington.  I sporadically see plates from every other state besides Hawaii (even including Alaska), but those are most likely those just passing through to other destinations now that I-49 is somewhat better connected, or are here for tourism purposes.  I think with the Great Resignation that's upon us, folks are realizing how much they can do over the Internet, and are looking for cheaper places that are now built out with Gig fiber like this area.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on July 06, 2021, 04:38:45 PM
If I'm not mistaking? Isn't the NWA one of the fastest growing areas in the country especially among retirees? And this has been going on for 20 years. Keep in mind a lot of people from California and the Northeast will continue to move there because of the low cost of living. Add that to whenever someone's house gets destroyed by California wildfires. One of the first places they relocate to is NWA

If the influx into NWA continues unabated, you can bet your last dollar that housing costs will at least steadily rise if not shoot up dramatically!  As far as CA outflow is concerned, NWA is just one of the regions, along with Boise, the I-35 corridor between San Antonio and Austin, and the upper Mississippi Valley between La Crosse and the Twin Cities that have become desirable relocation spots.  The availability of appropriate jobs is a prime factor driving those other than retirees; but occasionally the prevailing attitudes of a region become a deciding factor.  Back about 1992 a business colleague, who is gay, bought, with his partner, a house on a sizeable piece of land outside Rogers, AR primarily to take advantage of the difference in the cost of living compared to the South Bay area.  They were back in Sunnyvale by 1995; they never felt welcomed or even accepted by the local population at large.  Granted that their experience might have been something of an anomaly -- but nevertheless some regions may be more accommodating and even desirable to those who share similar sociopolitical views with a region's dominant paradigm.   Of course continued influx may result in something of a shift in that paradigm, but that's something that would come about over time -- even decades!   

Prices have gone nuts around here for sure.  Subdivisions and apartment complexes being built as fast as humanly possible, but not fast enough.  Since graduating from the U of A in 1997, I've lived in 2 houses.  Still have them both, but changing over the little old house in downtown Bentonville from long term rental to an AirBnB, likely beginning next week after we get our documentation and insurance policy together now that the remodeling is wrapped up.  If you believe Zillow estimates, and I'm sure real estate agencies likely wouldn't, the house we live in just outside of Fayetteville in Wedington Woods has close to doubled in price since we bought at what we thought was the worst possible time in 2008.  The little old house in Bentonville has gone up 6 fold, not because of the house, but because of proximity to all of the attractions/amenities that have developed since Benton County went wet and the Walton grandkids started investing in their hometown along with the Walton Foundation.  Little houses like mine are all being snapped up at what I would consider ridiculous prices, then an excavator comes in and places into dumpsters so that a 2 story with detached garage and an AirBnB apartment overhead can be built.  Or 3 story townhouses across the entire face of the block if close to the downtown core a block and a half away.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on July 06, 2021, 05:44:56 PM
If I'm not mistaking? Isn't the NWA one of the fastest growing areas in the country especially among retirees? And this has been going on for 20 years. Keep in mind a lot of people from California and the Northeast will continue to move there because of the low cost of living. Add that to whenever someone's house gets destroyed by California wildfires. One of the first places they relocate to is NWA

If the influx into NWA continues unabated, you can bet your last dollar that housing costs will at least steadily rise if not shoot up dramatically!  As far as CA outflow is concerned, NWA is just one of the regions, along with Boise, the I-35 corridor between San Antonio and Austin, and the upper Mississippi Valley between La Crosse and the Twin Cities that have become desirable relocation spots.  The availability of appropriate jobs is a prime factor driving those other than retirees; but occasionally the prevailing attitudes of a region become a deciding factor.  Back about 1992 a business colleague, who is gay, bought, with his partner, a house on a sizeable piece of land outside Rogers, AR primarily to take advantage of the difference in the cost of living compared to the South Bay area.  They were back in Sunnyvale by 1995; they never felt welcomed or even accepted by the local population at large.  Granted that their experience might have been something of an anomaly -- but nevertheless some regions may be more accommodating and even desirable to those who share similar sociopolitical views with a region's dominant paradigm.   Of course continued influx may result in something of a shift in that paradigm, but that's something that would come about over time -- even decades!   

Prices have gone nuts around here for sure.  Subdivisions and apartment complexes being built as fast as humanly possible, but not fast enough.  Since graduating from the U of A in 1997, I've lived in 2 houses.  Still have them both, but changing over the little old house in downtown Bentonville from long term rental to an AirBnB, likely beginning next week after we get our documentation and insurance policy together now that the remodeling is wrapped up.  If you believe Zillow estimates, and I'm sure real estate agencies likely wouldn't, the house we live in just outside of Fayetteville in Wedington Woods has close to doubled in price since we bought at what we thought was the worst possible time in 2008.  The little old house in Bentonville has gone up 6 fold, not because of the house, but because of proximity to all of the attractions/amenities that have developed since Benton County went wet and the Walton grandkids started investing in their hometown along with the Walton Foundation.  Little houses like mine are all being snapped up at what I would consider ridiculous prices, then an excavator comes in and places into dumpsters so that a 2 story with detached garage and an AirBnB apartment overhead can be built.  Or 3 story townhouses across the entire face of the block if close to the downtown core a block and a half away.

Wow -- NWA's getting the type of "teardown" RE purchases now common here in the San Jose area.  Small houses -- if they're on a reasonably sized lot -- are fetching well over $1M (primarily for the lot & location), to be replaced in short order with a house usually between 3K and 4K of floor space that comes damn close to the side property lines (to the consternation of some of the older long-time area residents!).  And those things are either presold or sell within a week or two of the landscaping going in.  Closer to downtown, row houses/townhouses are being built rapidly as well.   Sounds like the dynamics of NWA development are following the pattern seen in areas with longstanding high-end pricing.  Sacramento, 110 miles distant, is seeing comparable pricing to San Jose these days for similar properties; "infill" is being placed where physically possible.  The one limitation I can see with NWA is that while it's "filling out nicely" and expanding outward as needed, the closest comparable metro area would be Tulsa -- likely an impetus for the effort to establish an Interstate corridor between the areas.  Since OK seems to have relatively lax zoning practices (at least according to my cousins who live there), it wouldn't be difficult to imagine housing eventually being built along the present US 412 corridor (and along the original route in turnpike country) -- sporadically at first, but then infill would eventually kick in, so 30 or so years down the line after the E-W interstate is established, it'll be pretty much continuous development between the outskirts of Tulsa and Springdale.  In terms of topology being at least relatively benign toward housing deployment, west of the I-49 "spine" constitutes the path of least resistance with NWA.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on July 07, 2021, 12:12:08 AM
If I'm not mistaking? Isn't the NWA one of the fastest growing areas in the country especially among retirees? And this has been going on for 20 years. Keep in mind a lot of people from California and the Northeast will continue to move there because of the low cost of living. Add that to whenever someone's house gets destroyed by California wildfires. One of the first places they relocate to is NWA

If the influx into NWA continues unabated, you can bet your last dollar that housing costs will at least steadily rise if not shoot up dramatically!  As far as CA outflow is concerned, NWA is just one of the regions, along with Boise, the I-35 corridor between San Antonio and Austin, and the upper Mississippi Valley between La Crosse and the Twin Cities that have become desirable relocation spots.  The availability of appropriate jobs is a prime factor driving those other than retirees; but occasionally the prevailing attitudes of a region become a deciding factor.  Back about 1992 a business colleague, who is gay, bought, with his partner, a house on a sizeable piece of land outside Rogers, AR primarily to take advantage of the difference in the cost of living compared to the South Bay area.  They were back in Sunnyvale by 1995; they never felt welcomed or even accepted by the local population at large.  Granted that their experience might have been something of an anomaly -- but nevertheless some regions may be more accommodating and even desirable to those who share similar sociopolitical views with a region's dominant paradigm.   Of course continued influx may result in something of a shift in that paradigm, but that's something that would come about over time -- even decades!   

Prices have gone nuts around here for sure.  Subdivisions and apartment complexes being built as fast as humanly possible, but not fast enough.  Since graduating from the U of A in 1997, I've lived in 2 houses.  Still have them both, but changing over the little old house in downtown Bentonville from long term rental to an AirBnB, likely beginning next week after we get our documentation and insurance policy together now that the remodeling is wrapped up.  If you believe Zillow estimates, and I'm sure real estate agencies likely wouldn't, the house we live in just outside of Fayetteville in Wedington Woods has close to doubled in price since we bought at what we thought was the worst possible time in 2008.  The little old house in Bentonville has gone up 6 fold, not because of the house, but because of proximity to all of the attractions/amenities that have developed since Benton County went wet and the Walton grandkids started investing in their hometown along with the Walton Foundation.  Little houses like mine are all being snapped up at what I would consider ridiculous prices, then an excavator comes in and places into dumpsters so that a 2 story with detached garage and an AirBnB apartment overhead can be built.  Or 3 story townhouses across the entire face of the block if close to the downtown core a block and a half away.

Wow -- NWA's getting the type of "teardown" RE purchases now common here in the San Jose area.  Small houses -- if they're on a reasonably sized lot -- are fetching well over $1M (primarily for the lot & location), to be replaced in short order with a house usually between 3K and 4K of floor space that comes damn close to the side property lines (to the consternation of some of the older long-time area residents!).  And those things are either presold or sell within a week or two of the landscaping going in.  Closer to downtown, row houses/townhouses are being built rapidly as well.   Sounds like the dynamics of NWA development are following the pattern seen in areas with longstanding high-end pricing.  Sacramento, 110 miles distant, is seeing comparable pricing to San Jose these days for similar properties; "infill" is being placed where physically possible.  The one limitation I can see with NWA is that while it's "filling out nicely" and expanding outward as needed, the closest comparable metro area would be Tulsa -- likely an impetus for the effort to establish an Interstate corridor between the areas.  Since OK seems to have relatively lax zoning practices (at least according to my cousins who live there), it wouldn't be difficult to imagine housing eventually being built along the present US 412 corridor (and along the original route in turnpike country) -- sporadically at first, but then infill would eventually kick in, so 30 or so years down the line after the E-W interstate is established, it'll be pretty much continuous development between the outskirts of Tulsa and Springdale.  In terms of topology being at least relatively benign toward housing deployment, west of the I-49 "spine" constitutes the path of least resistance with NWA.

It's still closer to 1/3 of the $1M mark in Bentonville, unless you're lucky enough to have a decent lot along Central Ave., then it's almost there.  It's infilling more densely closer to the square along the Razorback Greenway hiking/biking trail now with a couple of 4 story developments with the bottom story being garages.  Both are building right along Town Branch as well, so hope they've accounted for the occasional flood.  US-69 marks the westernmost line of Ozark Plateau (and what I consider pleasing terrain in OK), so anything west of there would be trivial to develop as it most closely resembles the Tulsa area with not much required in dirt work to put footers/pads down for structures.  I don't think Tulsa is developing at nearly the clip of NWA at this point in time, but who knows what the future holds.

I actually believe that there'll be just as much development along US-62 both southeast and northwest.  Avoca will be infilled into Rogers within 10 years, and Farmington already has infilled to Fayetteville.  There's really only a couple of miles of Illinois River valley space between Farmington and Prairie Grove at this point, both of which are booming in residential subdivision development.  And US-412 east of Springdale has plenty of room for growth.  I see infill between there and Huntsville just as fast if not faster than growth towards Siloam Springs from Tontitown as land prices are notably cheaper than in Washington and Benton counties.  Lots of open land with ranches and broiler houses out that way.  Sonora got several new schools recently, so it'll grow completely into Springdale in short order like Tontitown, and US-412 is pretty much south of the main body of Beaver Lake, so the White River crossing isn't much of a barrier to development like it is for Benton County with Beaver Lake widening significantly there.  If I was looking for acreage close to NWA with not more than a 35 minute drive back to I-49, I'd personally buy in Madison County now.  If I didn't mind living in Missouri, though, there's probably just as good of deals on land in McDonald County, and it will assuredly take off within the year with the BVB unplugging the bottleneck hopefully in October.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on July 07, 2021, 12:17:46 AM
The NWA region has seen a lot of rapid growth in recent years. Maybe not as much as certain regions in Texas, but pretty significant nonetheless. Unfortunately for the NWA region it is NOT a transportation hub and it will not be able to function as a transportation hub for many years.

Within the Plains region, the Oklahoma City and Kansas City metro areas are very clearly the central transport hubs of the US. Perhaps more so for Kansas City since it has both an extremely major highway hub and rail hub. But Oklahoma City is at the junction of I-35 and I-40 (as well as I-44 and historic US-66).

The NWA region has no cross country Interstate routes. It will be a long time before the I-49 gap between Fort Smith and Texarkana is filled. And when it is finally filled it will be far from a direct route due to some mountainous terrain along the way. Commercial traffic doesn't like that stuff. Even though US-69 in Oklahoma is infected with some speed traps and other stupid nonsense, the direct nature of it between the DFW metro and junction at I-44 in Big Cabin will continue to make the route very attractive to truckers and other commercial vehicles.

There will never be a cross country East-West freeway going through the NWA region. The proposed Interstate upgrade for US-412 will be a short distance regional route.

As for all the real estate trends, a bunch of this feels an awful lot like 2006 all over again. But maybe even worse this time. Home valuations have soared so far out of whack in relation to real wage growth that the whole thing smells like an even worse Ponzi scheme. It is very clearly an absolutely unsustainable situation. There are already dire warning signs. Demand for commercial office space in major cities like NYC, LA and the Bay Area has fallen dramatically. California reported its first year over year net loss in population (over -180,000 residents) since they started keeping records over 100 years ago. "Flyover country" areas like Texas have been gaining new residents due to the migration. But living costs are now soaring there too. The price gouging just can't keep going on and on without consequence. At some point people have to actually start paying for all this $#!+ and when the bill comes due this economy is going to slam into a mountain-thick steel wall.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on July 07, 2021, 12:48:15 AM
The NWA region has seen a lot of rapid growth in recent years. Maybe not as much as certain regions in Texas, but pretty significant nonetheless. Unfortunately for the NWA region it is NOT a transportation hub and it will not be able to function as a transportation hub for many years.

Within the Plains region, the Oklahoma City and Kansas City metro areas are very clearly the central transport hubs of the US. Perhaps more so for Kansas City since it has both an extremely major highway hub and rail hub. But Oklahoma City is at the junction of I-35 and I-40 (as well as I-44 and historic US-66).

The NWA region has no cross country Interstate routes. It will be a long time before the I-49 gap between Fort Smith and Texarkana is filled. And when it is finally filled it will be far from a direct route due to some mountainous terrain along the way. Commercial traffic doesn't like that stuff. Even though US-69 in Oklahoma is infected with some speed traps and other stupid nonsense, the direct nature of it between the DFW metro and junction at I-44 in Big Cabin will continue to make the route very attractive to truckers and other commercial vehicles.

There will never be a cross country East-West freeway going through the NWA region. The proposed Interstate upgrade for US-412 will be a short distance regional route.

As for all the real estate trends, a bunch of this feels an awful lot like 2006 all over again. But maybe even worse this time. Home valuations have soared so far out of whack in relation to real wage growth that the whole thing smells like an even worse Ponzi scheme. It is very clearly an absolutely unsustainable situation. There are already dire warning signs. Demand for commercial office space in major cities like NYC, LA and the Bay Area has fallen dramatically. California reported its first year over year net loss in population (over -180,000 residents) since they started keeping records over 100 years ago. "Flyover country" areas like Texas have been gaining new residents due to the migration. But living costs are now soaring there too. The price gouging just can't keep going on and on without consequence. At some point people have to actually start paying for all this $#!+ and when the bill comes due this economy is going to slam into a mountain-thick steel wall.

True, the US-412 corridor will never be the backbone of a cross-country Interstate, as we don't even have a handful of those going E/W anyway due to mountain ranges.  But I really don't see US-69 being anything other than a 4-lane US highway in our lifetimes as Oklahoma doesn't have the political will or the willingness to tax themselves to invest in highway infrastructure.  It may be the most direct route between Dallas and KC, but other than the occasional bypass around some of the more notorious speedtraps, I don't see any push toward making a limited access facility along any significant portion of Oklahoma or Kansas south of Ft. Scott.  There aren't any metro areas of significance with any growth to speak of either.  I-49 has Joplin, NWA, Fort Smith, Texarkana, and Shreveport, although I wouldn't say Shreveport or Ft. Smith are growing at any significant rate at this point.  The US-412 corridor isn't likely to grow past Huntsville for the next 30 years, but the Jonesboro metro area is growing at a faster clip than NWA, so I see it growing toward Hardy within that same timeframe, and a bypass around Harrison is being planned, so that would uncork US-412 across northern AR more than anything other than 4 laning the 30 miles between Huntsville and Alpena.

The housing market at no point in the last 25 years in NWA has taken more than 1 or 2 year breather, without any discernible down-tick, and there aren't any shortage of job openings or new businesses starting up.  There's no bubble here, regardless of what may happen in other urban areas around the country that are overvalued.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on July 07, 2021, 11:41:55 AM
Quote from: MikieTimT
True, the US-412 corridor will never be the backbone of a cross-country Interstate, as we don't even have a handful of those going E/W anyway due to mountain ranges.  But I really don't see US-69 being anything other than a 4-lane US highway in our lifetimes as Oklahoma doesn't have the political will or the willingness to tax themselves to invest in highway infrastructure.  It may be the most direct route between Dallas and KC, but other than the occasional bypass around some of the more notorious speedtraps, I don't see any push toward making a limited access facility along any significant portion of Oklahoma or Kansas south of Ft. Scott.

The I-49 corridor doesn't even work as a good alternative for traffic on I-35 coming up through the Dallas Fort Worth metro. In order for the I-49 corridor to boast any time-saving or mileage advantage over I-35 or US-69 both the I-69 corridor and I-49 corridor must be fully completed (which will take decades). That's the only way how I-49 could possibly attract long haul truckers and other long distance commercial traffic coming up from South Texas and Mexico heading to places in the North and Northeast. And whenever I-49 is finally completed it will be traversing a significantly more mountainous route than US-69 or I-35. In the end I-49 will see a lot more use just handling regional NWA traffic than attracting vehicles from other N-S corridors.

It's going to be a long time before I-49 gets completed between Fort Smith and Texarkana. The NWA region is growing. Meanwhile the same isn't true for Fort Smith and areas on South from there. That's going to threaten any prioritization the Fort Smith to Texarkana segment of I-49 receives. Let's also not forget Texas has its own little hook of I-49 to complete (and I-49 isn't exactly a big priority for Texas). The Arkansas state legislature isn't keen on using tolls as a means of getting highways built any faster. So unless there is a giant amount of federal funding put forth for new Interstates the unfinished portion of I-49 is just as likely to languish as neglected corridors in Oklahoma.

Quote from: MikieTimT
The housing market at no point in the last 25 years in NWA has taken more than 1 or 2 year breather, without any discernible down-tick, and there aren't any shortage of job openings or new businesses starting up.  There's no bubble here, regardless of what may happen in other urban areas around the country that are overvalued.

No housing market anywhere is immune to price bubbles. And there are deeper structural issues in the market no one seems willing to admit exist. The "average" home price is the US is now over $300,000. Average wage levels aren't enough to afford such a mortgage even at current, abnormally low interest rates. Go to any American city, even here in Lawton, and you'll see just about all new homes getting built are for upper income buyers. These developers are building homes as if every American is rich.

There is a big shortage of modest, more affordable homes. No developer wants to build those. That's leaving a lot of young adults just out of high school and college stuck in apartments or living at home with parents. The situation makes it easier for them to "opt out" of the so-called American Dream of getting married, having a couple or so kids and buying a house. It's easier and cheaper to stay single. The problem is many industries, including the housing industry, depend on a revolving cycle of young adults getting married, having kids, buying homes and all that crap.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on July 07, 2021, 02:25:41 PM

It's going to be a long time before I-49 gets completed between Fort Smith and Texarkana. The NWA region is growing. Meanwhile the same isn't true for Fort Smith and areas on South from there. That's going to threaten any prioritization the Fort Smith to Texarkana segment of I-49 receives. Let's also not forget Texas has its own little hook of I-49 to complete (and I-49 isn't exactly a big priority for Texas). The Arkansas state legislature isn't keen on using tolls as a means of getting highways built any faster. So unless there is a giant amount of federal funding put forth for new Interstates the unfinished portion of I-49 is just as likely to languish as neglected corridors in Oklahoma.


Arkansas needs another John Paul Hammerschmidt to bring home the bacon (or pork), but I don't see that happening.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Wayward Memphian on July 07, 2021, 07:23:52 PM
The pop projections for the 2040 to 2045 time frame is 1 million for NWA.  XNA's own funded study showed that XNA would handle 2 mil  plus enplanements before then due to the folks moving here being from a distance away and why it would need 26 gates. That's right at the Memphis numbers of 2019.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Tomahawkin on July 07, 2021, 07:35:36 PM
I think those population numbers will be higher with all 4 of the population centers in NWA Annexing land to the east and west. In 20 years the Tulsa suburbs will be an hour drive from NWA if it isn't now?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on July 07, 2021, 08:02:42 PM
The pop projections for the 2040 to 2045 time frame is 1 million for NWA.  XNA's own funded study showed that XNA would handle 2 mil  plus enplanements before then due to the folks moving here being from a distance away and why it would need 26 gates. That's right at the Memphis numbers of 2019.
I think those population numbers will be higher with all 4 of the population centers in NWA Annexing land to the east and west. In 20 years the Tulsa suburbs will be an hour drive from NWA if it isn't now?

Actually, those numbers, along with the time frame, are what's projected for Boise (ID) and its Treasure Valley metro area -- also getting a sizeable influx of folks relocating from CA (and, if weather patterns continue to wreak havoc nationwide, other locations as well).  NWA, as well as much of the Midwest, gets floods & tornadoes; the West gets recurring heat domes with 100+ days (as does western Canada!), and the Gulf and East Coasts see extended storm/hurricane seasons.  One moves, and, increasingly, adverse weather of one sort or the other welcomes you in your new abode!   Welcome to the new reality!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bwana39 on July 07, 2021, 08:57:51 PM

It's going to be a long time before I-49 gets completed between Fort Smith and Texarkana. The NWA region is growing. Meanwhile the same isn't true for Fort Smith and areas on South from there. That's going to threaten any prioritization the Fort Smith to Texarkana segment of I-49 receives. Let's also not forget Texas has its own little hook of I-49 to complete (and I-49 isn't exactly a big priority for Texas). The Arkansas state legislature isn't keen on using tolls as a means of getting highways built any faster. So unless there is a giant amount of federal funding put forth for new Interstates the unfinished portion of I-49 is just as likely to languish as neglected corridors in Oklahoma.


My thinking is The priority list in Arkansas is
1)US-412 Upgrade (I-49 to Tulsa)
2) I-57
3) I-530. I could honestly see it completed to Monroe before I-49 between Fort Smith and Texarkana.
4) I-49 to Texarkana
Put three or four more unnamed projects in the list then.....
7) I-69

US-65 to Branson would provide a north outlet from Little Rock. US-412 could extend as a freeway across the rest of northern Arkansas. US-82 could become freeway from Texarkana to Greenville (MS).

My take is when Bob Moore is gone from the Arkansas State Highway Commission that what little support there is for I-69 as it is tentatively planned will erode to the point of nothingness. I am not saying I-69 will be completely abandoned, but it will be more direct and of service to a greater populace.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on July 07, 2021, 09:07:35 PM


It's going to be a long time before I-49 gets completed between Fort Smith and Texarkana. The NWA region is growing. Meanwhile the same isn't true for Fort Smith and areas on South from there. That's going to threaten any prioritization the Fort Smith to Texarkana segment of I-49 receives. Let's also not forget Texas has its own little hook of I-49 to complete (and I-49 isn't exactly a big priority for Texas). The Arkansas state legislature isn't keen on using tolls as a means of getting highways built any faster. So unless there is a giant amount of federal funding put forth for new Interstates the unfinished portion of I-49 is just as likely to languish as neglected corridors in Oklahoma.


My thinking is The priority list in Arkansas is
1)US-412 Upgrade (I-49 to Tulsa)
2) I-57
3) I-530. I could honestly see it completed to Monroe before I-49 between Fort Smith and Texarkana.
4) I-49 to Texarkana
Put three or four more unnamed projects in the list then.....
7) I-69

US-65 to Branson would provide a north outlet from Little Rock. US-412 could extend across the rest of northern Arkansas. US-82 could become freeway from Texarkana to Greenville (MS).

My take is when Bob Moore is gone from the Arkansas State Highway Commission that what little support there is for I-69 as it is tentatively planned will erode to the point of nothingness. I am not saying I-69 will be completely abandoned, but it will be more direct and of service to a greater populace.


412 already extends across north Arkansas, unless you mean upgrading it like ARDOT did from Sonora to Huntsville?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sprjus4 on July 07, 2021, 10:31:39 PM
^ No, he’s talking about upgrading US-412 between Springdale and Tulsa to interstate standards.

I see completing I-57 in Arkansas a higher priority, however. US-412 is at least a four lane divided route, meanwhile the proposed I-57 routing is merely a 2 lane road.

And as far as US-82, I’m more willing to bet I-69 would be built before a US-82 upgrade. I-69 has more utility than US-82 would. The most US-82 needs is a 65 mph 4 lane divided highway. It’s connecting smaller towns into the interstate system, it’s not carrying long distance traffic between major cities in the sense I-69 would between Memphis, Shreveport, Texarkana, Houston, Corpus Christi, Brownsville, McAllen, Laredo, etc.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on July 07, 2021, 11:11:55 PM
Quote from: sparker
Actually, those numbers, along with the time frame, are what's projected for Boise (ID) and its Treasure Valley metro area -- also getting a sizeable influx of folks relocating from CA (and, if weather patterns continue to wreak havoc nationwide, other locations as well).  NWA, as well as much of the Midwest, gets floods & tornadoes; the West gets recurring heat domes with 100+ days (as does western Canada!), and the Gulf and East Coasts see extended storm/hurricane seasons.  One moves, and, increasingly, adverse weather of one sort or the other welcomes you in your new abode! Welcome to the new reality!

No location will ever be perfect. That's particularly true for weather; every place will have some bad form of it. The trick is figuring out which form of bad weather you can tolerate the most balanced against what ever good weather that location offers. Resources like ample clean water supply are also vital. Water is one of the things that really endangers the long term sustainability of major cities in the Southwest US.

As for population growth projections, those all have to be taken with the proverbial grain of salt. The growth projections depend on current macro/socio-economic trends to stay their course. No one really knows what will happen in the future. Right now (with all sorts of inflation in food, materials, fuel, etc going way up out of the comfort zone) the outlook appears pretty dicey.

Anyone can look at a major metro region that has been growing rapidly and steadily, perhaps for decades (like Dallas-Fort Worth) and say the growth is unstoppable. Any popular metro will keep growing ...until it doesn't.

It's kind of easy to understand why places like California are currently losing population. Much of it comes down to the cost of living and how well people in various jobs/income categories can adapt to those living costs. For a lot of people in lower wage, service industry fields the situation is becoming financially untenable. Every city in America depends just as much on restaurant cooks, cashiers, grocery store stock clerks, etc as they do on police, fire fighters and various higher income professional workers. If a city prices its bottom level workers out of town it will run into serious functional problems.

Affordability is an issue any rapidly growing metro will eventually face. The population growth itself will often result in rising living costs. Local zoning that limits any affordable housing development will amplify housing cost inflation. High income home owners love the policies since they inflate their property values. Over the long term it ramps up the misery index for those on the lower rungs of the income ladder. If they can manage to escape to a lower cost region they'll move. Some who are well-off see the possible down-turns ahead, so they cash-out: sell their homes and take their profits to a region with more balance.

Quote from: sprjus4
And as far as US-82, I’m more willing to bet I-69 would be built before a US-82 upgrade. I-69 has more utility than US-82 would. The most US-82 needs is a 65 mph 4 lane divided highway. It’s connecting smaller towns into the interstate system, it’s not carrying long distance traffic between major cities in the sense I-69 would between Memphis, Shreveport, Texarkana, Houston, Corpus Christi, Brownsville, McAllen, Laredo, etc.

US-82 to the North of the Dallas-Fort Worth metro has some serious Interstate upgrade potential, simply because so much of the growth in DFW is spreading North in that direction. The segment between Gainesville and Sherman is threatening to be another difficult pickle like US-380 to the South. TX DOT was asleep at the wheel on US-380 and now has a pretty difficult upgrade situation on its hands. They're going to face the same problem with US-82 in the future. Really US-82 could be upgraded to a regional freeway (or toll road) from Henrietta and US-287 to New Boston and I-30.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on July 08, 2021, 05:49:08 AM
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Don't see US 82 from US 287 east to New Boston/I-30 being upgraded to Interstate status unless US 287 Ft. Worth>Amarillo is likewise constructed.  But even with that longer corridor functioning as 82's western connection, most of the traffic on 82 (or the future I-3X) would be generated locally; a "bridge" between the two halves of the DFW-to-I-40 composite connector would be functionally pointless unless it eventually serves as a northern bypass of metro DFW with something like I-49 between Shreveport and Texarkana as the completion of that "arc".  OTOH, it's likely that many of the Interstate corridors that will be proposed over the next few decades will be similar "relief routes", as the original system, laid out as it was as "connect-the-dots" between major cities, becomes increasingly overwhelmed with the combination of shorter-distance commutes and through commercial movements.  The corridors that would draw political and popular support would likely need to be more than simple parallel facilities; they'd need to also serve areas that were and are presently overlooked by the Interstate network -- the basic rationale behind current proposals such as I-14 and the P2P.  And I-49 itself is the product of that dynamic; it's been in the works since 1991's ISTEA; tellingly, it was the 1st high-priority corridor to be designated that year -- addressing, as it did, a glaring regional gap in the original system's configuration. 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bwana39 on July 08, 2021, 08:23:25 AM


Quote from: sprjus4
And as far as US-82, I’m more willing to bet I-69 would be built before a US-82 upgrade. I-69 has more utility than US-82 would. The most US-82 needs is a 65 mph 4 lane divided highway. It’s connecting smaller towns into the interstate system, it’s not carrying long distance traffic between major cities in the sense I-69 would between Memphis, Shreveport, Texarkana, Houston, Corpus Christi, Brownsville, McAllen, Laredo, etc.

US-82 to the North of the Dallas-Fort Worth metro has some serious Interstate upgrade potential, simply because so much of the growth in DFW is spreading North in that direction. The segment between Gainesville and Sherman is threatening to be another difficult pickle like US-380 to the South. TX DOT was asleep at the wheel on US-380 and now has a pretty difficult upgrade situation on its hands. They're going to face the same problem with US-82 in the future. Really US-82 could be upgraded to a regional freeway (or toll road) from Henrietta and US-287 to New Boston and I-30.

I agree with the point that I-69 has a greater utility to the national highway grid. I am just talking about the Arkansas priorities.

US-82 from in Grayson and Fannin Counties  has the ROW in place. Cooke County is another story.  I think US 82 east of Wichita Falls should be four-lane divided highway. The setup in Grayson and Fannin counties would be an excellent pattern. This would be really nice in Arkansas too. I put US-82 across Arkansas into my analogy as to point out how low I-69 is outside of Southeast Arkansas and particularly Desha and Arkansas counties.

Yes US-380 is a mess. Even 2 decades ago no one expected over a million people in Collin County and nearly a million in Denton County.  These figures are higher than Dallas and Tarrant Counties when the original interstates were built.

I have never driven US-67 past Searcy and that was 15 years ago or so.  I get the impression from Arkansas sources (a limited opinion) that if Oklahoma will commit to US-412 being upgraded that Arkansas will follow suit. Wal*Mart wants it done. I agree that I-57 (the US-67 corridor) is a more pressing need. I just kind of think NWA has more push this time especially if Oklahoma does their part.

Arkansas wants to see I-30 and I-40 east of NLR expanded to 6 to 8 lanes. It will be as major as the upgrades on US-75 from Richardson to Anna. Pretty much EVERYTHING will need to be replaced.

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on July 08, 2021, 08:33:30 AM
I think those population numbers will be higher with all 4 of the population centers in NWA Annexing land to the east and west. In 20 years the Tulsa suburbs will be an hour drive from NWA if it isn't now?

According to Google maps, its about 1 hr 20 minutes from the I-44/US 412/Creek Turnpike/Will Rogers Turnpike/OK 364 (I almost forgot that one) interchange at Catoosa to the junction of US 412 and old AR 68 west of Tontitown where the divided highway ends. If Tulsa builds towards Inola and NWA builds toward Siloam Springs, it is entirely possible for it to become a 1 hour trip.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Avalanchez71 on July 08, 2021, 09:52:18 AM
I think those population numbers will be higher with all 4 of the population centers in NWA Annexing land to the east and west. In 20 years the Tulsa suburbs will be an hour drive from NWA if it isn't now?

According to Google maps, its about 1 hr 20 minutes from the I-44/US 412/Creek Turnpike/Will Rogers Turnpike/OK 364 (I almost forgot that one) interchange at Catoosa to the junction of US 412 and old AR 68 west of Tontitown where the divided highway ends. If Tulsa builds towards Inola and NWA builds toward Siloam Springs, it is entirely possible for it to become a 1 hour trip.

That one hour will only be one hour for about a year.  After a year it will be a much longer trip due to the sprawl that will come along with it.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on July 08, 2021, 01:42:46 PM
I think those population numbers will be higher with all 4 of the population centers in NWA Annexing land to the east and west. In 20 years the Tulsa suburbs will be an hour drive from NWA if it isn't now?

According to Google maps, its about 1 hr 20 minutes from the I-44/US 412/Creek Turnpike/Will Rogers Turnpike/OK 364 (I almost forgot that one) interchange at Catoosa to the junction of US 412 and old AR 68 west of Tontitown where the divided highway ends. If Tulsa builds towards Inola and NWA builds toward Siloam Springs, it is entirely possible for it to become a 1 hour trip.

That one hour will only be one hour for about a year.  After a year it will be a much longer trip due to the sprawl that will come along with it.

I'd say closer to 12 to 15 years.  Sprawl doesn't develop quite that quickly.  It'd take a couple years of planning for development projects to get started, then there's the limitation of availability of construction companies, equipment, and workers puts somewhat of a cap on the speed of development.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Tomahawkin on July 08, 2021, 01:46:22 PM
I just forgot that it is 60 miles from Joplin to Bentonville. In 10 years that area could be a combined metropolitan statistical area...
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on July 08, 2021, 01:49:07 PM
I just forgot that it is 60 miles from Joplin to Bentonville. In 10 years that area could be a combined metropolitan statistical area...

McDonald County would make for a sure bet in real estate right now.  Fixing to uncork in October.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on July 08, 2021, 02:30:51 PM
I just forgot that it is 60 miles from Joplin to Bentonville. In 10 years that area could be a combined metropolitan statistical area...

McDonald County would make for a sure bet in real estate right now.  Fixing to uncork in October.

McDonald is extremely rural for the most part. It may turn out like NW Louisiana where businesses abandoned US 71 and moved to I-49.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on July 08, 2021, 05:10:40 PM
Quote from: sparker
Don't see US 82 from US 287 east to New Boston/I-30 being upgraded to Interstate status unless US 287 Ft. Worth>Amarillo is likewise constructed.  But even with that longer corridor functioning as 82's western connection, most of the traffic on 82 (or the future I-3X) would be generated locally; a "bridge" between the two halves of the DFW-to-I-40 composite connector would be functionally pointless unless it eventually serves as a northern bypass of metro DFW with something like I-49 between Shreveport and Texarkana as the completion of that "arc".

I see a number of possibilities happening with US-82. The most likely thing in the short term is US-82 being upgraded to a freeway between Gainesville and Sherman. TX DOT has studied building a US-82 relief route around Gainesville. The first study was for an option to the South, but others want a North option. It's possible a loop could end up being built. US-82 is already a freeway in Sherman and has had some additional improvements.

Existing US-82 between Gainesville and Sherman is currently a 4-lane divided route with four isolated freeway style exits. For much of that segment there is enough room to upgrade the main lanes and add flanking frontage roads. Closer to Gainesville it turns into a tighter squeeze; it's likely some buildings might have to be cleared.

West of Gainesville to Henrietta, that segment of US-82 would likely not be turned into an Interstate class facility unless the same was done to US-287 from at least Wichita Falls to Fort Worth, if not the whole Amarillo to Fort Worth leg.

US-82 going East of Sherman has better upgrade potential. The route is a hybrid of 4-lane freeway and divided expressway to Bonham where it drops to a hybrid Super-2 arrangement to Honey Grove. All of that can be brought up to Interstate standards fairly easily. The last stretch to Paris is regular 2-lane route. A freeway there might have to be on a new terrain alignment due to various properties hugging the corridor. I could see such a freeway upgrade connecting to Paris and then upgrading the odd Loop 286 road to full Interstate standards. Getting a new freeway built from Paris to New Boston (and I-30) would probably depend on other corridors like US-287 being further improved.

Quote from: sparker
OTOH, it's likely that many of the Interstate corridors that will be proposed over the next few decades will be similar "relief routes", as the original system, laid out as it was as "connect-the-dots" between major cities, becomes increasingly overwhelmed with the combination of shorter-distance commutes and through commercial movements.

Older, long established Interstates, such as the I-81 and I-78 combo or I-84 going from PA to MA or even I-12 in LA, function as relief routes to get around major population centers. The Interstate highway network is pretty densely packed in the Northeast US. With the kind of migration that has been taking place in recent years, particularly to places like Texas, it's only natural for the highway network to improve accordingly. The DFW metro is gigantic in size and has a legitimately enormous regional population. Some corridors in the region are long overdue for improvement due to that growth. Corridors like US-82 do indeed have potential as relief routes, particularly with the possibility to connect to other emerging major junctions in places like Texarkana.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on July 08, 2021, 05:36:58 PM


Quote from: sprjus4
And as far as US-82, I’m more willing to bet I-69 would be built before a US-82 upgrade. I-69 has more utility than US-82 would. The most US-82 needs is a 65 mph 4 lane divided highway. It’s connecting smaller towns into the interstate system, it’s not carrying long distance traffic between major cities in the sense I-69 would between Memphis, Shreveport, Texarkana, Houston, Corpus Christi, Brownsville, McAllen, Laredo, etc.

US-82 to the North of the Dallas-Fort Worth metro has some serious Interstate upgrade potential, simply because so much of the growth in DFW is spreading North in that direction. The segment between Gainesville and Sherman is threatening to be another difficult pickle like US-380 to the South. TX DOT was asleep at the wheel on US-380 and now has a pretty difficult upgrade situation on its hands. They're going to face the same problem with US-82 in the future. Really US-82 could be upgraded to a regional freeway (or toll road) from Henrietta and US-287 to New Boston and I-30.

I agree with the point that I-69 has a greater utility to the national highway grid. I am just talking about the Arkansas priorities.

US-82 from in Grayson and Fannin Counties  has the ROW in place. Cooke County is another story.  I think US 82 east of Wichita Falls should be four-lane divided highway. The setup in Grayson and Fannin counties would be an excellent pattern. This would be really nice in Arkansas too. I put US-82 across Arkansas into my analogy as to point out how low I-69 is outside of Southeast Arkansas and particularly Desha and Arkansas counties.

Yes US-380 is a mess. Even 2 decades ago no one expected over a million people in Collin County and nearly a million in Denton County.  These figures are higher than Dallas and Tarrant Counties when the original interstates were built.

I have never driven US-67 past Searcy and that was 15 years ago or so.  I get the impression from Arkansas sources (a limited opinion) that if Oklahoma will commit to US-412 being upgraded that Arkansas will follow suit. Wal*Mart wants it done. I agree that I-57 (the US-67 corridor) is a more pressing need. I just kind of think NWA has more push this time especially if Oklahoma does their part.

Arkansas wants to see I-30 and I-40 east of NLR expanded to 6 to 8 lanes. It will be as major as the upgrades on US-75 from Richardson to Anna. Pretty much EVERYTHING will need to be replaced.



As far as upgrading US 412 east of I-49 is concerned, while the connectivity to nearby significant metro areas is largely concentrated to the west (hence the 412 I-upgrade proposal, which ends at I-49), there's also a substantial recreational area to the east in the "lake district" along US 62/412; that is also covered by the definition of HPC #8, which takes in all of US 412 east of Tulsa.  Back in the heady days of 1995-2005 (which makes everyone feel old!) when numerous corridors were being touted as potential Interstates, the E-W variant through the Ozarks that garnered the most attention was HPC #3, using US 60 from Springfield east through Poplar Bluff; this was the fabled but premature "I-66" proposal, supposedly poised to link up with its equally publicized (to the point of "Future" signage being posted) counterpart across the southern tier of KY.  Of course, that has essentially petered out; there hasn't been a peep from any of the original backers (possibly no longer in office or in a position of influence) in years.  The HPC #3 proposal originally had the effect of taking the wind out of any possible sails regarding US 412 only 50-odd miles to the south; if the former were developed, the latter would be considered redundant and unnecessary (and a bit gratuitous!).  But now that "I-66" is effectively dead or at least dormant, it wouldn't be at all surprising to find US 412 across northern AR getting some attention as to a potential major corridor, particularly if the Interstate portion west of NWA is nailed down in the next couple of years.  While NWA is a prime attractant -- and an appropriate place to terminate a corridor -- there may be a push from the towns along 412 for a general corridor upgrade -- possibly in phases (expressway, then upgrade to I-status) east to at least I-57 -- especially if the eastern half of the Springdale bypass is fully completed.  Of course, such a corridor would simply join the queue of AR projects -- likely one of the last, well after the others with existing plans.  But since MO 4-laned US 60 a few years back -- and that's likely to be the extent of that route's improvement for the foreseeable future -- there's really no competition for a cross-Ozark corridor to one following US 412, especially since it serves recreational areas that were not a factor with the US 60-based corridor to the north.  Also an advantage -- if such a corridor were to reach I-57 -- and MO declined (for their usual fiscal reasons) to take part in a 412 upgrade in their "bootheel", it could simply head down US 63 and tie in with I-555 toward Memphis.

But a lot of that would depend upon the N. AR real estate market; if there weren't concurrent economic development in the traversed areas, an upgraded 412 wouldn't be terribly cost-effective even as an expressway, much less a full-fledged Interstate.  In any case, one would hope that it would sit in the state queue until Fort Smith-to-Texarkana is at least under construction rather than serve as a project siphoning funds away from the longer-standing route.   
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bwana39 on July 08, 2021, 05:49:59 PM
Quote from: sparker
Don't see US 82 from US 287 east to New Boston/I-30 being upgraded to Interstate status unless US 287 Ft. Worth>Amarillo is likewise constructed.  But even with that longer corridor functioning as 82's western connection, most of the traffic on 82 (or the future I-3X) would be generated locally; a "bridge" between the two halves of the DFW-to-I-40 composite connector would be functionally pointless unless it eventually serves as a northern bypass of metro DFW with something like I-49 between Shreveport and Texarkana as the completion of that "arc".

I see a number of possibilities happening with US-82. The most likely thing in the short term is US-82 being upgraded to a freeway between Gainesville and Sherman. TX DOT has studied building a US-82 relief route around Gainesville. The first study was for an option to the South, but others want a North option. It's possible a loop could end up being built. US-82 is already a freeway in Sherman and has had some additional improvements.

Existing US-82 between Gainesville and Sherman is currently a 4-lane divided route with four isolated freeway style exits. For much of that segment there is enough room to upgrade the main lanes and add flanking frontage roads. Closer to Gainesville it turns into a tighter squeeze; it's likely some buildings might have to be cleared.

West of Gainesville to Henrietta, that segment of US-82 would likely not be turned into an Interstate class facility unless the same was done to US-287 from at least Wichita Falls to Fort Worth, if not the whole Amarillo to Fort Worth leg.

US-82 going East of Sherman has better upgrade potential. The route is a hybrid of 4-lane freeway and divided expressway to Bonham where it drops to a hybrid Super-2 arrangement to Honey Grove. All of that can be brought up to Interstate standards fairly easily. The last stretch to Paris is regular 2-lane route. A freeway there might have to be on a new terrain alignment due to various properties hugging the corridor. I could see such a freeway upgrade connecting to Paris and then upgrading the odd Loop 286 road to full Interstate standards. Getting a new freeway built from Paris to New Boston (and I-30) would probably depend on other corridors like US-287 being further improved.

 You haven't been to Bonham lately have you? The four lane divided  is open all the way from the Lamar County line to just east of Gainesville.  As you said, part that to the east (Lamar, Red River , & Bowie Counties) is two lanes. Actually more of it two than four.  I might add, the part in Cooke county is four lane, but it is pretty dismal. The ROW for the portion from Sherman to east of Honey Grove is a facility for a full 2+2+2+2 if they decide to build it that way.  From Sherman to Whitesboro  is not quite so wide.

From Whitesboro to the Lamar County line is a reroute done in stages between 1975 to around 2000. SH-56 was US-82 before that.

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: msunat97 on July 14, 2021, 08:20:52 AM
Asphalt was being laid on the NB approach to the US71 overpass yesterday.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bwana39 on July 14, 2021, 04:43:47 PM


. It may turn out like NW Louisiana where businesses abandoned US 71 and moved to I-49.

Where? Natchitoches is really the only place that there is any real buildup along I-49. US-71 had a FEW businesses along it, maybe more twenty years ago, but nominal vacant buildings from the past 20-25 years.  As far as that goes, the Alexandria bound traffic tended to follow LA-1 not US-71.  Hwy 1 was as good or better facility than US-71 AND it is/was shorter.  There is exactly 1 business along I-49 between Shreveport and Texarkana.  There are some oilfield businesses that were built along I-49 in Desoto Parish, but those were new activities related to the shale drilling boom not relocations due to the primary road changing.  In Shreveport, US71 & LA-1 (Youree and N. Market are still both pretty busy.) Fact of business, the business center of Shreveport is on Youree.  US-71 in Bossier looks like the outside of a military base in any other city. As far as that goes, there has been significant buildup on US-71 south of Barksdale AFB.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on July 14, 2021, 06:18:18 PM
I too have been puzzled by the lack of services along I-49 in Louisiana. Perhaps the worst stretch of freeway in that regard east of the 100th meridian. You can't make it go by faster because the smokey bears are crawling like flies on that freeway. It's a hard 3 hours from Shreveport to Lafayette.

That freeway has been open for longer than 2 decades and once or twice I've sweated out making a gas station. Even in places like Nachitoches and Alexandria there might be one place to get gas. Once you hit Opelousas, you can get your boudin refills all day long.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on July 14, 2021, 08:12:08 PM
I too have been puzzled by the lack of services along I-49 in Louisiana. Perhaps the worst stretch of freeway in that regard east of the 100th meridian. You can't make it go by faster because the smokey bears are crawling like flies on that freeway. It's a hard 3 hours from Shreveport to Lafayette.

In 1998, I was going to Florida with some friends. We were heading south on I-49 and went through the loop at I-10 towards New Orleans. We were low on gas, and were in the right lane going 55, getting ready to exit at the next exit and the blue lights came on. Cops came to the car and asked us why we were going so slowly (The speed limit was 65 at the time.) My friend told him he was looking for a gas station, and the cop told him where the closest one was and for us to have a good night. We had Arkansas tags, and I assume the cop realized we were just 3 college kids and not drug runners and let us go.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on July 14, 2021, 09:22:40 PM
I too have been puzzled by the lack of services along I-49 in Louisiana. Perhaps the worst stretch of freeway in that regard east of the 100th meridian. You can't make it go by faster because the smokey bears are crawling like flies on that freeway. It's a hard 3 hours from Shreveport to Lafayette.

That freeway has been open for longer than 2 decades and once or twice I've sweated out making a gas station. Even in places like Nachitoches and Alexandria there might be one place to get gas. Once you hit Opelousas, you can get your boudin refills all day long.

The first time I used I-49 back in 1990, before it was completed through Alexandria, I was low on gas coming into that town heading north, so I filled up there.  Got to talking to the guy at the counter, and he let me know I was lucky to have refilled there, because there was nothing right on I-49 between there and Shreveport.  So subsequently I kept an eye out during my several times on 49 to see if more interim services had been added, but never noticed any significant change. 

Got to thinking when I saw the post -- is this the case with other "aftermarket" Interstates like I-22, so I did a GSV of that corridor and -- lo and behold -- saw exactly the opposite; there were services -- gas/convenience stores and occasionally restaurants -- at least at every 3rd interchange or so along the whole stretch from Memphis to Birmingham -- and definitely more within the towns.  I suppose the fact that US 78 was already a major intercity trucking corridor prior to freeway development had a lot to do with it; it's likely that some such businesses simply relocated to the freeway when it opened -- although where the freeway was close to the old road (MS 178) there were still quite a few gas stations along that road close to the crossroads that interchanged with the freeway.  That may be a skewing factor when determining such service levels; many of the currently signed newer Interstates were upgrades/overlays of existing freeways, on which services were established prior to Interstate status.  I-49 through LA, although paralleling both LA 1 and US 71 (the former much closer, of course) was aligned to the west to ostensibly avoid property acquisition near towns as well as avoidance of the Red River floodplain as much as possible.  And it's quite possible that service businesses in Natchitoches, Coushetta, and even Mansfield over on US 171, didn't have or couldn't raise the capital needed to purchase lots and effect a move over to the freeway -- so it just never happened to any extent.   This dynamic would likely be true with corridors on largely new-terrain alignment; those closely following existing commercial corridors might just "piggyback" on existing service facilities.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on July 15, 2021, 12:22:32 AM
I've been on I-49 in various stages of its development from the early 1980's into the 1990's. The first bits of I-49 were built going North of Lafayette and I-10 up to US-190. Then various segments on Northward were finished.

Regardless of the overall lack of services along I-49 between Shreveport and Opelousas it's still a far faster alternative than US-71 or LA-1. I've taken that trip on those roads and it's a pain. And I-49 isn't all that badly devoid of fuel stations along the way. The situation is certainly better than it used to be in the early 1990's. Web sites like Gas Buddy make it easy to chart out road trip stops. There are worse stretches of Interstates and other highway types that go longer distances between fuel stations.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bwana39 on July 15, 2021, 08:06:12 AM
I've been on I-49 in various stages of its development from the early 1980's into the 1990's. The first bits of I-49 were built going North of Lafayette and I-10 up to US-190. Then various segments on Northward were finished.

Regardless of the overall lack of services along I-49 between Shreveport and Opelousas it's still a far faster alternative than US-71 or LA-1. I've taken that trip on those roads and it's a pain. And I-49 isn't all that badly devoid of fuel stations along the way. The situation is certainly better than it used to be in the early 1990's. Web sites like Gas Buddy make it easy to chart out road trip stops. There are worse stretches of Interstates and other highway types that go longer distances between fuel stations.

I agree with you. There are worse. The point of this line of discussion started with a comment to this.



McDonald is extremely rural for the most part. It may turn out like NW Louisiana where businesses abandoned US 71 and moved to I-49.

There are sufficient services along I-49 for travel. On the most part though, there has been no wholesale relocation of businesses and services to I-49 or the I-49 corridor. 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on July 16, 2021, 05:14:23 PM
Minor Update

SB US 71 traffic will begin using a new ramp to  NB AR 549 starting Monday,  (https://www.nwahomepage.com/news/new-highway-71-ramp-to-bella-vista-bypass-opens-wednesday-in-bentonville/?fbclid=IwAR2UOi1lFd4gp79_d1VvAUuYgiju29bJ6rOKQN4Aa7JlPN2HvCWFMfsY4Oo)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on July 16, 2021, 06:36:39 PM
Minor Update

SB US 71 traffic will begin using a new ramp to  NB AR 549 starting Monday,  (https://www.nwahomepage.com/news/new-highway-71-ramp-to-bella-vista-bypass-opens-wednesday-in-bentonville/?fbclid=IwAR2UOi1lFd4gp79_d1VvAUuYgiju29bJ6rOKQN4Aa7JlPN2HvCWFMfsY4Oo)

Still just for the southbound traffic.  Sure wish ARDOT would fill the gaping pothole at Peach Orchard Rd. where everyone northbound does a U-turn to get onto the bypass.  All the dumptrucks pulling the U-turn there have dug out the seam between the lanes into a lovely teeth clenching hole, even at the 2MPH you're doing there.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: razorback0308 on July 16, 2021, 09:47:59 PM
Minor Update

SB US 71 traffic will begin using a new ramp to  NB AR 549 starting Monday,  (https://www.nwahomepage.com/news/new-highway-71-ramp-to-bella-vista-bypass-opens-wednesday-in-bentonville/?fbclid=IwAR2UOi1lFd4gp79_d1VvAUuYgiju29bJ6rOKQN4Aa7JlPN2HvCWFMfsY4Oo)


I was looking at this as I drove south on 549 this afternoon. Does this mean the NB traffic will start using the NB lanes? Otherwise, how does the traffic get to the southbound lanes? The center wall is basically complete.

I live off the first exit on 549, and the NB lanes were striped almost all the way to that first exit. It seems feasible that could be completed by Wednesday.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on July 19, 2021, 11:25:30 AM
Minor Update

SB US 71 traffic will begin using a new ramp to  NB AR 549 starting Monday,  (https://www.nwahomepage.com/news/new-highway-71-ramp-to-bella-vista-bypass-opens-wednesday-in-bentonville/?fbclid=IwAR2UOi1lFd4gp79_d1VvAUuYgiju29bJ6rOKQN4Aa7JlPN2HvCWFMfsY4Oo)


I was looking at this as I drove south on 549 this afternoon. Does this mean the NB traffic will start using the NB lanes? Otherwise, how does the traffic get to the southbound lanes? The center wall is basically complete.

I live off the first exit on 549, and the NB lanes were striped almost all the way to that first exit. It seems feasible that could be completed by Wednesday.

No change on northbound traffic.  Still have to do a U-turn at Peach Orchard Rd. and go back south as the only access onto AR-549 is still a right-turn-only off US-71B.  They appear to have only changed the intersection onto the entrance ramp for the southbound traffic onto AR-549 at this point.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Razorback19 on July 19, 2021, 12:23:52 PM
According to this article about road improvements in the Fort Smith area, I-49 between Barling and Alma has been "programmed"

https://www.nwaonline.com/news/2021/jul/18/state-says-most-fort-smith-highways-to-be-improved/

Quote
I-49 on the map
An extension of Interstate 49 between Barling and Alma has also been listed as “programmed”  in the state’s plans. Arkansas officials in recent years have pushed for the completion of I-49, which would run from New Orleans to Kansas City, Mo., once complete.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on July 19, 2021, 12:35:31 PM
According to this article about road improvements in the Fort Smith area, I-49 between Barling and Alma has been "programmed"

https://www.nwaonline.com/news/2021/jul/18/state-says-most-fort-smith-highways-to-be-improved/

Quote
I-49 on the map
An extension of Interstate 49 between Barling and Alma has also been listed as “programmed”  in the state’s plans. Arkansas officials in recent years have pushed for the completion of I-49, which would run from New Orleans to Kansas City, Mo., once complete.

But they still don't have money for the bridges over the Arkansas River.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Razorback19 on July 19, 2021, 02:33:26 PM
Just enough to put it on the road map  :-/
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: razorback0308 on July 19, 2021, 07:14:43 PM
Minor Update

SB US 71 traffic will begin using a new ramp to  NB AR 549 starting Monday,  (https://www.nwahomepage.com/news/new-highway-71-ramp-to-bella-vista-bypass-opens-wednesday-in-bentonville/?fbclid=IwAR2UOi1lFd4gp79_d1VvAUuYgiju29bJ6rOKQN4Aa7JlPN2HvCWFMfsY4Oo)


I was looking at this as I drove south on 549 this afternoon. Does this mean the NB traffic will start using the NB lanes? Otherwise, how does the traffic get to the southbound lanes? The center wall is basically complete.

I live off the first exit on 549, and the NB lanes were striped almost all the way to that first exit. It seems feasible that could be completed by Wednesday.

No change on northbound traffic.  Still have to do a U-turn at Peach Orchard Rd. and go back south as the only access onto AR-549 is still a right-turn-only off US-71B.  They appear to have only changed the intersection onto the entrance ramp for the southbound traffic onto AR-549 at this point.

Sorry, I probably wasn’t clear in my earlier post. I was referring to once drivers are on northbound 549. Currently they are traveling north in one of the SB lanes. Will that change later this week? Will we now have 2 lanes each direction on 549?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on July 19, 2021, 07:47:28 PM
Minor Update

SB US 71 traffic will begin using a new ramp to  NB AR 549 starting Monday,  (https://www.nwahomepage.com/news/new-highway-71-ramp-to-bella-vista-bypass-opens-wednesday-in-bentonville/?fbclid=IwAR2UOi1lFd4gp79_d1VvAUuYgiju29bJ6rOKQN4Aa7JlPN2HvCWFMfsY4Oo)


I was looking at this as I drove south on 549 this afternoon. Does this mean the NB traffic will start using the NB lanes? Otherwise, how does the traffic get to the southbound lanes? The center wall is basically complete.

I live off the first exit on 549, and the NB lanes were striped almost all the way to that first exit. It seems feasible that could be completed by Wednesday.

No change on northbound traffic.  Still have to do a U-turn at Peach Orchard Rd. and go back south as the only access onto AR-549 is still a right-turn-only off US-71B.  They appear to have only changed the intersection onto the entrance ramp for the southbound traffic onto AR-549 at this point.

Sorry, I probably wasn’t clear in my earlier post. I was referring to once drivers are on northbound 549. Currently they are traveling north in one of the SB lanes. Will that change later this week? Will we now have 2 lanes each direction on 549?

They would have to construct a crossover north of the intersection area for that to be possible.  I haven't heard of any such plans.  I was last up there a couple of weeks ago and they still hadn't finished the cable barrier or done any of the striping, but had done the BGS's.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on July 19, 2021, 10:40:04 PM
Quote from: US71
But they still don't have money for the bridges over the Arkansas River.

I'm wondering if there are any specific provisions in the hard infrastructure bill currently being debated in the US Congress. There's not a chance in hell the larger soft "infrastructure" bill will pass. Stuff like roads and bridges can attract a good amount of bipartisan support.

I would think the I-49 project in the Fort Smith area would kind of be a spotlight project since it has been in the planning stages for so many years. That's the biggest stumbling block for getting I-49 completed between Fort Smith and Texarkana. The rest of that (aside from Texas' Red River crossing) can be pieced together over time.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: I-39 on July 19, 2021, 10:49:22 PM
According to this article about road improvements in the Fort Smith area, I-49 between Barling and Alma has been "programmed"

https://www.nwaonline.com/news/2021/jul/18/state-says-most-fort-smith-highways-to-be-improved/

Quote
I-49 on the map
An extension of Interstate 49 between Barling and Alma has also been listed as “programmed”  in the state’s plans. Arkansas officials in recent years have pushed for the completion of I-49, which would run from New Orleans to Kansas City, Mo., once complete.

But they still don't have money for the bridges over the Arkansas River.

What’s the current $$ estimate for completing the entire segment between Alma and Barling, including the bridge?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on July 19, 2021, 11:27:19 PM
I think it was in the $600 million range. Pretty crazy.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on July 20, 2021, 12:26:46 AM
According to this article about road improvements in the Fort Smith area, I-49 between Barling and Alma has been "programmed"

https://www.nwaonline.com/news/2021/jul/18/state-says-most-fort-smith-highways-to-be-improved/

Quote
I-49 on the map
An extension of Interstate 49 between Barling and Alma has also been listed as “programmed”  in the state’s plans. Arkansas officials in recent years have pushed for the completion of I-49, which would run from New Orleans to Kansas City, Mo., once complete.

But they still don't have money for the bridges over the Arkansas River.

What’s the current $$ estimate for completing the entire segment between Alma and Barling, including the bridge?
I think it was in the $600 million range. Pretty crazy.

Maybe I'm just used to CA-level outlays, but $600M to complete (a) the navigable-waterway bridge (b) the rest of the I-40/49 interchange (c) the approach roads, including any bridge breaches needed for the floodplain doesn't seem completely out of line.  Now -- since there's a lot on ADOT's plate (I-57, the LR upgrades, and the rest of I-49), it may take a few funding cycles before that kind of money is amassed -- but unless there's dedicated funding for corridor completion in the current or future federal infrastructure bills  :-D (insert snark here), the whole shooting match has at least a 25-year horizon, with the bridge itself possibly ahead of that by 10 years.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: edwaleni on July 20, 2021, 12:42:49 AM
This just landed in my lap:

https://www.swtimes.com/story/news/2021/07/20/interstate-49-extension-arkansas-moves-into-next-phase-development/7996592002/ (https://www.swtimes.com/story/news/2021/07/20/interstate-49-extension-arkansas-moves-into-next-phase-development/7996592002/)

ARDOT announces I-49 extension to move into next phase of development

The Arkansas Department of Transportation is moving on to the next phase of project development for the construction of Interstate 49 from Highway 22 in Sebastian County to Interstate 40 in Crawford County.

The work to be done is about 13.6 miles long with an estimated price tag of $787 million, including a new bridge over the Arkansas River that may cost between $300 million and $400 million, according to Arkansas Department of Transportation District 4 Engineer Chad Adams.

Work during the next phase of the I-49 extension includes getting agency approvals for the re-evaluation of the 1997 Final Environment Impact Statement, preparing required agency construction permits, and developing final design and construction plans for a non-tolled facility from Highway 22 to I-40.

When completed, I-49 will connect Kansas City, Missouri, to southern Louisiana, passing through the Fayetteville-Springdale-Rogers metropolitan area, Fort Smith, and Texarkana. The possibility of tolling the four-lane I-49 extension from Alma to Fort Smith was deemed “not viable”  in April 2019. It was concluded that the gross revenue from the toll would be about $243 million over 40 years, which would not cover the cost of construction.

The 2020 approval by Arkansans of Issue 1 to provide more road funding will help pay for the I-49 extension.

“Issue 1 will create $270 million to go to that project,”  said Keith Gibson, member of the Arkansas State Highway Commission. “That $270 million right now is designated to build two lanes of the interstate from Alma to Highway 22 and two lanes of the bridge that will go over the river.”

Whether construction costs will be higher or lower than the $270 million is unknown until some engineering is done and final numbers are shared, Gibson said.

Issue 1 was passed into law with 55% of the Arkansas vote in November and indefinitely continues the 0.5% sales and use tax for state roadways once the current statewide tax sunsets on June 30, 2023. The tax currently generates an estimated $293.7 million.

The section was originally part of a larger corridor environmental study known as the “U.S. 71 Relocation.”  The study extended from Highway 70 in DeQueen to I-40 near Alma, encompassing about 125 miles.

Construction may be done in phases due to funding constraints. A phased construction approach may be used where two of the ultimate four lanes may be constructed in the first phase. The final determination of this phased construction approach will be determined during this next phase of project development.

The project has been in the works for a long time, but there is not a set date for the start of construction yet, said Gard Wayt, executive director for the I-49 Coalition.

"It's been under consideration and in the semi-planning stage," Wayt said. "Now it's actually ready for the official planning part of it, so it's high on the list right now."

Wayt's estimate is that construction will start in the next year and that the project will take a couple of years to complete, he said.

Finishing the stretch of I-49 in the Fort Smith area has been a high priority for the I-49 Coalition, and business leaders in the area. The connection has been called "the missing link." Wayt has pointed out how the connection will allow a more seamless flow of goods from all over the world all the way through the middle of the United States.

The connection "creates a transportation grid for moving goods and people and food and energy to and from anywhere from mid-America to anywhere in the world," Gayt added.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51324116685_2024ba77b1_b.jpg)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on July 20, 2021, 01:34:59 PM
...and piggybacking above:

Channel 40/29 Rogers/Fort Smith this morning: "Bella Vista Bypass nearing completion" (VIDEO)

https://www.4029tv.com/article/bella-vista-bypass-nearing-completion/37070316?fbclid=IwAR3V-fABAn3P7vt7Dq8mHnNxvwsYvfAMCnR4IPUp00QEKXgoqzwV0nnljkE#
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Scott5114 on July 20, 2021, 02:14:20 PM
Quote from: US71
But they still don't have money for the bridges over the Arkansas River.

I'm wondering if there are any specific provisions in the hard infrastructure bill currently being debated in the US Congress. There's not a chance in hell the larger soft "infrastructure" bill will pass. Stuff like roads and bridges can attract a good amount of bipartisan support.

I would think the I-49 project in the Fort Smith area would kind of be a spotlight project since it has been in the planning stages for so many years. That's the biggest stumbling block for getting I-49 completed between Fort Smith and Texarkana. The rest of that (aside from Texas' Red River crossing) can be pieced together over time.

My understanding is that the bill hasn't even been written yet. They're still hashing out the broad categories the bill is going to cover, how it is going to be paid for, etc. Once there's some semblance of agreement on that, that's when they're going to actually put it in writing.

I actually think there's a better chance that the larger "soft" bill is the one that passes. That's the one the administration wants; the whole reason for the "hard" bill's existence is because, under usual circumstances, passing a bill in the Senate requires 60 votes, and there's only 50 Democrats. So the hard bill is an attempt to try to get 10 Republicans to sign on. However, what should attract a good amount of bipartisan support, in this case, isn't. As the negotiations have continued, Senate Republicans have continued to oppose the bill despite changes the Democrats have made to their proposal, mostly because of disagreements on how to fund the bill. Most recently, the Republicans have rejected the idea of paying for the bill by increasing IRS enforcement of existing tax laws; the Democrats had advanced that possibility as something they felt both sides would be able to agree on (the thinking being, why would the other side willingly go on record as defending tax cheats?).

If the Democrats are unable to get to 60 votes, they do have a backup plan, which is the budget reconciliation process. This process can only be used twice a year, and it must affect the budget in some way, but in exchange requires only 50 votes + Kamala Harris to pass. If the Republicans overplay their hand dragging their feet too much, the Democrats are liable to get fed up and send the "soft" bill through reconciliation, cutting the Republicans out of the process entirely. They're less likely to send the "hard" bill down this route because the only reason for that bill existing in the first place was to avoid burning one of the two reconciliation slots if they didn't need to (and to do a public "well, we tried" gesture for the three remaining people in the country that actually care about bipartisanship).

Another possibility is simply lowering the vote threshold from 60 to 50 for everything, a move which itself only takes 50 votes. There are two Democratic senators that oppose that move, so it's not happening...for now, anyway. Again, if the Republicans overplay their hand, this "nuclear option" might be a possibility that goes back on the table, and if that happens, it's not going to the hard bill that passes.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on July 21, 2021, 12:51:16 AM
Well, I think the "hard" infrastructure bill is more practical. The Democrats could force the larger "soft" bill through reconciliation, but I think if they do so they will pay serious political consequences in doing so. I think they won a simple majority in Congress on the backs of moderate voters. Moderates like roads and bridges. The stuff in the "soft" bill has little to do with that and seems like a giant gift to progressives. The "soft" bill could turn off a lot of moderates and cost the Democrats big time in the mid term elections. I'm no fan of the GOP either, btw. I find some of the stunts they're pulling regarding our elections to be very offensive. They're on a slippery slope toward authoritarianism.

Quote from: sparker
Maybe I'm just used to CA-level outlays, but $600M to complete (a) the navigable-waterway bridge (b) the rest of the I-40/49 interchange (c) the approach roads, including any bridge breaches needed for the floodplain doesn't seem completely out of line.

The bridges in question aren't going to be high rise in nature. Clearance for barge traffic is considerably lower than ship traffic. The bridges aren't going to be "fancy" at all in terms of design. They'll look like any standard concrete highway bridges spanning rivers and creeks. No suspension cable towers or overhead truss work.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on July 21, 2021, 08:24:32 AM
Well, I think the "hard" infrastructure bill is more practical. The Democrats could force the larger "soft" bill through reconciliation, but I think if they do so they will pay serious political consequences in doing so. I think they won a simple majority in Congress on the backs of moderate voters. Moderates like roads and bridges. The stuff in the "soft" bill has little to do with that and seems like a giant gift to progressives. The "soft" bill could turn off a lot of moderates and cost the Democrats big time in the mid term elections. I'm no fan of the GOP either, btw. I find some of the stunts they're pulling regarding our elections to be very offensive. They're on a slippery slope toward authoritarianism.

Quote from: sparker
Maybe I'm just used to CA-level outlays, but $600M to complete (a) the navigable-waterway bridge (b) the rest of the I-40/49 interchange (c) the approach roads, including any bridge breaches needed for the floodplain doesn't seem completely out of line.

The bridges in question aren't going to be high rise in nature. Clearance for barge traffic is considerably lower than ship traffic. The bridges aren't going to be "fancy" at all in terms of design. They'll look like any standard concrete highway bridges spanning rivers and creeks. No suspension cable towers or overhead truss work.

I'm sure a large part of the price escalation can be chocked up to the inflation we've undergone in the past year.  However, I'm sure the Arkansas River Flood of 2019 changed some calculations on 100 year flood events, which likely bumped up the elevation of both the roadbed through the floodplain and the approaches to the bridges.  So, in the short term, we're likely to get an "AR-59 Bypass" with 2 lanes until funding comes around for the other carriageway, which is the Arkansas way for new terrain development these days.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Scott5114 on July 21, 2021, 01:04:30 PM
Well, I think the "hard" infrastructure bill is more practical. The Democrats could force the larger "soft" bill through reconciliation, but I think if they do so they will pay serious political consequences in doing so. I think they won a simple majority in Congress on the backs of moderate voters. Moderates like roads and bridges. The stuff in the "soft" bill has little to do with that and seems like a giant gift to progressives. The "soft" bill could turn off a lot of moderates and cost the Democrats big time in the mid term elections. I'm no fan of the GOP either, btw. I find some of the stunts they're pulling regarding our elections to be very offensive. They're on a slippery slope toward authoritarianism.

Well, the thing that politicians have learned (the Republicans figured it out first, and the Democrats only just recently) is that moderates and centrists, on a pure strategic level, aren't worth the time to appeal to. Come election time, the true fence sitters tend to fall into that "both sides are the same so I'm gonna take my ball and go home" mentality and don't vote, and the moderates that lean to one side or another tend to hold their nose and vote for their side regardless of what they've done. (As an example, in 2020, only one state–Maine–voted for a Senator of a different party than they voted for President.) So winning an election becomes more of a turnout game than a persuasion one. Get more people that already agree with you to actually commit to voting, because that is faster, easier, cheaper, and more effective than spending that time and money trying to persuade a moderate from the other side to jump the fence.

In that sort of environment, it makes more sense from a strategic point of view for the Democrats to cater to progressives, since they're more likely to actually come out and support the party at election time than moderates are. If a move you make excites two progressives for every moderate/centrist you piss off, it's a winning strategy.

You can find the same phenomenon in both parties, of course. It wins elections. Is pursuing that strategy the best for the country? Well, now, that's a totally different question...And one that probably lies beyond the forum rules for discussing politics.

But what that means for the infrastructure bill is that the Democrats are inclined to get it done any way possible, and if that means giving the progressives a big gift while pissing off the centrists, that's what they'll do.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: kphoger on July 21, 2021, 01:17:20 PM
Is pursuing that strategy the best for the country?

Nope.

And that might not go beyond the scope of this forum, because it's hard for me to imagine anyone actually arguing with "Nope".
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on July 21, 2021, 06:27:57 PM
Well, I think the "hard" infrastructure bill is more practical. The Democrats could force the larger "soft" bill through reconciliation, but I think if they do so they will pay serious political consequences in doing so. I think they won a simple majority in Congress on the backs of moderate voters. Moderates like roads and bridges. The stuff in the "soft" bill has little to do with that and seems like a giant gift to progressives. The "soft" bill could turn off a lot of moderates and cost the Democrats big time in the mid term elections. I'm no fan of the GOP either, btw. I find some of the stunts they're pulling regarding our elections to be very offensive. They're on a slippery slope toward authoritarianism.

Quote from: sparker
Maybe I'm just used to CA-level outlays, but $600M to complete (a) the navigable-waterway bridge (b) the rest of the I-40/49 interchange (c) the approach roads, including any bridge breaches needed for the floodplain doesn't seem completely out of line.

The bridges in question aren't going to be high rise in nature. Clearance for barge traffic is considerably lower than ship traffic. The bridges aren't going to be "fancy" at all in terms of design. They'll look like any standard concrete highway bridges spanning rivers and creeks. No suspension cable towers or overhead truss work.

I'm sure a large part of the price escalation can be chocked up to the inflation we've undergone in the past year.  However, I'm sure the Arkansas River Flood of 2019 changed some calculations on 100 year flood events, which likely bumped up the elevation of both the roadbed through the floodplain and the approaches to the bridges.  So, in the short term, we're likely to get an "AR-59 Bypass" with 2 lanes until funding comes around for the other carriageway, which is the Arkansas way for new terrain development these days.

Signage-wise, an initial 2-lane segment is more likely than not to simply be signed, as all interim I-49 facililties have been done to date, as AR 549 -- as a continuation of that signed segment SE of Fort Smith.  Of course, there will be "Future I-49" green signs along the route as well just to remind folks of the ultimate goal of the project. 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: roadman65 on July 21, 2021, 07:54:40 PM
Whoopie another Super Two.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on July 21, 2021, 08:05:51 PM
Whoopie another Super Two.

.........but infinitely better than a Super Zero!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on July 21, 2021, 11:51:04 PM
Whoopie another Super Two.

.........but infinitely better than a Super Zero!

As a Super-2 with a 65 MPH speed limit, it'd still trim 7-8 minutes off my trips to Charleston to visit family and friends.  Drives me nuts to drive 5 miles west then swing back southeast across the river at Barling.  Should also jumpstart development of Chaffee Crossing once it's seen as actually progressing towards connectivity.

Just went for a drive after work today along AR-549 (BVB).  They have lane closure signs on the new northbound carriageway closing off the left lane with several miles of barrels.  Likely just about ready to close off the southbound carriageway's inner lane for re-striping and finally do away with opposing traffic.  Could be tough to pass slow moving vehicles for the next several weeks, though.  They still have a little bit of inner shoulder work closer to the split from just past the jersey barrier for the overpass at the SPUI, but other than cable barrier, which is likely the main reason for closing off the left lane northbound, they only have a bit of striping work to do where the asphalt transitions to and from the concrete stretches that were done under the overpasses previously and closed off.  Starting to get real up to Rocky Dell Hollow Rd.

Afterwards, drove MO-90 to see the I-49 crossing there.  No pavement either north or south from there within sight yet, but putting rebar down on the roadbed to prepare for concrete, so late Sept./early Oct. will be here before we know it.  I'll have to do some picture editing and then will post in a couple of days when work slacks up.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on July 22, 2021, 12:15:27 AM
Yeah, a Super 2 is better than nothing. It will at least get the corridor established and the ROW blocked off from any developers trying to build on it. That's the key thing.

I think it won't be all that long after they get the initial 2 lanes built that the second set of lanes will go into construction. The project could go a little like the Bella Vista bypass.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: msunat97 on July 22, 2021, 07:55:29 AM
Whoopie another Super Two.

.........but infinitely better than a Super Zero!

As a Super-2 with a 65 MPH speed limit, it'd still trim 7-8 minutes off my trips to Charleston to visit family and friends.  Drives me nuts to drive 5 miles west then swing back southeast across the river at Barling.  Should also jumpstart development of Chaffee Crossing once it's seen as actually progressing towards connectivity.

Just went for a drive after work today along AR-549 (BVB).  They have lane closure signs on the new northbound carriageway closing off the left lane with several miles of barrels.  Likely just about ready to close off the southbound carriageway's inner lane for re-striping and finally do away with opposing traffic.  Could be tough to pass slow moving vehicles for the next several weeks, though.  They still have a little bit of inner shoulder work closer to the split from just past the jersey barrier for the overpass at the SPUI, but other than cable barrier, which is likely the main reason for closing off the left lane northbound, they only have a bit of striping work to do where the asphalt transitions to and from the concrete stretches that were done under the overpasses previously and closed off.  Starting to get real up to Rocky Dell Hollow Rd.

Afterwards, drove MO-90 to see the I-49 crossing there.  No pavement either north or south from there within sight yet, but putting rebar down on the roadbed to prepare for concrete, so late Sept./early Oct. will be here before we know it.  I'll have to do some picture editing and then will post in a couple of days when work slacks up.

Thanks for the update MikieTimT.  I hope I'm still able to drive (I'm 47 now...hopefully not too old) by the time this river crossing gets done.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Henry on July 22, 2021, 11:47:04 AM
Something tells me that the intermediate section from Texarkana to Ft. Smith will also be a temporary Super-2, and I wouldn't be surprised in the least.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: abqtraveler on July 22, 2021, 11:52:19 AM
Something tells me that the intermediate section from Texarkana to Ft. Smith will also be a temporary Super-2, and I wouldn't be surprised in the least.
Likely all signed as AR-549 until they get the second carriageway built. For the initial segment between I-40 and AR-22, everyone seems to think the bridge over the Arkansas River will be the most expensive part, but let's not forget about tying the new road into the existing I-40/I-49 North interchange. I think there will be a lot of money spent there too.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: edwaleni on July 22, 2021, 02:26:52 PM
The question for me is there a need to build a tunnel somewhere between Mansfield and Mena?

If so, shouldn't they build that first, or build everything else with a diversion to US-71 until a tunnel is done last.

It is one of the few places I have not driven, so I don't have personal experience with the legacy route.

Hence why I am asking.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Tomahawkin on July 22, 2021, 02:55:30 PM
I think that 50 percent if not more of 49 south of Ft. Smith to Texarkana will be built as elevated viaduct like the ones that were built between Alma and Fayetteville. That could take 10-15 years???
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on July 22, 2021, 04:17:00 PM
The question for me is there a need to build a tunnel somewhere between Mansfield and Mena?

If so, shouldn't they build that first, or build everything else with a diversion to US-71 until a tunnel is done last.

It is one of the few places I have not driven, so I don't have personal experience with the legacy route.

Hence why I am asking.

No plans for tunnels.  From what I've seen, I-49 will also go through the Foran Gap north of Acorn just like US-71.  If they were to tunnel anywhere, it would be through that mountain that goes up to 2000 Ft.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on July 22, 2021, 04:42:42 PM
The question for me is there a need to build a tunnel somewhere between Mansfield and Mena?

If so, shouldn't they build that first, or build everything else with a diversion to US-71 until a tunnel is done last.

It is one of the few places I have not driven, so I don't have personal experience with the legacy route.

Hence why I am asking.

IIRC, most of the summit area around Y City as well as the 71/270 multiplex calls for the freeway to be located directly atop the current facility; as there are no tunnels on the current route, it's not likely that one or more would be planned unless ARDOT planners figure to drastically "cut the corner" on one or another curve.  I'd guess that in this area, which would likely entail the most difficult construction, the freeway will be of minimal width -- just enough to satisfy I-standards -- and with terrain-matching curvature.  Tunneling, while capable of producing a straighter and faster alignment, drives the construction costs up considerably; with the difficulty of obtaining financing for the project in general, it's not likely to feature much in the way of structural cost than is absolutely necessary.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on July 22, 2021, 04:50:16 PM
From what I have read and heard, there are NO plans for another tunnel along I-49 or any other Interstate in Arkansas.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on July 23, 2021, 12:17:46 AM
If this project was being built 30 years ago tunnels would have been a realistic option. But not now. The United States has quickly priced itself out of being able to do things like that.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on July 23, 2021, 02:01:50 AM
If this project was being built 30 years ago tunnels would have been a realistic option. But not now. The United States has quickly priced itself out of being able to do things like that.

The type of inflation associated with massive projects like this has certainly taken its toll.  It looks like the only tunnel on I-49 will be the existing Bobby Hopper tunnel, opened 22 years ago (I drove through it shortly afterward).  Nevertheless, since ADOT is planning on utilizing as much of the existing US 71 ROW as possible between Mansfield and Mena, tunnels just wouldn't be in the cards anyway. 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on July 23, 2021, 07:17:10 AM
Whoopie another Super Two.

.........but infinitely better than a Super Zero!

As a Super-2 with a 65 MPH speed limit, it'd still trim 7-8 minutes off my trips to Charleston to visit family and friends.  Drives me nuts to drive 5 miles west then swing back southeast across the river at Barling.  Should also jumpstart development of Chaffee Crossing once it's seen as actually progressing towards connectivity.

Just went for a drive after work today along AR-549 (BVB).  They have lane closure signs on the new northbound carriageway closing off the left lane with several miles of barrels.  Likely just about ready to close off the southbound carriageway's inner lane for re-striping and finally do away with opposing traffic.  Could be tough to pass slow moving vehicles for the next several weeks, though.  They still have a little bit of inner shoulder work closer to the split from just past the jersey barrier for the overpass at the SPUI, but other than cable barrier, which is likely the main reason for closing off the left lane northbound, they only have a bit of striping work to do where the asphalt transitions to and from the concrete stretches that were done under the overpasses previously and closed off.  Starting to get real up to Rocky Dell Hollow Rd.

Afterwards, drove MO-90 to see the I-49 crossing there.  No pavement either north or south from there within sight yet, but putting rebar down on the roadbed to prepare for concrete, so late Sept./early Oct. will be here before we know it.  I'll have to do some picture editing and then will post in a couple of days when work slacks up.

Thanks for the update MikieTimT.  I hope I'm still able to drive (I'm 47 now...hopefully not too old) by the time this river crossing gets done.

You're welcome.  As I'm a year older than you, we both share that concern.  By that time, most people may not be driving at all, but merely passengers in Tesla shuttles that thankfully should be better looking than the Johnny Cabs from Total Recall.  Might even be settlements on Mars by then too!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on July 23, 2021, 07:42:03 AM
Bella Vista Bypass just north of the US-71 interchange northbound.  Note the left lane closure construction sign and barrels shifting traffic to the outer lane.  Likely going to open before completing the cable barrier in my estimation, so imminently shifting northbound traffic off of the southbound carriageway for restriping as there are barrels all along the southbound carriageway too.

(https://i.imgur.com/sttciH9.jpg)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on July 23, 2021, 07:44:54 AM
Bella Vista Bypass south end southbound onto what will be the US-71 exit ramp eventually.  They are shifting everything over to the left as they have rocks falling onto the ramp, so will have to do more blasting to widen the cut apparently.

(https://i.imgur.com/0df3Owm.jpg)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on July 23, 2021, 07:56:41 AM
Sorry for the serial posting.  Woke up early and did some photo edits and uploads.  For those that care, I also posted pics from the middle section in MO from the MO-90 crossing in the I-49 in Missouri thread. https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3239.msg2640531#msg2640531 (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3239.msg2640531#msg2640531)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on July 25, 2021, 08:33:58 AM
With the imminent opening of the Bella Vista Bypass portion of I-49, I wonder how long it will take Google to update Maps to reflect the new reality?  To say nothing of Street View or satellite imagery.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on July 25, 2021, 01:05:50 PM
With the imminent opening of the Bella Vista Bypass portion of I-49, I wonder how long it will take Google to update Maps to reflect the new reality?  To say nothing of Street View or satellite imagery.

Depends how important it is to them.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on July 25, 2021, 02:33:32 PM
It looks like Google has deprecated any further map updates from with the standalone Google Earth Pro application. The layers Borders & Labels, Places and Roads all have "outdated" listed next to them. I'm not a big fan of the web-based version of Google Earth. It doesn't work as smoothly.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Scott5114 on July 25, 2021, 05:48:16 PM
With the imminent opening of the Bella Vista Bypass portion of I-49, I wonder how long it will take Google to update Maps to reflect the new reality?  To say nothing of Street View or satellite imagery.

Hell, OKC has multiple major public works projects that have been open for over a year and still aren't shown on satellite imagery. I feel like Google straight-up doesn't care about providing quality data for non-coastal cities.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: vdeane on July 25, 2021, 10:09:12 PM
It looks like Google has deprecated any further map updates from with the standalone Google Earth Pro application. The layers Borders & Labels, Places and Roads all have "outdated" listed next to them. I'm not a big fan of the web-based version of Google Earth. It doesn't work as smoothly.
The web-based Google Earth feels like a gimmick to me.  Too bad that they seem to have deprecated the standalone, as that one is actually useful and something I use for work whenever I need to see city/town/village boundaries (via our KML file) or reference markers (ditto), or when I need to make maps for our railroad grade crossing IPP/FDRs.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: CoreySamson on July 25, 2021, 11:29:09 PM
With the imminent opening of the Bella Vista Bypass portion of I-49, I wonder how long it will take Google to update Maps to reflect the new reality?  To say nothing of Street View or satellite imagery.

Hell, OKC has multiple major public works projects that have been open for over a year and still aren't shown on satellite imagery. I feel like Google straight-up doesn't care about providing quality data for non-coastal cities.
Yeah I've noticed Google satellite imagery shows absolutely no work done on the I-69 flyover in Nacogdoches, despite work commencing in 2019.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Thegeet on July 26, 2021, 12:17:08 AM
With the imminent opening of the Bella Vista Bypass portion of I-49, I wonder how long it will take Google to update Maps to reflect the new reality?  To say nothing of Street View or satellite imagery.

Hell, OKC has multiple major public works projects that have been open for over a year and still aren't shown on satellite imagery. I feel like Google straight-up doesn't care about providing quality data for non-coastal cities.
Yeah I've noticed Google satellite imagery shows absolutely no work done on the I-69 flyover in Nacogdoches, despite work commencing in 2019.
Google updates it every 3 years apparently. Too bad they can’t invest in more satellite cams and street view cars.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: edwaleni on July 26, 2021, 12:33:56 AM
With the imminent opening of the Bella Vista Bypass portion of I-49, I wonder how long it will take Google to update Maps to reflect the new reality?  To say nothing of Street View or satellite imagery.

Hell, OKC has multiple major public works projects that have been open for over a year and still aren't shown on satellite imagery. I feel like Google straight-up doesn't care about providing quality data for non-coastal cities.
Yeah I've noticed Google satellite imagery shows absolutely no work done on the I-69 flyover in Nacogdoches, despite work commencing in 2019.
Google updates it every 3 years apparently. Too bad they can’t invest in more satellite cams and street view cars.

Google's work has slowed down considerably on their mapping efforts.  They have been pushing more of the work to third parties and using more stringent rules on where and what they map.

If their database shows a large number of phones traversing a route that has no counterpart in Maps, then they usually will have a vehicle dispatched to record it.

But there are still very large swaths of the country with low res imagery as far back as 2009 and much more with none.

They have a site where you can make "suggestions" for Maps to go but they say they don't respond to them directly.

Just like high speed internet, there are still many, many places in the USA that are only on paper maps and government proposals.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: GenExpwy on July 26, 2021, 07:40:52 AM
It looks like Google has deprecated any further map updates from with the standalone Google Earth Pro application. The layers Borders & Labels, Places and Roads all have "outdated" listed next to them. I'm not a big fan of the web-based version of Google Earth. It doesn't work as smoothly.
The web-based Google Earth feels like a gimmick to me.  Too bad that they seem to have deprecated the standalone, as that one is actually useful and something I use for work whenever I need to see city/town/village boundaries (via our KML file) or reference markers (ditto), or when I need to make maps for our railroad grade crossing IPP/FDRs.

Google has just announced that they are replacing the Labels, Places, Roads, and Borders layers (https://support.google.com/earth/thread/117930184/new-layers-set-in-google-earth-pro?hl=en) in Google Earth Pro “over the next few months” . It might be necessary to use the new 7.3.4 version of Google Earth Pro (https://support.google.com/earth/thread/118357890/announcing-google-earth-pro-7-3-4?hl=en) to see them.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: vdeane on July 26, 2021, 02:03:28 PM
It looks like Google has deprecated any further map updates from with the standalone Google Earth Pro application. The layers Borders & Labels, Places and Roads all have "outdated" listed next to them. I'm not a big fan of the web-based version of Google Earth. It doesn't work as smoothly.
The web-based Google Earth feels like a gimmick to me.  Too bad that they seem to have deprecated the standalone, as that one is actually useful and something I use for work whenever I need to see city/town/village boundaries (via our KML file) or reference markers (ditto), or when I need to make maps for our railroad grade crossing IPP/FDRs.

Google has just announced that they are replacing the Labels, Places, Roads, and Borders layers (https://support.google.com/earth/thread/117930184/new-layers-set-in-google-earth-pro?hl=en) in Google Earth Pro “over the next few months” . It might be necessary to use the new 7.3.4 version of Google Earth Pro (https://support.google.com/earth/thread/118357890/announcing-google-earth-pro-7-3-4?hl=en) to see them.
Great.  They're taking away all the customization options.  Now instead of international/state/county borders and leave coastlines and names off, it's all or nothing.  Same for transportation - can't have just roads and rail turned on.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on August 02, 2021, 10:54:49 PM
Drove AR-549 (BVB) again this evening.  Northbound carriageway is now in use for northbound traffic.  About a 3/4 mile stretch of passing available before getting to the asphalt portion of the project where the barrels shut down the inside lane for cable barrier installation completion, exit and entrance ramp crossover removal, inside shoulder completion at the old crossovers, and on the southbound carriageway, the removal of the centerline for restriping.  Still 65MPH up to the current end of the traveling lanes at Exit 289, WC 34, Highlands Blvd. where you have to exit/turn around on the overpass.  Wonder when the renumbering of the current exits 20-91 are going to happen?

Nice and smooth on the asphalt, but it'll have to be redone in 10 years unlike the concrete southbound lanes that will pretty much only need milling after 20 years or so.  At least it's finally getting done.

Lots of rocks falling on the exit ramp at US-71 southbound, so they've shifted the lanes to the left and are blasting again to expand the hill cut.  They have shut down the last camera at the hilltop, probably due to the blasting below it.

The end is in sight now!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on August 08, 2021, 09:51:08 PM
The first bolded quote amuses me.  I don't know that he meant to use that order of words but it's so appropriate.  The SECOND quote threw me - if you all had pointed this out earlier, I missed it, but given it's apparently true, wonderful news, because like replaced hoses place pressure on their aging stock counterparts on a radiator, the closer this thing gets to north Texarkana, the more pressure there will be to finish it.  :popcorn:

Quote
Talk Business, August 4th, 2021

Gibson also discussed future Interstate 49 projects.

“Lots of leaders involved in Arkansas want to see Interstate 49 to be completed and started as soon as possible,”  he said.

Through Issue 1, Arkansas has dedicated $270 million for the I-40 at Alma to Highway 22 13.7-mile project that includes a two-lane bridge over the Arkansas River, and another $270 million for the south part of the interstate from Greenwood to Y City, Gibson said. Both projects are only two lanes, though it will eventually be four lanes, he said. A consultant has been selected for the design work of the project. The shovel ready project will be started in 2025.

“We could take the south to Greenwood project and say let’s just do four lanes and get that done. Or we could abandon that part because there are a lot of people who would like to see the Y City to Greenwood part done. But what we prefer to do is what we promised to do, and that is to build two lanes of both of those,”  Gibson said. “We hope that the federal government through an infrastructure plan and earmarks and other things will provide the money once they see Arkansas building half that interstate and come in and say, let’s pump money into finishing it.”

The remaining cost to complete 136 miles of I-49 from Fort Smith to the Texas state line is $4.1 billion, he said.

https://talkbusiness.net/2021/08/updates-provided-on-greenwood-and-van-buren-road-projects/

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on August 09, 2021, 12:12:59 AM
This line about the Greenwood bypass puzzled me, too: "The route would also help with safety concerns, according to the city. If a bridge is out or flooded between downtown and the east side of the city, emergency personnel would have a 60-mile detour." If that's always been a concern, why is it only being solved now?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Plutonic Panda on August 09, 2021, 01:43:22 AM
So shovel ready now means 4 years out? Lol
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on August 09, 2021, 08:54:05 AM
This line about the Greenwood bypass puzzled me, too: "The route would also help with safety concerns, according to the city. If a bridge is out or flooded between downtown and the east side of the city, emergency personnel would have a 60-mile detour." If that's always been a concern, why is it only being solved now?

I thought 71 WAS the "Greenwod Bypass" ?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on August 09, 2021, 11:13:40 AM
This line about the Greenwood bypass puzzled me, too: "The route would also help with safety concerns, according to the city. If a bridge is out or flooded between downtown and the east side of the city, emergency personnel would have a 60-mile detour." If that's always been a concern, why is it only being solved now?

I thought 71 WAS the "Greenwod Bypass" ?

It is the bypass for Old Greenwood Road, however, none of the alignment will be shared with I-49 on any of the routing diagrams I've seen, except for the part between Y-City and Acorn.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Arkansastravelguy on August 09, 2021, 11:30:28 PM
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210810/643e43d036e550efea50901fb9996a4e.jpg)
549 Southbound at 71

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210810/7c25311e239ee363452709045629b5d0.jpg)


(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210810/980fbf51b70abb0fab6426d7adfc7055.jpg)
Northbound
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210810/5d985e58fc6fe67f8db17f414424e348.jpg)
State line into Arkansas. Fully complete.
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210810/1a9b48deff8f85e78ad63162fa650444.jpg)
Looking into Missouri. Arkansas welcome sign too left
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on August 10, 2021, 08:21:28 AM
To get to the border crossing at this point, you must be on one of the construction crews, know someone at one of the DOTs, or have a willingness to travel non-open roads knowing that the authorities ticket such behavior.  Interesting pics nonetheless!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: yakra on August 10, 2021, 03:07:28 PM
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210810/7c25311e239ee363452709045629b5d0.jpg)
What would this make the US71 interchange, 278?
Don't know if ARDOT intends to keep the sudden jump from Exit 88 around a while, but the exit numbers on the main existing I-49 segment  (https://travelmapping.net/hb/showroute.php?r=ar.i049) are out of sync with the (https://travelmapping.net/hb/showroute.php?r=ar.i049tex) rest (https://travelmapping.net/hb/showroute.php?r=ar.i049futbar) of (https://travelmapping.net/hb/showroute.php?r=ar.i049futbel) the route, and will need a renumbering by the time the whole route is stitched together across the state. Mileposts 20-43 are down by Texarkana!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Plutonic Panda on August 10, 2021, 03:19:02 PM
To get to the border crossing at this point, you must be on one of the construction crews, know someone at one of the DOTs, or have a willingness to travel non-open roads knowing that the authorities ticket such behavior.  Interesting pics nonetheless!
Oh look we have a Boy Scout over here.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on August 10, 2021, 05:48:18 PM
Questions:

1. Have they started clearing land for the new AR side visitor's center yet?  (South of the old Gun Range Rd.)

2. Wonder where the commercial action (i.e. convenience stores and/or fast food restaurants) will be in the 3 exits from Hiwasse to the state line on the Arkansas side?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Arkansastravelguy on August 10, 2021, 06:55:22 PM
Questions:

1. Have they started clearing land for the new AR side visitor's center yet?  (South of the old Gun Range Rd.)

2. Wonder where the commercial action (i.e. convenience stores and/or fast food restaurants) will be in the 3 exits from Hiwasse to the state line on the Arkansas side?
I’m not sure where you’re talking about, but as far as I could see from the top of both Highlands Blvd and Edinburgh bridges there were no clearing or signage indicating a rest area.

If anyone wants to go to the state line do not take Edinburgh from Highlands as the road is pretty washed out and would need a high clearance vehicle.


iPhone
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: edwaleni on August 10, 2021, 09:21:13 PM
To get to the border crossing at this point, you must be on one of the construction crews, know someone at one of the DOTs, or have a willingness to travel non-open roads knowing that the authorities ticket such behavior.  Interesting pics nonetheless!

Baloney.  Anyone with a truck (preferably a white one) and a yellow flasher up top could drive right on and no one would care unless you decided to test your speed, by which you would have created such a large dust cloud, they would automatically know you are a not involved joyrider.

My cousin used to drive up and down new roads and when asked he said he was a pavement inspector. No one asked him anything further.  He was "inspecting" the pavement.....for himself.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Arkansastravelguy on August 10, 2021, 10:06:07 PM
To get to the border crossing at this point, you must be on one of the construction crews, know someone at one of the DOTs, or have a willingness to travel non-open roads knowing that the authorities ticket such behavior.  Interesting pics nonetheless!

Baloney.  Anyone with a truck (preferably a white one) and a yellow flasher up top could drive right on and no one would care unless you decided to test your speed, by which you would have created such a large dust cloud, they would automatically know you are a not involved joyrider.

My cousin used to drive up and down new roads and when asked he said he was a pavement inspector. No one asked him anything further.  He was "inspecting" the pavement.....for himself.
I’ve seen two different State Troopers “inspect the pavement”  as well. No dust cloud, it’s striped, signed and ready to open.


iPhone
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on August 10, 2021, 10:26:24 PM
Questions:

1. Have they started clearing land for the new AR side visitor's center yet?  (South of the old Gun Range Rd.)

2. Wonder where the commercial action (i.e. convenience stores and/or fast food restaurants) will be in the 3 exits from Hiwasse to the state line on the Arkansas side?
I’m not sure where you’re talking about, but as far as I could see from the top of both Highlands Blvd and Edinburgh bridges there were no clearing or signage indicating a rest area.

If anyone wants to go to the state line do not take Edinburgh from Highlands as the road is pretty washed out and would need a high clearance vehicle.


iPhone

Seems that I'd heard the new Arkansas Visitor's Center will be south of the northernmost Arkansas exit (it used to be called Gun Range Rd.), and on the west side of the highway.  Forget where I heard it.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Arkansastravelguy on August 10, 2021, 10:45:55 PM
Questions:

1. Have they started clearing land for the new AR side visitor's center yet?  (South of the old Gun Range Rd.)

2. Wonder where the commercial action (i.e. convenience stores and/or fast food restaurants) will be in the 3 exits from Hiwasse to the state line on the Arkansas side?
I’m not sure where you’re talking about, but as far as I could see from the top of both Highlands Blvd and Edinburgh bridges there were no clearing or signage indicating a rest area.

If anyone wants to go to the state line do not take Edinburgh from Highlands as the road is pretty washed out and would need a high clearance vehicle.


iPhone

Seems that I'd heard the new Arkansas Visitor's Center will be south of the northernmost Arkansas exit (it used to be called Gun Range Rd.), and on the west side of the highway.  Forget where I heard it.
There’s not any exits between the state line and the current terminus, Rocky Dell Rd/Highlands Blvd. so no rest area
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Rothman on August 10, 2021, 11:32:16 PM
To get to the border crossing at this point, you must be on one of the construction crews, know someone at one of the DOTs, or have a willingness to travel non-open roads knowing that the authorities ticket such behavior.  Interesting pics nonetheless!

Baloney.  Anyone with a truck (preferably a white one) and a yellow flasher up top could drive right on and no one would care unless you decided to test your speed, by which you would have created such a large dust cloud, they would automatically know you are a not involved joyrider.

My cousin used to drive up and down new roads and when asked he said he was a pavement inspector. No one asked him anything further.  He was "inspecting" the pavement.....for himself.
Time to narc...
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on August 11, 2021, 10:15:59 AM
Questions:

1. Have they started clearing land for the new AR side visitor's center yet?  (South of the old Gun Range Rd.)

2. Wonder where the commercial action (i.e. convenience stores and/or fast food restaurants) will be in the 3 exits from Hiwasse to the state line on the Arkansas side?
I’m not sure where you’re talking about, but as far as I could see from the top of both Highlands Blvd and Edinburgh bridges there were no clearing or signage indicating a rest area.

If anyone wants to go to the state line do not take Edinburgh from Highlands as the road is pretty washed out and would need a high clearance vehicle.


iPhone

Seems that I'd heard the new Arkansas Visitor's Center will be south of the northernmost Arkansas exit (it used to be called Gun Range Rd.), and on the west side of the highway.  Forget where I heard it.
There’s not any exits between the state line and the current terminus, Rocky Dell Rd/Highlands Blvd. so no rest area

South of that one, I meant.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: seicer on August 11, 2021, 11:54:19 AM
To get to the border crossing at this point, you must be on one of the construction crews, know someone at one of the DOTs, or have a willingness to travel non-open roads knowing that the authorities ticket such behavior.  Interesting pics nonetheless!

Baloney.  Anyone with a truck (preferably a white one) and a yellow flasher up top could drive right on and no one would care unless you decided to test your speed, by which you would have created such a large dust cloud, they would automatically know you are a not involved joyrider.

My cousin used to drive up and down new roads and when asked he said he was a pavement inspector. No one asked him anything further.  He was "inspecting" the pavement.....for himself.
I’ve seen two different State Troopers “inspect the pavement”  as well. No dust cloud, it’s striped, signed and ready to open.

I used to "inspect the pavement" on unopened segments of the Industrial Parkway in NE Kentucky years ago. It was fun to take the ORV and then my car up to it for photos. I see ORV's all over the unfinished gradings and highways in many places. Nothing new :)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on August 12, 2021, 10:39:26 PM
2020 Population estimates for Northwest Arkansas and Fort Smith metro areas, pre-Bella Vista Bypass completion (and, obviously, waaaaay pre-Alma-Texarkana I-49 completion):

Northwest Arkansas: 546,725
Fort Smith: 244,310 (Obviously, FSM has lost population in the past 10 years, or the combined population would be well over 800,000.

Combined population: 791,035

Bentonville: 54,164
Fayetteville: 93,949
Fort Smith: 89,142
Rogers: 69,908
Springdale: 84,161

https://talkbusiness.net/2021/08/population-rises-in-metro-areas-u-s-representatives-allocated-to-arkansas-unchanged-2020-census-data-shows/

It will be interesting to revisit those numbers in 2031.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: yakra on August 12, 2021, 11:19:10 PM
Combined population: 791,035
North Dakota: 779,094
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Rick Powell on August 13, 2021, 09:47:45 AM
North Dakota: 779,094
Since Arkansas now needs it more than ND, just remove a chunk of I-29 and move it to the new I-49 alignment between Texarkana and Ft Smith. :-)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: jbnv on August 13, 2021, 09:55:12 AM
North Dakota: 779,094
Since Arkansas now needs it more than ND, just remove a chunk of I-29 and move it to the new I-49 alignment between Texarkana and Ft Smith. :-)

Not trying to take you literally here, but the need isn't Arkansas versus North Dakota, it's people who need to use the I-49 corridor versus people who need to use the I-29 corridor.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: GreenLanternCorps on August 13, 2021, 01:03:06 PM


(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210810/7c25311e239ee363452709045629b5d0.jpg)



Has ARDOT any plans to replace the I-540 Exit numbers and mileposts with the correct I-49 ones in the near future?  Since the new section will be correctly signed...
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Arkansastravelguy on August 13, 2021, 01:08:57 PM


(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210810/7c25311e239ee363452709045629b5d0.jpg)



Has ARDOT any plans to replace the I-540 Exit numbers and mileposts with the correct I-49 ones in the near future?  Since the new section will be correctly signed...
I’d guess no since they recently put new exit signs up with the old exit numbers


iPhone
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Rick Powell on August 13, 2021, 03:42:10 PM
Not trying to take you literally here, but the need isn't Arkansas versus North Dakota, it's people who need to use the I-49 corridor versus people who need to use the I-29 corridor.

Oddly, I haven't clinched an inch of I-49 yet except to cross it, but I have been on I-29 in the dead of winter. Not too much traffic, and they didn't do much to control the snow and ice except to let it blow over the 4 lanes for the week I was there.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on August 13, 2021, 06:44:11 PM


(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210810/7c25311e239ee363452709045629b5d0.jpg)



Has ARDOT any plans to replace the I-540 Exit numbers and mileposts with the correct I-49 ones in the near future?  Since the new section will be correctly signed...

North of 71 at Bella Vista. ARDOT  uses the I-49 exit numbers

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51274110175_ff489f08b4_z_d.jpg)

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on August 13, 2021, 07:44:41 PM


(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210810/7c25311e239ee363452709045629b5d0.jpg)



Has ARDOT any plans to replace the I-540 Exit numbers and mileposts with the correct I-49 ones in the near future?  Since the new section will be correctly signed...

North of 71 at Bella Vista. ARDOT  uses the I-49 exit numbers

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51274110175_ff489f08b4_z_d.jpg)



Any opinion as to whether ADOT will change the rest of I-49 numbers (despite the aforementioned old-540-number sign replacement) north of I-40 once the Bella Vista bypass opens, or just wait until more mileage is deployed south of I-40, including the Arkansas River bridge? 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on August 13, 2021, 07:54:12 PM


Any opinion as to whether ADOT will change the rest of I-49 numbers (despite the aforementioned old-540-number sign replacement) north of I-40 once the Bella Vista bypass opens, or just wait until more mileage is deployed south of I-40, including the Arkansas River bridge? 

I want to say ARDOT has plans to change the exit numbers, but I don't remember where I read it.

FWIW, 549 at Barling uses I-49 exit numbers.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/632/21146640884_98689658e8_z_d.jpg)

(https://live.staticflickr.com/577/21146640354_2f9173b786_z_d.jpg)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on August 14, 2021, 10:35:37 PM
September 30th completion, the Joplin Globe says:

https://www.joplinglobe.com/news/local_news/missouri-s-section-of-bella-vista-bypass-scheduled-for-completion-in-fall/article_d40917d0-91a2-11eb-ab12-7fdb05ab4357.html?fbclid=IwAR1NxlqQwMu031eGhvuJU3jeT7ffMI4guZXMm6ZNzPP_X2DXBDHyaEVl6hc

(https://bloximages.chicago2.vip.townnews.com/joplinglobe.com/content/tncms/assets/v3/editorial/c/85/c85a6a52-916f-11eb-8fac-77be31ccca1d/606348fd5d8ca.image.jpg?resize=1200%2C726)

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on August 15, 2021, 12:08:19 AM
September 30th completion, the Joplin Globe says:

https://www.joplinglobe.com/news/local_news/missouri-s-section-of-bella-vista-bypass-scheduled-for-completion-in-fall/article_d40917d0-91a2-11eb-ab12-7fdb05ab4357.html?fbclid=IwAR1NxlqQwMu031eGhvuJU3jeT7ffMI4guZXMm6ZNzPP_X2DXBDHyaEVl6hc

(https://bloximages.chicago2.vip.townnews.com/joplinglobe.com/content/tncms/assets/v3/editorial/c/85/c85a6a52-916f-11eb-8fac-77be31ccca1d/606348fd5d8ca.image.jpg?resize=1200%2C726)
Story is from March. Who knows what the timeline is now. Might be sooner, might be later.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on August 15, 2021, 01:11:40 AM

Story is from March. Who knows what the timeline is now. Might be sooner, might be later.

Last I heard is Ribbon cutting near the end of August, open to traffic by mid-September.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on August 15, 2021, 01:30:44 PM
Awesome sauce either way.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on August 15, 2021, 07:56:42 PM

Story is from March. Who knows what the timeline is now. Might be sooner, might be later.

Thanks, Road Hog.  Apologies for this.  I didn't realize the work was so near completion on the Arkansas side then.  Should'a looked at the trees. :pan:
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on August 15, 2021, 09:18:35 PM

Story is from March. Who knows what the timeline is now. Might be sooner, might be later.

Thanks, Road Hog.  Apologies for this.  I didn't realize the work was so near completion on the Arkansas side then.  Should'a looked at the trees. :pan:

The only thing left in Arkansas is the SPUI at US 71 (Bentonville) and paving the NB lanes (which may already be finished)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Arkansastravelguy on August 16, 2021, 04:35:50 AM

Story is from March. Who knows what the timeline is now. Might be sooner, might be later.

Thanks, Road Hog.  Apologies for this.  I didn't realize the work was so near completion on the Arkansas side then.  Should'a looked at the trees. :pan:

The only thing left in Arkansas is the SPUI at US 71 (Bentonville) and paving the NB lanes (which may already be finished)
Northbound lanes are open from the 71 ramp to Highlands. Well at least 1 lane is


iPhone
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Arkansastravelguy on August 16, 2021, 04:38:16 AM

Story is from March. Who knows what the timeline is now. Might be sooner, might be later.

Thanks, Road Hog.  Apologies for this.  I didn't realize the work was so near completion on the Arkansas side then.  Should'a looked at the trees. :pan:

The only thing left in Arkansas is the SPUI at US 71 (Bentonville) and paving the NB lanes (which may already be finished)
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210816/b002aeeeacfd486b218bec4b5ef0c5ce.jpg)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on August 16, 2021, 11:56:33 AM
Oddly, I haven't clinched an inch of I-49 yet except to cross it, but I have been on I-29 in the dead of winter. Not too much traffic, and they didn't do much to control the snow and ice except to let it blow over the 4 lanes for the week I was there.

I drove from Tulsa to Minot about a decade ago in January. There was snow on the ground in Tulsa when I left, and I didn't see another blade of grass for a week. There was snow drifting across the road on I-94. but the cars with North Dakota tags were doing 80, so I did the same.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: abqtraveler on August 17, 2021, 10:22:02 AM
Oddly, I haven't clinched an inch of I-49 yet except to cross it, but I have been on I-29 in the dead of winter. Not too much traffic, and they didn't do much to control the snow and ice except to let it blow over the 4 lanes for the week I was there.
I've clinched the original section of I-49 between Lafayette and Shreveport--twice. The first time was before any of the I-49 northward extension was built, so I guess it counts as a clinch under the original mileage, but then my clinch got taken away with parts of the northward extension opening up. I did drive most of the new section between Shreveport and Texarkana, but haven't driven any of the new I-49 north of that point.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on August 17, 2021, 01:38:13 PM
Oddly, I haven't clinched an inch of I-49 yet except to cross it, but I have been on I-29 in the dead of winter. Not too much traffic, and they didn't do much to control the snow and ice except to let it blow over the 4 lanes for the week I was there.
I've clinched the original section of I-49 between Lafayette and Shreveport--twice. The first time was before any of the I-49 northward extension was built, so I guess it counts as a clinch under the original mileage, but then my clinch got taken away with parts of the northward extension opening up. I did drive most of the new section between Shreveport and Texarkana, but haven't driven any of the new I-49 north of that point.

I've clinched everything that doesn't require passing a Road Closed sign at this point.  The more scenic parts are between I-40 and I-44, so it'll be worth a redo, assuming you want to go all the way to KC while you're at it.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: msunat97 on August 23, 2021, 08:23:27 AM
Looks like part of the new overpass is open per the iDriveArkansas.com cameras.  Traffic is using 1 lane of the SB I49 roadway. 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on August 23, 2021, 08:29:03 AM
Looks like part of the new overpass is open per the iDriveArkansas.com cameras.  Traffic is using 1 lane of the SB I49 roadway. 

ARDOT is doing some "touchup" work around there.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: msunat97 on August 23, 2021, 08:38:35 AM
Looks like part of the new overpass is open per the iDriveArkansas.com cameras.  Traffic is using 1 lane of the SB I49 roadway. 

ARDOT is doing some "touchup" work around there.

Is "touchup" code for blasting rock and fixing the face of the hill or fixing some other "feature" of the road work?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Arkansastravelguy on August 23, 2021, 10:22:51 AM
Looks like part of the new overpass is open per the iDriveArkansas.com cameras.  Traffic is using 1 lane of the SB I49 roadway. 

ARDOT is doing some "touchup" work around there.

Is "touchup" code for blasting rock and fixing the face of the hill or fixing some other "feature" of the road work?
Guardrails and such.


iPhone
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on August 23, 2021, 01:59:47 PM
Looks like part of the new overpass is open per the iDriveArkansas.com cameras.  Traffic is using 1 lane of the SB I49 roadway. 

ARDOT is doing some "touchup" work around there.

Is "touchup" code for blasting rock and fixing the face of the hill or fixing some other "feature" of the road work?
Guardrails and such.


iPhone

Drove it late last night on the way home from a job in Gravette for the first time.  Makes the southbound trip quite a bit quicker now, unless you actually want to exit onto 71B south.  The bridge is open due to the closure of the southbound offramp due to falling rock and also probably to make it easier to complete the SPUI underneath.  They are going to blast another 100 ft. from the top of the hillside to notch it out better to prevent rocks from falling onto the offramp when everything opens up.  Hasn't been an issue yet due to low traffic counts, but would assuredly result in the rude surprise of a rock coming through a windshield or onto a hood or roof, not to mention the hazard of avoiding large debris on the ramp itself once I-49 is opened onto the BVB.  Resulted in some lane shifts from my previous trip a couple of weeks ago southbound from Hiwasse.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on August 23, 2021, 02:51:09 PM
Looks like part of the new overpass is open per the iDriveArkansas.com cameras.  Traffic is using 1 lane of the SB I49 roadway. 

ARDOT is doing some "touchup" work around there.

Is "touchup" code for blasting rock and fixing the face of the hill or fixing some other "feature" of the road work?

Removing more unstable rock.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on August 23, 2021, 04:19:47 PM
Looks like part of the new overpass is open per the iDriveArkansas.com cameras.  Traffic is using 1 lane of the SB I49 roadway. 

ARDOT is doing some "touchup" work around there.

Is "touchup" code for blasting rock and fixing the face of the hill or fixing some other "feature" of the road work?
Guardrails and such.


iPhone

Drove it late last night on the way home from a job in Gravette for the first time.  Makes the southbound trip quite a bit quicker now, unless you actually want to exit onto 71B south.  The bridge is open due to the closure of the southbound offramp due to falling rock and also probably to make it easier to complete the SPUI underneath.  They are going to blast another 100 ft. from the top of the hillside to notch it out better to prevent rocks from falling onto the offramp when everything opens up.  Hasn't been an issue yet due to low traffic counts, but would assuredly result in the rude surprise of a rock coming through a windshield or onto a hood or roof, not to mention the hazard of avoiding large debris on the ramp itself once I-49 is opened onto the BVB.  Resulted in some lane shifts from my previous trip a couple of weeks ago southbound from Hiwasse.

I may take a look in the next couple days since I'm off.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: GreenLanternCorps on August 24, 2021, 07:43:25 AM
The I Drive Arkansas camera by the US 71 I-49 interchange has a nice view of the open southbound lanes.  Though the vast majority of southbound traffic is from US 71 south.

https://idrivearkansas.com/
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: msunat97 on August 24, 2021, 08:06:40 AM
The I Drive Arkansas camera by the US 71 I-49 interchange has a nice view of the open southbound lanes.  Though the vast majority of southbound traffic is from US 71 south.

https://idrivearkansas.com/

Agreed!  the NB camera view is great to see the flow & updates on the construction.  i'm interested to see the "touchup" work on the hill face across from the camera.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on August 24, 2021, 12:42:12 PM
The I Drive Arkansas camera by the US 71 I-49 interchange has a nice view of the open southbound lanes.  Though the vast majority of southbound traffic is from US 71 south.

https://idrivearkansas.com/

Agreed!  the NB camera view is great to see the flow & updates on the construction.  i'm interested to see the "touchup" work on the hill face across from the camera.

A timelapse of that feed over the next few weeks would be cool to watch the hillside disappear chunks at a time.

And it just goes to show how overdue this final segment of I-49 has been these past few decades.  Bella Vista is fixing to be pleasant to drive for the residents.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Tomahawkin on August 24, 2021, 01:09:31 PM
Now, I'm guessing it will take 15 years for the Ft Smith to Texarkana stretch to be completed? When completed. IMO, IH 49 in Arkansas will be one of the most scenic interstates in the midsouth, it should considered a high priority economic corridor to the feds with the amount of interstate commerce that go from Canada to Mexico via IH 49
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Arkansastravelguy on August 24, 2021, 01:44:11 PM
Now, I'm guessing it will take 15 years for the Ft Smith to Texarkana stretch to be completed? When completed. IMO, IH 49 in Arkansas will be one of the most scenic interstates in the midsouth, it should considered a high priority economic corridor to the feds with the amount of interstate commerce that go from Canada to Mexico via IH 49
15 years? You have a lot of faith in ARdot
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sparker on August 24, 2021, 03:26:18 PM
Now, I'm guessing it will take 15 years for the Ft Smith to Texarkana stretch to be completed? When completed. IMO, IH 49 in Arkansas will be one of the most scenic interstates in the midsouth, it should considered a high priority economic corridor to the feds with the amount of interstate commerce that go from Canada to Mexico via IH 49
15 years? You have a lot of faith in ARdot

Considering the scope, terrain, and the perennial funding issues of what remains, 25-30 years is more realistic.  Could be dropped to around 20 with a healthy dose of federal (i.e. earmark) funding. 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: msunat97 on August 24, 2021, 03:46:11 PM
I'm 47 & I never expect to see 49 completed in my lifetime.  25-30 years it optimistic with the way things move in DC.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on August 24, 2021, 05:20:12 PM
Now, I'm guessing it will take 15 years for the Ft Smith to Texarkana stretch to be completed? When completed. IMO, IH 49 in Arkansas will be one of the most scenic interstates in the midsouth, it should considered a high priority economic corridor to the feds with the amount of interstate commerce that go from Canada to Mexico via IH 49
15 years? You have a lot of faith in ARdot

It took from the mid-60's to go over the mountain.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: wdcrft63 on August 24, 2021, 06:19:26 PM
I'm 47 & I never expect to see 49 completed in my lifetime.  25-30 years it optimistic with the way things move in DC.
Does ARDoT have a plan for completing I-49? Do they have the route broken down into phases with a list of priorities indicating in what order segments will be built? That's essential to being able to attract funding, federal or state.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on August 24, 2021, 07:08:08 PM
Bypassing the bigger towns first like Mena and DeQueen (even with a super-2 to start) would make a huge difference in travel time. From Greenwood to Texarkana via US 71 is 166 miles. Should be two hours and change. Instead it's 3:15 with usual traffic, according to the Goog. And you KNOW there will be a logging truck.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Tomahawkin on August 24, 2021, 07:12:15 PM
yeah, I was optomistic about 49, then I forgot that ARDOT Is in charge. With that in mind, IH 30 and 40 projects will take priority
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on August 25, 2021, 12:46:18 PM
yeah, I was optomistic about 49, then I forgot that ARDOT Is in charge. With that in mind, IH 30 and 40 projects will take priority

They will certainly get the lion's share of funds, and rightfully so with AADT counts.  However, the perpetuation of the 1/2 cent sales tax after its original sunset was predicated on progress on the 4 Corners with 4 lanes idea that they've bandied about for a few decades now.  And a Super-2 from Ft. Smith to Y City was one of the routes on the marketing push from ARDOT to get the sales tax extended.  None of that binds them to a timeline, however, but politicians including our "Republican" governor hitched their wagon to this infrastructure push, so they've got to show something for our continued sales tax support, and not just in Central AR/NWA.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: mvak36 on August 25, 2021, 04:55:01 PM
yeah, I was optomistic about 49, then I forgot that ARDOT Is in charge. With that in mind, IH 30 and 40 projects will take priority

They will certainly get the lion's share of funds, and rightfully so with AADT counts.  However, the perpetuation of the 1/2 cent sales tax after its original sunset was predicated on progress on the 4 Corners with 4 lanes idea that they've bandied about for a few decades now.  And a Super-2 from Ft. Smith to Y City was one of the routes on the marketing push from ARDOT to get the sales tax extended.  None of that binds them to a timeline, however, but politicians including our "Republican" governor hitched their wagon to this infrastructure push, so they've got to show something for our continued sales tax support, and not just in Central AR/NWA.

I'm still waiting to see when they'll publish a new project list for that CAP2 program. I emailed them a few months back but never heard anything.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: msunat97 on August 26, 2021, 01:56:26 PM
The I Drive Arkansas camera by the US 71 I-49 interchange has a nice view of the open southbound lanes.  Though the vast majority of southbound traffic is from US 71 south.

https://idrivearkansas.com/

Agreed!  the NB camera view is great to see the flow & updates on the construction.  i'm interested to see the "touchup" work on the hill face across from the camera.

A timelapse of that feed over the next few weeks would be cool to watch the hillside disappear chunks at a time.

And it just goes to show how overdue this final segment of I-49 has been these past few decades.  Bella Vista is fixing to be pleasant to drive for the residents.

The real-time is cool also...the contractor just dropped a load of rock and debris on the roadway.  Too bad the cameras don't have sound.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: chays on August 31, 2021, 12:29:45 AM
Will the new roadway be signed I-49 immediately?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on August 31, 2021, 01:49:28 AM
Will the new roadway be signed I-49 immediately?

Yes.

Technically, it already is, but the signs are covered. There are maybe 3 or 4 549 signa left at US 71 in Bella Vista.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on August 31, 2021, 12:24:52 PM
Will the new roadway be signed I-49 immediately?

Yes.

Technically, it already is, but the signs are covered. There are maybe 3 or 4 549 signa left at US 71 in Bella Vista.

Most of the signs aren't even covered anymore.  It's I-49 (with left lane closed in both directions for striping/shoulder/median/cable barrier work) already pretty much except at the south end.  Still no news from ARDOT on the exit renumbering south of Bella Vista yet.  I emailed them a few weeks ago, and they were pretty vague on the plan in the response.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on August 31, 2021, 12:32:15 PM
Will the new roadway be signed I-49 immediately?

Yes.

Technically, it already is, but the signs are covered. There are maybe 3 or 4 549 signa left at US 71 in Bella Vista.

Most of the signs aren't even covered anymore.  It's I-49 (with left lane closed in both directions for striping/shoulder/median/cable barrier work) already pretty much except at the south end.  Still no news from ARDOT on the exit renumbering south of Bella Vista yet.  I emailed them a few weeks ago, and they were pretty vague on the plan in the response.

That's news to me. As of a week ago (8/24) most of the signs were still covered.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Arkansastravelguy on August 31, 2021, 01:36:09 PM
Will the new roadway be signed I-49 immediately?

Yes.

Technically, it already is, but the signs are covered. There are maybe 3 or 4 549 signa left at US 71 in Bella Vista.

Most of the signs aren't even covered anymore.  It's I-49 (with left lane closed in both directions for striping/shoulder/median/cable barrier work) already pretty much except at the south end.  Still no news from ARDOT on the exit renumbering south of Bella Vista yet.  I emailed them a few weeks ago, and they were pretty vague on the plan in the response.

That's news to me. As of a week ago (8/24) most of the signs were still covered.
I’m going to head up there in an hour or so and I’ll take more pics. I’ve seen 3 549 signs recently, two at 71B and one on Highlands, a to 549 sign. They are sandbagged tho, not in the ground. Idk about the AR72 exits


iPhone
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on August 31, 2021, 01:46:40 PM
Will the new roadway be signed I-49 immediately?

Yes.

Technically, it already is, but the signs are covered. There are maybe 3 or 4 549 signa left at US 71 in Bella Vista.

Most of the signs aren't even covered anymore.  It's I-49 (with left lane closed in both directions for striping/shoulder/median/cable barrier work) already pretty much except at the south end.  Still no news from ARDOT on the exit renumbering south of Bella Vista yet.  I emailed them a few weeks ago, and they were pretty vague on the plan in the response.

That's news to me. As of a week ago (8/24) most of the signs were still covered.
I’m going to head up there in an hour or so and I’ll take more pics. I’ve seen 3 549 signs recently, two at 71B and one on Highlands, a to 549 sign. They are sandbagged tho, not in the ground. Idk about the AR72 exits


iPhone

The signs at the junctions to the entrance ramps are likely still covered.  I'm thinking about the confidence signage on the road itself.  I don't remember seeing anything northbound that says AR-549 once you get up the hill from the south entrance.  I'll be up there in about 3 hours after I wrap up some work stuff and refresh my memory up to Rocky Dell Hollow Rd. and back.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on August 31, 2021, 02:03:48 PM


The signs at the junctions to the entrance ramps are likely still covered.  I'm thinking about the confidence signage on the road itself.  I don't remember seeing anything northbound that says AR-549 once you get up the hill from the south entrance.  I'll be up there in about 3 hours after I wrap up some work stuff and refresh my memory up to Rocky Dell Hollow Rd. and back.

All gone! Replaced with I-49 signage (still covered as of a week ago). Most of the BGS's are in place using mileage computed from Louisiana.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51412248224_3feedc52f5_z_d.jpg)

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Arkansastravelguy on August 31, 2021, 03:09:53 PM
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210831/a5e010e417301cc081d13f6d2af68db1.jpg)
The second sign has the old exit numbers
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Arkansastravelguy on August 31, 2021, 03:19:53 PM
Will the new roadway be signed I-49 immediately?

Yes.

Technically, it already is, but the signs are covered. There are maybe 3 or 4 549 signa left at US 71 in Bella Vista.

Most of the signs aren't even covered anymore.  It's I-49 (with left lane closed in both directions for striping/shoulder/median/cable barrier work) already pretty much except at the south end.  Still no news from ARDOT on the exit renumbering south of Bella Vista yet.  I emailed them a few weeks ago, and they were pretty vague on the plan in the response.

That's news to me. As of a week ago (8/24) most of the signs were still covered.
Some are some are not
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210831/a5b4340fafae75993495bdc94b94052f.jpg)
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210831/20c84cef9d30e2806d9ee9ef37d69816.jpg)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on August 31, 2021, 04:07:26 PM

That's news to me. As of a week ago (8/24) most of the signs were still covered.
Some are some are not
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210831/a5b4340fafae75993495bdc94b94052f.jpg)
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210831/20c84cef9d30e2806d9ee9ef37d69816.jpg)

Still "most" :)  :pan:
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on August 31, 2021, 04:12:19 PM
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210831/a5e010e417301cc081d13f6d2af68db1.jpg)
The second sign has the old exit numbers

THIS sign is new within the last week. Likely for US 71 North.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Arkansastravelguy on August 31, 2021, 04:46:14 PM
Projected ribbon cutting is September 30th at 10am at the state line
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on August 31, 2021, 10:12:02 PM
Projected ribbon cutting is September 30th at 10am at the state line

But conflicting info on if the road will be open or wait a couple weeks.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Arkansastravelguy on August 31, 2021, 10:15:11 PM
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210901/c4da0a15212d216bcc5c8dda9b9e7e07.jpg)
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210901/54190d1a81d32861aa7b72de116a318a.jpg)
This is the missouri side, from MO 90 and the 71 split at Pineville. They are coming along nicely but 30 day? Ehhh I don’t know. Arkansas? Yes. Which is weird. But victory for ARdot
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on August 31, 2021, 10:16:55 PM
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210901/c4da0a15212d216bcc5c8dda9b9e7e07.jpg)
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210901/54190d1a81d32861aa7b72de116a318a.jpg)
This is the missouri side, from MO 90 and the 71 split at Pineville. They are coming along nicely but 30 day? Ehhh I don’t know. Arkansas? Yes. Which is weird. But victory for ARdot

State Line Crossing won't open until MoDOT is finished
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on September 01, 2021, 01:15:59 PM
Will the new roadway be signed I-49 immediately?

Yes.

Technically, it already is, but the signs are covered. There are maybe 3 or 4 549 signa left at US 71 in Bella Vista.

Most of the signs aren't even covered anymore.  It's I-49 (with left lane closed in both directions for striping/shoulder/median/cable barrier work) already pretty much except at the south end.  Still no news from ARDOT on the exit renumbering south of Bella Vista yet.  I emailed them a few weeks ago, and they were pretty vague on the plan in the response.

That's news to me. As of a week ago (8/24) most of the signs were still covered.
I’m going to head up there in an hour or so and I’ll take more pics. I’ve seen 3 549 signs recently, two at 71B and one on Highlands, a to 549 sign. They are sandbagged tho, not in the ground. Idk about the AR72 exits


iPhone

The signs at the junctions to the entrance ramps are likely still covered.  I'm thinking about the confidence signage on the road itself.  I don't remember seeing anything northbound that says AR-549 once you get up the hill from the south entrance.  I'll be up there in about 3 hours after I wrap up some work stuff and refresh my memory up to Rocky Dell Hollow Rd. and back.

As remembered, northbound has complete and uncovered signage once up the initial hill.  They are still working on inner shoulders, median grading, and cable barriers.  Southbound, some are uncovered, some aren't.  The restriping of the southbound carriageway is close to done, if not.  Arkansas will likely be done before Sept. 30 at this rate, but can't open up past Exit 289 until Missouri gets done.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Henry on September 02, 2021, 10:25:45 AM
Sounds ambitious to get it all done in less than 30 days, but apparently AR is hellbent on having the whole thing open while MO has been sandbagging the project all along.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on September 02, 2021, 10:30:18 AM
Sounds ambitious to get it all done in less than 30 days, but apparently AR is hellbent on having the whole thing open while MO has been sandbagging the project all along.

Missouri started later than Arkansas, but was supposed to finish around the same time (same contractor, IIRC)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on September 02, 2021, 10:37:37 AM
Sounds ambitious to get it all done in less than 30 days, but apparently AR is hellbent on having the whole thing open while MO has been sandbagging the project all along.

Missouri started later than Arkansas, but was supposed to finish around the same time (same contractor, IIRC)

Missouri started later because the money they had allocated to the project disappeared when Arkansas didn't have ours ready as they apparently have other needs in their state, go figure.  Then, Missouri for the last several years has had funding issues all around for road building and maintenance.  It took the Northwest Arkansas Regional Planning Commission to put in the application for the BUILD grant that Missouri got to complete Missouri's funding needs as they didn't have enough for their part until that point.

Missouri's BVB Funding (https://www.joplinglobe.com/news/local_news/missouri-s-section-of-bella-vista-bypass-scheduled-for-completion-in-fall/article_d40917d0-91a2-11eb-ab12-7fdb05ab4357.html)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on September 02, 2021, 10:45:17 AM
Sounds ambitious to get it all done in less than 30 days, but apparently AR is hellbent on having the whole thing open while MO has been sandbagging the project all along.

Missouri started later than Arkansas, but was supposed to finish around the same time (same contractor, IIRC)

Missouri started later because the money they had allocated to the project disappeared when Arkansas didn't have ours ready as they apparently have other needs in their state, go figure.  Then, Missouri for the last several years has had funding issues all around for road building and maintenance.  It took the Northwest Arkansas Regional Planning Commission to put in the application for the BUILD grant that Missouri got to complete Missouri's funding needs as they didn't have enough for their part until that point.

IIRC, much of the I-49 funding in Missouri was spent on upgrading US 71 to Interstate standards
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on September 02, 2021, 10:48:28 AM
Sounds ambitious to get it all done in less than 30 days, but apparently AR is hellbent on having the whole thing open while MO has been sandbagging the project all along.

Missouri started later than Arkansas, but was supposed to finish around the same time (same contractor, IIRC)

Missouri started later because the money they had allocated to the project disappeared when Arkansas didn't have ours ready as they apparently have other needs in their state, go figure.  Then, Missouri for the last several years has had funding issues all around for road building and maintenance.  It took the Northwest Arkansas Regional Planning Commission to put in the application for the BUILD grant that Missouri got to complete Missouri's funding needs as they didn't have enough for their part until that point.

IIRC, much of the I-49 funding in Missouri was spent on upgrading US 71 to Interstate standards

It didn't take much.  They really only needed to build a handful of overpasses and exit/entrance ramps as the road itself was mostly through farmland, other than a handful of cities which already had limited access connections.  I don't even think they had to do much in the way of access roads.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Arkansastravelguy on September 02, 2021, 10:48:42 AM
Sounds ambitious to get it all done in less than 30 days, but apparently AR is hellbent on having the whole thing open while MO has been sandbagging the project all along.

Missouri started later than Arkansas, but was supposed to finish around the same time (same contractor, IIRC)

Missouri started later because the money they had allocated to the project disappeared when Arkansas didn't have ours ready as they apparently have other needs in their state, go figure.  Then, Missouri for the last several years has had funding issues all around for road building and maintenance.  It took the Northwest Arkansas Regional Planning Commission to put in the application for the BUILD grant that Missouri got to complete Missouri's funding needs as they didn't have enough for their part until that point.

IIRC, much of the I-49 funding in Missouri was spent on upgrading US 71 to Interstate standards
I may be wrong but didn’t Arkansas give Missouri like 25M to help complete it?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on September 02, 2021, 10:52:46 AM
Sounds ambitious to get it all done in less than 30 days, but apparently AR is hellbent on having the whole thing open while MO has been sandbagging the project all along.

Missouri started later than Arkansas, but was supposed to finish around the same time (same contractor, IIRC)

Missouri started later because the money they had allocated to the project disappeared when Arkansas didn't have ours ready as they apparently have other needs in their state, go figure.  Then, Missouri for the last several years has had funding issues all around for road building and maintenance.  It took the Northwest Arkansas Regional Planning Commission to put in the application for the BUILD grant that Missouri got to complete Missouri's funding needs as they didn't have enough for their part until that point.

IIRC, much of the I-49 funding in Missouri was spent on upgrading US 71 to Interstate standards
I may be wrong but didn’t Arkansas give Missouri like 25M to help complete it?

You're thinking of the BUILD grant.  The NWARPC put in the application on behalf of Missouri, as Missouri really hasn't put much priority on McDonald County until these past 2 years when it became apparent they would get federal money to help complete the BVB.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: abqtraveler on September 02, 2021, 10:57:16 AM
Sounds ambitious to get it all done in less than 30 days, but apparently AR is hellbent on having the whole thing open while MO has been sandbagging the project all along.

Missouri started later than Arkansas, but was supposed to finish around the same time (same contractor, IIRC)

Missouri started later because the money they had allocated to the project disappeared when Arkansas didn't have ours ready as they apparently have other needs in their state, go figure.  Then, Missouri for the last several years has had funding issues all around for road building and maintenance.  It took the Northwest Arkansas Regional Planning Commission to put in the application for the BUILD grant that Missouri got to complete Missouri's funding needs as they didn't have enough for their part until that point.

IIRC, much of the I-49 funding in Missouri was spent on upgrading US 71 to Interstate standards
That's correct. Prior to its conversion to I-49 in late 2012, the section of US-71 between Pineville and Kansas City was a 4-lane divided highway, with some controlled-access sections and other sections that had at-grade intersections and some driveway accesses. Missouri focused on upgrading that portion of US-71 (roughly 180 miles) by eliminating the at-grade intersections by building interchanges and overpasses in some locations and closing off cross-roads into cul-de-sacs in other places. They also built frontage roads in a few places to eliminate any remaining driveway accesses to complete the conversion to an interstate-grade freeway.

MoDOT wanted to continue I-49 past I-435 to end at I-70, but a court settlement from 1985 prevents MoDOT from upgrading three signalized intersections on US-71 at Gregory Blvd, 59th St, and 55th St, on the south side of KC to full interchanges. Until another judge reverses that court order, US-71 between I-435 and I-70 cannot be upgraded to I-49.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on September 02, 2021, 11:01:59 AM
Sounds ambitious to get it all done in less than 30 days, but apparently AR is hellbent on having the whole thing open while MO has been sandbagging the project all along.

Missouri started later than Arkansas, but was supposed to finish around the same time (same contractor, IIRC)

Missouri started later because the money they had allocated to the project disappeared when Arkansas didn't have ours ready as they apparently have other needs in their state, go figure.  Then, Missouri for the last several years has had funding issues all around for road building and maintenance.  It took the Northwest Arkansas Regional Planning Commission to put in the application for the BUILD grant that Missouri got to complete Missouri's funding needs as they didn't have enough for their part until that point.

IIRC, much of the I-49 funding in Missouri was spent on upgrading US 71 to Interstate standards
I may be wrong but didn’t Arkansas give Missouri like 25M to help complete it?

You're thinking of the BUILD grant.  The NWARPC put in the application on behalf of Missouri, as Missouri really hasn't put much priority on McDonald County until these past 2 years when it became apparent they would get federal money to help complete the BVB.
When the application was put in by the NWARPC, McDonald County was considered part of the NWA MSA.  It was removed for some reason a few years ago, but I GUARANTEE that it will be put back into the MSA within the next 10-15 years as there's no way the growth here doesn't spill northward due to land prices in Benton/Washington/~Madison Counties.  If I had a spare penny to my name right now, I'd be real estate speculating along the MO-90 exit vicinity.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on September 02, 2021, 11:04:21 AM
Sounds ambitious to get it all done in less than 30 days, but apparently AR is hellbent on having the whole thing open while MO has been sandbagging the project all along.

Missouri started later than Arkansas, but was supposed to finish around the same time (same contractor, IIRC)

Missouri started later because the money they had allocated to the project disappeared when Arkansas didn't have ours ready as they apparently have other needs in their state, go figure.  Then, Missouri for the last several years has had funding issues all around for road building and maintenance.  It took the Northwest Arkansas Regional Planning Commission to put in the application for the BUILD grant that Missouri got to complete Missouri's funding needs as they didn't have enough for their part until that point.

IIRC, much of the I-49 funding in Missouri was spent on upgrading US 71 to Interstate standards
That's correct. Prior to its conversion to I-49 in late 2012, the section of US-71 between Pineville and Kansas City was a 4-lane divided highway, with some controlled-access sections and other sections that had at-grade intersections and some driveway accesses. Missouri focused on upgrading that portion of US-71 (roughly 180 miles) by eliminating the at-grade intersections by building interchanges and overpasses in some locations and closing off cross-roads into cul-de-sacs in other places. They also built frontage roads in a few places to eliminate any remaining driveway accesses to complete the conversion to an interstate-grade freeway.

MoDOT wanted to continue I-49 past I-435 to end at I-70, but a court settlement from 1985 prevents MoDOT from upgrading three signalized intersections on US-71 at Gregory Blvd, 59th St, and 55th St, on the south side of KC to full interchanges. Until another judge reverses that court order, US-71 between I-435 and I-70 cannot be upgraded to I-49.

That's about as likely to happen in the next 30 years as me hitting the lottery.  And I don't play the lottery.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: kphoger on September 02, 2021, 11:23:02 AM
Straightened out all the quote strings so far.  I believe there are three conversations.  Let me know if I got anything wrong.

Preview, people.  Preview.

US71:  It all started when you removed a hyperlink, typed over it, and then posted without previewing.

MikeTimT:  Thank you for doing your part to fix it partway through.







Sounds ambitious to get it all done in less than 30 days, but apparently AR is hellbent on having the whole thing open while MO has been sandbagging the project all along.

Missouri started later than Arkansas, but was supposed to finish around the same time (same contractor, IIRC)

Missouri started later because the money they had allocated to the project disappeared when Arkansas didn't have ours ready as they apparently have other needs in their state, go figure.  Then, Missouri for the last several years has had funding issues all around for road building and maintenance.  It took the Northwest Arkansas Regional Planning Commission to put in the application for the BUILD grant that Missouri got to complete Missouri's funding needs as they didn't have enough for their part until that point.

Missouri's BVB Funding (https://www.joplinglobe.com/news/local_news/missouri-s-section-of-bella-vista-bypass-scheduled-for-completion-in-fall/article_d40917d0-91a2-11eb-ab12-7fdb05ab4357.html)

IIRC, much of the I-49 funding in Missouri was spent on upgrading US 71 to Interstate standards

It didn't take much.  They really only needed to build a handful of overpasses and exit/entrance ramps as the road itself was mostly through farmland, other than a handful of cities which already had limited access connections.  I don't even think they had to do much in the way of access roads.









Sounds ambitious to get it all done in less than 30 days, but apparently AR is hellbent on having the whole thing open while MO has been sandbagging the project all along.

Missouri started later than Arkansas, but was supposed to finish around the same time (same contractor, IIRC)

Missouri started later because the money they had allocated to the project disappeared when Arkansas didn't have ours ready as they apparently have other needs in their state, go figure.  Then, Missouri for the last several years has had funding issues all around for road building and maintenance.  It took the Northwest Arkansas Regional Planning Commission to put in the application for the BUILD grant that Missouri got to complete Missouri's funding needs as they didn't have enough for their part until that point.

Missouri's BVB Funding (https://www.joplinglobe.com/news/local_news/missouri-s-section-of-bella-vista-bypass-scheduled-for-completion-in-fall/article_d40917d0-91a2-11eb-ab12-7fdb05ab4357.html)

IIRC, much of the I-49 funding in Missouri was spent on upgrading US 71 to Interstate standards

I may be wrong but didn’t Arkansas give Missouri like 25M to help complete it?

You're thinking of the BUILD grant.  The NWARPC put in the application on behalf of Missouri, as Missouri really hasn't put much priority on McDonald County until these past 2 years when it became apparent they would get federal money to help complete the BVB.

When the application was put in by the NWARPC, McDonald County was considered part of the NWA MSA.  It was removed for some reason a few years ago, but I GUARANTEE that it will be put back into the MSA within the next 10-15 years as there's no way the growth here doesn't spill northward due to land prices in Benton/Washington/~Madison Counties.  If I had a spare penny to my name right now, I'd be real estate speculating along the MO-90 exit vicinity.








Sounds ambitious to get it all done in less than 30 days, but apparently AR is hellbent on having the whole thing open while MO has been sandbagging the project all along.

Missouri started later than Arkansas, but was supposed to finish around the same time (same contractor, IIRC)

Missouri started later because the money they had allocated to the project disappeared when Arkansas didn't have ours ready as they apparently have other needs in their state, go figure.  Then, Missouri for the last several years has had funding issues all around for road building and maintenance.  It took the Northwest Arkansas Regional Planning Commission to put in the application for the BUILD grant that Missouri got to complete Missouri's funding needs as they didn't have enough for their part until that point.

Missouri's BVB Funding (https://www.joplinglobe.com/news/local_news/missouri-s-section-of-bella-vista-bypass-scheduled-for-completion-in-fall/article_d40917d0-91a2-11eb-ab12-7fdb05ab4357.html)

IIRC, much of the I-49 funding in Missouri was spent on upgrading US 71 to Interstate standards

That's correct. Prior to its conversion to I-49 in late 2012, the section of US-71 between Pineville and Kansas City was a 4-lane divided highway, with some controlled-access sections and other sections that had at-grade intersections and some driveway accesses. Missouri focused on upgrading that portion of US-71 (roughly 180 miles) by eliminating the at-grade intersections by building interchanges and overpasses in some locations and closing off cross-roads into cul-de-sacs in other places. They also built frontage roads in a few places to eliminate any remaining driveway accesses to complete the conversion to an interstate-grade freeway.

MoDOT wanted to continue I-49 past I-435 to end at I-70, but a court settlement from 1985 prevents MoDOT from upgrading three signalized intersections on US-71 at Gregory Blvd, 59th St, and 55th St, on the south side of KC to full interchanges. Until another judge reverses that court order, US-71 between I-435 and I-70 cannot be upgraded to I-49.

That's about as likely to happen in the next 30 years as me hitting the lottery.  And I don't play the lottery.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on September 02, 2021, 11:30:56 AM
Went back and fixed my prior post as well since y'all don't have access to it. And, you're welcome!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on September 02, 2021, 12:04:21 PM
"Official" word on I-49 Connector: likely first or second week of October, but nothing definite yet.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on September 02, 2021, 12:43:11 PM
"Official" word on I-49 Connector: likely first or second week of October, but nothing definite yet.

It would be nice if they'd update I-49 Connector (https://www.modot.org/i-49-missouriarkansas-connector) so that "official" could become official.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on September 02, 2021, 12:48:16 PM
Checking the iDriveArkansas live camera at the south end of the US-71 interchange, looks like the mountain is in the process of taking its big dump on the offramp.  As far back as they're working on the top of the hill, it amazes me that this issue wasn't foreseen earlier in the construction, like when they blasted the hill the first time!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on September 02, 2021, 04:15:31 PM
Checking the iDriveArkansas live camera at the south end of the US-71 interchange, looks like the mountain is in the process of taking its big dump on the offramp.  As far back as they're working on the top of the hill, it amazes me that this issue wasn't foreseen earlier in the construction, like when they blasted the hill the first time!

Welcome to Arkansas. No time to do it right, but plenty of time to correct it ;)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: msunat97 on September 10, 2021, 03:59:02 PM
The hill to the south of the new interchange looks really different.  Take a look at the traffic cam on iDriveArkansas. 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Tomahawkin on September 16, 2021, 10:53:28 PM
OT, is there any overhead light on any stretch of 49 in NWA? IMO, it should have overhead lighting from the Boston mountains up to the Missouri line. With the amout of deer and fog in the winter months from Alma to Springdale. This should have been implemented 20+ years ago
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Arkansastravelguy on September 16, 2021, 11:12:04 PM
OT, is there any overhead light on any stretch of 49 in NWA? IMO, it should have overhead lighting from the Boston mountains up to the Missouri line. With the amout of deer and fog in the winter months from Alma to Springdale. This should have been implemented 20+ years ago
Pretty sure there isn’t


iPhone
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on September 18, 2021, 02:40:50 AM
Open to traffic October 1 (ostensibly 2021).:

Quote
Bella Vista Bypass to open Oct. 1 as part of Interstate 49

The Arkansas Department of Transportation (ArDOT) announced Friday (Sept. 17) the Bella Vista Bypass, or Missouri-Arkansas Connector, will open to traffic on Oct. 1. The completed highway will become a part of Interstate 49.

At 10 a.m. on Sept. 30, a ribbon-cutting celebration will take place to mark the completion of the 18.9-mile project. According to a news release, the new I-49 segment consisted of six projects totaling more than $220 million beginning in February 2011. Arkansas Gov. Asa Hutchinson and Missouri Gov. Mike Parson will join state officials and legislators at the Arkansas-Missouri state line for the celebration.

https://talkbusiness.net/2021/09/bella-vista-bypass-to-open-oct-1-as-part-of-interstate-49/


Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Plutonic Panda on September 18, 2021, 02:46:45 AM
Wow this progressed pretty fast as far modern projects go. Props to them for this.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: ilpt4u on September 18, 2021, 11:05:08 AM
View from afar: I-49 vs I-57 seems like a tale of two new interstates

I-49: MO holds up the new construction BVB for a long while, focusing more on upgrading the existing US 71 Expressway, but heh, better later than never!

I-57: MO already has funding authorized and construction scheduled for the 2-lane US 67 upgrade south of Poplar Bluff to the AR state line, leaving the existing US 60 Expressway upgrades as the “final”  box to check for 57
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on September 18, 2021, 02:04:26 PM
It's starting to look like much of the I-57 extension could be finished well before any big projects on I-49 in the Fort Smith area are completed. Get the cheaper "low hanging fruit" handled first, kick the can down the road on the more expensive projects (like that Alma-Barling I-49 project).
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on September 18, 2021, 02:13:04 PM

I-49: MO holds up the new construction BVB for a long while, focusing more on upgrading the existing US 71 Expressway, but heh, better later than never!


MODOT was ready to roll on 49 construction, but Arkansas didn't have the money. Then Arkansas had the money and MODOT doesn't. . Plus there was talk of making the connector a toll road, but that idea failed. It seemed like ARDOT and MODOT couldn't get their s#it together.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: abqtraveler on September 18, 2021, 04:19:08 PM
View from afar: I-49 vs I-57 seems like a tale of two new interstates

I-49: MO holds up the new construction BVB for a long while, focusing more on upgrading the existing US 71 Expressway, but heh, better later than never!

I-57: MO already has funding authorized and construction scheduled for the 2-lane US 67 upgrade south of Poplar Bluff to the AR state line, leaving the existing US 60 Expressway upgrades as the “final”  box to check for 57

About 10 years ago, MO had the money to finish their part of the BVB, but they redirected those funds to other projects when Arkansas was struggling to secure funding for its portion. And a few years later, we found ourselves in the opposite situation where AR had found money and MO didn't have any for their respective sections of the BVB. It was only when the NW Arkansas Council of Governments obtained approval for a federal grant did the MO portion of the BVB see its funding restored and allowing construction to proceed.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: mvak36 on September 18, 2021, 06:40:26 PM
View from afar: I-49 vs I-57 seems like a tale of two new interstates

I-49: MO holds up the new construction BVB for a long while, focusing more on upgrading the existing US 71 Expressway, but heh, better later than never!

I-57: MO already has funding authorized and construction scheduled for the 2-lane US 67 upgrade south of Poplar Bluff to the AR state line, leaving the existing US 60 Expressway upgrades as the “final”  box to check for 57

It probably helped that Poplar Bluff has had a little political pull in Jefferson City over the years. I think they've been making upgrades to US67/US60 over the years (before the interstate designation effort got legs).

At least the terrain won't be as bad as it was for the BVB whenever it comes time for them to meet Arkansas at the border.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: jbnv on September 20, 2021, 10:32:14 AM
If I were Arkansas, I'd ditch I-69 and pitch a dual-corridor I-49/57 effort to Louisiana. Now that all of south Louisiana has experienced a major hurricane within one calendar year, it should be *very* easy to sell an extension of I-57 all the way to Iowa-Lake Charles. I-69 is practically DOA in Louisiana anyway. And I-57 and I-49 complete to I-10 opens up a lot of Arkansas and Missouri for coastal evacuees (much more than the current routes open them to travelers who only look at interstates) as well as tourists. I-57 to the Gulf makes the Lake Charles area more attractive as a port and gives Louisiana more port redundancy.

Sorry for the diversion, but I feel that Arkansas should see having *both* I-49 and I-57 complete to the Gulf as beneficial to them. And they need to remember how the three-state effort is what gave them I-49 in the first place.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on September 20, 2021, 10:38:19 AM
If I were Arkansas, I'd ditch I-69 and pitch a dual-corridor I-49/57 effort to Louisiana. Now that all of south Louisiana has experienced a major hurricane within one calendar year, it should be *very* easy to sell an extension of I-57 all the way to Iowa-Lake Charles. I-69 is practically DOA in Louisiana anyway. And I-57 and I-49 complete to I-10 opens up a lot of Arkansas and Missouri for coastal evacuees (much more than the current routes open them to travelers who only look at interstates) as well as tourists. I-57 to the Gulf makes the Lake Charles area more attractive as a port and gives Louisiana more port redundancy.

Sorry for the diversion, but I feel that Arkansas should see having *both* I-49 and I-57 complete to the Gulf as beneficial to them. And they need to remember how the three-state effort is what gave them I-49 in the first place.

Well, 57 is supposed to terminate at I-40, so no trip to the Gulf for it.

69 is , IMO, some politician's wet dream. I don't understand it or see the need.

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: jbnv on September 20, 2021, 11:41:42 AM
Well, 57 is supposed to terminate at I-40, so no trip to the Gulf for it.

According to which indelible and irrevocable decree?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on September 20, 2021, 12:03:35 PM
Well, 57 is supposed to terminate at I-40, so no trip to the Gulf for it.

According to which indelible and irrevocable decree?

FOR NOW, it's supposed to end at I-40. I have heard nothing about extending it unless you know something different, in which case share it with the rest of us.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on September 20, 2021, 12:15:46 PM
This forum is the only place where I've seen any mention made of a southern extension of I-57 into Louisiana or previous ideas like extending I-530 down into Louisiana. For now, they can't even get the basics of AR-530 finished South of Poplar Bluff to US-278. That's only a Super-2 with at-grade intersections. Yet they can't fill the gap between AR-35 and AR-11.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: jbnv on September 20, 2021, 02:34:31 PM
Who said anything about it being anything more than an idea? The entire interstate system was nothing more than someone's idea at some point.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bassoon1986 on September 20, 2021, 02:38:50 PM
I just don’t see the purpose of extending 57 over I-530 and then into Louisiana. It doesn’t make sense as a long distance corridor to go SW into Little Rock, SE into Louisiana, then SW again to Lake Charles.

I-530 extended (some) as it’s own 4 lane corridor? Sure, maybe. I don’t see a huge need to have it go all the way to Monroe. In Louisiana, our 4 lane corridors like US 165/US 425 and US 167 serve us fine.


iPhone
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: jbnv on September 20, 2021, 02:43:38 PM
I laid out why in my post.

If I were Arkansas, I'd ditch I-69 and pitch a dual-corridor I-49/57 effort to Louisiana. Now that all of south Louisiana has experienced a major hurricane within one calendar year, it should be *very* easy to sell an extension of I-57 all the way to Iowa-Lake Charles. I-69 is practically DOA in Louisiana anyway. And I-57 and I-49 complete to I-10 opens up a lot of Arkansas and Missouri for coastal evacuees (much more than the current routes open them to travelers who only look at interstates) as well as tourists. I-57 to the Gulf makes the Lake Charles area more attractive as a port and gives Louisiana more port redundancy.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: mvak36 on September 20, 2021, 03:24:41 PM
I laid out why in my post.

If I were Arkansas, I'd ditch I-69 and pitch a dual-corridor I-49/57 effort to Louisiana. Now that all of south Louisiana has experienced a major hurricane within one calendar year, it should be *very* easy to sell an extension of I-57 all the way to Iowa-Lake Charles. I-69 is practically DOA in Louisiana anyway. And I-57 and I-49 complete to I-10 opens up a lot of Arkansas and Missouri for coastal evacuees (much more than the current routes open them to travelers who only look at interstates) as well as tourists. I-57 to the Gulf makes the Lake Charles area more attractive as a port and gives Louisiana more port redundancy.

It's not a bad idea. I doubt I'll see it in my lifetime.

How much of the route is 4 lanes south of Monticello (or wherever I-530 is supposed to meet with I-69)?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bassoon1986 on September 20, 2021, 04:29:34 PM
I laid out why in my post.

If I were Arkansas, I'd ditch I-69 and pitch a dual-corridor I-49/57 effort to Louisiana. Now that all of south Louisiana has experienced a major hurricane within one calendar year, it should be *very* easy to sell an extension of I-57 all the way to Iowa-Lake Charles. I-69 is practically DOA in Louisiana anyway. And I-57 and I-49 complete to I-10 opens up a lot of Arkansas and Missouri for coastal evacuees (much more than the current routes open them to travelers who only look at interstates) as well as tourists. I-57 to the Gulf makes the Lake Charles area more attractive as a port and gives Louisiana more port redundancy.

It's not a bad idea. I doubt I'll see it in my lifetime.

How much of the route is 4 lanes south of Monticello (or wherever I-530 is supposed to meet with I-69)?
AR 530 is completely 2-laned south of where it departs from I-530 in Pine Bluff. And there’s a gap in between 2 parts near the southern end.


iPhone
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: mvak36 on September 20, 2021, 04:33:04 PM
I laid out why in my post.

If I were Arkansas, I'd ditch I-69 and pitch a dual-corridor I-49/57 effort to Louisiana. Now that all of south Louisiana has experienced a major hurricane within one calendar year, it should be *very* easy to sell an extension of I-57 all the way to Iowa-Lake Charles. I-69 is practically DOA in Louisiana anyway. And I-57 and I-49 complete to I-10 opens up a lot of Arkansas and Missouri for coastal evacuees (much more than the current routes open them to travelers who only look at interstates) as well as tourists. I-57 to the Gulf makes the Lake Charles area more attractive as a port and gives Louisiana more port redundancy.

It's not a bad idea. I doubt I'll see it in my lifetime.

How much of the route is 4 lanes south of Monticello (or wherever I-530 is supposed to meet with I-69)?
AR 530 is completely 2-laned south of where it departs from I-530 in Pine Bluff. And there’s a gap in between 2 parts near the southern end.


iPhone

My bad. I was asking about the US 425 and US165 highways south of Monticello which I assume is the route jbnv was talking about in his post (please correct me if I'm wrong).
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: jbnv on September 20, 2021, 05:21:49 PM
My bad. I was asking about the US 425 and US165 highways south of Monticello which I assume is the route jbnv was talking about in his post (please correct me if I'm wrong).

Yes. US 425 is four-laned in Louisiana. My idea of "Interstate 57 to the Gulf" would make use of the four-laned sections of US 425 to Bastrop and US 165 to Iowa, LA.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bassoon1986 on September 20, 2021, 07:47:30 PM
I laid out why in my post.

If I were Arkansas, I'd ditch I-69 and pitch a dual-corridor I-49/57 effort to Louisiana. Now that all of south Louisiana has experienced a major hurricane within one calendar year, it should be *very* easy to sell an extension of I-57 all the way to Iowa-Lake Charles. I-69 is practically DOA in Louisiana anyway. And I-57 and I-49 complete to I-10 opens up a lot of Arkansas and Missouri for coastal evacuees (much more than the current routes open them to travelers who only look at interstates) as well as tourists. I-57 to the Gulf makes the Lake Charles area more attractive as a port and gives Louisiana more port redundancy.

It's not a bad idea. I doubt I'll see it in my lifetime.

How much of the route is 4 lanes south of Monticello (or wherever I-530 is supposed to meet with I-69)?
AR 530 is completely 2-laned south of where it departs from I-530 in Pine Bluff. And there’s a gap in between 2 parts near the southern end.


iPhone

My bad. I was asking about the US 425 and US165 highways south of Monticello which I assume is the route jbnv was talking about in his post (please correct me if I'm wrong).

Oh sorry, I didn’t realize what you were asking. South of Monticello it’s 2 lanes in Arkansas. And 4 lanes in Louisiana. The 425 to 165 combo is completely 4 lanes. 425 going southeast isn’t 4 lanes again until Rayville.


iPhone
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: mvak36 on September 20, 2021, 10:30:52 PM
I laid out why in my post.

If I were Arkansas, I'd ditch I-69 and pitch a dual-corridor I-49/57 effort to Louisiana. Now that all of south Louisiana has experienced a major hurricane within one calendar year, it should be *very* easy to sell an extension of I-57 all the way to Iowa-Lake Charles. I-69 is practically DOA in Louisiana anyway. And I-57 and I-49 complete to I-10 opens up a lot of Arkansas and Missouri for coastal evacuees (much more than the current routes open them to travelers who only look at interstates) as well as tourists. I-57 to the Gulf makes the Lake Charles area more attractive as a port and gives Louisiana more port redundancy.

It's not a bad idea. I doubt I'll see it in my lifetime.

How much of the route is 4 lanes south of Monticello (or wherever I-530 is supposed to meet with I-69)?
AR 530 is completely 2-laned south of where it departs from I-530 in Pine Bluff. And there’s a gap in between 2 parts near the southern end.


iPhone

My bad. I was asking about the US 425 and US165 highways south of Monticello which I assume is the route jbnv was talking about in his post (please correct me if I'm wrong).

Oh sorry, I didn’t realize what you were asking. South of Monticello it’s 2 lanes in Arkansas. And 4 lanes in Louisiana. The 425 to 165 combo is completely 4 lanes. 425 going southeast isn’t 4 lanes again until Rayville.


iPhone

So if the 425/165 is all 4 lanes, does that mean they just have to limit access on certain parts and build bypasses around towns to make it a freeway? Or is there going to have to be a lot of new terrain construction?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on September 21, 2021, 12:10:27 AM
OT, is there any overhead light on any stretch of 49 in NWA? IMO, it should have overhead lighting from the Boston mountains up to the Missouri line. With the amout of deer and fog in the winter months from Alma to Springdale. This should have been implemented 20+ years ago
Pretty sure there isn’t


iPhone

The ends of the Hopper Tunnel and inside the tunnel itself.  Otherwise, no lighting whatsoever on I-49 in Arkansas north of I-40 other than what leaks downward from overpasses in Rogers with their decorative street lights.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Tomahawkin on September 21, 2021, 12:50:28 AM
It's no fun, seeing deer near both sides of the Hopper Tunnel at night, and on days where it's foggy. I don't know why anyone local there hasn't brought that issue up?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Scott5114 on September 21, 2021, 01:37:34 AM
Though I don't remember the details offhand, I seem to recall AHTD/ArDOT's lighting policy is suitably insane that it's been the subject of repeated rounds of criticism here in the past–I think someone even confronted the AHTD rep here over it when they were around.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Anthony_JK on September 21, 2021, 06:34:23 AM
I just don’t see the purpose of extending 57 over I-530 and then into Louisiana. It doesn’t make sense as a long distance corridor to go SW into Little Rock, SE into Louisiana, then SW again to Lake Charles.

I-530 extended (some) as it’s own 4 lane corridor? Sure, maybe. I don’t see a huge need to have it go all the way to Monroe. In Louisiana, our 4 lane corridors like US 165/US 425 and US 167 serve us fine.


iPhone

From Little Rock to Monticello to Monroe is more S than SE, so an extension of I-57 southward to Bastrop, and eventually to Monroe and Alexandria/Lake Charles would be OK as a diagonal route.  Though, personally, I'd prefer I-51 or I-53 to match the grid better.

Also, you can justify a freeway extension along US 165/US 425 to Monticello independently of an I-69 routing.


Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: jbnv on September 21, 2021, 09:24:04 AM
Also, you can justify a freeway extension along US 165/US 425 to Monticello independently of an I-69 routing.

My point is that Louisiana has no incentive to build its part of I-69, but it has incentive to seek an interstate designation for US 165. If Louisiana doesn't build its part of I-69, Arkansas's part becomes a road to nowhere. So I believe that Arkansas should abandon I-69 and focus on the north-south corridors that it *already* has: I-49 and US 165/425/I-530/US 67 which will or could be Interstate 57. If Arkansas focuses on these two, then it can ask Louisiana and Missouri for an alliance to get them done. Which is far more likely to get either project finished than holding onto I-69.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Anthony_JK on September 21, 2021, 09:45:51 AM
I'd disagree, because Shreveport has a really BIG incentive to build out I-69: access to the Port of Shreveport-Bossier and "completing" the Inner Loop/LA 3132 (which would use portions of the segment of proposed I-69 between I-49 and I-20). It may be second fiddle right now to the I-49 ICC, but it's not pushed back that far in the basement either.

Arkansas, OTOH, probably doesn't have the money to even do the bridge across the Mississippi, let alone finish their segment of I-69, and the same goes with Mississippi.

If AR and MS do decide to bail out on I-69, and TX decides to call it a decade and simply build to Texarkana and use I-30/I-40/I-55/I-155 (or I-30/I-57/upgraded US 60) to declare I-69 "finished", then a Lake Charles/Alex/Monroe/Bastrop/Monticello/Pine Bluff freeway becomes that much more viable. It's needed anyway for LA just to finish the freeway system off with a SW/NE connection that would seriously renew Lake Charles and provide an added evac route for the new "major hurricane a year" reality.

All I'm saying is that regardless of what happens with I-69, a SW/NE freeway upgrade of US 165/425 is more than needed. Only issue is how to get it through Alexandria/Pineville.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: abqtraveler on September 21, 2021, 12:43:36 PM
I'd disagree, because Shreveport has a really BIG incentive to build out I-69: access to the Port of Shreveport-Bossier and "completing" the Inner Loop/LA 3132 (which would use portions of the segment of proposed I-69 between I-49 and I-20). It may be second fiddle right now to the I-49 ICC, but it's not pushed back that far in the basement either.

Arkansas, OTOH, probably doesn't have the money to even do the bridge across the Mississippi, let alone finish their segment of I-69, and the same goes with Mississippi.

If AR and MS do decide to bail out on I-69, and TX decides to call it a decade and simply build to Texarkana and use I-30/I-40/I-55/I-155 (or I-30/I-57/upgraded US 60) to declare I-69 "finished", then a Lake Charles/Alex/Monroe/Bastrop/Monticello/Pine Bluff freeway becomes that much more viable. It's needed anyway for LA just to finish the freeway system off with a SW/NE connection that would seriously renew Lake Charles and provide an added evac route for the new "major hurricane a year" reality.

All I'm saying is that regardless of what happens with I-69, a SW/NE freeway upgrade of US 165/425 is more than needed. Only issue is how to get it through Alexandria/Pineville.

I would suspect that completing the loop around Shreveport and Bossier City I-49(S) to I-20(E) would be LA's #1 priority for I-69, with the remainder of the route falling lower in priority since there will be no immediate utility for the sections outside of the Shreveport-Bossier area.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on September 21, 2021, 02:54:22 PM
Though I don't remember the details offhand, I seem to recall AHTD/ArDOT's lighting policy is suitably insane that it's been the subject of repeated rounds of criticism here in the past–I think someone even confronted the AHTD rep here over it when they were around.

The policy is, is that lighting is up to the municipality.  Don't agree with it, but given the inability to get a rather important bridge built to fill a glaring gap in the next phase of I-49 in the state, the funds just aren't there for the state to light the Interstates.  It's a 'pay as you go' state other than some specific bond issues retired by 1/2 cent tax money (CAP), so lighting isn't high on the priority list clearly.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on September 21, 2021, 04:25:03 PM
Back to I-49 and the BVB for a moment: if Arkansas had been able to build their side of the Bypass when Missouri was ready to in '05, the Harrisonville(?)-Pineville stretch of 71 still wouldn't have been Interstate for awhile and the new Bypass would have been still viewed as part of the I-49 pipe dream of yesteryear.  (The Texarkana-Shreveport section of I-49 wasn't built then, either, as I recall, nor was the little I-49 "Island" between Barling and Greenwood, let alone all the six-laned sections in NWA.)  In 10 days all the focus will be on that bridge plus the big Greenwood-Texarkana section.  Not saying I'm glad the BVP took so long to complete (and I know Arkansas politics, or rather, payment methods haven't changed), but again, NOT finishing I-49 as soon as possible will look a lot more foolish on October 1, 2021 than it would have on October 1, 2007, or thereabouts.  Amazing to see all the progress that HAS been made in this 16 year time frame.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on September 21, 2021, 10:35:57 PM
Regarding all the fictional projects in the SE half of the state bisected by US 67, good luck. The NW half is where the economic action is and traffic counts indicate this. Just fill potholes in Warren and El Dorado and they will be fine.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: jbnv on September 22, 2021, 01:24:32 PM
Regarding all the fictional projects in the SE half of the state bisected by US 67, good luck. The NW half is where the economic action is and traffic counts indicate this. Just fill potholes in Warren and El Dorado and they will be fine.

Well, yeah. Everything in the SE half pretty much depends on Louisiana working with them to have any chance of coming to fruition and not being roads to nowhere. By the same token, the action in Louisiana is along I-10 and the Future I-49 South corridor. I'm not even sure that Louisiana really cares about I-49 north of Shreveport any more.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Ryctor2018 on September 22, 2021, 02:38:18 PM
Regarding all the fictional projects in the SE half of the state bisected by US 67, good luck. The NW half is where the economic action is and traffic counts indicate this. Just fill potholes in Warren and El Dorado and they will be fine.

Well, yeah. Everything in the SE half pretty much depends on Louisiana working with them to have any chance of coming to fruition and not being roads to nowhere. By the same token, the action in Louisiana is along I-10 and the Future I-49 South corridor. I'm not even sure that Louisiana really cares about I-49 north of Shreveport any more.

I thought I-49 in Northern Louisiana was completed? (Outside of Shreveport's ICC that is).
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on September 22, 2021, 03:20:46 PM
Regarding all the fictional projects in the SE half of the state bisected by US 67, good luck. The NW half is where the economic action is and traffic counts indicate this. Just fill potholes in Warren and El Dorado and they will be fine.

Well, yeah. Everything in the SE half pretty much depends on Louisiana working with them to have any chance of coming to fruition and not being roads to nowhere. By the same token, the action in Louisiana is along I-10 and the Future I-49 South corridor. I'm not even sure that Louisiana really cares about I-49 north of Shreveport any more.

I thought I-49 in Northern Louisiana was completed? (Outside of Shreveport's ICC that is).

It is completed, other than in Shreveport itself.  I think jbnv is referring to the laughable maintenance since completed.  It's basically closed after ice or snow precipitation of any significance.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: jbnv on September 22, 2021, 03:32:28 PM
It is completed, other than in Shreveport itself.  I think jbnv is referring to the laughable maintenance since completed.  It's basically closed after ice or snow precipitation of any significance.

I was referring to the parts that aren't finished outside of Louisiana, namely Texarkana to Fort Smith. I wasn't aware of the laughable maintenance.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on September 22, 2021, 03:41:28 PM
It is completed, other than in Shreveport itself.  I think jbnv is referring to the laughable maintenance since completed.  It's basically closed after ice or snow precipitation of any significance.

I was referring to the parts that aren't finished outside of Louisiana, namely Texarkana to Fort Smith. I wasn't aware of the laughable maintenance.

I was thinking you might have been referring to another forum topic with your statement:    
I-49 in Northern Louisiana (Louisiana closes I-49 way too soon in cold weather.) (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=28522.0)

Now I understand you were not referring to Louisiana at all.  You're probably right in that using political capital to help Arkansas at this stage of I-49 development isn't high on their priority list, what with the large amount of I-49 still to be done in Louisiana itself within Shreveport, Lafayette, and the US-90 corridor.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: jbnv on September 22, 2021, 04:23:59 PM
Now I understand you were not referring to Louisiana at all.  You're probably right in that using political capital to help Arkansas at this stage of I-49 development isn't high on their priority list, what with the large amount of I-49 still to be done in Louisiana itself within Shreveport, Lafayette, and the US-90 corridor.

Exactly.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: ChimpOnTheWheel on September 22, 2021, 06:20:53 PM
https://www.4029tv.com/article/bella-vista-bypass-work-wrapping-up/37669448#

Work is wrapping up on the BVB (soon-to-be I-49). Interestingly, at 0'31" you can see a SPEED LIMIT 75 sign at the Arkansas line, heading southbound on I-49 from Missouri.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sprjus4 on September 22, 2021, 06:40:08 PM
^ I had questioned the speed limit being either 70 mph or 75 mph, depending on what Arkansas would decide to do, and this same image had been posted, but with a 70 mph speed limit.

Looks like Arkansas decided to bump this stretch to 75 mph, likely the entire section north of US-71. It’s generous, but as I also mentioned before, it will only be about 13 miles of 75 mph zone with 70 mph on either side for significant distances. I’m not opposed to them going for the increase, but wouldn’t have complained if they just stuck 70 mph uniform, at least while Missouri stays capped at 70 mph.

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.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on September 22, 2021, 11:18:28 PM
1. 
Quote
(From the 40/29 story 2 posts above) AR-DOT officials said they have plans for a new state-of-the-art welcome center that will be built at the first exit for Highway 72 on the bypass.

CONFIRMATION, finally (though no surprise).

2.
Quote
Now I understand you were not referring to Louisiana at all.  You're probably right in that using political capital to help Arkansas at this stage of I-49 development isn't high on their priority list, what with the large amount of I-49 still to be done in Louisiana itself within Shreveport, Lafayette, and the US-90 corridor.

The bigger question I would wonder is whether Texas would be willing to use political capital (whether joined or not by Louisiana) on this unfinished segment, especially given it will bump up to their state line.  A finished Arkansas I-49 might mean more to the Greater Houston Area and the Brownsville region than it even would to Baton Rouge/New Orleans.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: jbnv on September 23, 2021, 10:07:17 AM
The bigger question I would wonder is whether Texas would be willing to use political capital (whether joined or not by Louisiana) on this unfinished segment, especially given it will bump up to their state line.  A finished Arkansas I-49 might mean more to the Greater Houston Area and the Brownsville region than it even would to Baton Rouge/New Orleans.

It doesn't just bump up on their line; it currently ends right on it and part of that stretch will pass through Texas. So yes, Arkansas needs Texas to care about the stretch at all for it to get done. And maybe there's private conversation between the two states that's moving this forward behind the scenes.

What benefit does Louisiana get from I-49 complete in Arkansas anyway? The only one I can think of is better access to NWA for evacuations.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: edwaleni on September 23, 2021, 10:34:16 AM
The bigger question I would wonder is whether Texas would be willing to use political capital (whether joined or not by Louisiana) on this unfinished segment, especially given it will bump up to their state line.  A finished Arkansas I-49 might mean more to the Greater Houston Area and the Brownsville region than it even would to Baton Rouge/New Orleans.

It doesn't just bump up on their line; it currently ends right on it and part of that stretch will pass through Texas. So yes, Arkansas needs Texas to care about the stretch at all for it to get done. And maybe there's private conversation between the two states that's moving this forward behind the scenes.

What benefit does Louisiana get from I-49 complete in Arkansas anyway? The only one I can think of is better access to NWA for evacuations.

Port of New Orleans will benefit from certain commerce moving to/from Kansas City in a more effective manner.

A lot of ag products going to Europe exit through the Port of NOLA. Railroads have all but abandoned the 800 mile or less market. That leaves lots of room for markets between KCMO and NOLA to get product to port without railroad overhead.

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on September 23, 2021, 12:50:23 PM
The bigger question I would wonder is whether Texas would be willing to use political capital (whether joined or not by Louisiana) on this unfinished segment, especially given it will bump up to their state line.  A finished Arkansas I-49 might mean more to the Greater Houston Area and the Brownsville region than it even would to Baton Rouge/New Orleans.

It doesn't just bump up on their line; it currently ends right on it and part of that stretch will pass through Texas. So yes, Arkansas needs Texas to care about the stretch at all for it to get done. And maybe there's private conversation between the two states that's moving this forward behind the scenes.

What benefit does Louisiana get from I-49 complete in Arkansas anyway? The only one I can think of is better access to NWA for evacuations.

If Texas doesn't connect to the short segment in their state with some sort of NW bypass of Texarkana, I question their will to want any of I-49 in their state as they'd be on the hook for half of the Red River crossing.  I certainly see Arkansas' desire for splitting the cost.  I swear this state has more river border crossings...

I doubt that many evacuees would go all the way to NWA in the event of a hurricane as they are always tropical storm level or less by the time they work their way to the LA/AR border.  They'd be just as likely to go to Texarkana or Little Rock as continuing up a completed I-49.  In most storms, they likely wouldn't need to go further than Shreveport, unless flooding was a major concern as it sometimes still can be with remnants.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: jbnv on September 23, 2021, 01:40:50 PM
I doubt that many evacuees would go all the way to NWA in the event of a hurricane as they are always tropical storm level or less by the time they work their way to the LA/AR border.  They'd be just as likely to go to Texarkana or Little Rock as continuing up a completed I-49.  In most storms, they likely wouldn't need to go further than Shreveport, unless flooding was a major concern as it sometimes still can be with remnants.

I have a relative that lives "down the bayou" that got slammed by Ida. I heard she had gone all the way to Fredricksburg, Texas. I've heard of people evacuating to places like Atlanta and St. Louis. The simple fact is that hotels along the interstates fill up quickly in these situations and the states need places to send people. Also, NWA has the University of Arkansas. I figure that if it's not a home-game weekend, NWA should have plenty of hotel rooms that can accommodate evacuees.

For the record, you're supporting my argument that Louisiana gets little benefit from the completion of I-49 from Texarkana to Ft. Smith.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: ChiMilNet on September 23, 2021, 03:16:22 PM
I doubt that many evacuees would go all the way to NWA in the event of a hurricane as they are always tropical storm level or less by the time they work their way to the LA/AR border.  They'd be just as likely to go to Texarkana or Little Rock as continuing up a completed I-49.  In most storms, they likely wouldn't need to go further than Shreveport, unless flooding was a major concern as it sometimes still can be with remnants.

I have a relative that lives "down the bayou" that got slammed by Ida. I heard she had gone all the way to Fredricksburg, Texas. I've heard of people evacuating to places like Atlanta and St. Louis. The simple fact is that hotels along the interstates fill up quickly in these situations and the states need places to send people. Also, NWA has the University of Arkansas. I figure that if it's not a home-game weekend, NWA should have plenty of hotel rooms that can accommodate evacuees.

For the record, you're supporting my argument that Louisiana gets little benefit from the completion of I-49 from Texarkana to Ft. Smith.

Thinking big picture here. TX should have a lot of incentive to do that little part of I-49 along with AR finishing the central portion. When you combine that with the I-369/69 corridor from Texarkana to Houston, which TX does seem committed to, you suddenly have a very viable and relatively direct route to get from NW AR, KC, and other cities in the Central US further North down to Houston while relieving the pressure on the DFW freeways, plus also bypassing the OK turnpikes. Fact is, Houston is one of the faster growing and a top ten metropolitan area in the US, which also can get slammed by hurricanes. There needs to be as many routes out of the coastal areas for evacuations, as well as commerce. Right now, the only Interstate North out of Houston that is a complete route is the already overcrowded I-45. I-69/369/49 creates a much-needed access from Houston to the Central US. TX should know this, and realize it has a lot of stakes in its portion of I-49, though short it may be.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on September 23, 2021, 03:59:50 PM
I doubt that many evacuees would go all the way to NWA in the event of a hurricane as they are always tropical storm level or less by the time they work their way to the LA/AR border.  They'd be just as likely to go to Texarkana or Little Rock as continuing up a completed I-49.  In most storms, they likely wouldn't need to go further than Shreveport, unless flooding was a major concern as it sometimes still can be with remnants.

I have a relative that lives "down the bayou" that got slammed by Ida. I heard she had gone all the way to Fredricksburg, Texas. I've heard of people evacuating to places like Atlanta and St. Louis. The simple fact is that hotels along the interstates fill up quickly in these situations and the states need places to send people. Also, NWA has the University of Arkansas. I figure that if it's not a home-game weekend, NWA should have plenty of hotel rooms that can accommodate evacuees.

For the record, you're supporting my argument that Louisiana gets little benefit from the completion of I-49 from Texarkana to Ft. Smith.

I'm sure some folks do go that far in an evacuation, but I'd bet that most go that far due to family contacts as opposed to finding the first open room.  NWA is more than 500 miles from Lafayette, and even if there was a completed I-49, there'd be little in the way of services between Texarkana and Ft. Smith for quite a few years.  Sure, there will be truck stops and hotels go up pretty quick along the Waldron and Mena bypasses, but I'd be shocked if they amounted to many rooms until some infill occurs over the course of decades as there aren't much in the way of jobs at either to otherwise draw migrants.

I'm sure that those in Louisiana for the most part don't see as much benefit to Arkansas' remaining mileage, just as I personally won't see as much benefit to it either once the segment across the Arkansas River between I-40 and AR-22 are completed as I don't have much call to go south of Ft. Smith anymore as my family down there have all moved on.  And that goes doubly so for any of Louisiana's remaining gaps.  But there's plenty of others that I'm sure have different needs, so it's not like they don't have value.  The higher value portions (AADT) will inevitably be built first.  It's ISTEA HPC route #1, so it'll all get done eventually.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bassoon1986 on September 23, 2021, 05:33:22 PM
The bigger question I would wonder is whether Texas would be willing to use political capital (whether joined or not by Louisiana) on this unfinished segment, especially given it will bump up to their state line.  A finished Arkansas I-49 might mean more to the Greater Houston Area and the Brownsville region than it even would to Baton Rouge/New Orleans.

It doesn't just bump up on their line; it currently ends right on it and part of that stretch will pass through Texas. So yes, Arkansas needs Texas to care about the stretch at all for it to get done. And maybe there's private conversation between the two states that's moving this forward behind the scenes.

What benefit does Louisiana get from I-49 complete in Arkansas anyway? The only one I can think of is better access to NWA for evacuations.

If Texas doesn't connect to the short segment in their state with some sort of NW bypass of Texarkana, I question their will to want any of I-49 in their state as they'd be on the hook for half of the Red River crossing.  I certainly see Arkansas' desire for splitting the cost.  I swear this state has more river border crossings...

I doubt that many evacuees would go all the way to NWA in the event of a hurricane as they are always tropical storm level or less by the time they work their way to the LA/AR border.  They'd be just as likely to go to Texarkana or Little Rock as continuing up a completed I-49.  In most storms, they likely wouldn't need to go further than Shreveport, unless flooding was a major concern as it sometimes still can be with remnants.
You would be surprised. I knew people from Houma, LA after Hurricane Ida that had to travel as far as Hot Springs. That’s still a ways from NWA but further than I would have thought you could find accommodations.


iPhone
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on September 23, 2021, 11:51:53 PM
The bigger question I would wonder is whether Texas would be willing to use political capital (whether joined or not by Louisiana) on this unfinished segment, especially given it will bump up to their state line.  A finished Arkansas I-49 might mean more to the Greater Houston Area and the Brownsville region than it even would to Baton Rouge/New Orleans.

It doesn't just bump up on their line; it currently ends right on it and part of that stretch will pass through Texas. So yes, Arkansas needs Texas to care about the stretch at all for it to get done. And maybe there's private conversation between the two states that's moving this forward behind the scenes.

What benefit does Louisiana get from I-49 complete in Arkansas anyway? The only one I can think of is better access to NWA for evacuations.

Texarkana is making preparations to grow significantly when, as expected, I-369 and I-69 Texas are complete.  Bet there's a lot of private conversation on this subject going on, as you speculate.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on September 24, 2021, 10:16:23 AM
The iDriveArkansas camera viewing the south end sure looks different now with that hill mostly gone.  Still looks like a lot of work to be done before the end of next week, though.  Maybe the US-71 exit will still be closed southbound after Oct. 1.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: jbnv on September 24, 2021, 11:16:15 AM
What benefit does Louisiana get from I-49 complete in Arkansas anyway? The only one I can think of is better access to NWA for evacuations.

Just thought of a real benefit to Louisiana: a faster trip for LSU and Arkansas fans for the Battle of the Boot.

(This is sarcasm.)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Anthony_JK on September 24, 2021, 08:16:27 PM
They could just as easily move that game to Shreveport (Independence Bowl Stadium) and/or Little Rock.


Well, I-49 would, especially when I-49 South is completed, give better access to the main Louisiana ports (Port of South Louisiana, Port Fourchon, NOLA), which would not suck for commerce.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on September 26, 2021, 11:37:44 AM
BVB WEEK BEGINS!

(EDIT: It appears to be the lead story in today's Northwest Arkansas Democrat Gazette - it's at the top of their web site right now, regardless.  The I-49 pincer is about to shut to between Alma and north Texarkana.):

Missing link in I-49 ready to open, ribbon cutting set

https://www.nwaonline.com/news/2021/sep/26/missing-link-in-i-49-ready-to-open-ribbon-cutting/
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on September 27, 2021, 09:18:37 AM
BVB WEEK BEGINS!

(EDIT: It appears to be the lead story in today's Northwest Arkansas Democrat Gazette - it's at the top of their web site right now, regardless.  The I-49 pincer is about to shut to between Alma and north Texarkana.):

Missing link in I-49 ready to open, ribbon cutting set

https://www.nwaonline.com/news/2021/sep/26/missing-link-in-i-49-ready-to-open-ribbon-cutting/

Sure looks like they've got quite a bit left to finish on the overpass and the southbound US-71 exit in Bentonville looking at the live feed from the iDriveArkansas.com camera.  Still got lots of rock on the offramp, which will likely need a resurface at minimum after they clear all of the tailings from the blasting.  Still need to finish striping the southbound carriageway across the overpass, and they haven't done any striping of the northbound carriageway for a little ways past the ends of the overpass.  That likely can be done in a day, though.  Is the SPUI underneath scheduled to be done by Oct. 1, or is that considered its own project?  I'd probably expect some cleanup projects and lane closures after Oct. 1 for a month or so regardless.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: msunat97 on September 27, 2021, 09:50:03 AM
The rock cut could be completed after the opening & just leave that ramp closed & 1 lane over the BVB.  The NB painting could be done this week pretty quickly.  It looks like most of the SPUI is done, but it's hard to tell with the 1 camera.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on September 28, 2021, 12:58:22 AM
The rock cut could be completed after the opening & just leave that ramp closed & 1 lane over the BVB.  The NB painting could be done this week pretty quickly.  It looks like most of the SPUI is done, but it's hard to tell with the 1 camera.

I've got a job in Bella Vista Friday, so I'll get a closer look then.  Article came out just today on the subject, so apparently I wasn't the only one who wondered.

BVB Lane Closures Scheduled (https://www.nwahomepage.com/news/lane-closures-planned-for-bella-vista-bypass/)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Henry on September 28, 2021, 11:33:36 AM
So after the BVB opens to complete the Ft. Smith-Kansas City link, what will happen next?

Something tells me that they'll work from Alma south to Texarkana, aside from the short piece of freeway that's already completed southeast of Ft. Smith. It's better this way anyway, because it's still unknown how or when TX wants to do their small part, which would make working from Texarkana north a nonstarter. Plus, the south end of new I-49/old I-540 is easily connectable to the stub in Ft. Smith, so there's that.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on September 28, 2021, 12:43:00 PM
I've been wondering about development between Bella Vista and Gravette along the completed BVB.  Hadn't seen this ARDOT map (which is linked in this Talk Business story today on the proposed XNA Access Highway (https://talkbusiness.net/2021/09/ardot-asks-for-comments-on-85-million-xna-access-highway/)).  There's a HUGE swath that's been cleared at Rocky Dell Hollow and Highlands (NE corner of the last Arkansas exit on the Bella Vista Bypass heading north).  I wonder if that's commercial, or where they've decided to locate the "state-of-the-art visitor's center" the 40/29 reporter from last week mentioned.  Here's the map link:

https://www.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=8d6a3fa72e6c4e47ac177db7e2a01b59
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on September 28, 2021, 01:02:42 PM
So after the BVB opens to complete the Ft. Smith-Kansas City link, what will happen next?

Something tells me that they'll work from Alma south to Texarkana, aside from the short piece of freeway that's already completed southeast of Ft. Smith. It's better this way anyway, because it's still unknown how or when TX wants to do their small part, which would make working from Texarkana north a nonstarter. Plus, the south end of new I-49/old I-540 is easily connectable to the stub in Ft. Smith, so there's that.

Henry, this completed I-49 has been a long time in coming, and some of us still wonder if we'll see the finished product.  That being said, the money has apparently been allocated to build the section (including the Arkansas River Bridge) between Alma and Y City (west of Hot Springs) as a two lane "pre-interstate".  I will add this: the spotlight on this uncompleted section will be the brightest it has ever been in history starting this Friday.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Rick Powell on September 28, 2021, 05:05:16 PM
So after the BVB opens to complete the Ft. Smith-Kansas City link, what will happen next?

Something tells me that they'll work from Alma south to Texarkana, aside from the short piece of freeway that's already completed southeast of Ft. Smith. It's better this way anyway, because it's still unknown how or when TX wants to do their small part, which would make working from Texarkana north a nonstarter. Plus, the south end of new I-49/old I-540 is easily connectable to the stub in Ft. Smith, so there's that.

I predict in 20 years, the undone section between Ashdown and Texarkana will be the "new" BVB.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on September 28, 2021, 10:43:01 PM
Quote from: Henry
Something tells me that they'll work from Alma south to Texarkana, aside from the short piece of freeway that's already completed southeast of Ft. Smith. It's better this way anyway, because it's still unknown how or when TX wants to do their small part, which would make working from Texarkana north a nonstarter.

The Alma-Barling segment in metro Fort Smith will (hopefully) get its 2-lane partial start in the near future. The bridge is a time-sensitive project due to the ever-present factor of cost inflation over time. The sooner they get the entire thing completed the less it will ultimately cost.

After that it's anyone's guess what AR DOT will choose to build. There is a lot of different ways to "skin the cat" on completing the Fort Smith to Texarkana leg of I-49.

If it was up to me, I'd build the bypasses for Mansfield, Waldron, Mena, De Queen and Ashdown first then connect the gaps between later. It would be for the same reason the bridge between Alma and Barling needs to be built ASAP: cost inflation as well as getting ahead of real estate development. Plus there is bound to be at least some speculative real estate squatters looking to gobble up land they think is in the ROW to make AR DOT pay even more for it. The situation will get worse the longer AR DOT puts off building the bypasses. I think the squatter factor would be guaranteed to happen if AR DOT chooses to build out I-49 in a linear fashion from Fort Smith downward. It will be more predictable where the next projects will be built. If they mix things up, building projects in different disconnected locations, it will do more to throw off the land speculators.

One thing I think AR DOT should consider: initially building out much of the Fort Smith-Texarkana I-49 leg as a Super-2 even with some at-grade intersections to cut costs. It doesn't have to be immediately signed as an Interstate. They did so with the I-530 corridor South of Pine Bluff in order to secure the ROW path. They might want to do some of the same thing here.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: GreenLanternCorps on September 29, 2021, 06:23:07 AM
Quote from: Henry
Something tells me that they'll work from Alma south to Texarkana, aside from the short piece of freeway that's already completed southeast of Ft. Smith. It's better this way anyway, because it's still unknown how or when TX wants to do their small part, which would make working from Texarkana north a nonstarter.

The Alma-Barling segment in metro Fort Smith will (hopefully) get its 2-lane partial start in the near future. The bridge is a time-sensitive project due to the ever-present factor of cost inflation over time. The sooner they get the entire thing completed the less it will ultimately cost.

After that it's anyone's guess what AR DOT will choose to build. There is a lot of different ways to "skin the cat" on completing the Fort Smith to Texarkana leg of I-49.

If it was up to me, I'd build the bypasses for Mansfield, Waldron, Mena, De Queen and Ashdown first then connect the gaps between later. It would be for the same reason the bridge between Alma and Barling needs to be built ASAP: cost inflation as well as getting ahead of real estate development. Plus there is bound to be at least some speculative real estate squatters looking to gobble up land they think is in the ROW to make AR DOT pay even more for it. The situation will get worse the longer AR DOT puts off building the bypasses. I think the squatter factor would be guaranteed to happen if AR DOT chooses to build out I-49 in a linear fashion from Fort Smith downward. It will be more predictable where the next projects will be built. If they mix things up, building projects in different disconnected locations, it will do more to throw off the land speculators.

One thing I think AR DOT should consider: initially building out much of the Fort Smith-Texarkana I-49 leg as a Super-2 even with some at-grade intersections to cut costs. It doesn't have to be immediately signed as an Interstate. They did so with the I-530 corridor South of Pine Bluff in order to secure the ROW path. They might want to do some of the same thing here.

If there is no other way, yes, Super-2's will allow you to get the right-of-way, however I'm not a huge fan, as it means you have to build on the same real estate twice.  But what ever is needed to get the job done....

An exception to this is the Bridge.  The bridge freeway should be built as one unit and the US 71 interchange should be completed so that you have a completed freeway from the state line to south of Fort Smith.  I don't think the uncompleted interchange could handle the volume of southbound traffic coming from the bridge.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: GreenLanternCorps on September 29, 2021, 09:27:03 AM
According to our favorite iDrive Arkansas webcam, the northbound lanes of Future I-49 at the US 71 interchange are now mostly striped.

The yellow lines and dashed white lines are done.  The white line on the shoulder is partially done.

I wonder if some additional webcams are doing to pop up going North to the state line?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Rick Powell on September 29, 2021, 10:49:55 AM
If it was up to me, I'd build the bypasses for Mansfield, Waldron, Mena, De Queen and Ashdown first then connect the gaps between later. It would be for the same reason the bridge between Alma and Barling needs to be built ASAP: cost inflation as well as getting ahead of real estate development. Plus there is bound to be at least some speculative real estate squatters looking to gobble up land they think is in the ROW to make AR DOT pay even more for it. The situation will get worse the longer AR DOT puts off building the bypasses. I think the squatter factor would be guaranteed to happen if AR DOT chooses to build out I-49 in a linear fashion from Fort Smith downward. It will be more predictable where the next projects will be built. If they mix things up, building projects in different disconnected locations, it will do more to throw off the land speculators.

Arkansas could have more control over the I-49 corridor if they had the political will to do so. Several states, including FL, IL and IN (but apparently not AR according to a survey I read), have a "corridor protection" law that, once a corridor is identified and recorded, developers who want to build must notify the state DOT and the state basically has first right of refusal to buy the property, or let the development happen. It requires DOTs to "put their money where their mouth is" and be ready to pay fair market value to prevent an expensive development from happening in their corridor, but ultimately it would save money if there is a long range need to keep the corridor clear. IL's corridor protection law was affirmed by the US Supreme Court and IN copied it nearly word for word.

Of course, deciding where the corridor should go is the first step, and although some corridor protection laws don't require an environmental study, it would be a good idea to preserve a corridor that has federal environmental approval.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on September 29, 2021, 11:19:39 AM
From the "Build I-49" FB page - hope this image shows up - that hulk of a structure was there forever without signage at the Pineville split:

(https://scontent-dfw5-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.6435-9/243519635_10159649700513624_9086514090800374683_n.jpg?_nc_cat=102&ccb=1-5&_nc_sid=730e14&_nc_ohc=nH0XmG6EqPEAX9ZsJBP&_nc_ht=scontent-dfw5-2.xx&oh=26024549ddef2253026d6de605078f20&oe=61791247)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on September 29, 2021, 11:32:04 AM
If it was up to me, I'd build the bypasses for Mansfield, Waldron, Mena, De Queen and Ashdown first then connect the gaps between later. It would be for the same reason the bridge between Alma and Barling needs to be built ASAP: cost inflation as well as getting ahead of real estate development. Plus there is bound to be at least some speculative real estate squatters looking to gobble up land they think is in the ROW to make AR DOT pay even more for it. The situation will get worse the longer AR DOT puts off building the bypasses. I think the squatter factor would be guaranteed to happen if AR DOT chooses to build out I-49 in a linear fashion from Fort Smith downward. It will be more predictable where the next projects will be built. If they mix things up, building projects in different disconnected locations, it will do more to throw off the land speculators.

Arkansas could have more control over the I-49 corridor if they had the political will to do so.

Since you all were joking about football earlier on, now that Arkansas has beaten UT and aTm, someone ought to remind the state's leaders that Texas I-69 and I-35 will make it easier than ever to get those legions of Texas high school students (and 4-5 star recruits) to Razorback-land on a completed I-49.  Maybe that will entice them to finish it.  :sombrero:
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: mvak36 on September 29, 2021, 11:46:56 AM
From the "Build I-49" FB page - hope this image shows up - that hulk of a structure was there forever without signage at the Pineville split:

(https://scontent-dfw5-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.6435-9/243519635_10159649700513624_9086514090800374683_n.jpg?_nc_cat=102&ccb=1-5&_nc_sid=730e14&_nc_ohc=nH0XmG6EqPEAX9ZsJBP&_nc_ht=scontent-dfw5-2.xx&oh=26024549ddef2253026d6de605078f20&oe=61791247)

I don't see it, but here's the link to picture. https://www.facebook.com/288089113623/photos/a.297333663623/10159649700508624/?type=3&theater

Also uploaded to the gallery just in case:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/gallery/12408_29_09_21_11_45_57.jpeg)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on September 29, 2021, 01:03:09 PM
Quote from: GreenLaternCorps
If there is no other way, yes, Super-2's will allow you to get the right-of-way, however I'm not a huge fan, as it means you have to build on the same real estate twice.

In an environment where you're having to deal with funding limits it's important to focus on the most basic needs of the project. In this case it's the Right Of Way. You can't do anything else without the proposed route's ROW preserved and protected from future development. There's always going to be some jackass who makes a deal with city government people, county commissioners or whoever so he can plant a new apartment complex directly in the path of where the highway will eventually be built.

For example, the curvy, stupid (and short) Kilpatrick Turnpike extension in Oklahoma City ended up being built the way it is because various powers that be in Oklahoma were too stupid to preserve the ROW they needed for the Southern half of the Kilpatrick outer loop around the OKC metro back in the mid 1990's. Directly South of the Kilpatrick's original SW end at I-40 some jerk developer was allowed to put a housing subdivision right in the way. The powers that be didn't think at all about future highway needs. They just wanted to make a land deal right then. That and other similar deals have pretty much screwed OKC out of having a proper outer loop. Now they're trying to re-label some roads as I-240 to make their non-planning garbage look like it was all by design.

A Super-2, especially one with at-grade intersections isn't going to impress anybody. But it's an effective approach to getting the job done at securing Interstate-width ROW, including the land needed for the exits. This approach will allow more time and flexibility for things like re-locating utilities. Limited access exits can be added in various phases.

Quote from: GreenLaternCorps
An exception to this is the Bridge.  The bridge freeway should be built as one unit and the US 71 interchange should be completed so that you have a completed freeway from the state line to south of Fort Smith.  I don't think the uncompleted interchange could handle the volume of southbound traffic coming from the bridge.

Unfortunately AR DOT does not have the funding to do that. Hence the 2-lane interim version for now.

Quote from: Rick Powell
Arkansas could have more control over the I-49 corridor if they had the political will to do so. Several states, including FL, IL and IN (but apparently not AR according to a survey I read), have a "corridor protection" law that, once a corridor is identified and recorded, developers who want to build must notify the state DOT and the state basically has first right of refusal to buy the property, or let the development happen.

I don't know if the AR state government has anything like that on the books. It sure doesn't seem like Oklahoma does. Even if Oklahoma did, the "deciders" would be such cheapskates they would let various developers overrun an identified future highway corridor with new development rather than spend the fair market money to preserve the ROW.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on September 29, 2021, 01:17:39 PM
According to our favorite iDrive Arkansas webcam, the northbound lanes of Future I-49 at the US 71 interchange are now mostly striped.

The yellow lines and dashed white lines are done.  The white line on the shoulder is partially done.

I wonder if some additional webcams are doing to pop up going North to the state line?

They must have done that last night as I checked it a couple of times yesterday.

I'm sure they'll add more cameras north of what they have now.  Until 2 months ago, they had one on that hill they are cleaning up the debris from facing SE.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on September 29, 2021, 01:29:09 PM
Just submitted a Google Maps correction for the area so they can get on fixing the route (non-satellite map) and redesignation of the BVB into I-49.  Perhaps premature, but there's likely some lag time anyway.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on September 29, 2021, 03:38:10 PM
Thank you, mvak36!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: mvak36 on September 29, 2021, 06:42:29 PM
Thank you, mvak36!
Sure. I think you posted it correctly. I looked on the Tapatalk app and I could see your picture fine. I guess I just couldn’t see it on my Firefox browser.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on September 29, 2021, 08:19:30 PM


Interesting side note: they apparently changed the milepost from 5 to 4
(https://live.staticflickr.com/8518/8351163143_243627b04a_z_d.jpg)
2012


Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: ChiMilNet on September 30, 2021, 03:41:53 PM
Found this video online of a virtual drive through the new connector. Quite interesting, and I noticed that there are a number of sections with only a concrete divider in the middle (in Missouri especially). However, this will be a welcome connection.

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: msunat97 on September 30, 2021, 05:58:34 PM
Found this video online of a virtual drive through the new connector. Quite interesting, and I noticed that there are a number of sections with only a concrete divider in the middle (in Missouri especially). However, this will be a welcome connection.


Nice share.  That looks like how I normally drive!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: GreenLanternCorps on September 30, 2021, 07:47:51 PM
I think they are getting ready to open it.  The video quality is lousy on my phone at the moment.  But our favorite traffic cam was showing vehicles with yellow flashing lights in the Northbound lanes and it looks like the barrels in the Southbound lanes are gone or moved.

Edit:  Nope, barrels still in Southbound, but activity in Northbound…
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on September 30, 2021, 07:51:08 PM
I think they are getting ready to open it.  The video quality is lousy on my phone at the moment.  But our favorite traffic cam was showing vehicles with yellow flashing lights in the Northbound lanes and it looks like the barrels in the Southbound lanes are gone or moved.

MoDOT says 49 should open by 9am Friday.

Correction: it opened at 9:30 pm  this evening.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: msunat97 on October 01, 2021, 08:57:54 AM
I think they are getting ready to open it.  The video quality is lousy on my phone at the moment.  But our favorite traffic cam was showing vehicles with yellow flashing lights in the Northbound lanes and it looks like the barrels in the Southbound lanes are gone or moved.

MoDOT says 49 should open by 9am Friday.

Correction: it opened at 9:30 pm  this evening.

Waze showed that it was open as of this morning.  However, I didn't check after 930pm last night.  Google isn't quite there yet.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: GreenLanternCorps on October 01, 2021, 09:55:05 AM
It is now light enough that our favorite traffic cam is giving nice views of the traffic on I-49.

Both Southbound lanes are open.  Traffic starting to pick up with the morning commute, but not heavy. Northbound traffic lighter still, but it is morning and most commuters should be going South at this time of day.

Southbound ramp to US 71 is still closed.

The Exit number on the sign is the I-540 number of 93, not the Exit 279 it should be.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Thegeet on October 01, 2021, 10:05:57 AM
Finally. I-49 is open.
From the "Build I-49" FB page - hope this image shows up - that hulk of a structure was there forever without signage at the Pineville split:

(https://scontent-dfw5-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.6435-9/243519635_10159649700513624_9086514090800374683_n.jpg?_nc_cat=102&ccb=1-5&_nc_sid=730e14&_nc_ohc=nH0XmG6EqPEAX9ZsJBP&_nc_ht=scontent-dfw5-2.xx&oh=26024549ddef2253026d6de605078f20&oe=61791247)
I thought they still used clearview instead of Highway Gothic? Or are they simultaneous?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: jbnv on October 01, 2021, 10:17:19 AM
I thought they still used clearview instead of Highway Gothic? Or are they simultaneous?

I wasn't aware that Missouri ever used Clearview.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: razorback0308 on October 01, 2021, 10:48:41 AM
I drove northbound from Springdale to the first Hwy 72 exit (exit 284). When northbound motorists get off at exit 93 (Walton Blvd), they are funneled down to the new SPUI. Now I want to know the plan for the one-lane exit ramp that’s been used the past year or so.

Are they tearing that bridge out? I believe with a few tweaks it could be used for the Razorback Greenway connecting Bentonville to Lake Bella Vista. Has anybody heard anything?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Thegeet on October 01, 2021, 01:53:55 PM
I thought they still used clearview instead of Highway Gothic? Or are they simultaneous?

I wasn't aware that Missouri ever used Clearview.
Oops. I thought this was Arkansas. NVM then.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on October 02, 2021, 09:44:28 AM
I drove northbound from Springdale to the first Hwy 72 exit (exit 284). When northbound motorists get off at exit 93 (Walton Blvd), they are funneled down to the new SPUI. Now I want to know the plan for the one-lane exit ramp that’s been used the past year or so.

Are they tearing that bridge out? I believe with a few tweaks it could be used for the Razorback Greenway connecting Bentonville to Lake Bella Vista. Has anybody heard anything?

The Razorback Greenway crosses I-49 in a tunnel just a few dozen yards from the box culverts with the creek crossing.  They still need to reconstruct the actual Greenway connection as it was tore out during construction.  I haven't seen any timeframe yet, but I suspect it'll happen pretty quick with all of the equipment still hanging around.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on October 02, 2021, 09:52:34 AM
Did my first drive on it yesterday morning after a job in Bentonville.  The wife and I got off at Pineville after a very short ride from the SPUI to the northbound onramp of I-49 from US-71 northbound.  Witnessed a semi blow through a left turn clearly not paying attention to his own set of lights, but no one wants to ram a semi, so he proceeded unscathed.  Clearly needs to be better signage/light obscuring to help the general public with this hitherto unknown intersection type.  The new bypass saved 10 minutes during a non-rush hour, but during rushes, likely saves 15-20 minutes each way, so commuters from north of Pineville or along MO-90 will get a great deal of life back.  It actually connects Noel, MO to Bentonville a lot better now as well, so I expect that town to start showing signs of growth, which they could desperately use.  The Elk River will be more heavily used for weekend floats going forward now as well, I predict.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: ITB on October 02, 2021, 02:35:58 PM

Bella Vista Bypass ribbon cutting ceremony September 30, 2021:

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51539585704_985412a7ba_k.jpg)
Courtesy Arkansas Highways.

This photo (https://www.flickr.com/photos/ahtd/51539585704/) and others can be found on the Arkansas Highways flickr page. (https://www.flickr.com/photos/ahtd/)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on October 02, 2021, 04:51:53 PM
Did my first drive on it yesterday morning after a job in Bentonville.  The wife and I got off at Pineville after a very short ride from the SPUI to the northbound onramp of I-49 from US-71 northbound.  Witnessed a semi blow through a left turn clearly not paying attention to his own set of lights, but no one wants to ram a semi, so he proceeded unscathed.  Clearly needs to be better signage/light obscuring to help the general public with this hitherto unknown intersection type.  The new bypass saved 10 minutes during a non-rush hour, but during rushes, likely saves 15-20 minutes each way, so commuters from north of Pineville or along MO-90 will get a great deal of life back.  It actually connects Noel, MO to Bentonville a lot better now as well, so I expect that town to start showing signs of growth, which they could desperately use.  The Elk River will be more heavily used for weekend floats going forward now as well, I predict.

As goes Noel, so will (likely) go Grove, OK, a hub of activity in its own right.

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on October 02, 2021, 05:40:37 PM
Did my first drive on it yesterday morning after a job in Bentonville.  The wife and I got off at Pineville after a very short ride from the SPUI to the northbound onramp of I-49 from US-71 northbound.  Witnessed a semi blow through a left turn clearly not paying attention to his own set of lights, but no one wants to ram a semi, so he proceeded unscathed.  Clearly needs to be better signage/light obscuring to help the general public with this hitherto unknown intersection type.  The new bypass saved 10 minutes during a non-rush hour, but during rushes, likely saves 15-20 minutes each way, so commuters from north of Pineville or along MO-90 will get a great deal of life back.  It actually connects Noel, MO to Bentonville a lot better now as well, so I expect that town to start showing signs of growth, which they could desperately use.  The Elk River will be more heavily used for weekend floats going forward now as well, I predict.

As goes Noel, so will (likely) go Grove, OK, a hub of activity in its own right.



I'm  waiting for the first c-store or motel at 49/90.  Then again, Greenland, AR to Alma there's basically nothing.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Tomahawkin on October 02, 2021, 11:58:48 PM
A Buc'ees would be nice in that stretch and would bring a lot of jobs!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on October 03, 2021, 11:33:22 AM
A Buc'ees would be nice in that stretch and would bring a lot of jobs!

More likely a Love's  or local talent.  :)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Arkansastravelguy on October 03, 2021, 11:57:28 AM
A Buc'ees would be nice in that stretch and would bring a lot of jobs!

More likely a Love's  or local talent.  :)
I could see a workmans there


iPhone
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on October 03, 2021, 12:02:45 PM
A Buc'ees would be nice in that stretch and would bring a lot of jobs!

More likely a Love's  or local talent.  :)
I could see a workmans there


iPhone

Totally forgot about them, but yes.   Or maybe Coulson//Road Runner.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on October 03, 2021, 02:44:08 PM
No other convenience store chain is quite like Buc-ee's. Whenever I drive to DFW I usually stop at the Buc-ee's on TX-114 across from Texas Motor Speedway to get some beef jerky and other goodies. Sometimes I'll get a burger and Neapolitan milkshake at In-N-Out nearby.

Anyway, Buc-ee's has become rather picky where they choose to open new "Big Store" locations. They seem to prefer sites adjacent to Interstates near key highway junctions and/or on the outer fringes of major metro areas. The new one off I-10 in Alabama seems like it's in an isolated spot, but that's the main exit for Gulf Shores. So traffic is crazy at that location. The one in Leeds, AL off I-20 is at the first exit East of the I-20/I-459 interchange. And there's a big outlet mall nearby.

I'd love it if Buc-ee's built at least a couple locations in Oklahoma. But that's not going to be happening any time soon.

Buc-ee's is currently expanding into the Deep South and Florida. One of the latest announcements is a location off I-40, Exit 407 near Sevierville, TN. Currently the New Braunfel's Buc-ee's holds the title of World's Largest Convenience Store at 66,335 square feet. This new one in Tennessee will be 74,000 square feet. It will have 120 fueling stations, like the one in New Braunfels. This location will be an anchor store for a development called "The 407: Gateway to Adventure." This will be the second Buc-ee's in Tennessee. The first one is under construction in Crossville.

As fast as the NWA region has been growing, I think it's a practical possibility for Buc-ee's to build a Big Store next to I-49 if the company wants to start building locations in Arkansas. The trick is finding the right kind of location with a big enough plot of vacant land available to develop.

Actually one zone that would be a natural for Buc-ee's is a little ways North by Joplin along the overlap of I-44 and I-49. There is a LOT of cross country traffic going through that zone. One of the key customer groups Buc-ee's likes to serve is people on long distance road trips needing to stock up.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Arkansastravelguy on October 03, 2021, 04:03:24 PM
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20211003/1cd8f512d0792c570a0e8b1832cb65f7.jpg)


iPhone
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: jbnv on October 03, 2021, 07:24:08 PM
All I have to say about Buc'ees is that I'm pretty much shunning them since they pulled out of plans to build in Baton Rouge five years ago. (Ironically, had they built there they'd get a lot of my business since I work just a short distance from where they were going to build.) We don't need them anyway. Everyone along I-10 is upping their bathroom game and food service game. Also, beavers don't eat crawfish (https://nearbynature.fwni.org/2018/09/13/beavers-and-muskrats-background/).
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Tomahawkin on October 03, 2021, 08:30:36 PM
I would also like to see a Whataburger, and/or maybe Jack in the Box, somewhere along either 40, 49 or 30 in West Arkansas, the food options are pretty limited west of Little Rock, Hot Springs is too far away from IH 30 and there is relatively nothing between Little Rock and Fayetteville. Unless there are options in Russellville? I can't wait to go out there in 9 months
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Thegeet on October 03, 2021, 08:56:48 PM
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20211003/1cd8f512d0792c570a0e8b1832cb65f7.jpg)


iPhone
When can we expect Google Maps to street view this new bypass?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: CoreySamson on October 03, 2021, 09:56:19 PM
When can we expect Google Maps to street view this new bypass?
I would guess next year. Google doesn’t even seem to acknowledge that the bypass is open at the moment.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Arkansastravelguy on October 03, 2021, 10:04:59 PM
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20211004/fedca56dab8ae980626e0a1ac28f710b.jpg)
Anyone else surprised they already pulled 71B from Bentonville but left 71 through BV instead of piggybacking 71 on 49? I guess because Missouri typically doesn’t to Business US routes
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Scott5114 on October 03, 2021, 10:20:50 PM
Anyone else surprised they already pulled 71B from Bentonville but left 71 through BV instead of piggybacking 71 on 49? I guess because Missouri typically doesn’t to Business US routes

They do very much do Business Interstates, though.

Moving US 71 to I-49 here would require MoDOT and ArDOT to collaborate on the paperwork. My guess is that as long as both states intend to keep the old road through Bella Vista state maintained, there's not really much benefit to going through the trouble of moving the US route and getting some other designation (like Biz I-49 or some state route designation) approved.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on October 03, 2021, 10:37:27 PM

Anyone else surprised they already pulled 71B from Bentonville but left 71 through BV instead of piggybacking 71 on 49? I guess because Missouri typically doesn’t to Business US routes

ARDOT has been allowing local communities to assume maintenance of some (now former) Business Routes.

The Bus 71 designation at Bentonville was removed north of Rainbow Curve/ AR 12. But is still active  east of there to 8th Street, then south towards Springdale.

It was also been removed in Fayetteville.  Cities assume responsibility and the state relinquishes the segment.
 
Fort Smith is planning to do  this with Business 71, after ARDOT does sewer/drainage improvements.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on October 03, 2021, 10:51:47 PM
Anyone else surprised they already pulled 71B from Bentonville but left 71 through BV instead of piggybacking 71 on 49? I guess because Missouri typically doesn’t to Business US routes

They do very much do Business Interstates, though.

Moving US 71 to I-49 here would require MoDOT and ArDOT to collaborate on the paperwork. My guess is that as long as both states intend to keep the old road through Bella Vista state maintained, there's not really much benefit to going through the trouble of moving the US route and getting some other designation (like Biz I-49 or some state route designation) approved.

Arkansas hasn't done Business Interstates since the late 60's, IIRC.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on October 03, 2021, 11:22:41 PM
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20211003/1cd8f512d0792c570a0e8b1832cb65f7.jpg)


iPhone
When can we expect Google Maps to street view this new bypass?

Seems to me this stretch of interstate would do well to have the I-49 shield painted on the right lanes and the U S 71 badge painted on the left.  From the skid marks it looks like someone came close to having a problem already and we're just one weekend into this.  Then again, there's only one center lane so my idea mightn't work at all.  :wow:
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on October 03, 2021, 11:48:31 PM
I would also like to see a Whataburger, and/or maybe Jack in the Box, somewhere along either 40, 49 or 30 in West Arkansas, the food options are pretty limited west of Little Rock, Hot Springs is too far away from IH 30 and there is relatively nothing between Little Rock and Fayetteville. Unless there are options in Russellville? I can't wait to go out there in 9 months

No Jack in the Box, but there's 4 Whataburger locations within 2 miles of I-49 in NWA.

In Russellville off I-40, I'd recommend Feltner's Whattaburger (https://g.page/FeltnersWhattaBurger?share)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on October 03, 2021, 11:57:54 PM
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20211003/1cd8f512d0792c570a0e8b1832cb65f7.jpg)


iPhone
When can we expect Google Maps to street view this new bypass?

Seems to me this stretch of interstate would do well to have the I-49 shield painted on the right lanes and the U S 71 badge painted on the left.  From the skid marks it looks like someone came close to having a problem already and we're just one weekend into this.  Then again, there's only one center lane so my idea mightn't work at all.  :wow:

Those aren't skidmarks.  That's where they ground off the old shoulder lines.  They would do well to have the shields painted on the lanes, though, like they do on I-49 southbound in Fayetteville after you crest the hill past Clear Creek where AR-112 and the Fulbright Expressway exit off.  Still wondering when they're going to replace the old I-540 era milemarkers/exit numbers south of Bella Vista.  Never got a good answer from ARDOT when I emailed them.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Arkansastravelguy on October 04, 2021, 02:49:03 AM
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20211003/1cd8f512d0792c570a0e8b1832cb65f7.jpg)


iPhone
When can we expect Google Maps to street view this new bypass?

Seems to me this stretch of interstate would do well to have the I-49 shield painted on the right lanes and the U S 71 badge painted on the left.  From the skid marks it looks like someone came close to having a problem already and we're just one weekend into this.  Then again, there's only one center lane so my idea mightn't work at all.  :wow:

Those aren't skidmarks.  That's where they ground off the old shoulder lines.  They would do well to have the shields painted on the lanes, though, like they do on I-49 southbound in Fayetteville after you crest the hill past Clear Creek where AR-112 and the Fulbright Expressway exit off.  Still wondering when they're going to replace the old I-540 era milemarkers/exit numbers south of Bella Vista.  Never got a good answer from ARDOT when I emailed them.
When they replaced the exit signs you’d think they would’ve went ahead and changed them. There is room for 3 digit exit numbers on the signs, however. Maybe they are waiting on the new Arkansas river bridge. Which will hopefully be built in my lifetime.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: GreenLanternCorps on October 04, 2021, 07:29:21 AM
Google maps has the new stretch of I-49 up.

https://www.google.com/maps/@36.4853735,-94.3463068,23726m/data=!3m1!1e3

But it's labeled 549, even in Missouri...

(https://www.dictionary.com/e/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/picard-facepalm.jpg)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Henry on October 04, 2021, 11:02:43 AM
Google maps has the new stretch of I-49 up.

https://www.google.com/maps/@36.4853735,-94.3463068,23726m/data=!3m1!1e3

But it's labeled 549, even in Missouri...

(https://www.dictionary.com/e/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/picard-facepalm.jpg)
Also, the SPUI at the southern end isn't even complete, with the movements to and from the BVB missing. And there never was a reason for MO 549 to exist, as before the bypass existed, I-49 was simply an upgraded US 71 freeway.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: GreenLanternCorps on October 04, 2021, 02:14:48 PM
Google maps has the new stretch of I-49 up.

https://www.google.com/maps/@36.4853735,-94.3463068,23726m/data=!3m1!1e3

But it's labeled 549, even in Missouri...

(https://www.dictionary.com/e/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/picard-facepalm.jpg)
Also, the SPUI at the southern end isn't even complete, with the movements to and from the BVB missing. And there never was a reason for MO 549 to exist, as before the bypass existed, I-49 was simply an upgraded US 71 freeway.

As of this post,  the SPUI is correct, except for the missing southbound ramp (which isn't open yet), still marked as 549.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: msunat97 on October 04, 2021, 02:19:14 PM
i need to find another construction project to watch since this is 99.99% complete.  Something more interesting than a Zoom meeting
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: chays on October 04, 2021, 03:06:41 PM
The linework is indeed showing up in Google Maps but the route is not entirely routable at the moment. Try doing a route from Goodman, MO, to Springdale, AR, and it still takes the old 71 alignment. Can't even drag the routing to make it go on the new segment spanning the state line.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: vdeane on October 04, 2021, 09:26:13 PM
Looks like Google doesn't recognize it as a freeway either.  It seems to be drawn as an arterial.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: The Ghostbuster on October 04, 2021, 09:42:46 PM
Now that the Bella Vista Bypass is completed, how long until they renumber the old Interstate 540-mileage exits into Interstate 49-mileage exits? I think those exits should have been renumbered in 2014, when the Interstate 540-to-Interstate 49 conversion occurred.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: ilpt4u on October 04, 2021, 09:55:52 PM
Looks like Google doesn't recognize it as a freeway either.  It seems to be drawn as an arterial.
Howso?

They have 2 separate carriageways and all the interchanges…Looks very “Freeway”  to me on Google Maps
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sprjus4 on October 04, 2021, 10:35:34 PM
Looks like Google doesn't recognize it as a freeway either.  It seems to be drawn as an arterial.
Howso?

They have 2 separate carriageways and all the interchanges…Looks very “Freeway”  to me on Google Maps
Freeway is a separate layer, it looks different, is bolder, etc.

The bypass is not marked as such.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on October 04, 2021, 10:36:46 PM
Looks like Google doesn't recognize it as a freeway either.  It seems to be drawn as an arterial.
Howso?

They have 2 separate carriageways and all the interchanges…Looks very “Freeway”  to me on Google Maps

Depends on the zoom level you're looking at. It's missing altogether at the zoom level that has the mileage scale for 20 miles, and looks like a 2 lane road at most others until you zoom right into it.  I know there's a fair chunk of the new mileage that's on relatively narrow ROW with a concrete divider, but not a 2-lane's worth.  The navigation of Google Maps is still dumping everyone off on US-71.  Thankfully, most people aren't buying everything that the Goog is selling and staying on the new route.  I had a job in Bella Vista today, and it was confused as soon as I got onto the overpass.  Took a few minutes after getting to the job site to submit a correction in Google Maps about a missing road.  Had to trace pretty much all of the new mileage with my phone and label it I-49, requesting they also correct the road designation, put the route on the navigation portion, and correct the routing.  We'll see how long it takes for them to get it all together.  You'd think there must be several other areas of the U.S. that have had over a dozen miles of new Interstate Highway open recently or something with their lag time.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on October 04, 2021, 10:40:17 PM
i need to find another construction project to watch since this is 99.99% complete.  Something more interesting than a Zoom meeting

Next up, AR-612's western leg in NWA.  They are still actively working in the Jacksonville, AR area on projects for Future I-57 as well.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Arkansastravelguy on October 05, 2021, 12:14:42 AM
i need to find another construction project to watch since this is 99.99% complete.  Something more interesting than a Zoom meeting

Next up, AR-612's western leg in NWA.  They are still actively working in the Jacksonville, AR area on projects for Future I-57 as well.
Only project we got is Wedington interchange and the forever ROW acquisition for the airport connector


iPhone
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sprjus4 on October 05, 2021, 07:35:13 AM
Looks like Google doesn't recognize it as a freeway either.  It seems to be drawn as an arterial.
Howso?

They have 2 separate carriageways and all the interchanges…Looks very “Freeway”  to me on Google Maps

Depends on the zoom level you're looking at. It's missing altogether at the zoom level that has the mileage scale for 20 miles, and looks like a 2 lane road at most others until you zoom right into it.  I know there's a fair chunk of the new mileage that's on relatively narrow ROW with a concrete divider, but not a 2-lane's worth.  The navigation of Google Maps is still dumping everyone off on US-71.  Thankfully, most people aren't buying everything that the Goog is selling and staying on the new route.  I had a job in Bella Vista today, and it was confused as soon as I got onto the overpass.  Took a few minutes after getting to the job site to submit a correction in Google Maps about a missing road.  Had to trace pretty much all of the new mileage with my phone and label it I-49, requesting they also correct the road designation, put the route on the navigation portion, and correct the routing.  We'll see how long it takes for them to get it all together.  You'd think there must be several other areas of the U.S. that have had over a dozen miles of new Interstate Highway open recently or something with their lag time.
The routing not properly working is normal with new roadways for the first week or so.

Regardless of how the road is designated, soon enough the routing should be accurate.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Tomahawkin on October 05, 2021, 09:09:12 AM
Does anyone know about the IH 49/Wedington interchange improvements? Tease the folks? Will it be a SPUI? Or a DDI or just minor additions that just serve as a bandaid on a bullet wound? That interchange was crazy congested when I lived there 20 years ago, ditto for US 62 and 412 at IH49, total cluster####s
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Henry on October 05, 2021, 10:39:23 AM
Now that the Bella Vista Bypass is completed, how long until they renumber the old Interstate 540-mileage exits into Interstate 49-mileage exits? I think those exits should have been renumbered in 2014, when the Interstate 540-to-Interstate 49 conversion occurred.
My guess is that those changes won't take place until the entire interstate is completed.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on October 05, 2021, 01:52:20 PM
Does anyone know about the IH 49/Wedington interchange improvements? Tease the folks? Will it be a SPUI? Or a DDI or just minor additions that just serve as a bandaid on a bullet wound? That interchange was crazy congested when I lived there 20 years ago, ditto for US 62 and 412 at IH49, total cluster####s

Not reconfiguring, other than eliminating the left turn onto northbound I-49 from the west on AR-16.  They will be putting a quarter clover right turn under the overpass instead and widening Wedington up to and including the overpass to 3 lanes each direction out to Rupple Rd.  Cross Church and the fitness business will be butting up against the northbound onramp.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on October 05, 2021, 01:56:38 PM
i need to find another construction project to watch since this is 99.99% complete.  Something more interesting than a Zoom meeting

Next up, AR-612's western leg in NWA.  They are still actively working in the Jacksonville, AR area on projects for Future I-57 as well.
Only project we got is Wedington interchange and the forever ROW acquisition for the airport connector


iPhone

They are also getting started on AR-112 widening now with surveying and engineering, but that project is more for a local audience.  Those from out of the area will be more interested in I-49 in the Ft. Smith to Texarkana area, US-412 from Lowell to I-35, and I-57 and I-69.  Most of those other than I-57 are a little further down the road at this point with funding constraints.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Tomahawkin on October 05, 2021, 09:24:06 PM
112 should have been widened 20 years ago
OT, I Was hoping that there would be more development south and east of Fayetteville. There should be more hotels and Truck stops in the Greenland area! Has that area grown any? US 71 south of Fayetteville near the airport is awful IMO but should be a prime area for development? Has there been any expansion out there?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: GreenLanternCorps on October 06, 2021, 05:02:56 PM
FYI, Apple Maps does not have the new section of I-49 marked.  It only has the old section of AR 549.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on October 07, 2021, 12:15:11 AM
Looks like Google doesn't recognize it as a freeway either.  It seems to be drawn as an arterial.
Howso?

They have 2 separate carriageways and all the interchanges…Looks very “Freeway”  to me on Google Maps

Depends on the zoom level you're looking at. It's missing altogether at the zoom level that has the mileage scale for 20 miles, and looks like a 2 lane road at most others until you zoom right into it.  I know there's a fair chunk of the new mileage that's on relatively narrow ROW with a concrete divider, but not a 2-lane's worth.  The navigation of Google Maps is still dumping everyone off on US-71.  Thankfully, most people aren't buying everything that the Goog is selling and staying on the new route.  I had a job in Bella Vista today, and it was confused as soon as I got onto the overpass.  Took a few minutes after getting to the job site to submit a correction in Google Maps about a missing road.  Had to trace pretty much all of the new mileage with my phone and label it I-49, requesting they also correct the road designation, put the route on the navigation portion, and correct the routing.  We'll see how long it takes for them to get it all together.  You'd think there must be several other areas of the U.S. that have had over a dozen miles of new Interstate Highway open recently or something with their lag time.
The routing not properly working is normal with new roadways for the first week or so.

Regardless of how the road is designated, soon enough the routing should be accurate.

Looks like they at least have the route and designation fixed.  Don't know about the navigation part yet.

https://www.google.com/maps/@36.4930877,-94.3474906,11z (https://www.google.com/maps/@36.4930877,-94.3474906,11z)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: GreenLanternCorps on October 07, 2021, 10:21:01 AM
Looks like Google doesn't recognize it as a freeway either.  It seems to be drawn as an arterial.
Howso?

They have 2 separate carriageways and all the interchanges…Looks very “Freeway”  to me on Google Maps

Depends on the zoom level you're looking at. It's missing altogether at the zoom level that has the mileage scale for 20 miles, and looks like a 2 lane road at most others until you zoom right into it.  I know there's a fair chunk of the new mileage that's on relatively narrow ROW with a concrete divider, but not a 2-lane's worth.  The navigation of Google Maps is still dumping everyone off on US-71.  Thankfully, most people aren't buying everything that the Goog is selling and staying on the new route.  I had a job in Bella Vista today, and it was confused as soon as I got onto the overpass.  Took a few minutes after getting to the job site to submit a correction in Google Maps about a missing road.  Had to trace pretty much all of the new mileage with my phone and label it I-49, requesting they also correct the road designation, put the route on the navigation portion, and correct the routing.  We'll see how long it takes for them to get it all together.  You'd think there must be several other areas of the U.S. that have had over a dozen miles of new Interstate Highway open recently or something with their lag time.
The routing not properly working is normal with new roadways for the first week or so.

Regardless of how the road is designated, soon enough the routing should be accurate.

Looks like they at least have the route and designation fixed.  Don't know about the navigation part yet.

https://www.google.com/maps/@36.4930877,-94.3474906,11z (https://www.google.com/maps/@36.4930877,-94.3474906,11z)

Navigation is working now, just routed KC to Ft. Smith and it was straight down I-49.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bassoon1986 on October 07, 2021, 10:51:38 AM
On navigation the on ramps still say AR 549 (even at the MO 90 exit) but the highway itself says I-49


iPhone
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Rick Powell on October 07, 2021, 11:08:40 AM
Local TV report on traffic and development issues since opening of the bypass.

https://www.5newsonline.com/article/news/local/bella-vista-bypass-minor-dilemma-surrounding-communities/527-5496d427-91d0-4d2b-af65-3661b869f310
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Wayward Memphian on October 07, 2021, 11:43:46 AM
112 should have been widened 20 years ago
OT, I Was hoping that there would be more development south and east of Fayetteville. There should be more hotels and Truck stops in the Greenland area! Has that area grown any? US 71 south of Fayetteville near the airport is awful IMO but should be a prime area for development? Has there been any expansion out there?

There's less business growth in Fayetteville for such a need. Most new jobs are Springdale and North. The Fayetteville City Council is too concerned with woke issues and mask mandates over promoting  economic development.

Greenland and West Fork suffer from harder to develop land compared to Farmington/Prairie Grove and Elkins plus they're further away from core that's steadily shifting North.

I can see ADoT dropping down from the future US 412/AR612 western interchange to PG/Lincoln  before going further east with AR612 than Old Wire Road/AR265
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on October 07, 2021, 01:24:04 PM
112 should have been widened 20 years ago
OT, I Was hoping that there would be more development south and east of Fayetteville. There should be more hotels and Truck stops in the Greenland area! Has that area grown any? US 71 south of Fayetteville near the airport is awful IMO but should be a prime area for development? Has there been any expansion out there?

There's less business growth in Fayetteville for such a need. Most new jobs are Springdale and North. The Fayetteville City Council is too concerned with woke issues and mask mandates for economic development.


Fayetteville is an odd town. For many years it seemed like they were guarded against urban sprawl, but those days seem to be over now. 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on October 07, 2021, 01:54:34 PM
112 should have been widened 20 years ago
OT, I Was hoping that there would be more development south and east of Fayetteville. There should be more hotels and Truck stops in the Greenland area! Has that area grown any? US 71 south of Fayetteville near the airport is awful IMO but should be a prime area for development? Has there been any expansion out there?

There's less business growth in Fayetteville for such a need. Most new jobs are Springdale and North. The Fayetteville City Council is too concerned with woke issues and mask mandates for economic development.

Greenland and West Fork suffer from harder to develop land compared to Farmington/Prairie Grove and Elkins plus there further away from core that's steadily shifting North.

I can see ADot dropping down from the future US 412/AR612 western interchange to PG/Lincoln  before going further east with AR612 than Old Wire Road/AR265

Especially with the Western North-South Connector (https://wnsconnector.transportationplanroom.com/) they studying now to drop from between Gravette and Hiwassee on the newly completed BVB and the XNA access road planned for the next segment of the Springdale Bypass (AR-612/US-412B/I-???).

It all seems like the genesis of 2 lanes of the previously studied Northwest Arkansas Western Beltway (https://www.nwarpc.org/pdf/Federal%20Review/Western_Beltway_FinalReport.pdf).  Hope I retire and sell out before Harmon Rd. gets replaced with whatever comes next for the area.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: vdeane on October 07, 2021, 09:34:34 PM
Local TV report on traffic and development issues since opening of the bypass.

https://www.5newsonline.com/article/news/local/bella-vista-bypass-minor-dilemma-surrounding-communities/527-5496d427-91d0-4d2b-af65-3661b869f310
If the GPS systems aren't updated for I-49, shouldn't they just be sending people down US 71 like they always did?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on October 08, 2021, 02:02:02 AM
Local TV report on traffic and development issues since opening of the bypass.

https://www.5newsonline.com/article/news/local/bella-vista-bypass-minor-dilemma-surrounding-communities/527-5496d427-91d0-4d2b-af65-3661b869f310
If mom-and-pops are making more money, where's the dilemma?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on October 08, 2021, 11:08:34 AM
Local TV report on traffic and development issues since opening of the bypass.

https://www.5newsonline.com/article/news/local/bella-vista-bypass-minor-dilemma-surrounding-communities/527-5496d427-91d0-4d2b-af65-3661b869f310
If mom-and-pops are making more money, where's the dilemma?

Lost motorists isn't a dilemma?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Arkansastravelguy on October 08, 2021, 01:57:04 PM
Local TV report on traffic and development issues since opening of the bypass.

https://www.5newsonline.com/article/news/local/bella-vista-bypass-minor-dilemma-surrounding-communities/527-5496d427-91d0-4d2b-af65-3661b869f310
Problem with Americans, rely on damn phones instead of common sense


iPhone
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on October 08, 2021, 02:06:01 PM
Looks like the Google's GPS routing on the maps is getting better at least today.  It no longer routes on either US-71 or has folks getting off at Hiwasse if you put Sam's Club in Bentonville and an endpoint of Neosho, MO.  Who knows about the navigation functionality, though.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Thegeet on October 08, 2021, 06:19:57 PM
Looks like the Google's GPS routing on the maps is getting better at least today.  It no longer routes on either US-71 or has folks getting off at Hiwasse if you put Sam's Club in Bentonville and an endpoint of Neosho, MO.  Who knows about the navigation functionality, though.
And I-49 has been designated on the bypass for once.

Now, when will I-49 from AR-225 to I-40 be built?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on October 09, 2021, 01:54:38 AM
Looks like the Google's GPS routing on the maps is getting better at least today.  It no longer routes on either US-71 or has folks getting off at Hiwasse if you put Sam's Club in Bentonville and an endpoint of Neosho, MO.  Who knows about the navigation functionality, though.
And I-49 has been designated on the bypass for once.

Now, when will I-49 from AR-225 to I-40 be built?

Barring a total economic collapse (and I don't say that lightly), I think we're finished hearing about I-49 this year.  My gut feeling tells me in 2022 we'll get more than one story next year about both the current environmental studies of the I-49 Arkansas River bridge and possibly even the initial timetable for its construction, then if all goes well it starts in 2023 and we learn how long the extended bridge over the floodplain and the River bridge will take.  It was good to see a 40/29 report from this July indicating that the current design of the I-49 Alma interchange was created to be extended southward.  Again, the money is scheduled to start rolling in for it beginning in 2023, and they've allocated it for this section and the Greenwood-Y City one, even if they're the "Super 2" model.  It's a totally different scenario now for the remainder of I-49 Arkansas in multiple ways.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on October 09, 2021, 05:41:22 PM
Looks like the Google's GPS routing on the maps is getting better at least today.  It no longer routes on either US-71 or has folks getting off at Hiwasse if you put Sam's Club in Bentonville and an endpoint of Neosho, MO.  Who knows about the navigation functionality, though.
And I-49 has been designated on the bypass for once.

Now, when will I-49 from AR-225 to I-40 be built?
..

Should be the next project, once ARDOT gets funding, but that mat be a couple years, Initially, it will be a Super 2 until ARDOT gets money to finish it.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: ChimpOnTheWheel on October 09, 2021, 08:50:54 PM
As part of my trip to the NWA area (road tripping from Chicagoland), drove I-49 from Joplin to Centerton via the Bella Vista Bypass. Got off at exit 284.

Overall, very impressive drive. Was thrilled to see it.

Will get to drive the whole Bypass again tomorrow morning heading back, getting on from Walton Blvd and following I-49 to Joplin.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on October 10, 2021, 08:48:37 AM
Looks like the Google's GPS routing on the maps is getting better at least today.  It no longer routes on either US-71 or has folks getting off at Hiwasse if you put Sam's Club in Bentonville and an endpoint of Neosho, MO.  Who knows about the navigation functionality, though.
And I-49 has been designated on the bypass for once.

Now, when will I-49 from AR-225 to I-40 be built?

Barring a total economic collapse (and I don't say that lightly), I think we're finished hearing about I-49 this year.  My gut feeling tells me in 2022 we'll get more than one story next year about both the current environmental studies of the I-49 Arkansas River bridge and possibly even the initial timetable for its construction, then if all goes well it starts in 2023 and we learn how long the extended bridge over the floodplain and the River bridge will take.  It was good to see a 40/29 report from this July indicating that the current design of the I-49 Alma interchange was created to be extended southward.  Again, the money is scheduled to start rolling in for it beginning in 2023, and they've allocated it for this section and the Greenwood-Y City one, even if they're the "Super 2" model.  It's a totally different scenario now for the remainder of I-49 Arkansas in multiple ways.

The current southern ending of I-49 at I-40 clearly was designed to be taken across I-40 as the median widens out just south of the emergency vehicle crossover, so the current carriageways are really in essence just exit and entrance ramps from and to the right of what will be the mainline overpass over I-40.  There will have to be another fairly substantial overpass built over US-64 and the UP RR just to the south and parallel to I-40, unless they just do one really long one (over half a mile long) over all 3, which is probable given that the mainline I-49 carriageway will need to go over the eastbound I-40 to northbound I-49 flyover, so it'll have to be pretty tall as it doesn't appear they can go underneath I-40 with Frog Bayou/Clear Creek being right there and not far from the Arkansas River.  And it's pretty much all floodplain and the Arkansas River itself after bypassing Kibler until AR-22, so most all of it will need to be elevated either onto bridges or berms like I-40 in the ricelands of eastern AR and like I-57 will have to be in NE AR between Walnut Ridge and Corning.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Alex on October 10, 2021, 04:15:17 PM
Drove the new I-49 on Thursday. Looks like a lot of traffic was already using the Bella Vista Bypass section. The Missouri section was not as busy. Overall I thought it was designed well, though the addition of a truck climbing lane southbound might have been worthwhile.

Guide signs at both ends omit cardinal directions for I-49 and US 71. Still ongoing construction northbound leading to the separation.

Anyway, Buc-ee's has become rather picky where they choose to open new "Big Store" locations. They seem to prefer sites adjacent to Interstates near key highway junctions and/or on the outer fringes of major metro areas. The new one off I-10 in Alabama seems like it's in an isolated spot, but that's the main exit for Gulf Shores. So traffic is crazy at that location. The one in Leeds, AL off I-20 is at the first exit East of the I-20/I-459 interchange. And there's a big outlet mall nearby.

Totally off topic, but the Buc-ee's in Baldwin County, Alabama was built at the interchange with the Baldwin Beach Express. The Baldwin Beach Express was completed in 2014. It is the supposed reliever and better way to Gulf Shores/Orange Beach over SR 59, which is still the main route. Since it opened, Buc-ee's has overwhelmed that interchange with traffic congestion.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on October 11, 2021, 12:24:44 PM
A Buc'ees would be nice in that stretch and would bring a lot of jobs!

More likely a Love's  or local talent.  :)
I could see a workmans there


iPhone
There's already a couple of Workmans off I-49 in Crawford and Benton counties, Exit 24 and Exit 78, at least until they redo the exit numbers to align with mileage to LA.  The Gravette exit, Exit 287, seems primed for a great deal of development.  Would be a no-brainer for something to crop up there.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on October 11, 2021, 10:23:18 PM
A Buc'ees would be nice in that stretch and would bring a lot of jobs!

More likely a Love's  or local talent.  :)
I could see a workmans there


iPhone
There's already a couple of Workmans off I-49 in Crawford and Benton counties, Exit 24 and Exit 78, at least until they redo the exit numbers to align with mileage to LA.  The Gravette exit, Exit 287, seems primed for a great deal of development.  Would be a no-brainer for something to crop up there.


The Exit 24 location looks rundown inside. It's changed owners a couple times before Workman's came along.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: edwaleni on October 12, 2021, 10:43:24 AM
Look for more population shifting towards Gravette as the drive time just went down 25-30%.

Inquiries for commercial property at the AR-72 exit are in flight.  Don't be shocked if a Circle K or QT shows up by next spring.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Tomahawkin on October 12, 2021, 12:19:29 PM
They have QT locations in NWA? If so, when did this happen? Outside of Dallas, I haven't seen a QT west of the Mississippi...
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: clong on October 12, 2021, 12:34:06 PM
They have QT locations in NWA? If so, when did this happen? Outside of Dallas, I haven't seen a QT west of the Mississippi...

https://locations.quiktrip.com/ (https://locations.quiktrip.com/) lists locations in Arizona (Phoenix area), Kansas (Kansas City, Lawrence and Wichita areas), Louisiana (Shreveport area), Oklahoma (Tulsa area), Missouri (Kansas City, St Louis, Joplin and Columbia areas), Iowa (Des Moines area) and Nebraska (Omaha area) in addition to Texas where a quick look at the list shows at least San Antonio, Austin and Waco besides the Metroplex.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on October 12, 2021, 02:35:41 PM
They have QT locations in NWA? If so, when did this happen? Outside of Dallas, I haven't seen a QT west of the Mississippi...

Arkansas is indeed west of the Mississippi River.  However, the closest QT is in the Joplin area where I-49 South and I-44 intersect.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on October 12, 2021, 03:55:57 PM
Look for more population shifting towards Gravette as the drive time just went down 25-30%.

Inquiries for commercial property at the AR-72 exit are in flight.  Don't be shocked if a Circle K or QT shows up by next spring.


I wouldn't ignore Casey's.  They are becoming more and more of a presence.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: mvak36 on October 12, 2021, 04:02:49 PM
I'm surprised they haven't had a QT in NWA yet considering its proximity to their HQ (Tulsa). They might expand in that area now since it's booming.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: edwaleni on October 12, 2021, 04:17:24 PM
Look for more population shifting towards Gravette as the drive time just went down 25-30%.

Inquiries for commercial property at the AR-72 exit are in flight.  Don't be shocked if a Circle K or QT shows up by next spring.


I wouldn't ignore Casey's.  They are becoming more and more of a presence.

Casey's target market for years has been small towns in rural USA where there is little to no competition after 6PM local.

They don't make money on the gas, its on the fried chicken and pizza later in the evenings.

While I have seen them at small town rural exits, I don't see the AR-72 exit gaining one since there is one in Gravette already.

That exit has larger multi-pump with associated retail/fast food written all over it.

It will catch all the traffic that used to stop on the old US-71 for food/gas through Bella Vista.

I wouldn't be surprised if at least 1 economy hotel springs up as well.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Razorback19 on October 12, 2021, 08:02:52 PM
They have QT locations in NWA? If so, when did this happen? Outside of Dallas, I haven't seen a QT west of the Mississippi...

Believe they are almost finished building a QT in Little Rock by the Bass Pro/Outlet Mall off of I-30/I-430.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Plutonic Panda on October 12, 2021, 08:09:56 PM
QT is building a new location in OKC(first in the region) but it’ll be a new format travel store. It’ll have truck fueling spots and showers. I’d imagine they will expand on this concept and building on the new I-49 segment seems like a no brainer.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: CtrlAltDel on October 13, 2021, 09:55:03 AM
QT is building a new location in OKC(first in the region) but it’ll be a new format travel store. It’ll have truck fueling spots and showers. I’d imagine they will expand on this concept and building on the new I-49 segment seems like a no brainer.

On an weird (maybe) side note, I once got gas at Quik Trip store number 1, completely by happenstance. Digging into the matter, though, I found that there have been a few number 1 stores.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on October 13, 2021, 11:42:47 AM
QT is building a new location in OKC(first in the region) but it’ll be a new format travel store. It’ll have truck fueling spots and showers. I’d imagine they will expand on this concept and building on the new I-49 segment seems like a no brainer.

On an weird (maybe) side note, I once got gas at Quik Trip store number 1, completely by happenstance. Digging into the matter, though, I found that there have been a few number 1 stores.

Wal-Mart has had several different #1 stores.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on October 13, 2021, 12:34:15 PM
QT is building a new location in OKC(first in the region) but it’ll be a new format travel store. It’ll have truck fueling spots and showers. I’d imagine they will expand on this concept and building on the new I-49 segment seems like a no brainer.

On an weird (maybe) side note, I once got gas at Quik Trip store number 1, completely by happenstance. Digging into the matter, though, I found that there have been a few number 1 stores.

Wal-Mart has had several different #1 stores.

But Walton's 5-10 is the OG, so it became the museum for the chain.  The actual original Store #1 in Rogers is now called "Somewhere In Time Antique Mall", which used to be Shelby Lane Mall where I picked up a Thomas Kinkaid lithograph and had it signed by him prior to his passing.  The building is not much to look at, which is likely why Wal-Mart offloaded it and built across the road for the 2nd iteration of Store 1.  Now they're on the 3rd location further west on US-71B when they did the SuperCenter format conversion.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Scott5114 on October 13, 2021, 05:02:22 PM
They have QT locations in NWA? If so, when did this happen? Outside of Dallas, I haven't seen a QT west of the Mississippi...

QT is headquartered in Tulsa.....

I wouldn't ignore Casey's.  They are becoming more and more of a presence.

Casey's target market for years has been small towns in rural USA where there is little to no competition after 6PM local.

They don't make money on the gas, its on the fried chicken and pizza later in the evenings.

Their corporate strategy seems to have changed, as they bought up all of the Circle Ks in the Oklahoma City metro. Lots of C-store competition here.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on October 13, 2021, 06:44:32 PM
They have QT locations in NWA? If so, when did this happen? Outside of Dallas, I haven't seen a QT west of the Mississippi...

QT is headquartered in Tulsa.....

I wouldn't ignore Casey's.  They are becoming more and more of a presence.

Casey's target market for years has been small towns in rural USA where there is little to no competition after 6PM local.

They don't make money on the gas, its on the fried chicken and pizza later in the evenings.

Their corporate strategy seems to have changed, as they bought up all of the Circle Ks in the Oklahoma City metro. Lots of C-store competition here.

Springdale has a new Casey's across from Kum & Go
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on October 13, 2021, 06:58:36 PM
They have QT locations in NWA? If so, when did this happen? Outside of Dallas, I haven't seen a QT west of the Mississippi...

QT is headquartered in Tulsa.....

I wouldn't ignore Casey's.  They are becoming more and more of a presence.

Casey's target market for years has been small towns in rural USA where there is little to no competition after 6PM local.

They don't make money on the gas, its on the fried chicken and pizza later in the evenings.

Their corporate strategy seems to have changed, as they bought up all of the Circle Ks in the Oklahoma City metro. Lots of C-store competition here.

Springdale has a new Casey's across from Kum & Go

And another one off Exit 65 just past the Subaru dealership in Fayetteville.  Casey's are the ones growing fastest around here, not just in the small towns either.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on October 13, 2021, 08:04:31 PM
They have QT locations in NWA? If so, when did this happen? Outside of Dallas, I haven't seen a QT west of the Mississippi...

QT is headquartered in Tulsa.....

I wouldn't ignore Casey's.  They are becoming more and more of a presence.

Casey's target market for years has been small towns in rural USA where there is little to no competition after 6PM local.

They don't make money on the gas, its on the fried chicken and pizza later in the evenings.

Their corporate strategy seems to have changed, as they bought up all of the Circle Ks in the Oklahoma City metro. Lots of C-store competition here.

Springdale has a new Casey's across from Kum & Go

And another one off Exit 65 just past the Subaru dealership in Fayetteville.  Casey's are the ones growing fastest around here, not just in the small towns either.

Porter Rd seems like an odd location, but if it works, it works. Then again,  isn't the Police Department building a new HQ at Porter and Deane?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: GreenLanternCorps on October 15, 2021, 07:41:10 AM
I-49 BVB now showing up in Apple Maps.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Tomahawkin on October 15, 2021, 01:53:24 PM
OT, does anyone know why there aren't any if no Truck stops on 49 north of IH 40 north of Alma, before the series of elevated viaducts? I should have asked this 10 years ago?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on October 15, 2021, 02:38:27 PM
OT, does anyone know why there aren't any if no Truck stops on 49 north of IH 40 north of Alma, before the series of elevated viaducts? I should have asked this 10 years ago?

There was one at Mountainburg, but it closed (It may have been too far off the highway).  There's a small Phillips 66 Truck Stop at Greenland. Most of the existing businesses predate I-540/I-49. It's also possible individual communities opted not to rezone.  (Which is beginning to happen around Gravette/Hiwassee)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Tomahawkin on October 15, 2021, 02:52:57 PM
Yeah, I didn't like to go too far off of I-49 when I would drive from Fayetteville to Jonesboro. I usually left with a full tank and would stop outside of Russelville at the big pilot station there
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: msunat97 on October 22, 2021, 10:01:21 AM
Any updates on the timing to finish the exit from 49SB to US71?  My wife drove the BVB last night for the first time.  It's a huge upgrade.  She was very pleased with it and how nice it was to skip the traffic in Bella Vista.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on October 25, 2021, 09:59:09 AM
Any updates on the timing to finish the exit from 49SB to US71?  My wife drove the BVB last night for the first time.  It's a huge upgrade.  She was very pleased with it and how nice it was to skip the traffic in Bella Vista.

Back in late Aug. when they closed the offramp to resolve the falling rock onto the ramp, they stated that it would be closed for a couple of months.  Looks like they have lots of vehicles parked on the offramp today on the camera, but they are done with the hillside remediation.  Once the paving/striping/signage work is done, I'd expect it to reopen shortly.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on October 26, 2021, 11:48:33 PM
Any updates on the timing to finish the exit from 49SB to US71?  My wife drove the BVB last night for the first time.  It's a huge upgrade.  She was very pleased with it and how nice it was to skip the traffic in Bella Vista.

I'm told this coming Friday.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on October 27, 2021, 02:14:56 PM
I wonder when they're going to extend the 6 laning that currently terminates at Exit 88 up to Exit 91.  It's especially going to be a bottleneck southbound as platoons of traffic from the 71B SPUI merge into the mainline 2 lanes until Exit 88.  Bet it doesn't take ARDoT long to figure out the need, if it hasn't been brought up yet.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: msunat97 on October 29, 2021, 05:29:49 PM
Question for the board about I-49 in Fayetteville...why does the interstate have the weird curve where Fulbright Expressway connects?  This seems like a very weird an possibly unsafe bend in the road. 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: abqtraveler on October 29, 2021, 06:00:21 PM
Question for the board about I-49 in Fayetteville...why does the interstate have the weird curve where Fulbright Expressway connects?  This seems like a very weird an possibly unsafe bend in the road.

Because the Fullbright Expressway was a bypass of Fayetteville that existed prior to I-49...or should I say...I-540 at the time. The weird curves you see were the result of connecting newer sections of then-I-540 to the Fullbright.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: ARMOURERERIC on October 29, 2021, 08:46:58 PM
So, now that it has been a few weeks, do we have a feel for what is Arkansas  next big priority?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on October 29, 2021, 08:55:30 PM
Question for the board about I-49 in Fayetteville...why does the interstate have the weird curve where Fulbright Expressway connects?  This seems like a very weird an possibly unsafe bend in the road.

Because the Fullbright Expressway was a bypass of Fayetteville that existed prior to I-49...or should I say...I-540 at the time. The weird curves you see were the result of connecting newer sections of then-I-540 to the Fullbright.

The "old" 71 bypass dates back to around 1970, which was 4-laned circa 1980, then later upgraded  to I-540/I-49
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on October 30, 2021, 12:22:16 PM
So, now that it has been a few weeks, do we have a feel for what is Arkansas  next big priority?
As far as bulldozers on the ground, I'm thinking Arkansas will take a breather on I-49 for a while and concentrate on finishing the I-30 project and the widening through Jacksonville. That doesn't mean they won't be working on funding for the river bridge and other I-49 segments, though.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Tomahawkin on October 30, 2021, 06:30:04 PM
I dont see much happening either, even though interchange improvements in the Fayetteville, Springdale, and Rogers areas are still needed, IMO
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on October 30, 2021, 11:03:12 PM
So, now that it has been a few weeks, do we have a feel for what is Arkansas  next big priority?

We're back to the typical focus of Little Rock in the short term with I-30 and I-430 as well as US-67/Future I-57 in the Jacksonville area.  In NWA, the only short term items are the MLK and Wedington interchanges, although they are starting the surveys for AR-112 widening from Fayetteville to Bentonville, as well as studies for XNA's access road to the western leg of AR-612 and a N/S connector from the Bella Vista Bypass to the Springdale Bypass in the same vicinity as the XNA access road.

Don't know of much else that I would consider priority to the outside world other than piecemeal upgrades of US-82 in the south and US-412 in the north until some time passes to allow for CAP extension funding to be collected for further I-49 related projects between Texarkana and Alma and I-30/I-40 widening projects in the longer term as well as the Springdale Bypass completion.  It'd take federal funding to appear for anything major outside of LR in the short to medium term.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on November 02, 2021, 05:59:18 PM
This is an article today from TRAINS magazine on the impending Canadian Pacific/Kansas City Southern merger.  Though not a perfect parallel between Omaha and Winnipeg, it's fascinating how closely this network will parallel the Laredo/Brownsville-Houston-Minneapolis and Winnipeg-New Orleans corridors which the Texas I-69 and I-49 highway network will also serve.  The CPKC's marketing team is optimistically hoping to gain freight (as always) by taking trucks off the road.  Guessing they'll want to build brand loyalty between Kansas City and Laredo/Brownsville before the highways are complete.  Sharing this on the Texas I-69 thread as well.:

Quote

(https://www.trains.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/TRN_CP_KCS_traffic_map.jpg)

(https://www.trains.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/TRN_CP_KCS_Logos.jpg)

CP and KCS project dramatic rise in daily train counts

The Canadian Pacific-Kansas City Southern merger application highlights projected increases in traffic on the new railroad’s north-south spine, as well as planned capacity improvements. (Trains.com, with information from CP-KCS)
WASHINGTON — Canadian Pacific and Kansas City Southern say their proposed merger will generate significant traffic growth, with daily train counts on the combined system’s north-south spine projected to more than double within three years.

The traffic details were among those included in the railways’ 4,342-page, 1-gigabyte merger application filed with U.S. regulators late Friday. The document, posted to the Surface Transportation Board website overnight Monday, includes Canadian Pacific Kansas City’s operating plans, outlines capacity expansion projects, and makes projections for traffic and job growth that would flow from the creation of the first railroad to link Canada, the U.S., and Mexico.

https://www.trains.com/trn/news-reviews/news-wire/cp-and-kcs-project-dramatic-rise-in-daily-train-counts/?fbclid=IwAR0O-VcBN4JrVVuCyd8iUsNgSw8rbYAddESBAuadLV-c5f5p4x_H8HNXfmo

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on November 02, 2021, 10:09:51 PM
This is an article today from TRAINS magazine on the impending Canadian Pacific/Kansas City Southern merger.  Though not a perfect parallel between Omaha and Winnipeg, it's fascinating how closely this network will parallel the Laredo/Brownsville-Houston-Minneapolis and Winnipeg-New Orleans corridors which the Texas I-69 and I-49 highway network will also serve.  The CPKC's marketing team is optimistically hoping to gain freight (as always) by taking trucks off the road.  Guessing they'll want to build brand loyalty between Kansas City and Laredo/Brownsville before the highways are complete.  Sharing this on the Texas I-69 thread as well.:

Quote

(https://www.trains.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/TRN_CP_KCS_traffic_map.jpg)

(https://www.trains.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/TRN_CP_KCS_Logos.jpg)

CP and KCS project dramatic rise in daily train counts

The Canadian Pacific-Kansas City Southern merger application highlights projected increases in traffic on the new railroad’s north-south spine, as well as planned capacity improvements. (Trains.com, with information from CP-KCS)
WASHINGTON — Canadian Pacific and Kansas City Southern say their proposed merger will generate significant traffic growth, with daily train counts on the combined system’s north-south spine projected to more than double within three years.

The traffic details were among those included in the railways’ 4,342-page, 1-gigabyte merger application filed with U.S. regulators late Friday. The document, posted to the Surface Transportation Board website overnight Monday, includes Canadian Pacific Kansas City’s operating plans, outlines capacity expansion projects, and makes projections for traffic and job growth that would flow from the creation of the first railroad to link Canada, the U.S., and Mexico.

https://www.trains.com/trn/news-reviews/news-wire/cp-and-kcs-project-dramatic-rise-in-daily-train-counts/?fbclid=IwAR0O-VcBN4JrVVuCyd8iUsNgSw8rbYAddESBAuadLV-c5f5p4x_H8HNXfmo


I would think this affects the I-35 corridor more, as there isn't much traffic taking I-49/US-71/I-49 to the KC area, except perhaps a little from Houston at this point.  It'll also affect the McDonald's in Gentry, AR quite a bit to go from 11 trains a day to 25.  There are several a day that stop there for a few minutes to get food on the way through town as the restaurant is just a few steps from the track, and with the overpass in town now, the rather long trains don't block any busy cross streets for more than a few minutes.  I suspect they call ahead for their food and have it ready for when they pull up.  What with truckers retiring at the rate they are, taking more trailerloads off the roads isn't going to have much of an adverse societal or roadfunding impact.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on November 02, 2021, 11:36:25 PM
Even though there is a really serious shortage of truck drivers (as well as shortage of drivers for anything else that requires a CDL) an increase in rail traffic on a corridor from a merged CP/KCS network isn't going to make all that much of a dent in truck traffic on I-35. The line running along the OK/AR border isn't exactly the Southern Transcon. And there is still huge numbers of trucks on the I-44/I-40 combo despite upwards of 100 trains per day on the Southern Transcon.

Freight rail is very important to the nation's infrastructure. But it doesn't go everywhere, or even to a lot of locations it used to serve. Thousands of miles worth of track has been removed just within the last 30 years. Even with some improvements, such as double-track upgrades to the main lines, trucks on highways are still going to be very necessary to get shipments to their destinations.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on November 03, 2021, 10:57:49 AM
Even though there is a really serious shortage of truck drivers (as well as shortage of drivers for anything else that requires a CDL) an increase in rail traffic on a corridor from a merged CP/KCS network isn't going to make all that much of a dent in truck traffic on I-35. The line running along the OK/AR border isn't exactly the Southern Transcon. And there is still huge numbers of trucks on the I-44/I-40 combo despite upwards of 100 trains per day on the Southern Transcon.

Freight rail is very important to the nation's infrastructure. But it doesn't go everywhere, or even to a lot of locations it used to serve. Thousands of miles worth of track has been removed just within the last 30 years. Even with some improvements, such as double-track upgrades to the main lines, trucks on highways are still going to be very necessary to get shipments to their destinations.

True.  But the line running along the OK/AR border is about to be something even the east-west "transcons" aren't - a seamless link between North America's three biggest nations.  That same TRAINS article has maps indicating they're going to be running dedicated intermodals along the original Kansas City Southern Kansas City-Port Arthur mainline.  Unfortunately, the maps are smaller and poor quality on the web article.  As it is, the KCS has just been running manifest freights with a bunch of intermodal cars trailing at the end and never full container/trailer trains as they are planning now.  They're also planning on investing a LOT of money putting in sidings and other changes to this line, so there will be some benefit to the AR/OK region while that goes on.

Apologies for the bad humor about the trucks, as they will never be replaced despite the problems that industry faces right now.  That being said, it's still amazing to me just how important this particluar corridor is becoming not just for the interstates but also the railroads.  IMO, the I-49 corridor and the CPKC may end up complementing one another, as has happened in many other U.S. transit routes.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: edwaleni on November 03, 2021, 01:31:37 PM
Even though there is a really serious shortage of truck drivers (as well as shortage of drivers for anything else that requires a CDL) an increase in rail traffic on a corridor from a merged CP/KCS network isn't going to make all that much of a dent in truck traffic on I-35. The line running along the OK/AR border isn't exactly the Southern Transcon. And there is still huge numbers of trucks on the I-44/I-40 combo despite upwards of 100 trains per day on the Southern Transcon.

Freight rail is very important to the nation's infrastructure. But it doesn't go everywhere, or even to a lot of locations it used to serve. Thousands of miles worth of track has been removed just within the last 30 years. Even with some improvements, such as double-track upgrades to the main lines, trucks on highways are still going to be very necessary to get shipments to their destinations.

True.  But the line running along the OK/AR border is about to be something even the east-west "transcons" aren't - a seamless link between North America's three biggest nations.  That same TRAINS article has maps indicating they're going to be running dedicated intermodals along the original Kansas City Southern Kansas City-Port Arthur mainline.  Unfortunately, the maps are smaller and poor quality on the web article.  As it is, the KCS has just been running manifest freights with a bunch of intermodal cars trailing at the end and never full container/trailer trains as they are planning now.  They're also planning on investing a LOT of money putting in sidings and other changes to this line, so there will be some benefit to the AR/OK region while that goes on.

Apologies for the bad humor about the trucks, as they will never be replaced despite the problems that industry faces right now.  That being said, it's still amazing to me just how important this particluar corridor is becoming not just for the interstates but also the railroads.  IMO, the I-49 corridor and the CPKC may end up complementing one another, as has happened in many other U.S. transit routes.

I read the same article in Trains.

While the railroads would "like" to replace trucks, that actually isn't what is occurring.

Shippers rely heavily on trucks to dray containers to their endpoints, most of which are nowhere near a rail spur or terminal.

There are some cases of long distance drays, recently discovered was that shippers were trucking containers to Idaho from the Port of Los Angeles.

That was recently adjusted as UP is now creating blocks of containers to push up to Salt Lake City and have shipper dray them from there.

No matter where they get dropped, you still need drivers and chassis to get them to their endpoint.

CSX recently gave up on switching containers into Michigan, Indiana and Ohio and told shippers to dray the containers out of Chicago instead.

Back to KCS-CP, the big products up front will be a direct route for CP to get Alberta shale oil to the US Petro Coast and in return auto parts from Mexico to Michigan and Canadian auto assemblies.

Those will be the backbone products that make the route a winner.  When Alberta signed that major oil export and carriage deal with CN and CP, they both had customers on each side of Canada, but only CN had a direct route to the Petro Coast. Now with the merger, CP does as well.

How does impact I-49 (or I-35)?

Looking at it from a shipper perspective, there might be opportunities to get containers drayed from KC instead of from Houston. This would reduce the amount of truck volume out of Texas going north. But most shippers are not going to dray out of KC and drive back down to say Joplin/Springfield via I-49.

The one stumbling block for cross border rail from Mexico to the US, is the lack of rail capacity relative to the volumes. This is why there are so many trucks coming up out of south Texas. The railroads are just not efficient at these movements.

I don't think CP-KCS has the silver bullet so much as direct access to the Mexican suppliers. This requires little or no humping/switching/transfer at the US border. This gets them a time to market edge.

As long as trucks can move product north more effectively than trains can, then capacity for highways will always be required.

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on November 05, 2021, 10:20:21 AM
Any updates on the timing to finish the exit from 49SB to US71?  My wife drove the BVB last night for the first time.  It's a huge upgrade.  She was very pleased with it and how nice it was to skip the traffic in Bella Vista.

I'm told this coming Friday.

I was there a couple of days ago and used the exit again for the first time since they closed it.  It is open solely for right turns at this point, and they still need to finish redoing the curbs and drainage that undoubtedly collapsed under the weight of a forced rockslide, so there'll be occasional lane shifts even after they open it to left turning onto US-71 North at the SPUI.  Work vehicles on the offramp still visible on Arkansas' most viewed traffic cam.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on November 05, 2021, 11:15:10 AM
Even though there is a really serious shortage of truck drivers (as well as shortage of drivers for anything else that requires a CDL) an increase in rail traffic on a corridor from a merged CP/KCS network isn't going to make all that much of a dent in truck traffic on I-35. The line running along the OK/AR border isn't exactly the Southern Transcon. And there is still huge numbers of trucks on the I-44/I-40 combo despite upwards of 100 trains per day on the Southern Transcon.

Freight rail is very important to the nation's infrastructure. But it doesn't go everywhere, or even to a lot of locations it used to serve. Thousands of miles worth of track has been removed just within the last 30 years. Even with some improvements, such as double-track upgrades to the main lines, trucks on highways are still going to be very necessary to get shipments to their destinations.

True.  But the line running along the OK/AR border is about to be something even the east-west "transcons" aren't - a seamless link between North America's three biggest nations.  That same TRAINS article has maps indicating they're going to be running dedicated intermodals along the original Kansas City Southern Kansas City-Port Arthur mainline.  Unfortunately, the maps are smaller and poor quality on the web article.  As it is, the KCS has just been running manifest freights with a bunch of intermodal cars trailing at the end and never full container/trailer trains as they are planning now.  They're also planning on investing a LOT of money putting in sidings and other changes to this line, so there will be some benefit to the AR/OK region while that goes on.

Apologies for the bad humor about the trucks, as they will never be replaced despite the problems that industry faces right now.  That being said, it's still amazing to me just how important this particluar corridor is becoming not just for the interstates but also the railroads.  IMO, the I-49 corridor and the CPKC may end up complementing one another, as has happened in many other U.S. transit routes.

I read the same article in Trains.

While the railroads would "like" to replace trucks, that actually isn't what is occurring.

Shippers rely heavily on trucks to dray containers to their endpoints, most of which are nowhere near a rail spur or terminal.

There are some cases of long distance drays, recently discovered was that shippers were trucking containers to Idaho from the Port of Los Angeles.

That was recently adjusted as UP is now creating blocks of containers to push up to Salt Lake City and have shipper dray them from there.

No matter where they get dropped, you still need drivers and chassis to get them to their endpoint.

CSX recently gave up on switching containers into Michigan, Indiana and Ohio and told shippers to dray the containers out of Chicago instead.

Back to KCS-CP, the big products up front will be a direct route for CP to get Alberta shale oil to the US Petro Coast and in return auto parts from Mexico to Michigan and Canadian auto assemblies.

Those will be the backbone products that make the route a winner.  When Alberta signed that major oil export and carriage deal with CN and CP, they both had customers on each side of Canada, but only CN had a direct route to the Petro Coast. Now with the merger, CP does as well.

How does impact I-49 (or I-35)?

Looking at it from a shipper perspective, there might be opportunities to get containers drayed from KC instead of from Houston. This would reduce the amount of truck volume out of Texas going north. But most shippers are not going to dray out of KC and drive back down to say Joplin/Springfield via I-49.

The one stumbling block for cross border rail from Mexico to the US, is the lack of rail capacity relative to the volumes. This is why there are so many trucks coming up out of south Texas. The railroads are just not efficient at these movements.

I don't think CP-KCS has the silver bullet so much as direct access to the Mexican suppliers. This requires little or no humping/switching/transfer at the US border. This gets them a time to market edge.

As long as trucks can move product north more effectively than trains can, then capacity for highways will always be required.

The Trains article stated that the merger would result in the diversion of 64,000 long haul truck loads (annually I assume), so that doesn't significantly affect the truck traffic on either I-35 or I-49/I-69.  Apparently the growth they estimate in train counts isn't going to be intermodal in nature for the most part with those counts.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on November 05, 2021, 07:27:17 PM
The map showing the CPKC merger plan showed mostly modest increases in train traffic across the network. The leg between Kansas City and Shreveport currently carries 11 trains per day and is forecast to increase to 25 trains per day. That's a big increase, but maybe not enough to force a double-track upgrade for the entire leg. The busiest rail routes in the US carry upwards of 100 trains per day or even more along some stretches, like the BNSF Racetrack in the Chicago area or the UP main thru North Platte. The Bailey Yard in North Platte is the largest rail yard in the world. I-80 runs nearby.

Hopefully upgrades planned for parts of the CPKC network, such as that KC to Shreveport leg, will lead to some economic growth on the AR/OK border. The NWA region would need to see quite a bit more growth in order to attract something like passenger rail service. The Heartland Flyer route might pose a conflict since it is in relatively close proximity. Amtrak is enhancing the existing services on the existing Heartland Flyer line. The line will soon be extended North from Oklahoma City up to Wichita and Newton, KS where it will connect with the main Southwest Chief line (Chicago-LA). Those plans might compete with any future efforts to put passenger rail service parallel to the I-49 corridor.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Tomahawkin on November 06, 2021, 05:40:26 PM
Does anyone know or can guess how much 49 between Ft. Smith and Texarkana will cost. It's taking over 800 million in GA for the GA400/285 interchange, that covers around 20-25 square miles, and it's among the costliest projects in State history? I'm hoping that 400 million can get 49 completed in 15 years?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sprjus4 on November 06, 2021, 05:48:32 PM
I’m guessing at least a few billion, at minimum, given today’s costs of projects.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Tomahawkin on November 06, 2021, 07:41:00 PM
Anyone know how much it was to build 49 from Greenland to Alma? I guessing it would be that cost times 8, so you are right, it could be 1.2 to 2 billion, I forgot to add in the Arkansas River Bridge cost...Most likely it will be built in segments like IH 22 Was... But that took 25+ years
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on November 06, 2021, 08:19:33 PM
Anyone know how much it was to build 49 from Greenland to Alma? I guessing it would be that cost times 8, so you are right, it could be 1.2 to 2 billion, I forgot to add in the Arkansas River Bridge cost...Most likely it will be built in segments like IH 22 Was... But that took 25+ years

If I'm reading this correctly, it's projected to be $235.4 million for the Arkansas River Bridge plus and additional $235.4 million to construct the roadway to Hwy 22

https://www.interstate-guide.com/i-049/
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Tomahawkin on November 06, 2021, 09:51:37 PM
Cheesewhiz... IMO, Walmart, JB Hunt and Tyson would benefit to add to the funding, as well as adding warehouses and logistics facilities along That route which would bring jobs to those areas from Ft Smith Southward? I have heard that Ft. Smith is a decaying city that needs more revenue??? I heard this 15 years ago from someone I hangout with a lot when I was in Fayetteville...
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: mvak36 on November 06, 2021, 09:52:02 PM
Anyone know how much it was to build 49 from Greenland to Alma? I guessing it would be that cost times 8, so you are right, it could be 1.2 to 2 billion, I forgot to add in the Arkansas River Bridge cost...Most likely it will be built in segments like IH 22 Was... But that took 25+ years

If I'm reading this correctly, it's projected to be $235.4 million for the Arkansas River Bridge plus and additional $235.4 million to construct the roadway to Hwy 22

https://www.interstate-guide.com/i-049/
I’m curious if that cost is for the whole four lane roadway or the two lanes that ARDOT was planning to build first.

Maybe they can just build all 4 lanes now that the infrastructure bill has passed. Cheaper than having to back and do it at a higher price (due to inflation).
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on November 06, 2021, 10:19:26 PM
Quote from: Tomakawkin
I have heard that Ft. Smith is a decaying city that needs more revenue???

Fort Smith is kind of a mixed bag. They've been doing some work to spruce up the downtown. The improvements aren't as big in scale as a city like Pueblo. Garrison Avenue looks pretty decent approaching the riverfront. Some other parts of Fort Smith look pretty trashy. It reminds me of Lawton in some respects. Blight is pretty common in communities where much of the population is struggling with relatively low, stagnant incomes.

Quote from: Tomakawkin
Does anyone know or can guess how much 49 between Ft. Smith and Texarkana will cost.

Considering how many years will pass before the Fort Smith-Texarkana leg of I-49 is completed it's almost pointless to even guess at a final cost. The total will easily run into the billions. How many billions depends on how many decades they burn past building the highway. At the current pace we'll be lucky to see the Alma-Barling segment of I-49 fully complete before 2030. That segment alone may end up costing over a billion. It may be another 30 years past that before the rest of the freeway is completed.

One would think with all the advances that have been made in technology and engineering over the past few decades the innovations would have led to things like highway projects getting designed and completed much faster. If anything the progress has slowed way the hell down and costs have spiked over the moon.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: vdeane on November 06, 2021, 10:28:13 PM
Maybe they can just build all 4 lanes now that the infrastructure bill has passed. Cheaper than having to back and do it at a higher price (due to inflation).
Let's hope.  Between inflation on a high-cost part of the project and the utility of that segment, I would think getting it all done if the funding can be found would be a prudent course of action.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on November 07, 2021, 08:12:13 AM
Cheesewhiz... IMO, Walmart, JB Hunt and Tyson would benefit to add to the funding, as well as adding warehouses and logistics facilities along That route which would bring jobs to those areas from Ft Smith Southward? I have heard that Ft. Smith is a decaying city that needs more revenue??? I heard this 15 years ago from someone I hangout with a lot when I was in Fayetteville...

The Big 3 helped to bring 71/540/49 to NW Arkansas with the help of their political connections.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bwana39 on November 07, 2021, 03:48:23 PM
Cheesewhiz... IMO, Walmart, JB Hunt and Tyson would benefit to add to the funding, as well as adding warehouses and logistics facilities along That route which would bring jobs to those areas from Ft Smith Southward? I have heard that Ft. Smith is a decaying city that needs more revenue??? I heard this 15 years ago from someone I hangout with a lot when I was in Fayetteville...

The Big 3 helped to bring 71/540/49 to NW Arkansas with the help of their political connections.

I think you downplay the importance of UofA.  The University as far as it is from Little Rock is seemingly the center of the rest of Arkansas that is not in Pulaski or Garland COunties.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: edwaleni on November 07, 2021, 05:24:24 PM

One would think with all the advances that have been made in technology and engineering over the past few decades the innovations would have led to things like highway projects getting designed and completed much faster. If anything the progress has slowed way the hell down and costs have spiked over the moon.

Those advances in technology and engineering have been overcome by larger deficits in environmental impact reviews and more attention to public hearings and listening to every nimby.

This is just not 1966 anymore when it comes to highway construction. Some of the changes were good (like not targeting poor neighborhoods), some of the changes were detrimental, (like saving every McWhorter's Yellow-bellied finch)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Rothman on November 07, 2021, 05:34:19 PM
If I were a McWhorter's yellow-bellied finch, I'd want to be saved.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bwana39 on November 07, 2021, 06:48:26 PM


One would think with all the advances that have been made in technology and engineering over the past few decades the innovations would have led to things like highway projects getting designed and completed much faster. If anything the progress has slowed way the hell down and costs have spiked over the moon.


No, the level of microengineering and microinspections are the results.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on November 07, 2021, 07:12:26 PM
The map showing the CPKC merger plan showed mostly modest increases in train traffic across the network. The leg between Kansas City and Shreveport currently carries 11 trains per day and is forecast to increase to 25 trains per day. That's a big increase, but maybe not enough to force a double-track upgrade for the entire leg. The busiest rail routes in the US carry upwards of 100 trains per day or even more along some stretches, like the BNSF Racetrack in the Chicago area or the UP main thru North Platte. The Bailey Yard in North Platte is the largest rail yard in the world. I-80 runs nearby.

Hopefully upgrades planned for parts of the CPKC network, such as that KC to Shreveport leg, will lead to some economic growth on the AR/OK border. The NWA region would need to see quite a bit more growth in order to attract something like passenger rail service. The Heartland Flyer route might pose a conflict since it is in relatively close proximity. Amtrak is enhancing the existing services on the existing Heartland Flyer line. The line will soon be extended North from Oklahoma City up to Wichita and Newton, KS where it will connect with the main Southwest Chief line (Chicago-LA). Those plans might compete with any future efforts to put passenger rail service parallel to the I-49 corridor.

I-49 is 20 miles away from Siloam Springs, which is the closest city in Benton County to the bulk of the population of NWA, so passenger service on KCS wouldn't make sense for NWA anyway.  The Arkansas-Missouri Railroad (Class III) goes through the heart of NWA and terminates in Monette, MO at the BNSF line there.  The other end terminates in Fort Smith, AR and interties with the UP, KCS, and Fort Smith RR there.  There is an excursion train that seasonally runs on the Arkansas-Missouri Railroad between Springdale and Van Buren or Winslow, depending on the day.  I have ridden it from Cassville, MO all the way to Ft. Smith, AR, and it's a very scenic ride, especially this time of year.  I wouldn't call it a regular passenger service, though.  Jefferson Bus Lines would be the closest thing to a passenger service along the I-49 corridor.  There would pretty much need to be a spur line run along the US-412/I-**(*) corridor for any KCS passenger service for NWA to Siloam Springs.  Gravette, AR would be the closest community to I-49 and the KCS mainline, other than Ft. Smith, which isn't in NWA at all, and not on KCS's mainline either, but on a spur line.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on November 07, 2021, 07:28:00 PM
Quote from: Tomakawkin
I have heard that Ft. Smith is a decaying city that needs more revenue???

Fort Smith is kind of a mixed bag. They've been doing some work to spruce up the downtown. The improvements aren't as big in scale as a city like Pueblo. Garrison Avenue looks pretty decent approaching the riverfront. Some other parts of Fort Smith look pretty trashy. It reminds me of Lawton in some respects. Blight is pretty common in communities where much of the population is struggling with relatively low, stagnant incomes.

Quote from: Tomakawkin
Does anyone know or can guess how much 49 between Ft. Smith and Texarkana will cost.

Considering how many years will pass before the Fort Smith-Texarkana leg of I-49 is completed it's almost pointless to even guess at a final cost. The total will easily run into the billions. How many billions depends on how many decades they burn past building the highway. At the current pace we'll be lucky to see the Alma-Barling segment of I-49 fully complete before 2030. That segment alone may end up costing over a billion. It may be another 30 years past that before the rest of the freeway is completed.

One would think with all the advances that have been made in technology and engineering over the past few decades the innovations would have led to things like highway projects getting designed and completed much faster. If anything the progress has slowed way the hell down and costs have spiked over the moon.

Fort Smith's growth will happen more towards Barling along the Future I-49 corridor on the Chaffee Crossing development that is on Fort Chaffee's donated land from its downsizing during numerous BRAC sessions.  Downtown will see a tiny bit of gentrification, but there just isn't an adequate push to develop the riverfront to make much of a difference, which is a shame as there's all the possibility in the world there that's just wasted on an inept/corrupt city government running the show.  Fort Smith and Texarkana both will need some growth outside of a completed I-49 to get the push to make it a sufficient priority as it will take growth in US-71 traffic and the attendant accident/LOS decays to make it a priority.  I see Texarkana growing faster than Ft. Smith, so the push will come from the south more likely than not, which means that I-69 in TX would make a larger difference than anything that I can envision within AR for the foreseeable future.  If Arkansas doesn't at least get a Super-2 along with ROW for the full freeway within the next 20 years, there's a risk of the route running from Ft. Smith to Mena along the US-59 corridor like the KCS did, rather than in AR along US-71.  Quite frankly, Poteau, OK is more deserving of an Interstate than anything in Arkansas along US-71 north of Mena and south of Ft. Smith.  Terrain is certainly easier, which is why the railroad went that way.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on November 08, 2021, 01:53:22 AM
Oklahoma won't pay to upgrade a US 69 that runs right through the middle of it. Why would they pay for an I-49 that goes from Arkansas to Arkansas?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Henry on November 08, 2021, 10:10:13 AM
Oklahoma won't pay to upgrade a US 69 that runs right through the middle of it. Why would they pay for an I-49 that goes from Arkansas to Arkansas?
And besides, I-49 will not go anywhere near OK, so that's a nonstarter for them.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on November 08, 2021, 12:06:16 PM
Any updates on the timing to finish the exit from 49SB to US71?  My wife drove the BVB last night for the first time.  It's a huge upgrade.  She was very pleased with it and how nice it was to skip the traffic in Bella Vista.

Looks like Nov. 23 will be when they wrap everything up finally at the SB offramp/SPUI.

Construction Requires Lane Closures at Bella Vista Bypass Interchange in Bentonville (https://www.ardot.gov/news/21-365/)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bwana39 on November 08, 2021, 11:29:16 PM
Oklahoma won't pay to upgrade a US 69 that runs right through the middle of it. Why would they pay for an I-49 that goes from Arkansas to Arkansas?

I tend to agree. If the feds were to dictate the route, they might play ball but otherwise no. One irony is that it is virtually the same mileage wise and the grade would be far less.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on November 09, 2021, 07:28:25 AM
Oklahoma won't pay to upgrade a US 69 that runs right through the middle of it. Why would they pay for an I-49 that goes from Arkansas to Arkansas?

I tend to agree. If the feds were to dictate the route, they might play ball but otherwise no. One irony is that it is virtually the same mileage wise and the grade would be far less.

Which is why the KCS routing goes that way as railroads are far more grade sensitive.  So, Poteau has gotten as much road as it's ever going to get despite its being the same size as Greenwood, AR.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on November 09, 2021, 07:55:29 AM
Oklahoma won't pay to upgrade a US 69 that runs right through the middle of it. Why would they pay for an I-49 that goes from Arkansas to Arkansas?

Makes you wonder why Texas is doing just that, with a Red River bridge thrown in as an extra expense!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: edwaleni on November 09, 2021, 11:09:41 AM
Oklahoma won't pay to upgrade a US 69 that runs right through the middle of it. Why would they pay for an I-49 that goes from Arkansas to Arkansas?

Makes you wonder why Texas is doing just that, with a Red River bridge thrown in as an extra expense!

A couple of things in that line of thought.

- Arkansas is the predecessor state (1836) over Texas (1845)
- The Red River has shifted north where the planned bridge is to be built, so technically TxDOT would only provide the connector between each state line.
- TxDOT already owns the ROW between each state line, so they are prepared to pay regardless.

Based on this ArDOT would be the lead agency on any Red River bridge planning, TxDOT will simply connect it. (unless a flood moves the Red River again)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bwana39 on November 09, 2021, 12:01:12 PM
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3324.msg2499993;topicseen#:~:text=I%20think%20you,were%20centuries%20ago.

I think you gravely underestimate the local commitment in Texarkana and Bowie County to 1-49 and I-369. Texarkana (Texas) sees a major intersection out North of Leary with TWO interstates intersecting; not just one running through the River bottoms then crossing the river. You have to look at the existing bridges on US-59/71 across the Red River.  The Southbound bridge leaves Little River County Arkansas and lands in Bowie county TX. Texas paid for the cash portion of the local funds for the  construction costs Arkansas paid in "IN-kind funding" (almost entirely R.O.W.).   The Northbound bridge leaves Miller County AR and lands in Little River County AR. Partially Paid by TXDOT. 

Arkansas WANTS this rural stretch through Bowie County so Texas will help pay for the bridges and not have significant access for in-town businesses. As soon as digging gets started in Little River County it will also in Bowie County.

While I suggested an Eastern Oklahoma route had been discussed. I also noted that it (..."has never been significantly considered beyond theory)"   I see nothing short of JFK standing on that rock out side Big Cedar again making it happen. (Big Cedar is actually further south than US59). Yes, Oklahoma has bigger fish to fry. US 69 or US75 clearly are higher priorities for OKLAHOMA. This said, The US59 Corridor is a world away from US-69(or even the Indian Nation Turnpike.)  Any reference to this route going into Oklahoma is PURELY based on building on a blank slate with no political realities. It might be a better route purely from a road building perspective, but it does go into OKLAHOMA and OKLAHOMA doesn't want it and would choose to spend their money elsewhere. So I am done kicking the dead horse.

As to the chosen route: I pointed out it loops way east to minimize the mountain problems.  Arkansas made the same decision for US-71 nearly 100 years ago. Absent tunneling, it is what it is. There really doesn't seem to be a better Arkansas route. The same mountains are there that were centuries ago.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: silverback1065 on November 12, 2021, 02:22:55 PM
looks like the next piece to be done is the tiny gap between 40 and 22.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on November 12, 2021, 02:25:49 PM
looks like the next piece to be done is the tiny gap between 40 and 22.

As soon as they quit building side roads near 49 in Benton County ;)

"but seriously folks"... it will likely be 2 lanes only to start, then expanded later to 4 lanes as more money becomes available.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on November 12, 2021, 04:28:07 PM
looks like the next piece to be done is the tiny gap between 40 and 22.

As soon as they quit building side roads near 49 in Benton County ;)

"but seriously folks"... it will likely be 2 lanes only to start, then expanded later to 4 lanes as more money becomes available.

As the alternative is 5 miles I-40, 3 miles on I-540, then 10 miles of a 2 lane AR-59 currently, it's still a welcome start.  When it's done and taking 2 lanes of traffic, it's still better to drive 13.6 miles, even if there's few passing zones or enough traffic that they aren't usable frequently.  And it'll likely be like the Bella Vista Bypass in that it'll be followed up by the next 2 lanes within a few years.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: silverback1065 on November 12, 2021, 04:48:19 PM
Honest question, why wasn't 540 considered as the route for 49 through here? I don't know the area well and I don't read every response here so maybe it's been answered.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on November 12, 2021, 05:20:11 PM
Honest question, why wasn't 540 considered as the route for 49 through here? I don't know the area well and I don't read every response here so maybe it's been answered.

Short version: 540 deltas back to the mid 60's and is (IMO) sub-standard by today's standards. 

Longer answer: To upgrade 540, a lot of commercial development would have to move (there are no service roads), exit and entrance ramps would need to be extended &/or widened.  Some of the exits are too close together and run into each other. Not every exit has an acceleration or deceleration lane or they are too short.

There is a proposal to reroute part of I-540 to I-49, but that is somewhere in the future.



 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: I-39 on November 12, 2021, 05:30:26 PM
I wonder what we’ll see first, the next section of I-49 or the next section of I-57?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on November 12, 2021, 06:42:38 PM
I wonder what we’ll see first, the next section of I-49 or the next section of I-57?

I'm going to guess I-57.  The next section of 49 likely won't start for 2-3 more years.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Tomahawkin on November 12, 2021, 06:56:25 PM
57, will be 1st, Bank on it. The terrain in NEA is a lot flatter and with the added money from the Feds, Missouri will get onto IH 57 as well. If Im not mistaking Missouri only has to complete 80-100 miles in the state???
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bwana39 on November 12, 2021, 08:44:14 PM
57, will be 1st, Bank on it. The terrain in NEA is a lot flatter and with the added money from the Feds, Missouri will get onto IH 57 as well. If Im not mistaking Missouri only has to complete 80-100 miles in the state???

And I57 is DIRECTLY connected to LRA.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on November 12, 2021, 09:15:59 PM
Yeah, I-57 will be long-finished before I-49 is completed. Once all the sub-standard junk along US-67 in Jacksonville, AR is upgraded I-57 should be able to be signed all the way to Walnut Ridge. Early in 2022 the decision should be made which of 3 options going North of Walnut Ridge to the MO border will be chosen.

Missouri really has the easier share of the burden at completing I-57. US-60 between Poplar Bluff and Sikeston should be a relatively easy upgrade. US-67 from Poplar Bluff to the AR border is a short distance and has few obstacles.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bwana39 on November 12, 2021, 10:39:25 PM
Honest question, why wasn't 540 considered as the route for 49 through here? I don't know the area well and I don't read every response here so maybe it's been answered.

I can think of several reasons.
1) Traffic would have to go through town. WalMart traffic in particular is just thru traffic.
2) US-71 south of its' split with I-540 is really too congested to upgrade.
3) It might accidentally have taken I-49 through Oklahoma.  (It might have made the eastern Oklahoma route more likely. )
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bwana39 on November 12, 2021, 10:41:21 PM
Even though there is a really serious shortage of truck drivers (as well as shortage of drivers for anything else that requires a CDL) an increase in rail traffic on a corridor from a merged CP/KCS network isn't going to make all that much of a dent in truck traffic on I-35. The line running along the OK/AR border isn't exactly the Southern Transcon. And there is still huge numbers of trucks on the I-44/I-40 combo despite upwards of 100 trains per day on the Southern Transcon.

Freight rail is very important to the nation's infrastructure. But it doesn't go everywhere, or even to a lot of locations it used to serve. Thousands of miles worth of track has been removed just within the last 30 years. Even with some improvements, such as double-track upgrades to the main lines, trucks on highways are still going to be very necessary to get shipments to their destinations.

It isn't because there is a lack of drivers. The problem is the lack of drivers who can pass a DOT physical. The drug screen is a real stopping block for the physical pass rate.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bwana39 on November 12, 2021, 10:44:34 PM
Even though there is a really serious shortage of truck drivers (as well as shortage of drivers for anything else that requires a CDL) an increase in rail traffic on a corridor from a merged CP/KCS network isn't going to make all that much of a dent in truck traffic on I-35. The line running along the OK/AR border isn't exactly the Southern Transcon. And there is still huge numbers of trucks on the I-44/I-40 combo despite upwards of 100 trains per day on the Southern Transcon.

Freight rail is very important to the nation's infrastructure. But it doesn't go everywhere, or even to a lot of locations it used to serve. Thousands of miles worth of track has been removed just within the last 30 years. Even with some improvements, such as double-track upgrades to the main lines, trucks on highways are still going to be very necessary to get shipments to their destinations.

We should do a far better job of doing trailer trains and containers to places closer to the end delivery point. Even WalMart is figuring out how cost effective rail CAN be.

The reason we have all the truck traffic we have today is the rails were removed in so many places.
The reason the tracks have been taken up or abandoned is because we deregulated the railroads and their incentive to serve many areas disappeared.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on November 12, 2021, 11:31:47 PM
Quote from: bwana39
It isn't because there is a lack of drivers. The problem is the lack of drivers who can pass a DOT physical. The drug screen is a real stopping block for the physical pass rate.

There is indeed a genuine lack of truck drivers. The labor shortage is due to several factors. Probably the biggest reason is driving a big rig truck long distances is not a pleasant job, much less even a conventional one. There are many hours of solitary conditions away from family and friends. Not many people want to sign up for that. There are many hazards on the road; everything from weather and bad road conditions to people trying to pull stop-and-squat insurance fraud scams. Drivers deal with loads of paperwork, log books and other regulatory hassles. Just getting into the industry is difficult. It's not easy to get a CDL. Or cheap. However, more trucking companies are paying the tuition for future drivers to take the CDL classes and final tests.

The prospect of physical exams and drug tests up front along with random screenings definitely turns away some people. At my workplace (a sign design and manufacturing company) everybody is subject to random drug screenings since all our crane truck drivers are subject to the screenings. If they have to pee in a cup we all do. It's only fair. But I've literally seen people come in to fill out job applications, get to the notice about random drug/alcohol screenings and leave the application un-finished as they walk out the door. Oh well.

Quote from: bwana39
We should do a far better job of doing trailer trains and containers to places closer to the end delivery point. Even WalMart is figuring out how cost effective rail CAN be.

There has been a good deal of growth and innovation with moving freight via intermodal methods. For instance, traditional box cars are almost a thing of the past. They've been replaced with multiple rail car types designed to hold shipping containers or big rig truck trailers. "Well cars" can hold double stacked freight containers. Well cars are often joined in multi-unit configurations, either 3 or 5 units with single 4-wheel articulated connectors between the units. These things can haul a hell of a lot of freight.

Despite the innovation it seems more of the US freight rail network is being decommissioned and dismantled than there is new rail getting installed.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Rothman on November 13, 2021, 01:08:56 AM
I'd rather our truck drivers not have drug or alcohol issues...
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on November 13, 2021, 02:04:29 AM
The logistics of building an Arkansas River Bridge preclude the construction of a Super-2. You can't build half a span and come back and build the other half on the cheap. So Alma to Barling will be built in full when it happens.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bwana39 on November 13, 2021, 08:46:50 AM
I'd rather our truck drivers not have drug or alcohol issues...

I agree completely. A decade + ago the model was amphetamines and Vicodin. Neither conducive to safe driving.
The amount of meth addicts is huge.
Pot, regardless how we perceive, it is not a good thing for use when driving.
Drinking and driving also is a problem.



Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on November 13, 2021, 11:03:41 AM
I certainly don't advocate the government to ease requirements for drivers to be clean and sober. The insurance industry absolutely wouldn't ever stand for it. Coverage rates would spike if the government eased up restrictions for drug use on and off the clock. The fact so many people can't pass a piss test or choose drugs over a job with decent pay is a pretty sorry statement about the people of our nation. It makes us look weak as hell.

There is no reliable testing method to measure if someone is too high to drive. Any evidence of drug use in urine or the blood stream is damning. It doesn't matter if the person smoked a blunt that morning or two weeks ago. Plus there is the whole spectrum of drug types, all of which would vary in being able to evaluate if someone was high on that drug or not. It's far more complicated than the BAC tests for alcohol.

Quote from: Road Hog
The logistics of building an Arkansas River Bridge preclude the construction of a Super-2. You can't build half a span and come back and build the other half on the cheap. So Alma to Barling will be built in full when it happens.

They could build a twin bridge span. Build one two-lane bridge for the initial Super-2 segment and then add the second bridge later. The Arkansas River at Fort Smith doesn't require a super high clearance like the Mississippi River. More modest, conventional highway bridge designs can be used. This crossing doesn't require a visual "signature" bridge such as a cable-stayed suspension bridge. Cost estimates don't appear to allow for that at all. Building up berms across flood plain and other grading work is going to eat up much of the budget. The bridge (or bridges) that end up being built will be fairly ordinary looking.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on November 13, 2021, 03:21:05 PM
FWIW US 71 (I-49) at US 62 in Fayetteville was built in the late 60's early 70's as a 2-lane road with a bridge over 62. 71 would later be widened to 4lanes.
Of course SB is separate from NB.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Scott5114 on November 13, 2021, 05:50:25 PM
The prospect of physical exams and drug tests up front along with random screenings definitely turns away some people. At my workplace (a sign design and manufacturing company) everybody is subject to random drug screenings since all our crane truck drivers are subject to the screenings. If they have to pee in a cup we all do. It's only fair. But I've literally seen people come in to fill out job applications, get to the notice about random drug/alcohol screenings and leave the application un-finished as they walk out the door. Oh well.

I certainly don't advocate the government to ease requirements for drivers to be clean and sober. The insurance industry absolutely wouldn't ever stand for it. Coverage rates would spike if the government eased up restrictions for drug use on and off the clock. The fact so many people can't pass a piss test or choose drugs over a job with decent pay is a pretty sorry statement about the people of our nation. It makes us look weak as hell.

There is no reliable testing method to measure if someone is too high to drive. Any evidence of drug use in urine or the blood stream is damning. It doesn't matter if the person smoked a blunt that morning or two weeks ago. Plus there is the whole spectrum of drug types, all of which would vary in being able to evaluate if someone was high on that drug or not. It's far more complicated than the BAC tests for alcohol.

Keep in mind that you do live in a state with state-licensed medical marijuana. People with a medical marijuana card range from people who use it from time to time as needed (as I do, for insomnia) to people whose quality of life is greatly negatively impacted without it (my wife, who has chronic migraine so bad that before she was on cannabis she usually missed work one or two days a week).

For someone like my wife, you couldn't get her to take a job with regular drug testing if you paid her a hundred dollars an hour. The huge hit to her quality of life just wouldn't be worth it, and if there was any sort of attendance policy in place, she'd end up getting fired eventually anyway. A job isn't worth going back to spending half of her time in a dark room in debilitating pain for her.

For someone like me, if the price was right, you could maybe get me to make that deal. But on the other hand, even though I don't depend on cannabis to make it through the day, I still resent employers who are so presumptuous that they think they can dictate what I do when they're not paying me, especially if it's doing something the state says is legal, like consuming cannabis. And a particularly strict drug policy is a red flag that the employer may be on the wrong side of work/life balance in other areas too. Some employers might let you show your card and let you skate on drug tests, the same way they do employees who have a legitimate prescription for opioids, but dealing with all of the paperwork for that is a hassle, and the risk of getting terminated because you forgot your card lapsed makes it more trouble to accept a job like that than it's worth.

Drug policies are causing some Oklahoma employers to trip over their feet. The Chickasaw Nation, for instance, has been hemorrhaging employees because of pandemic-related resignations, and been unable to fill positions because applicants decline the offer when told it's contingent on a drug test. So they're running multimillion dollar facilities with a skeleton crew, forcing upper management to do front-line duties. You love to see it. But if employers can't fix their policies to reflect the reality of changing societal norms, they're going to be left in the dust.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: vdeane on November 13, 2021, 10:20:42 PM
While I certainly understand why we don't want truck drivers and other professions high or drunk on the job, I also believe it should be strictly illegal for employers to be able to regulate what their employees do off the clock.

I certainly don't advocate the government to ease requirements for drivers to be clean and sober. The insurance industry absolutely wouldn't ever stand for it. Coverage rates would spike if the government eased up restrictions for drug use on and off the clock. The fact so many people can't pass a piss test or choose drugs over a job with decent pay is a pretty sorry statement about the people of our nation. It makes us look weak as hell.
You don't know why people are declining the drug tests.  They might just not like the humiliation of being forced to pee in a cup for their employer.  People don't like being treated like criminals, and the days when people were willing to do anything for a dollar are long gone.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Rothman on November 14, 2021, 01:18:25 AM
When what employees do off the clock affects their job performance and safety (e.g., drinking or getting high before their start time), it very much matters.  So, drug screenings at the workplace are highly appropriate.

That said, those that desire to work baked have various other professions they could pursue.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: edwaleni on November 14, 2021, 03:47:07 AM
Colorado has an active THC field analyzer for DWUI cases.  After cannabis was made legal CHP started getting reports of excessively slow drivers on I-25 between Denver and Boulder.

For those who think you can avoid a THC toxicity test, most states permit a blood or saliva draw for DWUI.

Technically, all they need is a hair sample and they can tell if you have ingested THC in the past 30 days.

Sales of artificial genitalia with a urine holding sac are at all time highs, mostly for people who have to perform frequent/regular pee tests and need to pass.

Everyone has a choice. If intake is more important than a paycheck, by all means partake.

Now back to our regular programming on I-49
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: vdeane on November 14, 2021, 09:46:18 PM
Technically, all they need is a hair sample and they can tell if you have ingested THC in the past 30 days.
How does knowing someone ingested THC in the past 30 days tell you anything about whether they're high right now (which realistically would need to be proven for a DUI conviction)?

When what employees do off the clock affects their job performance and safety (e.g., drinking or getting high before their start time), it very much matters.  So, drug screenings at the workplace are highly appropriate.

That said, those that desire to work baked have various other professions they could pursue.

But still, it only matters if they're drunk or high at work (and therefore on the clock).  Employers shouldn't have a right to care what employees do if it doesn't affect work.  And that company that says "if any workers have to get screened, they all do" is especially ridiculous.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Rothman on November 14, 2021, 11:10:06 PM
Technically, all they need is a hair sample and they can tell if you have ingested THC in the past 30 days.
How does knowing someone ingested THC in the past 30 days tell you anything about whether they're high right now (which realistically would need to be proven for a DUI conviction)?

When what employees do off the clock affects their job performance and safety (e.g., drinking or getting high before their start time), it very much matters.  So, drug screenings at the workplace are highly appropriate.

That said, those that desire to work baked have various other professions they could pursue.

But still, it only matters if they're drunk or high at work (and therefore on the clock).  Employers shouldn't have a right to care what employees do if it doesn't affect work.  And that company that says "if any workers have to get screened, they all do" is especially ridiculous.
I am all for prescreenings of everyone rather than finding out after an incident someone had done a good job covering up their impaired state.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on November 14, 2021, 11:22:55 PM
Which is why the KCS routing goes that way as railroads are far more grade sensitive.  So, Poteau has gotten as much road as it's ever going to get despite its being the same size as Greenwood, AR.

Poteau is getting a 4 lane OK 112, and the stretch of US 59 west of Spiro is being 4 laned, which will connect Poteau with I-40 west. Hopefully, a 4 lane between Heavener and Poteau will eventually happen.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on November 14, 2021, 11:34:29 PM
I'd rather our truck drivers not have drug or alcohol issues...

Smoking a joint after work is not a "drug issue". The actual issue is the fact that they test for a mostly benign substance that stays in the system for months after all effects from the substance have long subsided.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Scott5114 on November 14, 2021, 11:39:49 PM
Technically, all they need is a hair sample and they can tell if you have ingested THC in the past 30 days.
How does knowing someone ingested THC in the past 30 days tell you anything about whether they're high right now (which realistically would need to be proven for a DUI conviction)?

When what employees do off the clock affects their job performance and safety (e.g., drinking or getting high before their start time), it very much matters.  So, drug screenings at the workplace are highly appropriate.

That said, those that desire to work baked have various other professions they could pursue.

But still, it only matters if they're drunk or high at work (and therefore on the clock).  Employers shouldn't have a right to care what employees do if it doesn't affect work.  And that company that says "if any workers have to get screened, they all do" is especially ridiculous.
I am all for prescreenings of everyone rather than finding out after an incident someone had done a good job covering up their impaired state.

Might be justified for positions where a fuck-up means someone might actually get hurt, but it shouldn't be allowed just because Jerry the retail manager gets a power boner at the thought of controlling his cashiers' lives 24/7.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on November 14, 2021, 11:59:06 PM
I agree completely. A decade + ago the model was amphetamines and Vicodin. Neither conducive to safe driving.

Actually, that is false, or at least it isn't true all the time. Amphetamines can make some drivers drive better, especially if they have ADHD. They help drivers concentrate on the road, and pay more attention to driving. Plus they help wake you up.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Rothman on November 15, 2021, 12:03:16 AM
Technically, all they need is a hair sample and they can tell if you have ingested THC in the past 30 days.
How does knowing someone ingested THC in the past 30 days tell you anything about whether they're high right now (which realistically would need to be proven for a DUI conviction)?

When what employees do off the clock affects their job performance and safety (e.g., drinking or getting high before their start time), it very much matters.  So, drug screenings at the workplace are highly appropriate.

That said, those that desire to work baked have various other professions they could pursue.

But still, it only matters if they're drunk or high at work (and therefore on the clock).  Employers shouldn't have a right to care what employees do if it doesn't affect work.  And that company that says "if any workers have to get screened, they all do" is especially ridiculous.
I am all for prescreenings of everyone rather than finding out after an incident someone had done a good job covering up their impaired state.

Might be justified for positions where a fuck-up means someone might actually get hurt, but it shouldn't be allowed just because Jerry the retail manager gets a power boner at the thought of controlling his cashiers' lives 24/7.
This I agree with.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on November 15, 2021, 12:08:51 AM
Quote from: Scott5114
Keep in mind that you do live in a state with state-licensed medical marijuana. People with a medical marijuana card range from people who use it from time to time as needed (as I do, for insomnia) to people whose quality of life is greatly negatively impacted without it (my wife, who has chronic migraine so bad that before she was on cannabis she usually missed work one or two days a week).

We've been seeing the issue of applicants walking off due to the drug/alcohol policy long before marijuana was legalized on a medical basis.

Our sign company doesn't have the random screening policy in place just to be puritanical jerks over drinking and drug use. We have to comply with federal law. Nation-wide, anyone with a CDL has to be clean and sober, able to pass a drug/alcohol screening. A state can legalize marijuana on a medical or recreational basis, but that still does not change the situation with federal regulations for people who drive big rig trucks, crane trucks, school buses, etc.

Years ago our company only required employees who drove the crane trucks to be subject to drug/alcohol screenings. It turned into a pretty big morale problem. Anyone who operated a crane truck was held to one standard while everyone else could do whatever they wanted. Some staff members quit over the situation.

Quote from: edwaleni
Colorado has an active THC field analyzer for DWUI cases.  After cannabis was made legal CHP started getting reports of excessively slow drivers on I-25 between Denver and Boulder.

Lawton has an epidemic of excessively slow drivers. What I consider excessively slow is 15-20mph under the posted speed limit. Some of the problem could be drug use. Some other cases are elderly drivers who no longer have the cognitive skills to drive with the flow of traffic. And we have plenty of others on the road who are just assholes who enjoy obstructing the flow of traffic.

Quote from: edwaleni
Sales of artificial genitalia with a urine holding sac are at all time highs, mostly for people who have to perform frequent/regular pee tests and need to pass.

One of my former co-workers was busted trying smuggle someone else's pee into Allied Labs during a random screening. He didn't count on them doing a temperature check of the sample. Even fake "junk" with a sac holding another urine sample isn't going to work all that accurately for keeping the sample at a correct temperature. People operating the labs are aware of the various schemes people use to bring pee from someone else into the building.

Quote from: bugo
Smoking a joint after work is not a "drug issue". The actual issue is the fact that they test for a mostly benign substance that stays in the system for months after all effects from the substance have long subsided.

Smoking a joint after work is a pretty big legal problem if that worker is operating a potentially dangerous piece of machinery, such as a big rig truck, and is involved in an accident where other people are hurt or killed. It's 100% likely that worker will be drug tested as part of the accident investigation. If his piss test comes back hot then the lawyers are going to have one hell of a field day suing the crap out of the company. If the employer is a small business the legal action may put it completely out of business and all of its workers out of their jobs.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Scott5114 on November 15, 2021, 12:20:18 AM
Our sign company doesn't have the random screening policy in place just to be puritanical jerks over drinking and drug use. We have to comply with federal law.

Federal law can be unjust. Just because something is the law doesn't mean it should be.

Quote
Years ago our company only required employees who drove the crane trucks to be subject to drug/alcohol screenings. It turned into a pretty big morale problem. Anyone who operated a crane truck was held to one standard while everyone else could do whatever they wanted. Some staff members quit over the situation.

It sounds like your coworkers are babies. In a company of any size, different job titles have different responsibilities and different expectations. At the casino, the security guards were allowed to carry tasers or even guns, and the cashiers like me weren't. They also had to be CLEET certified and we didn't, though. And the cashiers had to take a more thorough certification on money-laundering law than the housekeepers did. Everyone understood this to be fair because all of us had different job responsibilities.

If crane man didn't like that he had to get drug tested and the graphic designer didn't, he should transfer to the graphic designer position when it comes open.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on November 15, 2021, 12:21:13 AM
The laws need to change. The problem isn't with weed, its with the law.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Plutonic Panda on November 15, 2021, 04:15:30 AM
We clearly don’t have to comply with federal law given the fact that we don’t, we tax it, and violate federal so that argument is thrown out the window. There is nothing wrong with smoking a joint after work regardless of what your profession is. Get with the times!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: jbnv on November 15, 2021, 09:04:21 AM
We clearly don’t have to comply with federal law given the fact that we don’t, we tax it, and violate federal so that argument is thrown out the window. There is nothing wrong with smoking a joint after work regardless of what your profession is. Get with the times!

I'd love to watch you tell your employer that.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: silverback1065 on November 15, 2021, 09:43:56 AM
can we talk about roads and not weed?  :-D
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on November 15, 2021, 10:06:28 AM
can we talk about roads and not weed?  :-D

Please!  I don't care about it one way or the other as long as matter doesn't try to occupy space already occupied by other matter.

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: J N Winkler on November 15, 2021, 12:24:30 PM
This is a gentle suggestion that the ins and outs of workplace alcohol and drug testing and its effects on safety, including on the roads, are much broader than I-49 in Arkansas and deserve their own thread.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: The Ghostbuster on November 15, 2021, 12:35:37 PM
Does anyone think any of us will see a completed Interstate 49 between New Orleans, LA and Kansas City, MO within our lifetimes? Considering how long it will take to complete 49 between Interstates 30 and 40, and how slowly the upgrades are coming to US 90 between Lafayette and New Orleans, I would say no.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on November 15, 2021, 12:42:53 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster
Does anyone think any of us will see a completed Interstate 49 between New Orleans, LA and Kansas City, MO within our lifetimes? Considering how long it will take to complete 49 between Interstates 30 and 40, and how slowly the upgrades are coming to US 90 between Lafayette and New Orleans, I would say no.

My own guess is it will take another 10 years just to get I-49 completed in the Fort Smith area. That guess is based on how long it took for the Belle Vista Bypass to be completed. It may take another 30 years after that to get it built down to Texarkana. That is unless the federal and state governments re-vamp how they go about building highways.

I-49 South between Lafayette and New Orleans could actually get completed faster. The toughest part is getting through Lafayette and the clutter South of it. I figure that portion may be done in 10 years, barring any last minute curve balls get thrown. But it will be another 20 or so years for I-49 to be completed to the West Bank Expressway. Funny thing: the West Bank Expressway is getting close to 40 years old. Much of it will have to be re-built in the not so distant future.

I don't know what to think about the Shreveport ICC. It could get done before the end of this decade if the opposition got out of the way.

Quote from: Scott5114
Federal law can be unjust. Just because something is the law doesn't mean it should be.

Our company cannot disregard the law regardless if we are or are not in favor of it. Add to that the fact the United States is home to the majority of the world's attorneys. One figure I saw was that the US has 70% of the world's lawyers. They're all out there trying to make a living, looking for people and businesses to sue.

Every freaking night on our local evening news the station airs commercials from 3 or more law firms asking viewers if they've been in an accident with a commercial truck. Given this reality our company must do its best to cover its ass. If that means random screening all employees to make sure anyone driving a crane truck is clean then so be it. We cannot change our policies until the laws change and the courtroom situation changes. It doesn't look like that will happen any time soon. If anything, I figure more regulations and laws will be piled on to add to the burden. All it takes is one high profile accident involving a truck and the driver doing something he shouldn't have been doing.

Quote from: Scott5114
It sounds like your coworkers are babies.

No, not really. They just figure it's bull$#!+ if they have to comply to one standard and another co-worker can do drugs at home or even come to work drunk or high and not be subject to any scrutiny.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on November 15, 2021, 03:38:41 PM
Does anyone think any of us will see a completed Interstate 49 between New Orleans, LA and Kansas City, MO within our lifetimes? Considering how long it will take to complete 49 between Interstates 30 and 40, and how slowly the upgrades are coming to US 90 between Lafayette and New Orleans, I would say no.

Whose lifetime? Yours, maybe. Mine, probably not.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Plutonic Panda on November 15, 2021, 03:41:23 PM

No, not really. They just figure it's bull$#!+ if they have to comply to one standard and another co-worker can do drugs at home or even come to work drunk or high and not be subject to any scrutiny.
Except no one is advocating for allowing coworkers to come into work drunk or high.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on November 15, 2021, 07:18:35 PM
It's still a double standard. The legal situation with truck/bus drivers having to abstain entirely from drugs is not going to change until truly reliable methods are developed to determine how high someone is at the time of an accident or arrest. We're not there yet, particularly for anything that will stand up in court.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: NE2 on November 15, 2021, 08:25:08 PM
Many of the same employers that fire you for being high make you show up when you're sick to the point of vomiting. Man flu is a hell of a drug.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: jbnv on November 15, 2021, 08:54:25 PM
Does anyone think any of us will see a completed Interstate 49 between New Orleans, LA and Kansas City, MO within our lifetimes? Considering how long it will take to complete 49 between Interstates 30 and 40, and how slowly the upgrades are coming to US 90 between Lafayette and New Orleans, I would say no.

It could get done if the Louisiana and Arkansas Congressional delegations would grow a pair and demand that infrastructure bills fund actual specific projects, not just block grants to states. I've commented on the infrastructure money in the Louisiana I-49 threads so I won't repeat it here. Suffice it to say that we're giving the states these big piles of money and trusting them to spend it responsibly. That's trust I don't have in the Louisiana Legislature.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on November 15, 2021, 09:00:51 PM
Does anyone think any of us will see a completed Interstate 49 between New Orleans, LA and Kansas City, MO within our lifetimes? Considering how long it will take to complete 49 between Interstates 30 and 40, and how slowly the upgrades are coming to US 90 between Lafayette and New Orleans, I would say no.

It could get done if the Louisiana and Arkansas Congressional delegations would grow a pair and demand that infrastructure bills fund actual specific projects, not just block grants to states. I've commented on the infrastructure money in the Louisiana I-49 threads so I won't repeat it here. Suffice it to say that we're giving the states these big piles of money and trusting them to spend it responsibly. That's trust I don't have in the Louisiana Legislature.

Otherwise, Arkansas would just blow 45% of anything on Little Rock with probably 20% on NWA and 10% on NEA with the remainder of the state getting the scraps.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Tomahawkin on November 15, 2021, 09:13:11 PM
Downtown Little Rock is dead? What the hell happened there? It seems like NWA will continue to attract new residents from the left coast and Texas. IMO, Little Rock isn't as attractive a place to move to in comparison to NWA. It wasn't like that 30+ years ago
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Scott5114 on November 16, 2021, 12:50:27 AM

Quote from: Scott5114
It sounds like your coworkers are babies.

No, not really. They just figure it's bull$#!+ if they have to comply to one standard and another co-worker can do drugs at home or even come to work drunk or high and not be subject to any scrutiny.

They figure incorrectly. It's not bullshit at all.

Or do surgeons think it's bullshit that the people that mop up puke don't have to comply to the same standard of having M.D.s that they do?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on November 16, 2021, 01:11:59 AM
Quote from: Scott5114
They figure incorrectly. It's not bullshit at all.

It does not matter if you think they "figure incorrectly." The employees still feel how they feel about the issue. Telling them they're "wrong" doesn't change a Goddamned thing, especially how they feel. If they're pissed off enough about the situation they quit. And that sucks, especially if the person who walks is a good employee. I already witnessed the situation as it played out in reality. Once everyone in the company was subject to the random screenings the morale problems over that issue ended. No one was getting "special treatment" anymore.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: vdeane on November 16, 2021, 12:58:23 PM
Quote from: Scott5114
They figure incorrectly. It's not bullshit at all.

It does not matter if you think they "figure incorrectly." The employees still feel how they feel about the issue. Telling them they're "wrong" doesn't change a Goddamned thing, especially how they feel. If they're pissed off enough about the situation they quit. And that sucks, especially if the person who walks is a good employee. I already witnessed the situation as it played out in reality. Once everyone in the company was subject to the random screenings the morale problems over that issue ended. No one was getting "special treatment" anymore.
Why did they get into a line of work that requires a CDL if they didn't want to get tested?  That requirement isn't going to change no matter where they work, so comparing with a graphic designer at the same company is irrelevant.

Realistically, we need a test that can test for whether someone is high at the moment rather than whether they used any drugs at any time within the past several days/weeks, but I suspect the reason we don't have such a thing is because of the War on Drugs.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on November 16, 2021, 01:37:29 PM
Quote
Quote from: Road Hog
The logistics of building an Arkansas River Bridge preclude the construction of a Super-2. You can't build half a span and come back and build the other half on the cheap. So Alma to Barling will be built in full when it happens.

They could build a twin bridge span. Build one two-lane bridge for the initial Super-2 segment and then add the second bridge later. The Arkansas River at Fort Smith doesn't require a super high clearance like the Mississippi River. More modest, conventional highway bridge designs can be used. This crossing doesn't require a visual "signature" bridge such as a cable-stayed suspension bridge. Cost estimates don't appear to allow for that at all. Building up berms across flood plain and other grading work is going to eat up much of the budget. The bridge (or bridges) that end up being built will be fairly ordinary looking.
That would most certainly be on brand for Arkansas. Penny wise and pound foolish. Can't build now while it'll be as cheap as it will ever be.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on November 16, 2021, 02:56:46 PM
ARDOT said in the preliminary review they have 3 ways they were looking at build 2 lane bridge, build 2 lanes and build the concrete supports in the River for the second bridge the same time, or build a 4 lane build. But they are still just starting the designs so who knows what they will decide.   
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on November 16, 2021, 03:33:34 PM
Downtown Little Rock is dead? What the hell happened there? It seems like NWA will continue to attract new residents from the left coast and Texas. IMO, Little Rock isn't as attractive a place to move to in comparison to NWA. It wasn't like that 30+ years ago

My wife and I run a BnB in Bentonville at our old house as a second source of income.  Mostly who we get are folks from Texas coming in to mtn bike.  We've got a family from Dallas, TX staying with us for several days this weekend to look for a home in the area.  Guess the Californians are starting to run the Texans out of Austin and Dallas.  The family that moved in across the street there were from the Baltimore area, so we're getting them from both coasts as well as tons from Texas.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Tomahawkin on November 16, 2021, 07:12:05 PM
I met many of people from Texas there when I was at the U of A in the mid 2000's the Big Texas schools are really hard to get into, therefore The U of A has a lot of enrollees from Texas. Having worked at a home depot there. I met plenty of people from California they moved there because of either retirement or that the fact that the cost of living is a fraction of what it is to live in California. This was before the recession and all of the major wildfires that have happened annually over the last decade. In 2008 NWA was ranked one of the best areas to move to in the country...
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on November 17, 2021, 12:29:33 PM
Quote from: Gordon
ARDOT said in the preliminary review they have 3 ways they were looking at build 2 lane bridge, build 2 lanes and build the concrete supports in the River for the second bridge the same time, or build a 4 lane build. But they are still just starting the designs so who knows what they will decide.

Hopefully they'll bite the bullet and build the entire bridge sooner than later, even if other elements of the project on land are initially just 2 lanes. Bridges (or really anything else) aren't getting cheaper to build years later. The costs only seem to go up and up and up.

Quote from: vdeane
Why did they get into a line of work that requires a CDL if they didn't want to get tested?

None of the co-workers I've had thru the years who drove crane trucks had any problem getting tested. What many of them didn't like was that while they had to live to a cleaner (and more sober) standard certain others who didn't need a CDL were flagrantly pushing their luck. Certain staff members would miss work more often, with partying too hard the night before being a reason. Some would show up to work high and/or drunk. That affects other people in the workplace by fouling up productivity. In the years after making the random screening policy company-wide, we've seen more people fail the alcohol side of the test. A couple of employees were even fired for repeat violations.

Quote from: vdeane
Realistically, we need a test that can test for whether someone is high at the moment rather than whether they used any drugs at any time within the past several days/weeks, but I suspect the reason we don't have such a thing is because of the War on Drugs.

I'm betting the issue has more to do with medical science rather than politics. There is a pretty big money-making incentive to develop sobriety tests for drugs that work as they do for alcohol. There is no profit motive for refusing to develop the testing technology if such a thing is already possible.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: vdeane on November 17, 2021, 12:57:03 PM
I'm curious how much traffic I-49 would get.  The Bella Vista Bypass basically went to nowhere until completed.  This, however, would be a major link... I could see reason to build 4-lane from the get-go for that reason alone, even setting aside cost increase considerations.

None of the co-workers I've had thru the years who drove crane trucks had any problem getting tested. What many of them didn't like was that while they had to live to a cleaner (and more sober) standard certain others who didn't need a CDL were flagrantly pushing their luck. Certain staff members would miss work more often, with partying too hard the night before being a reason. Some would show up to work high and/or drunk. That affects other people in the workplace by fouling up productivity. In the years after making the random screening policy company-wide, we've seen more people fail the alcohol side of the test. A couple of employees were even fired for repeat violations.
Yikes.  I can't even imagine being drunk or high at work.

Quote
I'm betting the issue has more to do with medical science rather than politics. There is a pretty big money-making incentive to develop sobriety tests for drugs that work as they do for alcohol. There is no profit motive for refusing to develop the testing technology if such a thing is already possible.
Not until states started legalizing marijuana, there wouldn't have been.  Even now, it's still fully legal under federal law, so anything federally regulated can just say "I don't care when you were high, it's illegal".  This is also why it's illegal to buy marijuana in one state (or Canada) and bring it home to another, even if it's legal in both places and everywhere in between.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on November 17, 2021, 04:57:24 PM
Quote from: vdeane
Yikes. I can't even imagine being drunk or high at work.

It gets better. Not only were people having a little something extra with their morning breakfast, but if they were out of the office they might step into a bar while on the clock. One of our office people who did sales work and visit clients at their location would sometimes do that between sales calls. It caused all kinds of problems, from all sorts of unexplained delays to missing details on technical surveys of existing signs, buildings, etc. I'd sometimes have to go back behind the guy to job sites and do the measuring work myself, usually after office hours. When we got the company wide testing policy put into place this guy was one of the first to get fired.

It's one thing to turn in a "hot" piss test from having smoked a joint a couple weeks ago. It's really bad if a person can't manage to blow a 0.000 reading on a BAC meter in the middle of the morning because he can't do without alcohol for more than a few hours at a time.

Quote from: vdeane
Not until states started legalizing marijuana, there wouldn't have been.  Even now, it's still fully legal under federal law, so anything federally regulated can just say "I don't care when you were high, it's illegal".  This is also why it's illegal to buy marijuana in one state (or Canada) and bring it home to another, even if it's legal in both places and everywhere in between.

Demand has been pretty strong for testing services well before marijuana laws began to relax in some states. Remember, the majority of the world's attorneys work inside the United States. Drug testing figures in big with liability cases, both in court and when buying insurance coverage. Some of our insurance bills are lower because our company has a drug screening policy in place.

I can't imagine any business that would be against better screening methods for how high a person is at the time on various kinds of drugs. I'm certain many kinds of businesses that use commercial vehicles or dangerous equipment would pay a premium for such testing work if it was available. I think any suggestion that there is some plot against developing such testing methods would be ridiculous. What would the motivation be to block such research and development? The plain fact is science hasn't figured it out yet.

There is some movement afoot to decriminalize marijuana at the federal level. That would make it a lot easier for dispensaries and grow house businesses to do their banking. Oklahoma is kind of an odd state with its medical marijuana setup. It's not hard for anyone to get a medical marijuana card, which makes the "medical" part a mere formality. It's practically recreational, but there are limits where you can use the drug. You can't just blaze-up while walking down the sidewalk. It's also not hard to open a dispensary or grow house. The licensing costs are minimal compared to other states and there appears to be no limit on how many dispensaries or grow houses can operate in a county. I've lost track of how many signs, window wraps and other graphics I've designed for such places. I think it has done a pretty good job of killing the illegal pot business in the state. Still, we have plenty of pushers selling coke, meth and fake pills laced with fentanyl. Lots of people are dying of it too, more than 100,000 Americans between April 2020 and April 2021.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: jbnv on November 17, 2021, 08:39:48 PM
Oklahoma is kind of an odd state with its medical marijuana setup. It's not hard for anyone to get a medical marijuana card, which makes the "medical" part a mere formality. .... It's also not hard to open a dispensary or grow house. The licensing costs are minimal compared to other states and there appears to be no limit on how many dispensaries or grow houses can operate in a county. I've lost track of how many signs, window wraps and other graphics I've designed for such places.

Two years ago I took a sign-photography trip through extreme eastern Oklahoma while my family were staying in Arkansas. I was quite surprised to see the number of dispensaries in the middle of nowhere. 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on November 18, 2021, 12:43:42 AM
There are so many dispensaries operating in the Lawton area that if you blind-folded yourself, spun around a few times and then threw a rock you might hit one.

We've done a number of business name change projects for these marijuana-related businesses. I don't mind those because those projects are usually pretty easy since we usually have a lot of existing details from drawings that we can use. There are bigger interests with deeper pockets moving into the state and buying out smaller operators who are struggling. The market is hitting a saturation point. Out of all the different kinds of business categories that operate in a particular town I think there might be more dispensaries than anything else. I'm pretty sure they outnumber all the convenience store locations in the area. Over the next few years a lot of consolidation will take place. If the federal government legalized marijuana on the federal level then it's all but guaranteed big tobacco and big pharma companies will swoop in and take over everything. That's how we get the odd situation where independent dispensary operators kind of want the current situation to stay as-is.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Scott5114 on November 18, 2021, 03:30:42 PM
Oklahoma has the most per-capita weed sales revenue of any state. I don't think it's going to be market saturation that is going to trigger consolidation, it's going to be the Metrc regulations kicking in. A lot of small operators aren't going to want to deal with the regulatory overhead and exit the business. A lot of these small operators got into the business thinking it was a get-rich-quick ticket and have kind of soured on it when they realized it takes a lot of work to succeed, like any other business.

A lot of cannabis businesses are also struggling because of bad business sense. There are a bunch of dealers and growers that were in the business when it was illegal, transitioned to running a legal business, and then found out you can't operate a legal business the same way you do on the black market. When it's black market, you can go back on deals, ghost people, and stiff people on work they've done, because what are they going to do, quit buying, or call the cops? But when it's legal, these people have no idea what to do when someone hires a lawyer to go after their ass, or when people stop doing business with them because they got fucked over.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on November 18, 2021, 05:37:44 PM
Some of the difficulty in running a "legit" weed business is the complication that comes with having a physical brick and mortar location. They're having to pay rent, utilities, a variety of taxes, etc.

Even with all those challenges, the situation in Oklahoma is far more "business friendly" than just about all other states. Most other states charge a ridiculous fortune in up-front licensing fees and limit the number of operations in a county, or state-wide. Those limits open the door for all kinds of political favoritism and corruption just for a pot business to get a license. Oklahoma's setup is far more market friendly. The customers are really the big winners in this because competition between dispensaries and grow houses is pretty fierce. That translates into a higher competition bar for product quality, product variety and price. If you live in a state that allows only one dispensary per county (or only a handful state-wide) you're probably going to pay a lot more for the product and the product may not be so great.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on November 18, 2021, 05:47:28 PM
How in the world has this thread about an incomplete Interstate in Arkansas been hijacked into a topic about weed in Oklahoma?

Hopefully there'll be money in this infrastructure package to make some real progress on bridging I-49 across the Arkansas River.  Anyone have any idea when we'll get a breakdown on what gets spent and where?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bassoon1986 on November 18, 2021, 05:55:05 PM
Are there any exits planned between I-40 and AR 255 along I-49 there or just the river bridge?


iPhone
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on November 18, 2021, 06:02:33 PM
Are there any exits planned between I-40 and AR 255 along I-49 there or just the river bridge?

There are 2 additional exits between I-40 and AR-22.  One at Gun Club Rd. and the other at Clear Creek Rd.

Here's a map of the routing.
https://www.swtimes.com/story/news/2021/07/20/interstate-49-extension-arkansas-moves-into-next-phase-development/7996592002/ (https://www.swtimes.com/story/news/2021/07/20/interstate-49-extension-arkansas-moves-into-next-phase-development/7996592002/)

Hopefully, the infrastructure package will have some funding for the I-49 Arkansas River bridge for 4 lanes.  There's only about a mile and a half from the current terminus at the overpass at AR-22 to where the bridge approach would be, so if Arkansas does wind up having to do some Super-2 for the remaining 10 miles or so, hopefully it's 4 lane from the bridge southward at least to knock out the most expensive portion ASAP before inflation bites too hard.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on November 18, 2021, 08:01:21 PM
I think the state of Arkansas is literally leaving lots of money on the table by not getting the Alma to Barling segment of I-49 built quickly.

For quite a few years now the Fort Smith region and state of Arkansas in general has wanted to re-develop the Fort Chaffee area (which no longer has active duty troops permanently stationed there). They've wanted to re-vamp the area as both a distribution hub and even possibly a retail/outlet hub. None of that is fully feasible without a direct freeway link to I-40. They did get one segment of Future I-49 built between US-71 and AR-255. That doesn't do a whole lot to spur development without that physical link to I-40.

Additionally, the area just East of Van Buren could see a good bit of new retail or residential growth once the Alma-Barling I-49 segment is finished. Not much can be built right next to the river due to possible flooding issues. But there is about 30 square miles of land between the river and I-40 that can be developed.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on November 19, 2021, 08:13:47 PM
I think the state of Arkansas is literally leaving lots of money on the table by not getting the Alma to Barling segment of I-49 built quickly.

For quite a few years now the Fort Smith region and state of Arkansas in general has wanted to re-develop the Fort Chaffee area (which no longer has active duty troops permanently stationed there). They've wanted to re-vamp the area as both a distribution hub and even possibly a retail/outlet hub. None of that is fully feasible without a direct freeway link to I-40. They did get one segment of Future I-49 built between US-71 and AR-255. That doesn't do a whole lot to spur development without that physical link to I-40.

Additionally, the area just East of Van Buren could see a good bit of new retail or residential growth once the Alma-Barling I-49 segment is finished. Not much can be built right next to the river due to possible flooding issues. But there is about 30 square miles of land between the river and I-40 that can be developed.

Van Buren may grow a little as a result, but since US-64 isn't getting an exit as the overpass over I-40 will also overpass US-64 being as close as it is, even Alma right next door won't really get any more access to I-49 than it already has.  Kibler is all bottomland with Clear Creek/Frog Bayou as the next exit south at Clear Creek Rd., so any development there will require a fair amount of fill to stay above flooding that would still periodically cut off access as the roads there have moderate flood risk.  Gun Club Rd. on the next exit is pretty much river bottom cropland, so that won't have any foreseeable growth either.  It's not until south of AR-22 that the real development potential exists, and even AR-22 was under water in the 2019 Arkansas River Flood there at Chaffee just east of the traffic light with that creek running past backed up from river.  Had to detour around to Greenwood from/to Charleston to make the trip to Ft. Smith during the high water.  The Chaffee Crossing land that's being developed is higher than the parts to the east that flooded, thankfully.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bwana39 on November 20, 2021, 01:25:03 PM
Does anyone think any of us will see a completed Interstate 49 between New Orleans, LA and Kansas City, MO within our lifetimes? Considering how long it will take to complete 49 between Interstates 30 and 40, and how slowly the upgrades are coming to US 90 between Lafayette and New Orleans, I would say no.

The part between NWA and Texarkana is going to be expensive, it is going to have minimal benefit to metro Little Rock, and it seemingly falls a good bit below other Arkansas projects on the priority list.

The reason we are talking about the Alma to Barling portion is because the people in Fort Smith know that once it is built, that I-49 south will seem incomplete. If it is in need of completion, at some point, it might actually be completed.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on November 20, 2021, 02:51:26 PM
The hardest part in the whole I-49 project is the Alma to Barling segment. Once they can get that finished the segments proceeding farther South will be easier to build. No long bridges over rivers.

The new terrain segments will take a good bit of grading work, but there are few properties in the way to clear either. I think I said it earlier: they can "flesh-out" much of the corridor, reserving needed ROW, by building a Super 2 just like they did with AR-530 farther East. The second set of lanes and limited access exits can be added as funding becomes available. I think AR DOT may have to use this approach with the bypasses around towns along the route.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on November 20, 2021, 02:58:21 PM
The hardest part in the whole I-49 project is the Alma to Barling segment. Once they can get that finished the segments proceeding farther South will be easier to build. No long bridges over rivers.

The new terrain segments will take a good bit of grading work, but there are few properties in the way to clear either. I think I said it earlier: they can "flesh-out" much of the corridor, reserving needed ROW, by building a Super 2 just like they did with AR-530 farther East. The second set of lanes and limited access exits can be added as funding becomes available. I think AR DOT may have to use this approach with the bypasses around towns along the route.

ARDOT has already stated the I-40 rt Barling segment will be a Super 2, to be completed as money becomes available.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bwana39 on November 20, 2021, 03:29:48 PM
The hardest part in the whole I-49 project is the Alma to Barling segment. Once they can get that finished the segments proceeding farther South will be easier to build. No long bridges over rivers.

The new terrain segments will take a good bit of grading work, but there are few properties in the way to clear either. I think I said it earlier: they can "flesh-out" much of the corridor, reserving needed ROW, by building a Super 2 just like they did with AR-530 farther East. The second set of lanes and limited access exits can be added as funding becomes available. I think AR DOT may have to use this approach with the bypasses around towns along the route.

You have got to be kidding! The mountains are the WORST part.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on November 20, 2021, 09:06:56 PM
The hardest part in the whole I-49 project is the Alma to Barling segment. Once they can get that finished the segments proceeding farther South will be easier to build. No long bridges over rivers.

The new terrain segments will take a good bit of grading work, but there are few properties in the way to clear either. I think I said it earlier: they can "flesh-out" much of the corridor, reserving needed ROW, by building a Super 2 just like they did with AR-530 farther East. The second set of lanes and limited access exits can be added as funding becomes available. I think AR DOT may have to use this approach with the bypasses around towns along the route.

You have got to be kidding! The mountains are the WORST part.

Not on a cost per mile basis.  The bridge, approaches, and roadbed buildup over a significant portion of the 13.6 miles, not to mention taking mainline I-49 across I-40 along with the flyovers for northbound I-49 to westbound I-40 and westbound I-40 to southbound I-49 will be significantly higher per mile.  Mountainous terrain building isn't a foreign concept for Arkansas as the 40 miles from Fayetteville's southernmost exit to I-40 is all mountains.  Thankfully that stretch didn't have to go the Super-2 route initially like these other portions will due to John Paul Hammerschmidt's pushing for funding that stretch of I-49/I-540 to replace the deadly Scenic US-71 that was choked with truck traffic and not enough passing zones.  Unfortunately, the Ft. Smith area and more especially the portions south don't have the population nor political pull to expedite a full 4 lane.

Edit:  That 40 mile stretch was still done piecemeal in typical Arkansas fashion however.  The initial portion went from Alma to the Mountainburg exit, which forced traffic through Mountainburg on US-71 for the rest of the way to Fayetteville's Fulbright Expressway.  That's why there's that rather large abandoned truckstop at the edge of Mountainburg you can see from I-49, as there were several years of construction of the northern 31 miles that left an opportunity for that business to flourish for a time.  I think the Super-2 on better sightlines, curve radii, and town bypassing would be preferable to the way that I-49 north of I-40 was done in Arkansas.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bwana39 on November 21, 2021, 10:53:45 PM
The hardest part in the whole I-49 project is the Alma to Barling segment. Once they can get that finished the segments proceeding farther South will be easier to build. No long bridges over rivers.

The new terrain segments will take a good bit of grading work, but there are few properties in the way to clear either. I think I said it earlier: they can "flesh-out" much of the corridor, reserving needed ROW, by building a Super 2 just like they did with AR-530 farther East. The second set of lanes and limited access exits can be added as funding becomes available. I think AR DOT may have to use this approach with the bypasses around towns along the route.

You have got to be kidding! The mountains are the WORST part.

Not on a cost per mile basis.

I will give you that. On the other hand, the cost of the segment from Mena to Waldron will have cost over-runs, delays, and problems.
It has been a while since there has been significant freeway built in the mountains. There is no telling what the cost will be.  While the per-mile cost may (perhaps even probably) be less than the river crossing , the per traffic mile and segment cost will almost surely be higher.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on November 22, 2021, 07:55:26 AM
The Mena-Waldron segment could end up being one of the last segments of I-49 being built. However, the mountain pass between Y City and Acorn isn't nearly as challenging as the mountain passes I-70 cuts through in Colorado and Utah.

It will be interesting to see the order AR DOT chooses to build out the segments of I-49 between Fort Smith and Texarkana after they finish the Alma-Barling segment. IMHO, I think they should tackle bypasses around Mansfield, Waldron, Mena, DeQueen and Ashdown first since those would be the most inflation-prone segments over the long term. Completion of the town bypasses would make the corridor more free-flowing that must faster. Things would get finished even faster if they had multiple construction crews working on separate segments simultaneously. Upgrades between towns would be easier to build (except for the mountain bypasses). As I said earlier, they could choose the built-out the corridor in a linear fashion from North to South, bit by bit. Kind of like how I-69 has proceeded in Southern Indiana (but going South to North in that case). However that process could end up going slower.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on November 22, 2021, 09:51:10 AM
The hardest part in the whole I-49 project is the Alma to Barling segment. Once they can get that finished the segments proceeding farther South will be easier to build. No long bridges over rivers.

The new terrain segments will take a good bit of grading work, but there are few properties in the way to clear either. I think I said it earlier: they can "flesh-out" much of the corridor, reserving needed ROW, by building a Super 2 just like they did with AR-530 farther East. The second set of lanes and limited access exits can be added as funding becomes available. I think AR DOT may have to use this approach with the bypasses around towns along the route.

You have got to be kidding! The mountains are the WORST part.

Not on a cost per mile basis.

I will give you that. On the other hand, the cost of the segment from Mena to Waldron will have cost over-runs, delays, and problems.
It has been a while since there has been significant freeway built in the mountains. There is no telling what the cost will be.  While the per-mile cost may (perhaps even probably) be less than the river crossing , the per traffic mile and segment cost will almost surely be higher.

It hasn't been that long since I-49 was built through the Boston Mtns., so there's likely still some old timers with institutional knowledge, not to mention all of Arkansas northwest of US-67 is mountains other than the river valleys.  Plus, they've surely learned a lesson about mountain cuts from the about to be completed SPUI offramp on I-49 South to US-71 in Bentonville.  The methodology in the Ouachitas will assuredly be cuts on the smaller ridges like these:

US-71 south of Greenwood, AR (https://goo.gl/maps/E3UxmXZYv6pEc5yr7)
AR-45 north of Hackett (https://goo.gl/maps/weXkyXHP9Gyij63EA)

The fill created by the cuts fills the valleys to shorten the bridging requirements between ridges.  Through the Arkansas River Valley, however, fill will need to be hauled in, which isn't exactly cheap.

The only really tricky stretch really is where US-71 is concurrent with US-270 through the Foran Gap between Y-City and Acorn.  And it's pretty well been decided that I-49 will subsume US-71 and US-270 through the Foran Gap due to the tight fit and little need for access as the population is very low through there, so half the carriageway is already there other than maybe some corner radii adjustments.  It'll most likely be a concrete median with the additional lanes just on the other side, like from the Winslow exit (https://goo.gl/maps/yoWoocM6NmGKug987) on I-49 to the Hopper Tunnel.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on November 23, 2021, 08:51:55 AM
There is some movement afoot to decriminalize marijuana at the federal level. That would make it a lot easier for dispensaries and grow house businesses to do their banking. Oklahoma is kind of an odd state with its medical marijuana setup. It's not hard for anyone to get a medical marijuana card, which makes the "medical" part a mere formality. It's practically recreational, but there are limits where you can use the drug. You can't just blaze-up while walking down the sidewalk. It's also not hard to open a dispensary or grow house. The licensing costs are minimal compared to other states and there appears to be no limit on how many dispensaries or grow houses can operate in a county. I've lost track of how many signs, window wraps and other graphics I've designed for such places. I think it has done a pretty good job of killing the illegal pot business in the state. Still, we have plenty of pushers selling coke, meth and fake pills laced with fentanyl. Lots of people are dying of it too, more than 100,000 Americans between April 2020 and April 2021.

This is not accurate. State law says that it is legal for a licensed patient to smoke cannabis anywhere it is legal to smoke tobacco cigarettes. I figure this will eventually be changed, but for now, you can smoke cannabis anywhere you can smoke tobacco. And other cannabis products like edibles can be used anywhere.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on November 23, 2021, 09:08:34 AM
I-49 is planned to be built on top of current US 71-270 through Foran Gap, split off somewhere north of the CR 70 intersection, then head south to bypass Mena to the east and south. It will cross CR 70 about a half mile east of the current US 71-270/CR 70 intersection. I suspect the exit will be built at CR 70. It would be cheaper than building a trumpet. If this happens, US 71-270 will likely hop off of I-49 at CR 70, and follow what is now CR 70 from I-49 to current US 71-270. Current US 71-270 from CR 70 north to the point where I-49 leaves the US 71-270 alignment will be a dead end road. Current CR 70 will have to be upgraded to state highway standards, and the 71/270/70 intersection will be reconfigured so 71/270 will seamlessly transition to the CR 70 alignment. That is what would make the most sense, anyway. Some sort of grade separation will have to be built where I-49 will cross the Ouachita Trail. Here's a satellite view of the area.

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.6619976,-94.1576687,3519m/data=!3m1!1e3
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bwana39 on November 23, 2021, 04:27:22 PM
I-49 is planned to be built on top of current US 71-270 through Foran Gap, split off somewhere north of the CR 70 intersection, then head south to bypass Mena to the east and south. It will cross CR 70 about a half mile east of the current US 71-270/CR 70 intersection. I suspect the exit will be built at CR 70. It would be cheaper than building a trumpet. If this happens, US 71-270 will likely hop off of I-49 at CR 70, and follow what is now CR 70 from I-49 to current US 71-270. Current US 71-270 from CR 70 north to the point where I-49 leaves the US 71-270 alignment will be a dead end road. Current CR 70 will have to be upgraded to state highway standards, and the 71/270/70 intersection will be reconfigured so 71/270 will seamlessly transition to the CR 70 alignment. That is what would make the most sense, anyway. Some sort of grade separation will have to be built where I-49 will cross the Ouachita Trail. Here's a satellite view of the area.

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.6619976,-94.1576687,3519m/data=!3m1!1e3

In Colorado, they have built some fairly low cost pedestrian bridges for those trails in mountainous trails.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: edwaleni on November 24, 2021, 12:23:03 PM
I-49 is planned to be built on top of current US 71-270 through Foran Gap, split off somewhere north of the CR 70 intersection, then head south to bypass Mena to the east and south. It will cross CR 70 about a half mile east of the current US 71-270/CR 70 intersection. I suspect the exit will be built at CR 70. It would be cheaper than building a trumpet. If this happens, US 71-270 will likely hop off of I-49 at CR 70, and follow what is now CR 70 from I-49 to current US 71-270. Current US 71-270 from CR 70 north to the point where I-49 leaves the US 71-270 alignment will be a dead end road. Current CR 70 will have to be upgraded to state highway standards, and the 71/270/70 intersection will be reconfigured so 71/270 will seamlessly transition to the CR 70 alignment. That is what would make the most sense, anyway. Some sort of grade separation will have to be built where I-49 will cross the Ouachita Trail. Here's a satellite view of the area.

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.6619976,-94.1576687,3519m/data=!3m1!1e3

This is why I was asking about the viability of tunnels in Arkansas generally.  I saw the Foran Gap as a wasteful use of forest land and private property especially between Acorn and Gap Creek to take for a 4 lane interstate.

A tunnel that enters north of Acorn and comes out at Cedar Creek ravine seems to be (IMHO) a more effective route, especially for trucks to avoid a large grade.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on November 25, 2021, 02:35:38 PM
The I-49 route between Mansfield and Mena would be a lot better if it was possible to fund and build 3 or more tunnels. Mansfield down to Waldron should be a more direct route, but a tunnel would be required. Waldron to Y City has a good bend to that route segment. Y City down to Acorn is a big "S" shape that could be much more straight and level via one or even two different tunnels. Obviously we're talking billions of dollars to build such a thing.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on November 25, 2021, 05:47:51 PM
The I-49 route between Mansfield and Mena would be a lot better if it was possible to fund and build 3 or more tunnels. Mansfield down to Waldron should be a more direct route, but a tunnel would be required. Waldron to Y City has a good bend to that route segment. Y City down to Acorn is a big "S" shape that could be much more straight and level via one or even two different tunnels. Obviously we're talking billions of dollars to build such a thing.

Unless things have changed, I was under the impression that Hopper tunnel was "one and done." I suppose that could change deepening on who is on the highway commission.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Tomahawkin on November 25, 2021, 05:53:17 PM
I seriously don't think tunnels will be built because it's more expensive and takes more time to plan and build. I'm expecting to see a lot of viaducts through the Ouachita mountain area and at grade roads in SW Arkansas north of the Texarkana area. Also I expect interchanges with state and county roads to be few and far between???
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: edwaleni on November 25, 2021, 10:39:33 PM
The I-49 route between Mansfield and Mena would be a lot better if it was possible to fund and build 3 or more tunnels. Mansfield down to Waldron should be a more direct route, but a tunnel would be required. Waldron to Y City has a good bend to that route segment. Y City down to Acorn is a big "S" shape that could be much more straight and level via one or even two different tunnels. Obviously we're talking billions of dollars to build such a thing.

Unless things have changed, I was under the impression that Hopper tunnel was "one and done." I suppose that could change deepening on who is on the highway commission.

The Hopper Tunnel cost $952k per meter of 4 lane twin bore tunnel in 1992 dollars.

So accounting for inflation, all things being the same, that would come out to about $1.88 million per meter of 4 lane twin bore tunnel.

If you build a new 900 meter 4 lane twin bore tunnel north of Acorn to avoid the Foran Gap, that would ring up a bill of about $1.7B to build it.

However, one thing about the Hopper that was unique (and expensive). They used the older blast and scrap method of creating the bores. They did not use a boring machine.

On top of that the regolith they pulled out had no re-purpose at the time, so it was simply dumped aside.

So if they could use traditional boring, which is faster and cheaper, and find reuse for the regolith, you could probably reduce the costs somewhat.

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on November 26, 2021, 12:57:34 AM
Oh I'm sure they would find any excuse to run up the cost of any tunnel project by multiple billions of dollars, even if they can use a cost effective method to get the job done. That's just how Americans do infrastructure -blow up the cost and take decades to finish it. Meanwhile other rival nations (China and Japan in particular) build really serious tunnels like it's not all that big a deal. Just building one in the US is damned near impossible. The situation is pretty pathetic.

In the end, I-49 between Mansfield and Mena is not going to be any fun for truckers. The route is really going to suck in any kind of bad weather. Two or three tunnels to make the route more level and direct would make I-49 safer, faster and more efficient. But that just can't happen here in America. We price ourselves out of stuff like that.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on November 26, 2021, 12:14:08 PM
Oh I'm sure they would find any excuse to run up the cost of any tunnel project by multiple billions of dollars, even if they can use a cost effective method to get the job done. That's just how Americans do infrastructure -blow up the cost and take decades to finish it. Meanwhile other rival nations (China and Japan in particular) build really serious tunnels like it's not all that big a deal. Just building one in the US is damned near impossible. The situation is pretty pathetic.

In the end, I-49 between Mansfield and Mena is not going to be any fun for truckers. The route is really going to suck in any kind of bad weather. Two or three tunnels to make the route more level and direct would make I-49 safer, faster and more efficient. But that just can't happen here in America. We price ourselves out of stuff like that.

During winter events, I-49 north of I-40 until Fayetteville gets sketchy even with the tunnel and a decent amount of road maintenance.  Those long, tall bridges on inclines inevitably wind up getting periodic closures due to accidents.  Thankfully, there's not normally more than 2-3 of those type of events each winter, so the road closures are typically short lived and don't amount to more than a total of a little more than a day for the entire year.  There's generally less wintry precipitation south of the Arkansas River, so that should be lessened south of Ft. Smith, but there'd still be a need for a couple of road treatment depots between Mansfield and Mena like there are off the Mountainburg and Winslow exits on the stretch south of Fayetteville.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on November 26, 2021, 01:08:57 PM
The I-49 route between Mansfield and Mena would be a lot better if it was possible to fund and build 3 or more tunnels. Mansfield down to Waldron should be a more direct route, but a tunnel would be required. Waldron to Y City has a good bend to that route segment. Y City down to Acorn is a big "S" shape that could be much more straight and level via one or even two different tunnels. Obviously we're talking billions of dollars to build such a thing.

My Grandpa had a ranch between Mansfield and Hartford near the base of that first mountain, Poteau Mtn., and my Dad had another for a time between Hon and Cauthron, both of them with northern property lines on old railroad ROWs on both sides of the mountain.  I rode 4-wheelers all over the southern face of that mountain and used to go deer hunting in Natl. Forest land on the north face.  It's pretty immense as mountains in Arkansas go (like it's well over 1400 ft. tall from the base of the surrounding areas, and gets up to 2660ft. where the radio towers are) and would take a tunnel longer than 1 mile long to bore through.  It would save a chunk of mileage, but that's a lot of sandstone and shale to go through.  Going through the mountain south of Y-City to straighten the S out would be a tunnel probably 1.5 miles long as the tunnel likely wouldn't be straight north and south with a reservoir and another ridge just to the other side of the mountain.  It'd be great if they could find a way as it would save a significant amount of altitude change as well as overall mileage, but it would take some "manna from heaven" in the form of federal grants for Arkansas to change the routing at this point.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on November 26, 2021, 08:39:55 PM
The Eisenhower Tunnel on I-70 is almost 1.7 miles long. I get the feeling if that tunnel didn't already exist and was going to be proposed today it might not ever get built. Drivers on I-70 going from Denver to Utah would be stuck taking US-6.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Plutonic Panda on November 26, 2021, 09:08:38 PM
^^^^

That’s exactly right. You’d have the usual suspects on this thread and IRL complaining the United States of America can’t do it it even though tons of other countries can and are.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: edwaleni on November 26, 2021, 11:58:26 PM
The Eisenhower Tunnel on I-70 is almost 1.7 miles long. I get the feeling if that tunnel didn't already exist and was going to be proposed today it might not ever get built. Drivers on I-70 going from Denver to Utah would be stuck taking US-6.

The Eisenhower-Johnson Tunnel cost about $1.1 billion in 2021 dollars, but construction was spread out over several years. Eisenhower bore (1973) and the Johnson bore (1979)

Since it is 2.7km long and used boring machines and not blast, it was done much, much cheaper than the Hopper Tunnel on a per meter basis.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on November 27, 2021, 12:26:34 AM
The Eisenhower Tunnel on I-70 is almost 1.7 miles long. I get the feeling if that tunnel didn't already exist and was going to be proposed today it might not ever get built. Drivers on I-70 going from Denver to Utah would be stuck taking US-6.

The Eisenhower-Johnson Tunnel cost about $1.1 billion in 2021 dollars, but construction was spread out over several years. Eisenhower bore (1973) and the Johnson bore (1979)

Since it is 2.7km long and used boring machines and not blast, it was done much, much cheaper than the Hopper Tunnel on a per meter basis.

We just need to put it out for bids and have the Boring Company put in the low bid.  Surely sandstone and shale aren't more difficult to bore through than what they wallowed out from Elon's parking lot.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: edwaleni on November 27, 2021, 10:19:32 PM
The Eisenhower Tunnel on I-70 is almost 1.7 miles long. I get the feeling if that tunnel didn't already exist and was going to be proposed today it might not ever get built. Drivers on I-70 going from Denver to Utah would be stuck taking US-6.

The Eisenhower-Johnson Tunnel cost about $1.1 billion in 2021 dollars, but construction was spread out over several years. Eisenhower bore (1973) and the Johnson bore (1979)

Since it is 2.7km long and used boring machines and not blast, it was done much, much cheaper than the Hopper Tunnel on a per meter basis.

We just need to put it out for bids and have the Boring Company put in the low bid.  Surely sandstone and shale aren't more difficult to bore through than what they wallowed out from Elon's parking lot.

The most recent tunneling technology was used in the Alaskan Way tunnel (3.5km) under Seattle. "Big Bertha" did have some issues at first, but finished in about 3.5 years @ a cost of $3.3B USD.

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b0/Front_of_model_of_tunnel_boring_machine_at_Milepost_31.JPG/1920px-Front_of_model_of_tunnel_boring_machine_at_Milepost_31.JPG)

But the biggest difference here is that Seattle "stacked" the lanes in the tunnel. 2 lanes on top and 2 lanes below.

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/dd/Seattle_SR_99_Tunnel_Tour_%2832198663686%29.jpg/1920px-Seattle_SR_99_Tunnel_Tour_%2832198663686%29.jpg)

That goes against most designs for rural interstate tunnels where they want the bores to be physically separate in case of a fire.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on November 28, 2021, 12:35:20 AM
There won't ever be another highway tunnel in Arkansas. The I-49 tunnel was built to show off AHTD's abilities, and it would have cost less if they had built a cut, but they wanted to impress everybody. A tunnel through Fourche Mountain would indeed be well over a mile long. Foran Gap is pretty much flat, and is wide enough for 4 lanes.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: seicer on November 28, 2021, 09:34:57 AM
The Eisenhower Tunnel on I-70 is almost 1.7 miles long. I get the feeling if that tunnel didn't already exist and was going to be proposed today it might not ever get built. Drivers on I-70 going from Denver to Utah would be stuck taking US-6.

The Eisenhower-Johnson Tunnel cost about $1.1 billion in 2021 dollars, but construction was spread out over several years. Eisenhower bore (1973) and the Johnson bore (1979)

Since it is 2.7km long and used boring machines and not blast, it was done much, much cheaper than the Hopper Tunnel on a per meter basis.

We just need to put it out for bids and have the Boring Company put in the low bid.  Surely sandstone and shale aren't more difficult to bore through than what they wallowed out from Elon's parking lot.

The Boring Company hasn't demonstrated its ability to complete an actual project other than for its own vanity. It hasn't dramatically reduced the costs of tunnel construction without having to dramatically reduce the diameter of tunnels from 28 feet to... 12 feet. Their tunnels are also not designed for combustible vehicles and contain no ventilation systems. (https://streetfins.com/the-frightening-economics-of-the-boring-company/) I'm all for reducing construction costs for tunnels - but the Boring Company is just another pie-in-the-sky proposal that if it actually bears fruit in reducing costs by even half for a standard tunnel, it would be amazing.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on November 29, 2021, 01:30:36 PM
Article in yesterday's Arkansas Democrat-Gazette.  It seems to hint that this so-called infrastructure act of the Biden Administration may provide funds for the I-49 completion.  I hope so.  Regardless, it confirms to me that the spotlight is and will remain the strongest it's been on this last section of I-49 no matter what the funding status.  It should be - the Canadian Pacific Kansas City Southern merger mentioned several pages back confirms how critical this corridor is.:

Quote

Next I-49 work plans to extend new highway across River Valley, south to Y City

The department's next project is building a section of interstate from Arkansas 22 near Barling in Sebastian County to the interchange of Interstate 40 and Interstate 49 at Alma in Crawford County.

"That piece from the river up, it certainly will benefit a lot of people," said Chad Adams, a district engineer with the Transportation Department. "Everybody south of the river, it's going to improve their connectivity up to Fayetteville and Bentonville and to I-40 east and west."

The timeline is undetermined. Adams said some preparation work has been done for the section north of the Arkansas River, but the portion south of the river is still in the planning stages. Crews are out doing survey, environmental and geological work required to decide how and where to build across the river bottoms.

"I think there's an incentive to get that started before the end of this decade, if not sooner," Adams said. "I would say sooner. Probably within the next three to four years we'll see a project let."

Adams said some dirt could be moved as early as 2023.

"Typically, you see a dirt project to build the subgrade, and you have to get enough of that accomplished before you have a paving contract," Adams said. "They're usually separate contracts. It's not going to be one gigantic project, at least historically."

...

Keith Gibson, a state highway commissioner from Fort Smith, said the approval of Issue 1 and a new federal infrastructure bill mean there's finally money available to start pushing I-49 farther south. The ultimate goal is filling in the current gap by connecting Fort Smith and Texarkana with an interstate. That would complete the I-49 corridor from the Mississippi River in Louisiana to Canada.

Getting the initial 13-mile section completed will have a big impact on economic development in the River Valley, he said.

"That part from Alma to Barling and connecting to the interstate there is so critically important for dragging traffic, particularly truck traffic and industrial transportation into the Chaffee Crossing area, thus the Fort Smith area," Gibson said. "I think that's a critical need right now and, particularly with the potential and maybe now likelihood of the development of an Intermodal Port in this area. That would be a huge economic driver to western Arkansas."

Gibson said getting I-49 done would mean jobs for western Arkansas. There are also safety and convenience aspects, he said.

"There's just not a good way to get to Hot Springs, and there's not a real good way to get to Texarkana and those two things need to be improved," Gibson said.

Gibson said better connections between the bigger cities in western Arkansas would send economic ripples across the state. Plans also call for improvements to U.S. 270, the highway between Hot Springs and Y City, he noted.

"If you look, there's really not a good way to get from Fort Smith to Hot Springs and that's really unfortunate because those two communities, there could be a lot of mutual benefit in having a better route to the central part of Arkansas," Gibson said. (EDIT: there "could"?)

...

https://www.arkansasonline.com/news/2021/nov/28/next-i-49-work-plans-to-extend-new-highway-across/?news-arkansas&fbclid=IwAR0RSFpmN49sbdfM0ULQMw1g06pCxTkLAImF3Oiwulc9jVtEALFWOUvdf1s

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on November 29, 2021, 02:42:42 PM
So, it's a Super-2 bypass of I-40/I-540/AR-59 the Arkansas River in the short term, then.  Certainly helpful, but won't be much draw to Chaffee Crossing's development until movement is made on the final carriageway to complete I-49 (current AR-549) at least to its current terminus at US-71 close to the community of Jenny Lind.  Hopefully it wouldn't take very many years before the other two lanes are built.

An intermodal port would be a no-brainer with the rail, road, and river access in the area, moreso on the north side of the river where UP's line is close, not to mention the Arkansas/Missouri Railroad.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on November 29, 2021, 03:10:01 PM
So, it's a Super-2 bypass of I-40/I-540/AR-59 the Arkansas River in the short term, then.  Certainly helpful, but won't be much draw to Chaffee Crossing's development until movement is made on the final carriageway to complete I-49 (current AR-549) at least to its current terminus at US-71 close to the community of Jenny Lind.  Hopefully it wouldn't take very many years before the other two lanes are built.

An intermodal port would be a no-brainer with the rail, road, and river access in the area, moreso on the north side of the river where UP's line is close, not to mention the Arkansas/Missouri Railroad.

The new Canadian Pacific Kansas City railroad will also have access to Fort Smith.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on November 29, 2021, 03:59:25 PM
So, it's a Super-2 bypass of I-40/I-540/AR-59 the Arkansas River in the short term, then.  Certainly helpful, but won't be much draw to Chaffee Crossing's development until movement is made on the final carriageway to complete I-49 (current AR-549) at least to its current terminus at US-71 close to the community of Jenny Lind.  Hopefully it wouldn't take very many years before the other two lanes are built.

An intermodal port would be a no-brainer with the rail, road, and river access in the area, moreso on the north side of the river where UP's line is close, not to mention the Arkansas/Missouri Railroad.R

The new Canadian Pacific Kansas City railroad will also have access to Fort Smith.

That's right.  There is a spur line that goes into Ft. Smith from Poteau.  Not really close to I-49, though.  Guess it does intertie with Van Buren's UP across the AR-MO RR bridge, so the intermodal facility could be either on the Ft. Smith side or Van Buren side at the end of the day.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: edwaleni on November 29, 2021, 05:38:43 PM
So, it's a Super-2 bypass of I-40/I-540/AR-59 the Arkansas River in the short term, then.  Certainly helpful, but won't be much draw to Chaffee Crossing's development until movement is made on the final carriageway to complete I-49 (current AR-549) at least to its current terminus at US-71 close to the community of Jenny Lind.  Hopefully it wouldn't take very many years before the other two lanes are built.

An intermodal port would be a no-brainer with the rail, road, and river access in the area, moreso on the north side of the river where UP's line is close, not to mention the Arkansas/Missouri Railroad.R

The new Canadian Pacific Kansas City railroad will also have access to Fort Smith.

That's right.  There is a spur line that goes into Ft. Smith from Poteau.  Not really close to I-49, though.  Guess it does intertie with Van Buren's UP across the AR-MO RR bridge, so the intermodal facility could be either on the Ft. Smith side or Van Buren side at the end of the day.

Most of the industrial switching for Fort Smith is by the Ft Smith Railroad.

https://pioneerlines.com/fort-smith-railroad-fsr/ (https://pioneerlines.com/fort-smith-railroad-fsr/)

They tie in the UP/AR-MO/KCS.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on November 29, 2021, 09:03:23 PM
Seriously, the slogan for this highway needs to be changed from "Build I-49" to "Finish I-49".  With all that's been accomplished on it since the year 2000 we're past the "dream" stage on this road, no matter what funding challenges lie ahead.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on November 30, 2021, 02:11:32 AM
It wouldn't make sense to build the highway due north of Acorn, because it will bypass Mena to the south and east, and if it tunneled through Fourche Mountain, it would have to swing east to bypass the town.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on November 30, 2021, 10:17:35 AM
It wouldn't make sense to build the highway due north of Acorn, because it will bypass Mena to the south and east, and if it tunneled through Fourche Mountain, it would have to swing east to bypass the town.

No, you're right.  Looking at the Terrain View on Google Maps, any tunneling would make more sense straight south of Y-City, but there's a reservoir and another ridge to the south that would be need to be worked around or cut to make any sense for the road to be routed there.  I don't know that it would save enough mileage, but there is about a 500 ft. climb and drop through the Foran Gap still without a tunnel.  I'd be shocked if the build anything other than what they did for the climb out of the McKissick Creek Valley at the south end of the BVB, with 2x2 with median barrier and a climb/merge lane hopefully on each uphill side until the top.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: edwaleni on November 30, 2021, 01:16:17 PM
It wouldn't make sense to build the highway due north of Acorn, because it will bypass Mena to the south and east, and if it tunneled through Fourche Mountain, it would have to swing east to bypass the town.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51714820297_30df0d3bd7_b.jpg)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Scott5114 on November 30, 2021, 02:44:05 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/ewrS29j.png)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: edwaleni on November 30, 2021, 04:03:10 PM
I was trying to find (any) corridor documentation for this area and this is all I can find. ArDOT is planning a passing lane project in the area.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51716166118_7edfb0eb0e_b.jpg)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: edwaleni on November 30, 2021, 04:18:24 PM
I think I found it. Not as detailed as I would like.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51716616264_94d0ca9c52_b.jpg)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Plutonic Panda on November 30, 2021, 05:36:55 PM
I wonder if leaders there would feel pressured if Texas built their segment.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: msunat97 on November 30, 2021, 06:30:07 PM
I wonder if leaders there would feel pressured if Texas built their segment.

Only if it was sponsored by the University of Texas & somehow made the Razorbacks look like they lost something to UT.  I'm saying this only halfway sarcastically.  Some people in the state are still living in the 60's when Arky & UT played for championships.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: edwaleni on November 30, 2021, 11:39:12 PM
I wonder if leaders there would feel pressured if Texas built their segment.

TxDOT has already said they wont do anything until ArDOT does.

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Strider on December 01, 2021, 02:18:44 AM
I wonder if leaders there would feel pressured if Texas built their segment.

TxDOT has already said they wont do anything until ArDOT does.


and ArDOT already built its part of I-49 from I-30 upwards and ends at the TX/AR state line. What is TxDOT waiting for? ArDOT to build the other section of I-49 north of Texas border to Ashdown and moving south to Texas border? It makes no sense.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on December 01, 2021, 12:01:51 PM
I wonder if leaders there would feel pressured if Texas built their segment.

TxDOT has already said they wont do anything until ArDOT does.


and ArDOT already built its part of I-49 from I-30 upwards and ends at the TX/AR state line. What is TxDOT waiting for? ArDOT to build the other section of I-49 north of Texas border to Ashdown and moving south to Texas border? It makes no sense.

The only other segment that makes sense to focus on from the southern end would be from the Texas border to all the way around DeQueen to better connect up to US-70.  Not that there's a ton of traffic on US-70, but likely almost as much as US-59 and US-270 north of Mena.  I really don't see much progress on anything until some bypasses are accomplished, though, as that's typically how Arkansas develops new terrain routes, with Super-2's connecting to preexisting bypasses for the most part, other than how I-49 happened north of I-40 and south of Fayetteville.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: edwaleni on December 01, 2021, 01:43:22 PM
I wonder if leaders there would feel pressured if Texas built their segment.

TxDOT has already said they wont do anything until ArDOT does.


and ArDOT already built its part of I-49 from I-30 upwards and ends at the TX/AR state line. What is TxDOT waiting for? ArDOT to build the other section of I-49 north of Texas border to Ashdown and moving south to Texas border? It makes no sense.

Because while it does traverse Texas briefly, Arkansas is the lead agency for the bridge over the Red River. There is no sense of Texas building 4 lanes to somewhere where ArDOT doesn't even have a centerline established in writing.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bwana39 on December 01, 2021, 02:03:09 PM
I wonder if leaders there would feel pressured if Texas built their segment.

TxDOT has already said they wont do anything until ArDOT does.


and ArDOT already built its part of I-49 from I-30 upwards and ends at the TX/AR state line. What is TxDOT waiting for? ArDOT to build the other section of I-49 north of Texas border to Ashdown and moving south to Texas border? It makes no sense.

The only other segment that makes sense to focus on from the southern end would be from the Texas border to all the way around DeQueen to better connect up to US-70.  Not that there's a ton of traffic on US-70, but likely almost as much as US-59 and US-270 north of Mena.  I really don't see much progress on anything until some bypasses are accomplished, though, as that's typically how Arkansas develops new terrain routes, with Super-2's connecting to preexisting bypasses for the most part, other than how I-49 happened north of I-40 and south of Fayetteville.



I don't think this map shows the currently proposed route from Ashdown to DeQueen. It SEEMS to me the current route runs significantly farther west (going close to Horatio) and may even intersect US-70 WEST of DeQueen.

Assuming the map is not current, this just doesn't work. I-49 is planned to skirt ASHDOWN to the west. They already routed AR-32 back to town on a new alignment, but that takes you to the south side of town, just north of where US-71 traffic slows down from 65. It would add around ten miles and cost as many or more minutes.  That one is a non-starter. Arkansas could build a loop around to US-71 north of town, but that really is short term and would be severely underutilized when I-49 was actually completed to DeQueen.  I don't see that money being spent.

It makes zero sense for TXDOT to build anything until the Arkansas portion is well underway: THE ENTIRE PORTION to DEQUEEN.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: edwaleni on December 01, 2021, 10:08:22 PM
I wonder if leaders there would feel pressured if Texas built their segment.

TxDOT has already said they wont do anything until ArDOT does.


and ArDOT already built its part of I-49 from I-30 upwards and ends at the TX/AR state line. What is TxDOT waiting for? ArDOT to build the other section of I-49 north of Texas border to Ashdown and moving south to Texas border? It makes no sense.

The only other segment that makes sense to focus on from the southern end would be from the Texas border to all the way around DeQueen to better connect up to US-70.  Not that there's a ton of traffic on US-70, but likely almost as much as US-59 and US-270 north of Mena.  I really don't see much progress on anything until some bypasses are accomplished, though, as that's typically how Arkansas develops new terrain routes, with Super-2's connecting to preexisting bypasses for the most part, other than how I-49 happened north of I-40 and south of Fayetteville.



I don't think this map shows the currently proposed route from Ashdown to DeQueen. It SEEMS to me the current route runs significantly farther west (going close to Horatio) and may even intersect US-70 WEST of DeQueen.

Assuming the map is not current, this just doesn't work. I-49 is planned to skirt ASHDOWN to the west. They already routed AR-32 back to town on a new alignment, but that takes you to the south side of town, just north of where US-71 traffic slows down from 65. It would add around ten miles and cost as many or more minutes.  That one is a non-starter. Arkansas could build a loop around to US-71 north of town, but that really is short term and would be severely underutilized when I-49 was actually completed to DeQueen.  I don't see that money being spent.

It makes zero sense for TXDOT to build anything until the Arkansas portion is well underway: THE ENTIRE PORTION to DEQUEEN.

I just looked at the ArcGIS maps of Little River County, While they aren't down to the parcel level yet (to see how much ROW ArDOT owns) it does provide some good granularity on the routing.

It appears I-49 is planned to run parallel of US-71 to the west at the same NW routing until it hits the AR-32 Bypass south of Ashdown. It will then turn north using a old railroad easement and powerline easement and turn straight north.

The reason it will run a couple of miles parallel west of US-71 is due to a Domtar/Narcoosa paper mill south of Ashdown.

Once it turns north, west of Ashdown, it will re-merge with the current US-71 ROW with a bridge over the KCS railroad south of Wilton.

As it gets closer to the Little River, it will be widened next to another existing powerline easement west of the US-71 ROW and I assume a new Little River bridge will be built there.

It will continue to overlay until Ben Lemond where it appears it will use a different ravine east of Falls Chapel on Winter Creek to avoid the residential and church properties in Falls Chapel.

Another small jog around a church and houses around Pennys, then it is a straight shot to just before US-371 south of Lockesburg.

Sevier County also doesn't have per parcel granularity but you can still interpolate the plan.

South of Lockesburg, I-49 will turn to the NNW again following a route to avoid a large strip mine east of the Little Crossatot River.

After that the ROW will take a straight NW direction towards DeQueen and it looks like the exit ramps for US-71 will be just east of Gentry Chevrolet around Pepper Creek where there is a large high power transmission line easement.

Of course this could all change based on parcel acquisitions, high costs, unknown sinkholes, lawsuits etc.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on December 01, 2021, 11:36:37 PM
There's likely to be 2 Super-2 bypasses built before any of this stretch really starts in earnest.  The bypass of Mena from County Road 70 northeast of Acorn to Potter Junction would likely be the first bypass built anywhere, but a Super-2 cutoff bypassing southern Lockesburg over to by Gentry Chevrolet in DeQueen is likely shortly to follow.  Waldron I don't think gets bypassed until the Super-2 long haul segments get done as US-71 around Waldron is pretty much already a bypass and isn't really congested all that much with the population it has, especially with the loss of its Wal-Mart.  Mansfield's Super-2 bypass where it crosses US-71 north and east likely precedes the northern stretch of Super-2 to Y-City, which probably happens before much occurs in the southern two-thirds.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bwana39 on December 02, 2021, 12:39:14 AM


I just looked at the ArcGIS maps of Little River County, While they aren't down to the parcel level yet (to see how much ROW ArDOT owns) it does provide some good granularity on the routing.

It appears I-49 is planned to run parallel of US-71 to the west at the same NW routing until it hits the AR-32 Bypass south of Ashdown. It will then turn north using a old railroad easement and powerline easement and turn straight north.

The reason it will run a couple of miles parallel west of US-71 is due to a Domtar (Formerly Nekoosa)  paper mill south of Ashdown.

Once it turns north, west of Ashdown, it will re-merge with the current US-71 ROW with a bridge over the KCS railroad south of Wilton.

As it gets closer to the Little River, it will be widened next to another existing powerline easement west of the US-71 ROW and I assume a new Little River bridge will be built there.

It will continue to overlay until Ben Lemond where it appears it will use a different ravine east of Falls Chapel on Winter Creek to avoid the residential and church properties in Falls Chapel.

Another small jog around a church and houses around Pennys, then it is a straight shot to just before US-371 south of Lockesburg.

Sevier County also doesn't have per parcel granularity but you can still interpolate the plan.

South of Lockesburg, I-49 will turn to the NNW again following a route to avoid a large strip mine east of the Little Crossatot River.

After that the ROW will take a straight NW direction towards DeQueen and it looks like the exit ramps for US-71 will be just east of Gentry Chevrolet around Pepper Creek where there is a large high power transmission line easement.

Of course this could all change based on parcel acquisitions, high costs, unknown sinkholes, lawsuits etc.

Forgive me, I am on mobile.

So, we kind of know how I-49 is going to connect with Fort Smith's section, going from north to south: by snaking between Alma and Kibler. But, I want to talk about a potential route from the section in Fort Smith to Texarkana and that involves straightening out the current route of 71 as much as possible by establishing a linkage to 49 for Greenwood, Huntington, Mansfield, Waldron, Mena, Wickes, Grannis, DeQueen, Horatio, and then link up with 71 at Ashdown; upgrade 71 to interstate standards and then link former 71 (Ashdown to I-49 Mileage = Decommissioned/redesignated) with an interchange for 49 and US 71 South at the current terminus of I-49.

Now, I know this does not account for: potential grade separation, other rivers, valleys, mountains, or any other scenario such as the Ouachita National Forest. But it kinda/sorta takes as much of a pre-existing route as possible. Thoughts?

I can't find anything on paper, but it seems to me that there is either no place to build the bridge and or EIS issues at the current Little River Crossing. It probably is dramatically less expensive to build the bridges and the road elsewhere. (It definitely would be around a dozen miles closer.) 

 It seems to me like it seemed pretty much set in stone until 5 or 6 years ago to follow this map you have (it may have even contained some land purchases) It seems to me like the last map put out by ARDOT went in a relatively straight line from the bridges from Texas to DeQueen with the road closer to Horatio and Alleen than to Wilton and Lockesburg.

Politically both county seats are serviced by the Interstate so this route I am talking about serves  counties both equally as well as the one on the map.

 I may be completely wrong. I have been before, but this time, I don't think so. The one thing I am certain of is that I didn't just pluck it out of thin air. I might have seen it in local media or Facebook.

I mentioned this previously on a different thread https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=14100.msg2607602#msg2607602
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: edwaleni on December 02, 2021, 11:27:20 AM
Forgive me, I am on mobile.

So, we kind of know how I-49 is going to connect with Fort Smith's section, going from north to south: by snaking between Alma and Kibler. But, I want to talk about a potential route from the section in Fort Smith to Texarkana and that involves straightening out the current route of 71 as much as possible by establishing a linkage to 49 for Greenwood, Huntington, Mansfield, Waldron, Mena, Wickes, Grannis, DeQueen, Horatio, and then link up with 71 at Ashdown; upgrade 71 to interstate standards and then link former 71 (Ashdown to I-49 Mileage = Decommissioned/redesignated) with an interchange for 49 and US 71 South at the current terminus of I-49.

Now, I know this does not account for: potential grade separation, other rivers, valleys, mountains, or any other scenario such as the Ouachita National Forest. But it kinda/sorta takes as much of a pre-existing route as possible. Thoughts?

I can't find anything on paper, but it seems to me that there is either no place to build the bridge and or EIS issues at the current Little River Crossing. It probably is dramatically less expensive to build the bridges and the road elsewhere. (It definitely would be around a dozen miles closer.) 

 It seems to me like it seemed pretty much set in stone until 5 or 6 years ago to follow this map you have (it may have even contained some land purchases) It seems to me like the last map put out by ARDOT went in a relatively straight line from the bridges from Texas to DeQueen with the road closer to Horatio and Alleen than to Wilton and Lockesburg.

Politically both county seats are serviced by the Interstate so this route I am talking about serves  counties both equally as well as the one on the map.

 I may be completely wrong. I have been before, but this time, I don't think so. The one thing I am certain of is that I didn't just pluck it out of thin air. I might have seen it in local media or Facebook.

I mentioned this previously on a different thread https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=14100.msg2607602#msg2607602

I totally understand what you are saying. Since ArDOT doesn't have a green light for funding land acquisitions en masse due to a needed EIS, everything up to now is just informed speculation.

It won't be until they get some solid Phased engineering done, the proposed route will get more solid and a centerline established.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Rick Powell on December 02, 2021, 05:57:20 PM
It won't be until they get some solid Phased engineering done, the proposed route will get more solid and a centerline established.
And ARDOT has not been shy about buying right of way, years before it is needed unlike some other states. I think they have acquired all of the I-69 corridor from McGehee to the Mississippi River, with nothing on the horizon for constructing the roadway section or the river crossing.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: abqtraveler on December 03, 2021, 12:07:50 PM
It won't be until they get some solid Phased engineering done, the proposed route will get more solid and a centerline established.
And ARDOT has not been shy about buying right of way, years before it is needed unlike some other states. I think they have acquired all of the I-69 corridor from McGehee to the Mississippi River, with nothing on the horizon for constructing the roadway section or the river crossing.
Yes, ARDOT has acquired the ROW for I-69 from US-65 to the Mississippi River, which would constitute its side of the Charles W. Dean Bridge. Nothing has been done on the Mississippi side, and it looks like that will be the case for the foreseeable future.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: cbalducc on December 03, 2021, 11:08:59 PM
Will there be any tunnels?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on December 03, 2021, 11:44:03 PM
Will there be any tunnels?
As has been posted before, doubtful. The Foran Gap is not that treacherous and you can drive it easily at posted speed on the existing 2-lane. The sightlines will be that much better with modern engineering.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on December 03, 2021, 11:46:01 PM
I wonder if leaders there would feel pressured if Texas built their segment.

Depends upon how much pressure is exerted within Texas:

Quote

The Next Austin? How About (Northwest) Arkansas. Seriously.

This isn't just throwing a dart at the map and arbitrarily calling something the next Austin. Northwest Arkansas has both idiosyncratic and macro factors that make it a logical heir to the role played by Austin for so long.

...

Northwestern Arkansas also benefits from the continued growth of Texas in the same way that Austin benefited from the growth of the economy in California. There's intense competition from universities in neighboring states to raise their profile and fill seats by recruiting students from Texas, and more than 25% of the student body of the University of Arkansas hails from Texas. Fayetteville is an 8-hour drive from Austin and a 5.5-hour drive from Dallas, so to the extent the Texas metros get too crowded or expensive for locals, northwest Arkansas already has a diaspora of Lone Star expats that should make it a sensible place to consider while remaining less than a day's drive away from "home."

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-11-30/austin-s-mega-growth-rubs-off-on-walmart-s-arkansas


I get why Texas won't move until Arkansas does.  I also didn't know that UAF had THAT many Texans.  When Texas I-69 is completed alongside the long-finished Texas I-30, Texarkana is going to become an upside-down sieve into the Natural State.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on December 04, 2021, 01:29:38 AM
The most direct route between DFW and NWA remains via US 69 through Oklahoma. I'll leave it there.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on December 04, 2021, 01:33:18 AM
I get why Texas won't move until Arkansas does.  I also didn't know that UAF had THAT many Texans.  When Texas I-69 is completed alongside the long-finished Texas I-30, Texarkana is going to become an upside-down sieve into the Natural State.

Oh, it's pretty evident that there's that many Texans here now, especially when you drive I-49 with any regularity.  Plenty of Texas tags, and lots that cut you off with no blinkers just like they did back home.  Notably less civility in traffic here than there was even 5 years ago.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bwana39 on December 04, 2021, 11:44:57 AM
The most direct route between DFW and NWA remains via US 69 through Oklahoma. I'll leave it there.

The I-30 to (a completed) I-49 would be the closest all freeway route UNLESS  US-69 or 75 gets upgraded to I-40. Even absent the upgrade, the difference in mileage is big enough to have 90% of traffic keep going through Atoka and beyond.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: edwaleni on December 04, 2021, 03:50:55 PM
The most direct route between DFW and NWA remains via US 69 through Oklahoma. I'll leave it there.

The I-30 to (a completed) I-49 would be the closest all freeway route UNLESS  US-69 or 75 gets upgraded to I-40. Even absent the upgrade, the difference in mileage is big enough to have 90% of traffic keep going through Atoka and beyond.

Agreed, DFW-NWA is a US-69/US-412 deal.

Once TxDOT has I-69/I-369 to Marshall done between Houston and Tenaha, and I-49 is done, perhaps there will be some drain off, but not very much. I-49 is more about KCMO to Gulf than NWA.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on December 04, 2021, 07:16:58 PM
The most direct route between DFW and NWA remains via US 69 through Oklahoma. I'll leave it there.

The I-30 to (a completed) I-49 would be the closest all freeway route UNLESS  US-69 or 75 gets upgraded to I-40. Even absent the upgrade, the difference in mileage is big enough to have 90% of traffic keep going through Atoka and beyond.



Agreed, DFW-NWA is a US-69/US-412 deal.

Once TxDOT has I-69/I-369 to Marshall done between Houston and Tenaha, and I-49 is done, perhaps there will be some drain off, but not very much. I-49 is more about KCMO to Gulf than NWA.

Actually, US-69/I-40/I-49 is quicker and only about 8 miles longer than US-69/US-412 as Muskogee, OK and Siloam Springs have to be transited with all the congestion and lights they have, as well as a couple of other towns along US-69 north of I-40.  The Cherokee Turnpike toll as cheap as it is still likely also dissuades some folks from using that route, so it just isn't worth saving a few miles to take a longer amount of time and deal with the cities along the way.

Every time I've gone to Dallas/Ft. Worth from here in NWA, it's been I-49/I-40/US-69.  US-69/US-412 be a better looking line on the map, but it'd take Siloam Springs, Muskogee, and Wagoner bypasses to make the route quicker.  The real push should be for OK to handle US-69 south of I-40, which makes all the aforementioned routes quicker.  If they don't handle that stretch, then anything north of I-40 for US-69 is kinda moot.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: rte66man on December 04, 2021, 08:41:42 PM
The most direct route between DFW and NWA remains via US 69 through Oklahoma. I'll leave it there.

The I-30 to (a completed) I-49 would be the closest all freeway route UNLESS  US-69 or 75 gets upgraded to I-40. Even absent the upgrade, the difference in mileage is big enough to have 90% of traffic keep going through Atoka and beyond.



Agreed, DFW-NWA is a US-69/US-412 deal.

Once TxDOT has I-69/I-369 to Marshall done between Houston and Tenaha, and I-49 is done, perhaps there will be some drain off, but not very much. I-49 is more about KCMO to Gulf than NWA.

Actually, US-69/I-40/I-49 is quicker and only about 8 miles longer than US-69/US-412 as Muskogee, OK and Siloam Springs have to be transited with all the congestion and lights they have, as well as a couple of other towns along US-69 north of I-40.  The Cherokee Turnpike toll as cheap as it is still likely also dissuades some folks from using that route, so it just isn't worth saving a few miles to take a longer amount of time and deal with the cities along the way.

Every time I've gone to Dallas/Ft. Worth from here in NWA, it's been I-49/I-40/US-69.  US-69/US-412 be a better looking line on the map, but it'd take Siloam Springs, Muskogee, and Wagoner bypasses to make the route quicker.  The real push should be for OK to handle US-69 south of I-40, which makes all the aforementioned routes quicker.  If they don't handle that stretch, then anything north of I-40 for US-69 is kinda moot.

They are doing it VERY slowly.  The McAlester stretch should be fully freeway in the next 5-7 years meaning Checotah to Savanna will be freeway.  Red River to Caddo will also be done by then. Not sure if Atoka will ever be bypassed :)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on December 06, 2021, 01:28:44 PM
2 months after the opening, it looks like the bypass has taken 10,000 cars per day out of Bella Vista.  The BVB will also likely result in more holiday travel through NWA now that there's a completed Interstate.

https://www.nwahomepage.com/news/bella-vista-bypass-benefits-those-in-the-area/ (https://www.nwahomepage.com/news/bella-vista-bypass-benefits-those-in-the-area/)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: edwaleni on December 06, 2021, 04:13:31 PM
2 months after the opening, it looks like the bypass has taken 10,000 cars per day out of Bella Vista.  The BVB will also likely result in more holiday travel through NWA now that there's a completed Interstate.

https://www.nwahomepage.com/news/bella-vista-bypass-benefits-those-in-the-area/ (https://www.nwahomepage.com/news/bella-vista-bypass-benefits-those-in-the-area/)

AR-72 around Hiwasse will blossom, especially around Exit 287.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: dchristy on December 07, 2021, 09:37:57 PM
The most direct route between DFW and NWA remains via US 69 through Oklahoma. I'll leave it there.

The I-30 to (a completed) I-49 would be the closest all freeway route UNLESS  US-69 or 75 gets upgraded to I-40. Even absent the upgrade, the difference in mileage is big enough to have 90% of traffic keep going through Atoka and beyond.



Agreed, DFW-NWA is a US-69/US-412 deal.

Once TxDOT has I-69/I-369 to Marshall done between Houston and Tenaha, and I-49 is done, perhaps there will be some drain off, but not very much. I-49 is more about KCMO to Gulf than NWA.

Actually, US-69/I-40/I-49 is quicker and only about 8 miles longer than US-69/US-412 as Muskogee, OK and Siloam Springs have to be transited with all the congestion and lights they have, as well as a couple of other towns along US-69 north of I-40.  The Cherokee Turnpike toll as cheap as it is still likely also dissuades some folks from using that route, so it just isn't worth saving a few miles to take a longer amount of time and deal with the cities along the way.

Every time I've gone to Dallas/Ft. Worth from here in NWA, it's been I-49/I-40/US-69.  US-69/US-412 be a better looking line on the map, but it'd take Siloam Springs, Muskogee, and Wagoner bypasses to make the route quicker.  The real push should be for OK to handle US-69 south of I-40, which makes all the aforementioned routes quicker.  If they don't handle that stretch, then anything north of I-40 for US-69 is kinda moot.

They are doing it VERY slowly.  The McAlester stretch should be fully freeway in the next 5-7 years meaning Checotah to Savanna will be freeway.  Red River to Caddo will also be done by then. Not sure if Atoka will ever be bypassed :)

The owners of all the new businesses along 69 in the south side of Atoka don't think it will ever be bypassed....
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on December 07, 2021, 11:20:49 PM
The most direct route between DFW and NWA remains via US 69 through Oklahoma. I'll leave it there.

The I-30 to (a completed) I-49 would be the closest all freeway route UNLESS  US-69 or 75 gets upgraded to I-40. Even absent the upgrade, the difference in mileage is big enough to have 90% of traffic keep going through Atoka and beyond.



Agreed, DFW-NWA is a US-69/US-412 deal.

Once TxDOT has I-69/I-369 to Marshall done between Houston and Tenaha, and I-49 is done, perhaps there will be some drain off, but not very much. I-49 is more about KCMO to Gulf than NWA.

Actually, US-69/I-40/I-49 is quicker and only about 8 miles longer than US-69/US-412 as Muskogee, OK and Siloam Springs have to be transited with all the congestion and lights they have, as well as a couple of other towns along US-69 north of I-40.  The Cherokee Turnpike toll as cheap as it is still likely also dissuades some folks from using that route, so it just isn't worth saving a few miles to take a longer amount of time and deal with the cities along the way.

Every time I've gone to Dallas/Ft. Worth from here in NWA, it's been I-49/I-40/US-69.  US-69/US-412 be a better looking line on the map, but it'd take Siloam Springs, Muskogee, and Wagoner bypasses to make the route quicker.  The real push should be for OK to handle US-69 south of I-40, which makes all the aforementioned routes quicker.  If they don't handle that stretch, then anything north of I-40 for US-69 is kinda moot.

They are doing it VERY slowly.  The McAlester stretch should be fully freeway in the next 5-7 years meaning Checotah to Savanna will be freeway.  Red River to Caddo will also be done by then. Not sure if Atoka will ever be bypassed :)

The owners of all the new businesses along 69 in the south side of Atoka don't think it will ever be bypassed....

I-45 ever makes it across the Red River, and they'll start sweating.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: CoolAngrybirdsrio4 on December 07, 2021, 11:52:42 PM
2 months after the opening, it looks like the bypass has taken 10,000 cars per day out of Bella Vista.  The BVB will also likely result in more holiday travel through NWA now that there's a completed Interstate.

https://www.nwahomepage.com/news/bella-vista-bypass-benefits-those-in-the-area/ (https://www.nwahomepage.com/news/bella-vista-bypass-benefits-those-in-the-area/)

AR-72 around Hiwasse will blossom, especially around Exit 287.

Hiwasse could also be incorporated as well if it grows quickly like the rest of Springdale area.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on December 08, 2021, 10:10:11 AM
2 months after the opening, it looks like the bypass has taken 10,000 cars per day out of Bella Vista.  The BVB will also likely result in more holiday travel through NWA now that there's a completed Interstate.

https://www.nwahomepage.com/news/bella-vista-bypass-benefits-those-in-the-area/ (https://www.nwahomepage.com/news/bella-vista-bypass-benefits-those-in-the-area/)

AR-72 around Hiwasse will blossom, especially around Exit 287.

Hiwasse could also be incorporated as well if it grows quickly like the rest of Springdale area.

Hiwasse was absorbed into Gravette a few years back.  It's not really it's own town anymore as a result.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: edwaleni on December 08, 2021, 01:06:49 PM
2 months after the opening, it looks like the bypass has taken 10,000 cars per day out of Bella Vista.  The BVB will also likely result in more holiday travel through NWA now that there's a completed Interstate.

https://www.nwahomepage.com/news/bella-vista-bypass-benefits-those-in-the-area/ (https://www.nwahomepage.com/news/bella-vista-bypass-benefits-those-in-the-area/)

AR-72 around Hiwasse will blossom, especially around Exit 287.

Hiwasse could also be incorporated as well if it grows quickly like the rest of Springdale area.

Hiwasse was absorbed into Gravette a few years back.  It's not really it's own town anymore as a result.

Hiwasse faced a great division in 2007—2008, when two groups faced off over the incorporation of Hiwasse. In the end, the voters decided not to incorporate, with adjacent Gravette annexing the community in 2012.

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on December 08, 2021, 02:31:57 PM
Quote from: dchristy
The owners of all the new businesses along 69 in the south side of Atoka don't think it will ever be bypassed....

All the road-side businesses that have been built along US-69 on the South side of Atoka were built for commercial truckers and other road-trippers. Population growth in Atoka is stagnant, aging and slowly losing residents to death or out-migration. It was 3100 in 2010 and barely 3000 now. There isn't a good jobs base to attract young adults. Like other small town and rural school districts across Oklahoma the one in Atoka struggles. Young adults wanting to build families want to live in well-funded districts, such as Edmond.

If I had my way Atoka would be located on a considerably more important highway junction than it is now. Not only do I believe I-45 should be extended along US-69 up to Big Cabin, I think Oklahoma needs another diagonal turnpike from the Panhandle region thru OKC and down to the Texarkana region to connect into I-49 going to the Gulf. Anyway, Atoka is at the intersection of both roads. In that scenario Atoka could be attractive as a distribution hub.

As long as US-69/75 going thru Tushka, Atoka and Stringtown is kept as is those towns will continue to wither. The OKC and Tulsa metros are the only ones in the state seeing any significant growth. Everywhere else state-wide is seeing population stagnation or loss. If the US-69/75 corridor was upgraded to Interstate quality from the Red River to I-40 it would do more to put those stagnant towns on the map. If they're only known for stop lights and speed traps highway travelers will look for other alternative corridors in the region, like I-35 or the emerging I-49 corridor.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: edwaleni on December 08, 2021, 03:19:42 PM
Quote from: dchristy
The owners of all the new businesses along 69 in the south side of Atoka don't think it will ever be bypassed....

All the road-side businesses that have been built along US-69 on the South side of Atoka were built for commercial truckers and other road-trippers. Population growth in Atoka is stagnant, aging and slowly losing residents to death or out-migration. It was 3100 in 2010 and barely 3000 now. There isn't a good jobs base to attract young adults. Like other small town and rural school districts across Oklahoma the one in Atoka struggles. Young adults wanting to build families want to live in well-funded districts, such as Edmond.

If I had my way Atoka would be located on a considerably more important highway junction than it is now. Not only do I believe I-45 should be extended along US-69 up to Big Cabin, I think Oklahoma needs another diagonal turnpike from the Panhandle region thru OKC and down to the Texarkana region to connect into I-49 going to the Gulf. Anyway, Atoka is at the intersection of both roads. In that scenario Atoka could be attractive as a distribution hub.

As long as US-69/75 going thru Tushka, Atoka and Stringtown is kept as is those towns will continue to wither. The OKC and Tulsa metros are the only ones in the state seeing any significant growth. Everywhere else state-wide is seeing population stagnation or loss. If the US-69/75 corridor was upgraded to Interstate quality from the Red River to I-40 it would do more to put those stagnant towns on the map. If they're only known for stop lights and speed traps highway travelers will look for other alternative corridors in the region, like I-35 or the emerging I-49 corridor.

Isn't there a US-69 thread for this?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on December 08, 2021, 03:51:56 PM
US-69 sort of turned into a sidebar in relation to what a completed I-49 would do to draw traffic off US-69 in Oklahoma.

I don't think a fully complete I-49 would have much effect on traffic levels going North out of DFW. On the other hand, the I-69 and I-369 routes in Texas may be largely complete before I-49 is completed between Texarkana and Fort Smith. In that scenario, I-49 would have a pretty good shot at drawing long distance traffic coming up from South Texas away from the DFW metro and Oklahoma altogether.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on December 09, 2021, 12:02:46 AM
Quote
Turnpike widening, Gilcrease Expressway part of $5 billion road plan for Oklahoma

In related action, Gatz called attention to a section of the federal Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act that provides an interstate designation for U.S. 412 from Interstate 35 east to Interstate 49 in Arkansas.

“That would include the Cimarron and Cherokee turnpikes and the section of 412 really between state Highway 99 and the end of the Cherokee Turnpike that is the Oklahoma Department of Transportation section,”  Gatz said.

The designation can only be put on that section of U.S. 412 after the length is brought up to interstate standards, Gatz said.

“It means after we do the work to bring the corridor up to interstate standards, it is already approved to have an interstate shield put on it, designating it as the best facility available.

https://tulsaworld.com/news/state-and-regional/govt-and-politics/turnpike-widening-gilcrease-expressway-part-of-5-billion-road-plan-for-oklahoma/article_9da908dc-56d5-11ec-98b8-179f51b609b6.html?utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook&utm_campaign=user-share&fbclid=IwAR0EatY2YHgRsiOgwO6atbMdDvwIxi-toomsV5aa-tRgJ6VDrtUB6IArSzY

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: CoolAngrybirdsrio4 on December 09, 2021, 04:24:07 AM
2 months after the opening, it looks like the bypass has taken 10,000 cars per day out of Bella Vista.  The BVB will also likely result in more holiday travel through NWA now that there's a completed Interstate.

https://www.nwahomepage.com/news/bella-vista-bypass-benefits-those-in-the-area/ (https://www.nwahomepage.com/news/bella-vista-bypass-benefits-those-in-the-area/)

AR-72 around Hiwasse will blossom, especially around Exit 287.

Hiwasse could also be incorporated as well if it grows quickly like the rest of Springdale area.

Hiwasse was absorbed into Gravette a few years back.  It's not really it's own town anymore as a result.

Hiwasse faced a great division in 2007—2008, when two groups faced off over the incorporation of Hiwasse. In the end, the voters decided not to incorporate, with adjacent Gravette annexing the community in 2012.

Interesting, although on google maps, it appears that Gravette is far from the boundaries of Hiwasse.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on December 09, 2021, 07:37:20 AM
2 months after the opening, it looks like the bypass has taken 10,000 cars per day out of Bella Vista.  The BVB will also likely result in more holiday travel through NWA now that there's a completed Interstate.

https://www.nwahomepage.com/news/bella-vista-bypass-benefits-those-in-the-area/ (https://www.nwahomepage.com/news/bella-vista-bypass-benefits-those-in-the-area/)

AR-72 around Hiwasse will blossom, especially around Exit 287.

Hiwasse could also be incorporated as well if it grows quickly like the rest of Springdale area.

Hiwasse was absorbed into Gravette a few years back.  It's not really it's own town anymore as a result.

Hiwasse faced a great division in 2007—2008, when two groups faced off over the incorporation of Hiwasse. In the end, the voters decided not to incorporate, with adjacent Gravette annexing the community in 2012.

Interesting, although on google maps, it appears that Gravette is far from the boundaries of Hiwasse.

Since Hiwasse didn't elect to incorporate, Gravette, foreseeing the day when I-49 would be completed, annexed along AR-72 to get to that exit knowing that its future growth was headed that way.  It's what happened with Bella Vista as well with Lake Bella Vista.  Bentonville annexed all the way up to and including Lake Bella Vista since Bella Vista was an unincorporated village at the time.  They wanted to keep their Cooper Community origins, but with Bentonville grabbing them from the south, they finally did incorporate a year later to keep from being slowly absorbed into Bentonville.  Now despite their resistance to change, they even have an elementary school, which is certainly not something that retirement communities typically fund.  And the Walton Foundation has sponsored the construction of a rather extensive mountain bike trail system throughout the community since the terrain is so conducive to it and there's so much open space between areas of development there.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: CoolAngrybirdsrio4 on December 09, 2021, 02:47:55 PM
2 months after the opening, it looks like the bypass has taken 10,000 cars per day out of Bella Vista.  The BVB will also likely result in more holiday travel through NWA now that there's a completed Interstate.

https://www.nwahomepage.com/news/bella-vista-bypass-benefits-those-in-the-area/ (https://www.nwahomepage.com/news/bella-vista-bypass-benefits-those-in-the-area/)

AR-72 around Hiwasse will blossom, especially around Exit 287.

Hiwasse could also be incorporated as well if it grows quickly like the rest of Springdale area.

Hiwasse was absorbed into Gravette a few years back.  It's not really it's own town anymore as a result.

Hiwasse faced a great division in 2007—2008, when two groups faced off over the incorporation of Hiwasse. In the end, the voters decided not to incorporate, with adjacent Gravette annexing the community in 2012.

Interesting, although on google maps, it appears that Gravette is far from the boundaries of Hiwasse.

Since Hiwasse didn't elect to incorporate, Gravette, foreseeing the day when I-49 would be completed, annexed along AR-72 to get to that exit knowing that its future growth was headed that way.  It's what happened with Bella Vista as well with Lake Bella Vista.  Bentonville annexed all the way up to and including Lake Bella Vista since Bella Vista was an unincorporated village at the time.  They wanted to keep their Cooper Community origins, but with Bentonville grabbing them from the south, they finally did incorporate a year later to keep from being slowly absorbed into Bentonville.  Now despite their resistance to change, they even have an elementary school, which is certainly not something that retirement communities typically fund.  And the Walton Foundation has sponsored the construction of a rather extensive mountain bike trail system throughout the community since the terrain is so conducive to it and there's so much open space between areas of development there.

Interesting how Bella Vista was in the same boat as Hiwasse at one point.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on December 09, 2021, 05:53:24 PM

Interesting how Bella Vista was in the same boat as Hiwasse at one point.

BV was carved out as a retirement community in the late 60's/early 70's IIRC. They finally incorporated when Bentonville  tried to annex them.

Hiwasse was courted by Bentonville and  Gravette, IIRC. They opted for Gravette.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Tomahawkin on December 09, 2021, 06:31:15 PM
Whats the next town to Sprawl in the NWA area. I would think that Greenland, Goshen, and Farmington would see a lot of growth due to the fact of the close distance to campus? Does anyone know if the NWACC Population has increased over the last 15 years???

IMO Greenland would and should serve as a area for large truckstops hotels, and restaurants, especially since everything would be close to IH 49
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on December 09, 2021, 07:06:24 PM
Whats the next town to Sprawl in the NWA area. I would think that Greenland, Goshen, and Farmington would see a lot of growth due to the fact of the close distance to campus? Does anyone know if the NWACC Population has increased over the last 15 years???

IMO Greenland would and should serve as a area for large truckstops hotels, and restaurants, especially since everything would be close to IH 49

Greenland has a small truck stop /McDonald's and a Sonic Drive-In.

Harp's Grocery has a store (and gas) in West Fork close to the freeway.

My guess is the communities  along 49 aren't  in a big hurry to rezone.  Maybe after it's extended south of I-40 ?

There was a truck stop in Mountainburg that served traffic leaving AR 549 (I-49), but it closed after 49 was extended north.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Tomahawkin on December 09, 2021, 08:54:15 PM
Thanks for the 411. I didnt know there was a Harps in West Fork. I love that store and hope that they Expand along Towns on the 40 corridor. Im kinda curious as to why Wal Mart hasnt opened a neighborhood market store in those areas...?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on December 09, 2021, 09:18:38 PM
Thanks for the 411. I didnt know there was a Harps in West Fork. I love that store and hope that they Expand along Towns on the 40 corridor. Im kinda curious as to why Wal Mart hasnt opened a neighborhood market store in those areas...?

Maybe the demand isn't high enough? Walmart has their own game (like eliminating cashiers), so it's anybody's guess.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: zzcarp on December 09, 2021, 09:37:18 PM

Interesting how Bella Vista was in the same boat as Hiwasse at one point.

BV was carved out as a retirement community in the late 60's/early 70's IIRC. They finally incorporated when Bentonville  tried to annex them.

Hiwasse was courted by Bentonville and  Gravette, IIRC. They opted for Gravette.

What are the actual incorporation limits of the towns? Google maps show both Hiwasse and Gravette's limits separately and not contiguous with one another. Is there no contiguity requirement in Arkansas, or are the Google maps wrong?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Revive 755 on December 09, 2021, 10:24:38 PM
Will there be any tunnels?
As has been posted before, doubtful. The Foran Gap is not that treacherous and you can drive it easily at posted speed on the existing 2-lane. The sightlines will be that much better with modern engineering.

IIRC - based on the EIS - part of the routing between Fort Smith and Texarkana was selected to avoid having any tunnels, with at least two of the alternate routings considered had a tunnel, one of which would have been 6,000 feet long.

EDIT:  Looking through https://www.ardot.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/001747_1997.08.07_aFEIS.pdf (https://www.ardot.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/001747_1997.08.07_aFEIS.pdf), I see mention of a 4,500 foot tunnel on Page 76/358 and an 8,000 foot tunnel on Page 83/358.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on December 10, 2021, 04:50:20 AM
The prosperity is very uneven in NWA, I've noticed.

While some cities are booming, others like Greenland and West Fork have languished for some reason, and Decatur (off the beaten path, granted) had to go 8-man to keep its football team. These towns should grow just for the attractiveness of living in a small town.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bwana39 on December 10, 2021, 07:39:55 AM
The prosperity is very uneven in NWA, I've noticed.

While some cities are booming, others like Greenland and West Fork have languished for some reason, and Decatur (off the beaten path, granted) had to go 8-man to keep its football team. These towns should grow just for the attractiveness of living in a small town.

It sort of is like North Texas. While Farmersville and Melissa are (finally) growing rapidly, Blue Ridge and Trenton are still outside the sprawl. Even Greenville is not growing anything akin to Fate or Anna.  Outside the footprint of the sprawl, small communities in North Texas as well as the rest of the United States (including Northwest Arkansas) are still declining.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on December 10, 2021, 08:09:20 AM
The prosperity is very uneven in NWA, I've noticed.

While some cities are booming, others like Greenland and West Fork have languished for some reason, and Decatur (off the beaten path, granted) had to go 8-man to keep its football team. These towns should grow just for the attractiveness of living in a small town.

It will take time, but growth will spill out from the big 4 cities and already has to the towns directly adjacent.  Centerton, Farmington, Goshen, Sonora, Tontitown, Prairie Grove, Little Flock, Bethel Heights, and Bella Vista have all grown greatly as bedroom communities over the last decade.  As prices rise in those areas due to residential inflow, the others will be better bargains for those looking to find cheaper housing.  The issue with Greenland, West Fork, Decatur, Gentry, Gravette, Lincoln, etc. is that their schools aren't as good as the other districts which is important to those with school-age kids, but that will start changing once they get better funded with additional growth from property taxes from those who move to those towns to commute to the big 4 cities and Siloam Springs for work and are unable to find housing in their budget closer in.  Decatur has poultry processing facilities, but those aren't exactly known for high paying work and thus aren't lifting the schools as much as other industries would.  Decatur, Gentry, and to some extent Gravette are dependent on Siloam Springs for work otherwise, and thus really use AR-59 more than they'd use I-49 or one of the highways that intersect it.  Siloam Springs is more of an industrial blue-collar city compared to the rest of the metro area and draws labor in from Oklahoma as much as it does from the surrounding communities.  With a university there, however, I foresee it growing greatly over the next decade, especially as US-412 gets a little more concrete development as an Interstate and a bypass starts being planned.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on December 10, 2021, 02:24:45 PM
Quote from: Road Hog
While some cities are booming, others like Greenland and West Fork have languished for some reason, and Decatur (off the beaten path, granted) had to go 8-man to keep its football team. These towns should grow just for the attractiveness of living in a small town.

The kinds of people who typically want a "small town" living experience and are willing to re-locate to such places aren't in the demographic a struggling small town needs in order to improve. Often it's older adults, empty nesters not far from retirement age. That doesn't do a whole lot to improve a small town tax base, property tax base or work force. Even those adults looking for small town living are going to be picky about the location if they're not simply looking to get the most bang for their buck on housing prices.

Very few young people want to have anything to do with small town living unless they're staying in a small town where they were raised. Here in Oklahoma we have lots of small towns with shrinking populations. These towns are caught in a catch 22 situation. They don't have enough good quality jobs and don't have enough funding for the local schools. In order to have both the town already has to have enough working age adults and a property tax base big enough to pay teachers enough and be able to equip a local school well enough. The locations that do have a good property tax base develop pretty much an unfair advantage and siphon away population from other places.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: edwaleni on December 10, 2021, 02:39:50 PM
Everyone wants "small town", but no one wants the lack of resources a "small town" can't provide.

What people really want is 5 acres that is within 10-15 min of all the shopping chains, amenities (like movies, sports, etc) and a high school that can support all their programs of interest

Unlimited access to internet and cell phone service. Low taxes and low services costs (well water, septic).

Access to a place of worship where the kids/teen group is more than 7 kids.

Work be no more than 20-30 minutes away, and no traffic or seasonal obstacles to getting to/from there.

Rural residence, suburban lifestyle with access to urban culture.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: msunat97 on December 10, 2021, 02:45:12 PM
My wife and I are looking to move to the NWA area in late 2022.  She grew up 90 miles south & wants to find something outside the sprawl of the big cities in the area.  However, we also want the options of recreation, food, entertainment, etc. that comes with a bigger city.  You all bring up some good points.  How do you find the best value for housing, but have it in a place that is progressing and not fading away?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: edwaleni on December 10, 2021, 02:54:37 PM
My wife and I are looking to move to the NWA area in late 2022.  She grew up 90 miles south & wants to find something outside the sprawl of the big cities in the area.  However, we also want the options of recreation, food, entertainment, etc. that comes with a bigger city.  You all bring up some good points.  How do you find the best value for housing, but have it in a place that is progressing and not fading away?

Siloam Springs or Gravette probably meets your bill. Farmington/Prairie Grove. All within driving distance of NWA Metro.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on December 10, 2021, 02:54:59 PM
It's difficult finding the right balance. Heck some of the small towns around here are suffering simply because their local Internet service stinks. Bigger towns and bigger cities have access to bigger "pipes" and much faster access. The Internet isn't just for streaming Netflix either. Businesses are getting more dependent on good quality Internet access.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on December 10, 2021, 05:46:33 PM
It's difficult finding the right balance. Heck some of the small towns around here are suffering simply because their local Internet service stinks. Bigger towns and bigger cities have access to bigger "pipes" and much faster access. The Internet isn't just for streaming Netflix either. Businesses are getting more dependent on good quality Internet access.

Those that have Ozarks Electric as their electric provider also are in the service area for Ozarks Go.  Out of the city limits actually has a better shot at fiber Gigabit Internet now that they have gotten pretty far along with the rollout around the areas south of US-412 both east and west of I-49.  Internet in NWA, even in most of the rural areas, is developing into world class for speed and stability now.  Most of the development is moving west of I-49, so anyone wanting to move to NWA needs to get about 15 minutes further out than what they think they do if they don't want things growing up around them in 15 years.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on December 10, 2021, 06:28:00 PM
The prosperity is very uneven in NWA, I've noticed.

While some cities are booming, others like Greenland and West Fork have languished for some reason, and Decatur (off the beaten path, granted) had to go 8-man to keep its football team. These towns should grow just for the attractiveness of living in a small town.

It sort of is like North Texas. While Farmersville and Melissa are (finally) growing rapidly, Blue Ridge and Trenton are still outside the sprawl. Even Greenville is not growing anything akin to Fate or Anna.  Outside the footprint of the sprawl, small communities in North Texas as well as the rest of the United States (including Northwest Arkansas) are still declining.
You make a very good point while sort of proving mine.

The DFW-area towns you mentioned are finally starting to grow a little after kind of a slow start. But all of those towns are a good hour's drive from downtown Dallas, and that's if the traffic's good. Another good DFW example is Gunter, which is seeing slow, steady growth. People are moving out there for the cheaper housing, small-town and ranchette lifestyle, and a short drive to the Walmart and Texas Roadhouse. In terms of growth, Gunter is about 15 years behind the pace of its neighbor to the south, Celina.

Greenland and West Fork are similarly close to those amenities. They are maybe 15 to 20 minutes from Razorback Stadium and should be growing at a similar pace to the exurban communities mentioned. I'm not on the ground there, so I can only speculate why they're stagnant: anti-growth city government, small city and school footprints, territory inconducive to development, etc.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on December 10, 2021, 06:49:35 PM
My wife and I are looking to move to the NWA area in late 2022.  She grew up 90 miles south & wants to find something outside the sprawl of the big cities in the area.  However, we also want the options of recreation, food, entertainment, etc. that comes with a bigger city.  You all bring up some good points.  How do you find the best value for housing, but have it in a place that is progressing and not fading away?

Sounds like you should spend a few days up here in a VRBO or AirBnB to do some scouting of the area and get a feel for what your areas of interest are like in person.  We've had several folks from other areas of the country do exactly the same thing with our AirBnB.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on December 11, 2021, 04:05:18 PM
My wife and I are looking to move to the NWA area in late 2022.  She grew up 90 miles south & wants to find something outside the sprawl of the big cities in the area.  However, we also want the options of recreation, food, entertainment, etc. that comes with a bigger city.  You all bring up some good points.  How do you find the best value for housing, but have it in a place that is progressing and not fading away?

NWA has lots of lakes for boating or swimming. For food/entertainment Fayetteville gets the nod, but there is stuff all over.  Housing-wise, the whole area is exploding, New housing can't keep up with demand. IMO, you'd have better luck with the bedroom communities (Greenland, West Fork, Elkins, Farmington). My sister lives in Fayetteville, but the next street over is Elkins.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: razorback0308 on December 11, 2021, 05:08:43 PM
My wife and I are looking to move to the NWA area in late 2022.  She grew up 90 miles south & wants to find something outside the sprawl of the big cities in the area.  However, we also want the options of recreation, food, entertainment, etc. that comes with a bigger city.  You all bring up some good points.  How do you find the best value for housing, but have it in a place that is progressing and not fading away?

NWA has lots of lakes for boating or swimming. For food/entertainment Fayetteville gets the nod, but there is stuff all over.  Housing-wise, the whole area is exploding, New housing can't keep up with demand. IMO, you'd have better luck with the bedroom communities (Greenland, West Fork, Elkins, Farmington). My sister lives in Fayetteville, but the next street over is Elkins.

Pea Ridge is growing too. My parents have retired and moved out there with new subdivisions popping up everywhere.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: msunat97 on December 12, 2021, 10:53:59 AM
Luckily my wife has family in the area.  We will spend some time in the area looking around during the Christmas holidays.  Please keep posting your insights and thoughts.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on December 12, 2021, 10:07:21 PM
Luckily my wife has family in the area.  We will spend some time in the area looking around during the Christmas holidays.  Please keep posting your insights and thoughts.

Since your wife's family sounds like they're south of NWA, the Greenland I-49 exit is 5 minutes south of Fayetteville, and West Fork is about 12 minutes south.  We actually looked at very scenic and affordable land off the Winslow and Chester exits just north and south of the tunnel respectively back when we moved out of Bentonville, but would have had to build a house and also would have had kids in some schools that are struggling, so we went west of Fayetteville to get the kids into Farmington schools.

The more affordable areas to buy a home are west of I-49, or south of Fayetteville off I-49 or US-71.  Fayetteville and Bentonville are going to be the more expensive cities with the best downtown districts and nightlife, and southwest Rogers and northern Cave Springs close behind on housing cost, but driving to most everything of interest, unless you like golf and buy a home on one of the courses.  Bella Vista has more golf courses than the rest of NWA put together, so that'd be something to consider depending on how close you wanted to be to family and how much you like golf.  I-49 is generally fairly free flowing even at rush hour now that it's 6-8 laned, unless someone goofed behind the wheel and face planted another vehicle or barrier.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on December 15, 2021, 09:31:29 PM
I-49 isn't going anywhere near Horatio. It will cross US 59/70/71/371 several miles east of De Queen.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on December 15, 2021, 10:51:44 PM
When I-49 is completed in the Fort Smith area, it will provide a good connection between I-49 south and I-40 east. However, to go from NB I-49 to WB I-40 or from EB I-40 to SB I-49, it will take quite a bit of backtracking. A controlled access freeway from I-49 south of Fort Smith that connects to US 59 east of Spiro, combined with the 4 lane expressway US 59 from Sallisaw to the western OK 9 intersection and the planned US 59/OK 9 expressway to Sunset Corner would make the trip quite a bit shorter. This is something ODOT and ArDOT should start working on.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bwana39 on December 16, 2021, 08:42:13 AM
I-49 isn't going anywhere near Horatio. It will cross US 59/70/71/371 several miles east of De Queen.

According to the maps that we are seeing now, I would agree. On the other hand I am almost certain that ARDOT has discussed and I seem to remember that it was the most recent LOCAL discussion that the I-49 Little River crossing along  the current US-71 track was a no-go and that they had decided on a more direct path to DeQueen. Maybe they went back to the old routing so they could do loops and not have to build it all at the same time, but......

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on December 16, 2021, 10:13:47 AM
Quote from: bugo
When I-49 is completed in the Fort Smith area, it will provide a good connection between I-49 south and I-40 east. However, to go from NB I-49 to WB I-40 or from EB I-40 to SB I-49, it will take quite a bit of backtracking.

Are you saying the planned modification of the I-40/I-49 interchange in Alma is going to be missing a couple of ramps? Are there any schematics or other diagrams available?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on December 16, 2021, 10:36:27 AM
No, I meant that you will have to go all the way to Alma, which is several miles out of the way. A shortcut between US 59 and I-49 would save several miles.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on December 16, 2021, 11:18:06 AM
I think AR DOT needs to work on improving the 4.5 mile segment of US-71 between I-540 and the south end of current AR-549 to limited access. It might involve a few property removals, but I think such a project is do-able. I think the agency will need to do that mainly for the matters of NB I-49 traffic going directly into Fort Smith. It would also be possible for I-49 drivers to use the same segment to take I-540 into Oklahoma where it turns into US-271. They could take that over to Spiro to get on US-59 and then go up to Salisaw. I have a feeling a lot of people driving NB I-49 to WB I-40 will just stay on I-49 until Alma in order to stay on Interstates all the way.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on December 16, 2021, 02:43:54 PM
I think AR DOT needs to work on improving the 4.5 mile segment of US-71 between I-540 and the south end of current AR-549 to limited access. It might involve a few property removals, but I think such a project is do-able. I think the agency will need to do that mainly for the matters of NB I-49 traffic going directly into Fort Smith. It would also be possible for I-49 drivers to use the same segment to take I-540 into Oklahoma where it turns into US-271. They could take that over to Spiro to get on US-59 and then go up to Salisaw. I have a feeling a lot of people driving NB I-49 to WB I-40 will just stay on I-49 until Alma in order to stay on Interstates all the way.

There would certainly need to be access roads, overpasses at major crossroads, and exit/entrance ramps onto the access roads on the northern 2 miles of US-71 south of I-540 and also US-71 for a mile south of AR-45 South with the development/access that is currently built up there.  It doesn't look like they'd necessarily have to widen the cut down into the Massard Creek valley from Rye Hill for access roads, but basically run them where the hill levels out on both ends, but probably would eventually require widening the cut for access roads.  That area likely will infill with businesses once  Future I-49/AR-549 construction south of I-40 gets at least Super-2 completion down to Y-City, including the Arkansas River crossing and connection to the north end of current AR-549.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: msunat97 on December 28, 2021, 03:40:43 PM
Finally got to drive the BVB on the way south for Christmas.  That's such a HUGE improvement over taking 71 thru Bella Vista.  After 12 hours in the car, fighting the traffic in Bella Vista always sucked.  The bypass is well worth the $$.

Looking in the future, the ArDOT has their hands full with extending the road across 64 & the river area.  Has anyone seen any proposals for the routing or is it way too early for that level of detail?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on December 28, 2021, 04:58:33 PM
Finally got to drive the BVB on the way south for Christmas.  That's such a HUGE improvement over taking 71 thru Bella Vista.  After 12 hours in the car, fighting the traffic in Bella Vista always sucked.  The bypass is well worth the $$.

Looking in the future, the ArDOT has their hands full with extending the road across 64 & the river area.  Has anyone seen any proposals for the routing or is it way too early for that level of detail?

They've had the routing for a while, just not the funding.

(https://www.gannett-cdn.com/presto/2021/07/19/NTRE/d3a28748-3b71-4fbb-849c-370f95718893-I-49_Extension_Map.jpg?width=600&height=806&fit=crop&format=pjpg&auto=webp)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: The Ghostbuster on December 29, 2021, 02:35:57 PM
So there would only be two exits between AR 22 and Interstate 40? Seems about right. Will any rest areas be constructed along future Interstate 49 between Interstate 30 and Interstate 40? I've noticed that a lot of newer long-distance freeways seem to lack them.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on December 29, 2021, 02:50:08 PM
So there would only be two exits between AR 22 and Interstate 40? Seems about right. Will any rest areas be constructed along future Interstate 49 between Interstate 30 and Interstate 40? I've noticed that a lot of newer long-distance freeways seem to lack them.

Maybe planned further south?  I know 49 in Missouri doesn't have any, but Louisiana does
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on December 29, 2021, 03:04:51 PM
If I-49 can actually be completed between Fort Smith and Texarkana I think chances would be decent for at least one or two rest areas. I think a rest area in the Foran Gap area between Mena and Waldron might be decent. There are some scenic opportunities there.

Another possible outcome: one or more commercial service plazas in the median of the Interstate, in the style of Oklahoma's turnpike service plazas. I-49 between Fort Smith and Texarkana will pass thru some very sparsely populated areas, not every town along the way is going to have 24/7 operating service businesses. Rest areas also come in more handy in Western states where roads go thru more desolate territory for the same reasons.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on December 29, 2021, 03:25:09 PM
If I-49 can actually be completed between Fort Smith and Texarkana I think chances would be decent for at least one or two rest areas. I think a rest area in the Foran Gap area between Mena and Waldron might be decent. There are some scenic opportunities there.

Another possible outcome: one or more commercial service plazas in the median of the Interstate, in the style of Oklahoma's turnpike service plazas. I-49 between Fort Smith and Texarkana will pass thru some very sparsely populated areas, not every town along the way is going to have 24/7 operating service businesses. Rest areas also come in more handy in Western states where roads go thru more desolate territory for the same reasons.

And not all will survive (waving at the Mountainburg BP ;) )
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on December 29, 2021, 09:07:23 PM
If I-49 can actually be completed between Fort Smith and Texarkana I think chances would be decent for at least one or two rest areas. I think a rest area in the Foran Gap area between Mena and Waldron might be decent. There are some scenic opportunities there.

Another possible outcome: one or more commercial service plazas in the median of the Interstate, in the style of Oklahoma's turnpike service plazas. I-49 between Fort Smith and Texarkana will pass thru some very sparsely populated areas, not every town along the way is going to have 24/7 operating service businesses. Rest areas also come in more handy in Western states where roads go thru more desolate territory for the same reasons.
Unless federal law has changed, service plazas on free interstates will not be happening. You'll be lucky to get a vending machine that works half the time.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: abqtraveler on December 30, 2021, 12:18:57 AM
If I-49 can actually be completed between Fort Smith and Texarkana I think chances would be decent for at least one or two rest areas. I think a rest area in the Foran Gap area between Mena and Waldron might be decent. There are some scenic opportunities there.

Another possible outcome: one or more commercial service plazas in the median of the Interstate, in the style of Oklahoma's turnpike service plazas. I-49 between Fort Smith and Texarkana will pass thru some very sparsely populated areas, not every town along the way is going to have 24/7 operating service businesses. Rest areas also come in more handy in Western states where roads go thru more desolate territory for the same reasons.
Unless federal law has changed, service plazas on free interstates will not be happening. You'll be lucky to get a vending machine that works half the time.
I-49 would have to be built as a toll road for service plazas to be allowed, and I-49 between Texarkana and Fort Smith likely would not generate enough traffic for tolls to be a viable option.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on December 30, 2021, 12:49:36 AM
If I-49 can actually be completed between Fort Smith and Texarkana I think chances would be decent for at least one or two rest areas. I think a rest area in the Foran Gap area between Mena and Waldron might be decent. There are some scenic opportunities there.

Another possible outcome: one or more commercial service plazas in the median of the Interstate, in the style of Oklahoma's turnpike service plazas. I-49 between Fort Smith and Texarkana will pass thru some very sparsely populated areas, not every town along the way is going to have 24/7 operating service businesses. Rest areas also come in more handy in Western states where roads go thru more desolate territory for the same reasons.

It would be advisable for at least 1 to be created.  US-71 has one between Mansfield and Waldron where AR-23 ends.  Don't know if there'll instead be an exit somewhere between Elm Park and Booth to get AR-23 access to I-49, but it would make sense to.  If so, they'll just likely put a sign directing I-49 traffic to that rest area.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on December 30, 2021, 02:00:30 AM
Looking at the 1997 FEIS to see where the route has an exit near Elm Park, it looks like there'll be an exit on AR-378 within a mile or so of US-71, so with that being the case, I'd bet they actually don't build another rest area, but instead put signage directing traffic to the already existing one that will be within 2 miles of the exit.  Incidentally, I spent the first 5 years of my life on a cattle ranch less than 3 miles from that rest area, so I'm pretty familiar with the area.  There's nothing for services whatsoever between Mansfield and Waldron on US-71 other than that rest area.  Gorgeous drive, but there'll need to be yet another move by businesses in Waldron from the core of the old US-71 through town to the "bypass for the bypass" as folks will need some fuel/food services by that area.

Consult Pg. 20 of the 1997 FEIS to see the area in question.  Or the pages before and after if you want to see the alignments selected back in the day when things were originally proposed.

https://www.ardot.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/001747_1997.08.07_aFEIS.pdf (https://www.ardot.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/001747_1997.08.07_aFEIS.pdf)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sprjus4 on December 30, 2021, 07:43:51 AM
Looking at the 1997 FEIS to see where the route has an exit near Elm Park, it looks like there'll be an exit on AR-378 within a mile or so of US-71, so with that being the case, I'd bet they actually don't build another rest area, but instead put signage directing traffic to the already existing one that will be within 2 miles of the exit.
That’s too far of the highway to be a viable rest area for interstate traffic. If a rest area were to be located off an exit, it would have to be in the immediate vicinity. An easy on-off situation. That doesn’t appear to be one, having traffic drive a mile or two each way.

Easy solution is to close the existing US-71 rest area, and either construct two new ones on the mainline (one northbound, one southbound), or construct a single rest area off one of the exits that’s accessible by both directions. The latter would have less cost and still be viable if it’s immediately off the exit and well signed.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on December 30, 2021, 10:11:36 AM
Looking at the 1997 FEIS to see where the route has an exit near Elm Park, it looks like there'll be an exit on AR-378 within a mile or so of US-71, so with that being the case, I'd bet they actually don't build another rest area, but instead put signage directing traffic to the already existing one that will be within 2 miles of the exit.
That’s too far of the highway to be a viable rest area for interstate traffic. If a rest area were to be located off an exit, it would have to be in the immediate vicinity. An easy on-off situation. That doesn’t appear to be one, having traffic drive a mile or two each way.

Easy solution is to close the existing US-71 rest area, and either construct two new ones on the mainline (one northbound, one southbound), or construct a single rest area off one of the exits that’s accessible by both directions. The latter would have less cost and still be viable if it’s immediately off the exit and well signed.

I don't know that a new rest area has been built in Arkansas in the last 30 years.  They've closed down a few, though, due to crime in the Morrilton and Maumelle areas.  There used to be one on US-71 in the Brentwood area, but they turned that over to the town for use as a park.  There isn't one yet on I-49 anywhere in Arkansas, much less roughly equidistant along the route where one existed/exists on US-71.  We'll see how long it takes to put Welcome Centers on I-49, which would certainly come before any plans for any rest areas midstate.  They have redone some of the Welcome Centers in recent years, so there's hope.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sprjus4 on December 30, 2021, 10:30:12 AM
^

IIRC, a welcome center is planned at the AR-72 interchange off the new I-49 Bella Vista Bypass segment.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on December 31, 2021, 11:56:32 AM
^

IIRC, a welcome center is planned at the AR-72 interchange off the new I-49 Bella Vista Bypass segment.

Just south of  CR 34/ Highlands Blvd.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: apjung on January 06, 2022, 07:46:53 PM
Google Maps now has Bella Vista Bypass imagery
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on January 06, 2022, 08:36:26 PM
Google Maps now has Bella Vista Bypass imagery

Took 'em long enough
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: vdeane on January 06, 2022, 09:04:26 PM
Google Maps now has Bella Vista Bypass imagery
The imagery I'm seeing has been there for a while.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on January 06, 2022, 09:07:06 PM
I noticed the update last week in Google Earth. The imagery is dated 9/7/2021, with the Belle Vista Bypass very near completion.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: CoolAngrybirdsrio4 on January 06, 2022, 09:09:20 PM
That is nice to hear that google finally updated their imagery of the bypass.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: abqtraveler on January 06, 2022, 09:49:52 PM
That is nice to hear that google finally updated their imagery of the bypass.

Just went to Google Maps and I'm still seeing the old imagery that shows the BVB under construction from US-71 south of BV to the Missouri state line. How do I see the latest imagery in Google Maps?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: BlueOutback7 on January 06, 2022, 10:07:39 PM
He is exactly correct. None of that imagery is even close to being new. The last time the Street View car passed through was almost 4 years ago in May 2018. Google is long overdue for a trip to Northwest Arkansas.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: mvak36 on January 07, 2022, 09:20:03 AM
That is nice to hear that google finally updated their imagery of the bypass.

Just went to Google Maps and I'm still seeing the old imagery that shows the BVB under construction from US-71 south of BV to the Missouri state line. How do I see the latest imagery in Google Maps?

So what I'm seeing is it's updated in Google Earth but not Google maps.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on January 07, 2022, 09:45:05 AM
That is nice to hear that google finally updated their imagery of the bypass.

Just went to Google Maps and I'm still seeing the old imagery that shows the BVB under construction from US-71 south of BV to the Missouri state line. How do I see the latest imagery in Google Maps?

So what I'm seeing is it's updated in Google Earth but not Google maps.

What I'm seeing in Google Earth and the Google Maps webapp looks pretty janky with the curvature matching the terrain differences.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Rick Powell on January 07, 2022, 09:58:35 AM
What I'm seeing in Google Earth and the Google Maps webapp looks pretty janky with the curvature matching the terrain differences.

In other words, there is new aerial imagery (that follows the earth contours when blown up to ground-level view), but no new Street View to match. The Street View is from 2018, and it is missing from Rt 34 to the I-69/US 71 junction in MO (where I-49 didn't exist in 2018). I also see that there is a piece of new aerial missing at the south end of BVB, from 2 miles west of US 71 to just east of Rt 72.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on January 07, 2022, 10:03:34 AM
He is exactly correct. None of that imagery is even close to being new. The last time the Street View car passed through was almost 4 years ago in May 2018. Google is long overdue for a trip to Northwest Arkansas.

No doubt about it.  Trouble is, they're likely trying to figure when the best opportunity is to catch it in a state that isn't going to change dramatically in 2 years, and I can tell you that there's massive amounts of cranes, red dirt, dump trucks, construction crews, etc. as Benton County is one of the fastest growing counties in the U.S. right now.  It's starting from a low population compared to what everyone considers metropolitan, but with decades now of ~25% growth, it makes for a lot of change.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on January 07, 2022, 10:17:43 AM
On the subject of the south end of the BVB, I wonder when ARDOT is going to reinstall the traffic cam that they removed when they had to widen the hill cut over the southbound offramp to US-71?  It'll be lower in elevation, so it would have a better view of the SPUI underneath, assuming they put it back on that hill.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: abqtraveler on January 07, 2022, 10:19:46 AM
He is exactly correct. None of that imagery is even close to being new. The last time the Street View car passed through was almost 4 years ago in May 2018. Google is long overdue for a trip to Northwest Arkansas.

No doubt about it.  Trouble is, they're likely trying to figure when the best opportunity is to catch it in a state that isn't going to change dramatically in 2 years, and I can tell you that there's massive amounts of cranes, red dirt, dump trucks, construction crews, etc. as Benton County is one of the fastest growing counties in the U.S. right now.  It's starting from a low population compared to what everyone considers metropolitan, but with decades now of ~25% growth, it makes for a lot of change.
Okay, so I loaded Google Earth and I see the nearly-completed BVB. What I find interesting is they paved the new NB lanes from US-71 to CR-34 with asphalt (the SB lanes on this stretch are concrete). So you have the NB side mostly asphalt, save for short concrete sections at the interchanges with CR-34, AR-72, and the second AR-72.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on January 07, 2022, 10:31:50 AM
He is exactly correct. None of that imagery is even close to being new. The last time the Street View car passed through was almost 4 years ago in May 2018. Google is long overdue for a trip to Northwest Arkansas.

No doubt about it.  Trouble is, they're likely trying to figure when the best opportunity is to catch it in a state that isn't going to change dramatically in 2 years, and I can tell you that there's massive amounts of cranes, red dirt, dump trucks, construction crews, etc. as Benton County is one of the fastest growing counties in the U.S. right now.  It's starting from a low population compared to what everyone considers metropolitan, but with decades now of ~25% growth, it makes for a lot of change.
Okay, so I loaded Google Earth and I see the nearly-completed BVB. What I find interesting is they paved the new NB lanes from US-71 to CR-34 with asphalt (the SB lanes on this stretch are concrete). So you have the NB side mostly asphalt, save for short concrete sections at the interchanges with CR-34, AR-72, and the second AR-72.

They cheaped out by finishing the project in asphalt.  The concrete sections that you see were done when the southbound Super-2 lanes were done as they did all of the overpasses and exit/entrance ramps at that time, so they did concrete under the overpasses as a result and just connected the exits with asphalt.  We'll see how it looks in 10 years.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: vdeane on January 07, 2022, 12:59:24 PM
What I'm seeing in Google Earth and the Google Maps webapp looks pretty janky with the curvature matching the terrain differences.

In other words, there is new aerial imagery (that follows the earth contours when blown up to ground-level view), but no new Street View to match. The Street View is from 2018, and it is missing from Rt 34 to the I-69/US 71 junction in MO (where I-49 didn't exist in 2018). I also see that there is a piece of new aerial missing at the south end of BVB, from 2 miles west of US 71 to just east of Rt 72.
New aerial imagery in Google Earth.  It hasn't yet made it over to Google Maps (which shows older imagery) as of last night.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Tomahawkin on January 07, 2022, 08:20:49 PM
Saw a video on Youtube that filmed 49 south from Bella Vista to The Boston mountains. Excluding the Interchanges with US 62, Wedington Rd. and 412, I was very impressed with the interchange improvements in the area. Why hasnt anything been done to The Wedington Rd interchange? Also Why is there no overhead lighting on that stretch? Considering all the foggy days that The Fayetteville area gets this time of the year? LED Lighting would be enough because it does emit as much light pollution as the standard ones used to

There should be overhead lighting at the Fulbright expressway interchange. That interchange can be confusing for out of towners, IMO
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on January 07, 2022, 09:18:17 PM
The I-49 interchange with the Fulbright Expressway is pretty unusual. As to the lack of overhead lights along I-49 in that part of Fayetteville, I can only guess AR DOT is being cheap. It's either that or home owners nearby don't want the light pollution.

They could modify the concrete Jersey barrier to include recessed LED-based flood lights, facing forward to spread a beam of light out onto the roadway. A recessed design would do much to hide the lights from opposing traffic. The renovation of I-25 through Trinidad, CO features some of this kind of lighting design. No tall overhead masts contributing to light pollution. But motorists still see the roadway nice and clearly.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Tomahawkin on January 07, 2022, 09:51:15 PM
I hope ARDOT just read your last post. Once 49 is completed, there will be a lot more truck traffic using that route. I'm really surprised there is no lighting in the Boston Mountains area because of all the fog and Deer traffic. Alabama is using Solar panels on their bridges areas of high elevation on IH 20. Why can't Arkansas implement that? Especially since they say the state is too broke for interstate upgrades?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on January 07, 2022, 10:10:00 PM
Saw a video on Youtube that filmed 49 south from Bella Vista to The Boston mountains. Excluding the Interchanges with US 62, Wedington Rd. and 412, I was very impressed with the interchange improvements in the area. Why hasnt anything been done to The Wedington Rd interchange? Also Why is there no overhead lighting on that stretch? Considering all the foggy days that The Fayetteville area gets this time of the year? LED Lighting would be enough because it does emit as much light pollution as the standard ones used to

There should be overhead lighting at the Fulbright expressway interchange. That interchange can be confusing for out of towners, IMO

The Wedington Interchange is in the process of being "remolded".  Construction just began in the last month or two,
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Razorback19 on January 07, 2022, 10:12:52 PM
Construction on I-49 corridor connecting Chaffee Crossing to Alma starting this fall

The project has been in the works for over 20 years.

Updated: 7:39 PM CST January 7, 2022

BARLING, Ark. – The Arkansas Department of Transportation and the Fort Chaffee Redevelopment Authority (FCRA) has announced that construction on the I-49 corridor between Chaffee Crossing and Alma will begin this fall.
Funding to complete the 13.5-mile stretch of I-49 between Highway 22 in Sebastian County to I-40 in Crawford County was approved by voters in 2020 as part of Issue 1 on the ballot.

"We are sincerely thankful for ARDOT's fulfillment of promises to Arkansas voters following passage of Issue 1 in November 2020," FCRA CEO Daniel Mann said.
The new stretch of interstate is part of a long-term congressional plan to connect Shreveport, Louisiana, to Kansas City, Missouri.
Construction will begin in the fall of 2022, but no details about a completion date have been shared.
"It will be a great pleasure to plan the groundbreaking this fall and see real work begin in the near future," Mann said. "I-49 is a major transportation corridor that will open up the Fort Smith regional market to greater domestic and international trade."
Please check back for updates to this developing story.

https://www.5newsonline.com/article/news/local/interstate-49-corridor-construction-chaffee-crossing-barling-alma-arkansas-start-date/527-950b0b7c-70e0-4cf3-9570-edc25d518f83?fbclid=IwAR3t-w6eUkKDTly9BTX3IWLLDQNfmphfECge_M9KVkN7PMtMzHcYtQ3HeXs
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on January 07, 2022, 10:58:57 PM
Finally!  Our tax dollars at work.  I just wonder about whether they do a Super-2 initially as nothing has been stated publicly that I've seen on how this is going to be built out.  It would seem to be difficult to twin the span over the Arkansas River, so maybe they just do all 4 lanes with a Jersey barrier like I-540 and just stripe for 2 lanes initially?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on January 08, 2022, 12:22:52 AM
Construction on I-49 corridor connecting Chaffee Crossing to Alma starting this fall

The project has been in the works for over 20 years.

Updated: 7:39 PM CST January 7, 2022

BARLING, Ark. – The Arkansas Department of Transportation and the Fort Chaffee Redevelopment Authority (FCRA) has announced that construction on the I-49 corridor between Chaffee Crossing and Alma will begin this fall.
Funding to complete the 13.5-mile stretch of I-49 between Highway 22 in Sebastian County to I-40 in Crawford County was approved by voters in 2020 as part of Issue 1 on the ballot.

"We are sincerely thankful for ARDOT's fulfillment of promises to Arkansas voters following passage of Issue 1 in November 2020," FCRA CEO Daniel Mann said.
The new stretch of interstate is part of a long-term congressional plan to connect Shreveport, Louisiana, to Kansas City, Missouri.
Construction will begin in the fall of 2022, but no details about a completion date have been shared.
"It will be a great pleasure to plan the groundbreaking this fall and see real work begin in the near future," Mann said. "I-49 is a major transportation corridor that will open up the Fort Smith regional market to greater domestic and international trade."
Please check back for updates to this developing story.

https://www.5newsonline.com/article/news/local/interstate-49-corridor-construction-chaffee-crossing-barling-alma-arkansas-start-date/527-950b0b7c-70e0-4cf3-9570-edc25d518f83?fbclid=IwAR3t-w6eUkKDTly9BTX3IWLLDQNfmphfECge_M9KVkN7PMtMzHcYtQ3HeXs

Told you the spotlight will now be the brightest it's ever been on the remainder of Arkansas I-49.

BTW, dig what's considered the top Northwest Arkansas business story for the year 2021 in TalkBusiness&Politics. (https://talkbusiness.net/2022/01/year-in-review-the-top-10-stories-that-shaped-2021-in-northwest-arkansas/)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on January 08, 2022, 03:56:04 AM
Saw a video on Youtube that filmed 49 south from Bella Vista to The Boston mountains. Excluding the Interchanges with US 62, Wedington Rd. and 412, I was very impressed with the interchange improvements in the area. Why hasnt anything been done to The Wedington Rd interchange? Also Why is there no overhead lighting on that stretch? Considering all the foggy days that The Fayetteville area gets this time of the year? LED Lighting would be enough because it does emit as much light pollution as the standard ones used to

There should be overhead lighting at the Fulbright expressway interchange. That interchange can be confusing for out of towners, IMO
That's a longtime function of AHTD/ARDOT farming out responsibility of lighting interchanges to the county or municipality with jurisdiction over the interchange.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bwana39 on January 08, 2022, 10:33:17 AM
Saw a video on Youtube that filmed 49 south from Bella Vista to The Boston mountains. Excluding the Interchanges with US 62, Wedington Rd. and 412, I was very impressed with the interchange improvements in the area. Why hasnt anything been done to The Wedington Rd interchange? Also Why is there no overhead lighting on that stretch? Considering all the foggy days that The Fayetteville area gets this time of the year? LED Lighting would be enough because it does emit as much light pollution as the standard ones used to

There should be overhead lighting at the Fulbright expressway interchange. That interchange can be confusing for out of towners, IMO
That's a longtime function of AHTD/ARDOT farming out responsibility of lighting interchanges to the county or municipality with jurisdiction over the interchange.

Louisiana is the same way. DOTD doesn't pay for the lighting. If the city or parish doesn't want to pay, they just cut them off. DOTD does install lighting in new construction  IF the locals have agreed to pay. If there is no payment agreement, they leave it off the project.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Razorback19 on January 08, 2022, 11:05:09 AM
Finally!  Our tax dollars at work.  I just wonder about whether they do a Super-2 initially as nothing has been stated publicly that I've seen on how this is going to be built out.  It would seem to be difficult to twin the span over the Arkansas River, so maybe they just do all 4 lanes with a Jersey barrier like I-540 and just stripe for 2 lanes initially?

Probably wishful thinking but since they didn't specifically say maybe we will get all four lanes.

If they do the Super 2, I do think they should go ahead and do the 4 lane bridge even if it only services 2 lanes at the beginning. Whether that is twin spans or a four lane divided remains to be seen.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: yakra on January 08, 2022, 01:48:44 PM
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=410633771
Looks 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.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on January 09, 2022, 03:32:44 PM
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=410633771
Looks 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.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on January 09, 2022, 03:40:06 PM
Finally!  Our tax dollars at work.  I just wonder about whether they do a Super-2 initially as nothing has been stated publicly that I've seen on how this is going to be built out.  It would seem to be difficult to twin the span over the Arkansas River, so maybe they just do all 4 lanes with a Jersey barrier like I-540 and just stripe for 2 lanes initially?

Probably wishful thinking but since they didn't specifically say maybe we will get all four lanes.

If they do the Super 2, I do think they should go ahead and do the 4 lane bridge even if it only services 2 lanes at the beginning. Whether that is twin spans or a four lane divided remains to be seen.

Even a Super-2 at 65MPH knocks 10 minutes off the trip from Alma to Barling.  It won't stay that way for long as it'll get quite a lot of traffic from the south side of the Arkansas River east of Barling bound for NWA and the converse.  Not to mention US-71 through traffic.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on January 10, 2022, 04:45:06 AM
Finally!  Our tax dollars at work.  I just wonder about whether they do a Super-2 initially as nothing has been stated publicly that I've seen on how this is going to be built out.  It would seem to be difficult to twin the span over the Arkansas River, so maybe they just do all 4 lanes with a Jersey barrier like I-540 and just stripe for 2 lanes initially?

Probably wishful thinking but since they didn't specifically say maybe we will get all four lanes.

If they do the Super 2, I do think they should go ahead and do the 4 lane bridge even if it only services 2 lanes at the beginning. Whether that is twin spans or a four lane divided remains to be seen.

Even a Super-2 at 65MPH knocks 10 minutes off the trip from Alma to Barling.  It won't stay that way for long as it'll get quite a lot of traffic from the south side of the Arkansas River east of Barling bound for NWA and the converse.  Not to mention US-71 through traffic.
With all the earthwork involved and the bridge, they might as well put in both main lanes at the same time. After all that costly construction work, paving a lane would be a drop in the bucket.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on January 10, 2022, 11:01:28 AM
Finally!  Our tax dollars at work.  I just wonder about whether they do a Super-2 initially as nothing has been stated publicly that I've seen on how this is going to be built out.  It would seem to be difficult to twin the span over the Arkansas River, so maybe they just do all 4 lanes with a Jersey barrier like I-540 and just stripe for 2 lanes initially?

Probably wishful thinking but since they didn't specifically say maybe we will get all four lanes.

If they do the Super 2, I do think they should go ahead and do the 4 lane bridge even if it only services 2 lanes at the beginning. Whether that is twin spans or a four lane divided remains to be seen.

Even a Super-2 at 65MPH knocks 10 minutes off the trip from Alma to Barling.  It won't stay that way for long as it'll get quite a lot of traffic from the south side of the Arkansas River east of Barling bound for NWA and the converse.  Not to mention US-71 through traffic.
With all the earthwork involved and the bridge, they might as well put in both main lanes at the same time. After all that costly construction work, paving a lane would be a drop in the bucket.

That's how they did AR-540/I-540/I-49 from Alma to Fayetteville, except they did it in 2 segments.  They did all travel lanes and bridges from I-40 to the Mountainburg exit, then dumped off onto Dollard Rd/AR-282 to connect to old US-71 for the remainder of the trip until they got the giant bridges and tunnel completed to pave the northern segment.  That took a few years, but got some benefit.  I don't see how they'd logically break this up into segments as Kibler isn't much of a traffic generator, nor the river bottoms themselves, so it's likely that it opens all at once if they decide that a Super-2 doesn't save much in the interim and the alternative route that I-49 is replacing isn't near the new terrain construction.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on January 11, 2022, 11:31:43 AM
Quote from: bugo
When I-49 is completed in the Fort Smith area, it will provide a good connection between I-49 south and I-40 east. However, to go from NB I-49 to WB I-40 or from EB I-40 to SB I-49, it will take quite a bit of backtracking.

Are you saying the planned modification of the I-40/I-49 interchange in Alma is going to be missing a couple of ramps? Are there any schematics or other diagrams available?

Just remembered this question, and ARDOT does still have the diagrams for the planned interchange.

https://www.ardot.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/2018-05-01_Public-Meeting-I49-Concept-Exhibits_FINAL-DRAFT-4_I-40.pdf (https://www.ardot.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/2018-05-01_Public-Meeting-I49-Concept-Exhibits_FINAL-DRAFT-4_I-40.pdf)

The mainline I-49 overpasses are WAY up at the top of the stack.

Edit:  They are also planning on deleting the current I-49S->I-40W offramp and replacing.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on January 11, 2022, 01:50:20 PM
So the finished interchange will be a 4-level directional stack. Good. A directional stack in that location is not really an extravagance considering two of the existing flyover ramps will remain.

I think it does make sense to replace the existing SB I-49 to WB I-40 ramp with a new ramp that will join with a new NB I-49 to WB I-40 flyover ramp. That will reduce any merge conflicts with I-49 traffic entering WB I-40.

Quote from: MikieTimT
The mainline I-49 overpasses are WAY up at the top of the stack.

In retro-fitting an existing Y interchange into a full stack they have don't have any other choice. What else could they do? Tunnel the main lanes of I-49 under I-40?

It's not necessarily a bad thing to place the main lanes of one highway at the top level of a 4-level directional stack interchange. Others exist that have done so. the I-45/I-30 interchange in Dallas is one example. The Bush Turnpike and US-75 in Plano is another. The US-101/CA-110 interchange in downtown LA is old but iconic.

Anyway, when the I-40/I-49 interchange is completed it will no doubt be used a lot more by motorists coming up I-49 and going into Oklahoma as opposed to leaving I-49 South of Fort Smith and taking other roads to reach I-40 in Salisaw. There are 7 traffic signals along the 4.5 mile stretch of US-71 between the future I-49/US-71 interchange and I-540. Once I-540 enters Oklahoma, turning into US-271, there is at least a couple more traffic signals along the way in towns like Spiro. Taking I-49 up to Alma to pick up I-40 might indeed involve some back-tracking to go West into Oklahoma. But that's going to be a lot faster than any alternatives.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: yakra on January 11, 2022, 03:20:40 PM
https://www.ardot.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/2018-05-01_Public-Meeting-I49-Concept-Exhibits_FINAL-DRAFT-4_I-40.pdf
Am I missing something? I don't see any missing ramps in the diagram.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Wayward Memphian on January 11, 2022, 03:21:26 PM
Maybe this will light a fire under OK to finish US 75/US 69:bigass:
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on January 11, 2022, 04:16:20 PM
Maybe this will light a fire under OK to finish US 75/US 69:bigass:

Sure would be nice if they would, at least up to I-40 in our lifetimes.  Arkansas is showing how it gets done in the modern era.  It does take a tax bump to pull it off, but it's an investment in yourself at the end of the day.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on January 11, 2022, 04:17:47 PM
https://www.ardot.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/2018-05-01_Public-Meeting-I49-Concept-Exhibits_FINAL-DRAFT-4_I-40.pdf
Am I missing something? I don't see any missing ramps in the diagram.

None as far I can see either.  Looks like a fully-formed 2 interstate stack.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: The Ghostbuster on January 11, 2022, 04:37:08 PM
Now that the Bella Vista Bypass is completed, it is high time the old Interstate 540 exit numbers 20-88 become Interstate 49 exit numbers 206-274!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on January 11, 2022, 04:44:08 PM
So the finished interchange will be a 4-level directional stack. Good. A directional stack in that location is not really an extravagance considering two of the existing flyover ramps will remain.

I think it does make sense to replace the existing SB I-49 to WB I-40 ramp with a new ramp that will join with a new NB I-49 to WB I-40 flyover ramp. That will reduce any merge conflicts with I-49 traffic entering WB I-40.

Quote from: MikieTimT
The mainline I-49 overpasses are WAY up at the top of the stack.

In retro-fitting an existing Y interchange into a full stack they have don't have any other choice. What else could they do? Tunnel the main lanes of I-49 under I-40?

It's not necessarily a bad thing to place the main lanes of one highway at the top level of a 4-level directional stack interchange. Others exist that have done so. the I-45/I-30 interchange in Dallas is one example. The Bush Turnpike and US-75 in Plano is another. The US-101/CA-110 interchange in downtown LA is old but iconic.

Anyway, when the I-40/I-49 interchange is completed it will no doubt be used a lot more by motorists coming up I-49 and going into Oklahoma as opposed to leaving I-49 South of Fort Smith and taking other roads to reach I-40 in Salisaw. There are 7 traffic signals along the 4.5 mile stretch of US-71 between the future I-49/US-71 interchange and I-540. Once I-540 enters Oklahoma, turning into US-271, there is at least a couple more traffic signals along the way in towns like Spiro. Taking I-49 up to Alma to pick up I-40 might indeed involve some back-tracking to go West into Oklahoma. But that's going to be a lot faster than any alternatives.

No, the mainlines of I-49 on top of the stack make the most sense since they also must cross over US-64 and UP RR in short succession as there isn't room for an interchange with US-64 anyway, nor is it very far to bump east 1 exit on I-40 or 5 miles on I-40 west to I-540 and get there anyway.

That segment of US-71 between I-49 and I-540 would make for a decent short 3di with frontage roads.  Probably would only take 4-5 overpasses and frontage roads to make it happen.  I prefer going to Dallas using I-40/I-540/US-271/OK-112/US-271/OK-1/OK-2/OK-43 around Sardis Lake and then US-69/US-75 for mileage/scenic reasons, given a 3 minute difference in time between taking US-69 all the way to I-40 and over.  Plus my wife is Asian and we inevitably end up stopping on Midland Ave. in Ft. Smith and stock up cheap Asian ingredients while coming back through.  So, I'd probably rarely use it myself as I-540 takes me closer to downtown there, but once I-49 goes south and intersects AR-10, a new shortcut opens up to OK-112 over OK-120 that's really scenic as well and cuts off Pocola and Ft. Smith altogether.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on January 11, 2022, 04:45:17 PM
Now that the Bella Vista Bypass is completed, it is high time the old Interstate 540 exit numbers 20-88 become Interstate 49 exit numbers 206-274!

I never did get a response from ARDOT when I posed that same statement.  Maybe they're waiting for the missing link...
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on January 12, 2022, 09:55:25 AM
Here is the proposed schematic for the section with the I-49 Arkansas River Bridge.  Since this was dated prior to the Great Arkansas River Flood of 2019, I wonder about how current the profile charts are that show the distance above the current ground level now that we've had a new high water mark in the area.

https://www.ardot.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/2018-05-01_I49-Schematic_DRAFT2_SpringHillPark-GunClubRoad.pdf (https://www.ardot.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/2018-05-01_I49-Schematic_DRAFT2_SpringHillPark-GunClubRoad.pdf)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: CtrlAltDel on January 12, 2022, 12:30:07 PM
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.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: abqtraveler on January 12, 2022, 12:36:56 PM
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.
Maybe it was Breast Cancer Awareness Month when they submitted the bridge designs that called for the girders to be painted hot pink. :-D
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on January 12, 2022, 12:45:52 PM
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.
Maybe it was Breast Cancer Awareness Month when they submitted the bridge designs that called for the girders to be painted hot pink. :-D

Maybe it was the cheapest color for that line item at bid time!  Arkansas isn't exactly famous for health consciousness!  At least they painted the steel.  Now the graffitti artists have to figure out how to do their manly signage and compensate for the effeminate base color.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on January 12, 2022, 12:50:17 PM
Here's the I-40/I-49 interchange elevation profile.  Looks like the I-49 mainline overpass is over 90 ft. above I-40 mainline elevation, so that's a good ways up.  Should be a great view of the area and river southward from up there.

https://www.ardot.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/2018-05-01_I49-Schematic_DRAFT7_I-40.pdf (https://www.ardot.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/2018-05-01_I49-Schematic_DRAFT7_I-40.pdf)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on January 12, 2022, 04:19:40 PM
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/ (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.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on January 13, 2022, 01:18:14 AM
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/ (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.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: abqtraveler on January 13, 2022, 02:19:45 PM
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/ (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?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Plutonic Panda on January 13, 2022, 03:31:56 PM
Wait so does that mean major construction won’t happen until 24/25 or they mean substantial completion by then?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sprjus4 on January 13, 2022, 03:50:24 PM
Wait so does that mean major construction won’t happen until 24/25 or they mean substantial completion by then?
The latter.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Plutonic Panda on January 13, 2022, 03:53:47 PM
Wait 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?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sprjus4 on January 13, 2022, 04:28:00 PM
Wait 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.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Plutonic Panda on January 13, 2022, 04:33:57 PM
Wait 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.
Ah, that is a bummer then.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on January 13, 2022, 06:46:35 PM
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.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Plutonic Panda on January 13, 2022, 07:12:01 PM
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.
Sorry I didn’t look into it, how much is Arkansas getting from the infrastructure bill?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on January 13, 2022, 09:09:26 PM
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.
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, $278M

I think those numbers are over a 5 year window.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Plutonic Panda on January 13, 2022, 09:25:08 PM
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.
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, $278M

I think those numbers are over a 5 year window.
Any word on where those funds are going? Or I’m guessing ARDOT still hasn’t made public any plans.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on January 13, 2022, 11:22:22 PM
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/ (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.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on January 14, 2022, 09:10:49 AM
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/ (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.

Land prices in the area aren't going to be the issue.  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.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on January 14, 2022, 11:08:18 AM
The cuts they make into hill sides will be fairly modest, only as deep as they need to be keep grades at 6% or less and curve geometry fast enough for Interstate speeds. It's just going to be a "facelift" for the existing US-71 highway. I-49 from Mansfield down to Mena is going to be pretty curvy, particularly the "S" shape path from Y City down to Acorn. If the project was being built in China or even Japan several tunnels would be involved. Not here.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on January 14, 2022, 08:31:40 PM
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.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on January 14, 2022, 09:45:58 PM
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.

It's really not that bad, just a rather long climb and drop and looks bad on the map.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: edwaleni on January 15, 2022, 11:29:16 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_Ridge (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Umtanum_Ridge)

Mesocene era mountains that predate the Cascades.

Drive I-82 from Yakima to Ellensburg as a reference.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on January 15, 2022, 12:38:03 PM
  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_Ridge (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Umtanum_Ridge)

Mesocene era mountains that predate the Cascades.

Drive I-82 from Yakima to Ellensburg as a reference.

I stand corrected and thanks for the insight!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on January 15, 2022, 12:46:55 PM
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=410633771
Looks 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.

Well, I drove the BVB yesterday to take care of a couple of clinics in Bella Vista and Gravette yesterday.  I noticed something different this trip than the last one a couple of weeks ago.

Good news:  They have changed out some exit numbers as a result of opening the new stretch.

Bad news:  ARDOT doubled-down on the dumb and clearly didn't bother to read the email I sent them that they didn't respond to about correcting mile markers and exit numbers north of Alma and south of Gravette.  The southern Gravette exit I took to get to Bella Vista that was Exit 284 has become........Exit 99.  I'm sure they changed the other 2 exits as well if they changed everything.  It's clear that they have no intention to correct the mileages to account for the gaps, which means they don't expect to fill them in any sort of timely manner.  Punting to take the pressure off, I guess.  Either that, or they're not confident that the route is set in stone.  Regardless, it's going to make things difficult marketing-wise for the businesses off the exit when it comes time to get it right.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: edwaleni on January 16, 2022, 01:00:03 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_Ridge (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Umtanum_Ridge)

Mesocene era mountains that predate the Cascades.

Drive I-82 from Yakima to Ellensburg as a reference.

I stand corrected and thanks for the insight!

No worries, I think there are only 5 E/W ranges in all the Lower 48.  It's kind of like a river flowing north as well. Just not common.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on January 16, 2022, 01:23:13 PM
  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_Ridge (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Umtanum_Ridge)

Mesocene era mountains that predate the Cascades.

Drive I-82 from Yakima to Ellensburg as a reference.

I stand corrected and thanks for the insight!

No worries, I think there are only 5 E/W ranges in all the Lower 48.  It's kind of like a river flowing north as well. Just not common.

We've got a few of those too.  White, Illinois, and Kings Rivers all go north out of the Boston Mtns. before emptying into a lake that goes east from there, or swinging back south after going west.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: mvak36 on January 16, 2022, 10:28:33 PM
  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_Ridge (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Umtanum_Ridge)

Mesocene era mountains that predate the Cascades.

Drive I-82 from Yakima to Ellensburg as a reference.

I stand corrected and thanks for the insight!

No worries, I think there are only 5 E/W ranges in all the Lower 48.  It's kind of like a river flowing north as well. Just not common.

We've got a few of those too.  White, Illinois, and Kings Rivers all go north out of the Boston Mtns. before emptying into a lake that goes east from there, or swinging back south after going west.

I know this one flows north up into Canada: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_River_of_the_North
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Tomahawkin on January 17, 2022, 05:48:12 AM
Once 49 is completed? Does anyone think that people will move to the west central part of the state? That area from I have seen looks very scenic, and could be a destination area for retirees? I know many people moved to NWA From California and Texas because the cost of living was 50 percent less in NWA...
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bwana39 on January 17, 2022, 08:49:58 AM
Once 49 is completed? Does anyone think that people will move to the west central part of the state? That area from I have seen looks very scenic, and could be a destination area for retirees? I know many people moved to NWA From California and Texas because the cost of living was 50 percent less in NWA...

I will give you this. There are lots of people retiring to Northeast Texas but it seems they are from DFW not really from out of the larger region. The ones from California are moving to DFW and to retirement communities not to rural areas.  Holly Lake Ranch and Hot Springs Village are the kinds of places they want. Even the Dallas folks are afraid of Bears and the darkness. There are no bears in NE Texas and my thought on the darkness is if I can see them they can see me. I keep all of my outside lighting off after bedtime. I like the tranquility.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Tomahawkin on January 17, 2022, 09:45:20 AM
Good point. I forgot about that area of Texas along IH-30 in terms of people moving there. If  Walmart or Amazon adds a facility in-between Ft Smith and Texarkana. People will move there. Not to mention many people from California and the west coast who lose their homes to wildfires/mudslides flock to rural areas of Arkansas because houses are a hell of a lot cheaper...
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on January 17, 2022, 11:43:18 AM
Good point. I forgot about that area of Texas along IH-30 in terms of people moving there. If  Walmart or Amazon adds a facility in-between Ft Smith and Texarkana. People will move there. Not to mention many people from California and the west coast who lose their homes to wildfires/mudslides flock to rural areas of Arkansas because houses are a hell of a lot cheaper...

The environmental types from California won't like it here.  We prescribe burn our forests like the Native Americans did to keep the wildfire fuel down and our environmental laws are much more lax than theirs.  Tourism is a big deal here, so for the most part, we don't overharvest the resources here, but we don't let things get in the way of job creation.  As a result, we'd possibly draw a certain type of fed-up west coast type that's been politically marginalized for a very long time, but the rest would only feel at home in Fayetteville proper.  Once you get south of Greenwood and north of DeQueen on US-71, it gets backwoods in a hurry.  I grew up in the area and can appreciate it for the lifestyle it affords, but you really gotta want to escape people to want to settle in that area.  In other words, you'd likely want to enjoy the national forest lands and national trails, but likely not want to move there.  There are no jobs that aren't timber or agricultural, and neither Amazon nor Wal-Mart is going to put anything north of Texarkana or south of Chaffee Crossing in our lifetimes for warehousing/distribution.  The push to fill the I-49 gap will likely come once the Super-2 AR-549 is almost complete and drawing probably twice the traffic that the current US-71 is.  The hope is that Arkansas gets more INFRA or BUILD type grants to put toward the project once the feds see the state making concrete progress mostly on the back of the continuation of the 0.5 cent sales tax proceeds.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Plutonic Panda on January 17, 2022, 01:08:39 PM
Good point. I forgot about that area of Texas along IH-30 in terms of people moving there. If  Walmart or Amazon adds a facility in-between Ft Smith and Texarkana. People will move there. Not to mention many people from California and the west coast who lose their homes to wildfires/mudslides flock to rural areas of Arkansas because houses are a hell of a lot cheaper...

The environmental types from California won't like it here.  We prescribe burn our forests like the Native Americans did to keep the wildfire fuel down and our environmental laws are much more lax than theirs.
California is so dumb for not doing this.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Rothman on January 17, 2022, 01:13:42 PM
Good point. I forgot about that area of Texas along IH-30 in terms of people moving there. If  Walmart or Amazon adds a facility in-between Ft Smith and Texarkana. People will move there. Not to mention many people from California and the west coast who lose their homes to wildfires/mudslides flock to rural areas of Arkansas because houses are a hell of a lot cheaper...

The environmental types from California won't like it here.  We prescribe burn our forests like the Native Americans did to keep the wildfire fuel down and our environmental laws are much more lax than theirs.
California is so dumb for not doing this.
Do they not?

https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/prescribed-burning
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Plutonic Panda on January 17, 2022, 01:14:49 PM
Good point. I forgot about that area of Texas along IH-30 in terms of people moving there. If  Walmart or Amazon adds a facility in-between Ft Smith and Texarkana. People will move there. Not to mention many people from California and the west coast who lose their homes to wildfires/mudslides flock to rural areas of Arkansas because houses are a hell of a lot cheaper...

The environmental types from California won't like it here.  We prescribe burn our forests like the Native Americans did to keep the wildfire fuel down and our environmental laws are much more lax than theirs.
California is so dumb for not doing this.
Do they not?

https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/prescribed-burning
Interesting. I've never seen California do it so I suspect it's rare. I always try and keep up with this stuff so thanks for the link. I will check it out.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on January 17, 2022, 01:41:03 PM
Good point. I forgot about that area of Texas along IH-30 in terms of people moving there. If  Walmart or Amazon adds a facility in-between Ft Smith and Texarkana. People will move there. Not to mention many people from California and the west coast who lose their homes to wildfires/mudslides flock to rural areas of Arkansas because houses are a hell of a lot cheaper...

The environmental types from California won't like it here.  We prescribe burn our forests like the Native Americans did to keep the wildfire fuel down and our environmental laws are much more lax than theirs.
California is so dumb for not doing this.
Do they not?

https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/prescribed-burning

It may be in the books as a valid forestry management tool, but that doesn't mean that it gets employed sufficiently to address the issue of fuel surplus on the forest floors.

In Arkansas, there's wind and humidity constraints that limit the windows that it's used, but there's no mechanism that I know of other than that where the U.S. Forestry Service has any other constraints, including public feedback of any kind.  They'll issue advisories to the local news media, but then it just happens.  You'll see a plume of smoke for a couple of days, then it's over.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Plutonic Panda on January 17, 2022, 01:48:40 PM
Good point. I forgot about that area of Texas along IH-30 in terms of people moving there. If  Walmart or Amazon adds a facility in-between Ft Smith and Texarkana. People will move there. Not to mention many people from California and the west coast who lose their homes to wildfires/mudslides flock to rural areas of Arkansas because houses are a hell of a lot cheaper...

The environmental types from California won't like it here.  We prescribe burn our forests like the Native Americans did to keep the wildfire fuel down and our environmental laws are much more lax than theirs.
California is so dumb for not doing this.
Do they not?

https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/prescribed-burning

It may be in the books as a valid forestry management tool, but that doesn't mean that it gets employed sufficiently to address the issue of fuel surplus on the forest floors.

This is what I think as well.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Arkansastravelguy on January 20, 2022, 04:17:17 PM
I noticed the numbers were changed as well. I imagine we wont see 49 completed in my lifetime


iPhone
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bwana39 on January 21, 2022, 12:06:29 AM
I noticed the numbers were changed as well. I imagine we wont see 49 completed in my lifetime


iPhone

What is this in reply of? I need some context....
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on January 21, 2022, 10:14:19 AM
I noticed the numbers were changed as well. I imagine we wont see 49 completed in my lifetime


iPhone

What is this in reply of? I need some context....

https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3324.msg2698027#msg2698027 (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3324.msg2698027#msg2698027)

And in confirmation of my suspicion, I took the entire BVB to Joplin on the way to Cabool, MO to pick up a topper for my truck, and sure enough, there is no longer any I-49 exit in Arkansas greater than 105 now.  But we do have the desirable state of having multiple mile markers that are now duplicates in the range of 20-42!  Can't for the life of me reconcile why they did this.  Now AR-549 from US-71 to AR-22 stands out like a sore thumb of sensibility!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: yakra on January 22, 2022, 07:09:07 PM
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3324.msg2698027#msg2698027 (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3324.msg2698027#msg2698027)

And in confirmation of my suspicion, I took the entire BVB to Joplin on the way to Cabool, MO to pick up a topper for my truck, and sure enough, there is no longer any I-49 exit in Arkansas greater than 105 now.  But we do have the desirable state of having multiple mile markers that are now duplicates in the range of 20-42!  Can't for the life of me reconcile why they did this.  Now AR-549 from US-71 to AR-22 stands out like a sore thumb of sensibility!
Your linked post mentions 284 -> 99. What are the new numbers for 287 & 289?
I assume the significance of 105 is that that's the mile number at the Missouri line?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on January 22, 2022, 11:56:52 PM
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3324.msg2698027#msg2698027 (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3324.msg2698027#msg2698027)

And in confirmation of my suspicion, I took the entire BVB to Joplin on the way to Cabool, MO to pick up a topper for my truck, and sure enough, there is no longer any I-49 exit in Arkansas greater than 105 now.  But we do have the desirable state of having multiple mile markers that are now duplicates in the range of 20-42!  Can't for the life of me reconcile why they did this.  Now AR-549 from US-71 to AR-22 stands out like a sore thumb of sensibility!
Your linked post mentions 284 -> 99. What are the new number for 287 & 289?
I assume the significance of 105 is that that's the mile number at the Missouri line?
Yes it's stupid, but count on Arkansas to do the right thing only after all other alternatives have failed.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Tomahawkin on January 23, 2022, 08:59:07 PM
Im catching up on the posts about 49 and the building from Ft Smith to Texarkana? What does a super 2 road mean in the building process? Im guessing its a two lane road with passing lanes added every 15 to 20 milies? or adding lanes near towns along the route? While the land will be cleared for another 2 lane road to be finished at a later date?

If Im right in guessing, Most of IH 22 in Alabama and Mississippi was done in the same order through similiar terrain. Problem is that 220 mile segment took 25+ years to complete
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sprjus4 on January 23, 2022, 09:00:58 PM
Yes, similar to how the Belle Vista Bypass was done, or the southern segments of AR-530 currently.

A new location, two lane freeway with the grading for a parallel roadway to complete a full 4 lane design.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on January 23, 2022, 10:44:10 PM
Even a Super-2 connecting the completed ends of I-49 / AR 549 would be preferable to the current US 71.

From point to point, taking US 71 from the south end of AR 549 near Greenwood to the north end of I-49 at the state line near Texarkana is 164 miles, or 3 hours and 5 minutes. A completed Super-2 between the two points (based on projected exit numbers) would cut the distance to 145 miles and the drive time to about 2 hours, 14 minutes (even assuming a 65 mph speed limit). Something is better than nothing.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Rick Powell on January 23, 2022, 10:55:49 PM
Im catching up on the posts about 49 and the building from Ft Smith to Texarkana? What does a super 2 road mean in the building process? Im guessing its a two lane road with passing lanes added every 15 to 20 milies? or adding lanes near towns along the route? While the land will be cleared for another 2 lane road to be finished at a later date?
Super 2s are often built as one side of a future 4 lane road, but with two way traffic on the two interim lanes. Often it is built to interstate standards with no at-grade crossings and interchange ramps where entrances and exits are needed. Sometimes at grade intersections and entrances are allowed, but this means they will need to be removed in the future if the roadway is to attain “interstate”  status.

Often the entire future right of way is bought at once, if the plan is to expand to 4-lanes in the future. Sometimes the unbuilt lanes are cleared and graded so that pavement can be placed on them when funding is available, but sometimes the land is untouched until when/if the future lanes are constructed.

Passing lanes, etc are not a necessary feature of Super 2s but could be installed, especially if the road is to remain a Super 2 for a few decades. May depend on whether the Super 2 is planned as an eventual 4-lane or not.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on January 24, 2022, 01:27:57 AM
My guess is any Super-2 of I-49 that gets built will be wide enough to accommodate without paved shoulders passing lanes, which will likely be needed because of the terrain in some locations. If the Super-2 is built to future interstate specs, it should be at least 38 feet wide throughout (2x 12-foot lanes, a 10-foot outside shoulder and a 4-foot inside shoulder).
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on January 24, 2022, 02:31:48 PM
Im catching up on the posts about 49 and the building from Ft Smith to Texarkana? What does a super 2 road mean in the building process? Im guessing its a two lane road with passing lanes added every 15 to 20 milies? or adding lanes near towns along the route? While the land will be cleared for another 2 lane road to be finished at a later date?

If Im right in guessing, Most of IH 22 in Alabama and Mississippi was done in the same order through similiar terrain. Problem is that 220 mile segment took 25+ years to complete

My guess is they'll do it like AR-530 south of Pine Bluff initially.  ROW purchased and utilities moved as needed with dirt work done for the initial 2 lanes of carriageway with the elevation gradients and curve radii done to interstate specifications.  The 2 lanes will have passing zones (improved sightlines due to interstate-grade geometry makes them both more numerous and longer in length generally), but likely no climb lanes for passing, unless the ultimate interstate will have them as generally the Super-2 makes up the carriageway for one of the lane sets, with the dirtwork, bridges, etc. done for the 2nd set of lanes when funds come to fruition.  AR-549's Super-2 for the BVB had grade separation done from the get-go, which made the 2nd set of lanes much quicker as only bridging over roads without exits and over creeks were necessary, otherwise, it was just dirtwork, roadbed building, and paving between the overpasses, which already had the 2nd carriageway completed between the exit and entrance ramps under the overpasses as part of the exit-building in the initial Super-2 construction.  Then, it was just minor work of restriping the initial Super-2 to eliminate the lines constraining passing, put the inside shoulder yellow line, removal of the crossovers for exit/entrance ramps to the Super-2 across the median with regrading, and signage movement/deployment.  My guess is they'll do it like AR-530 due to funding constraints though with at-grade intersections of the crossroads and limit access between the crossroads to discourage development along the new road, other than near where there will ultimately be future exits.  The part that took longest for the BVB going from Super-2 to full I-49 after funding was secured for Missouri's portion was the reworking of the roundabout at Bentonville/Bella Vista/US-71 into a SPUI exit with the mainline going over a long overpass.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on January 24, 2022, 02:38:23 PM
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3324.msg2698027#msg2698027 (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3324.msg2698027#msg2698027)

And in confirmation of my suspicion, I took the entire BVB to Joplin on the way to Cabool, MO to pick up a topper for my truck, and sure enough, there is no longer any I-49 exit in Arkansas greater than 105 now.  But we do have the desirable state of having multiple mile markers that are now duplicates in the range of 20-42!  Can't for the life of me reconcile why they did this.  Now AR-549 from US-71 to AR-22 stands out like a sore thumb of sensibility!
Your linked post mentions 284 -> 99. What are the new numbers for 287 & 289?
I assume the significance of 105 is that that's the mile number at the Missouri line?

Exit 287 is now Exit 102.  I haven't actually noticed there being mile markers on the BVB portion yet.  Now Google Maps has bad information yet again for the BVB, and it's not even been open that long.  This is why we can't have nice things...
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: yakra on January 24, 2022, 03:47:01 PM
That leaves us with 289. This could be either:
- 104, because 289-(284-99 or 287-102)
- 103, because 289-(279 (http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=36.414583&lon=-94.221840&zoom=14)-93)
104 looks more likely, being >2 miles from 102.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: The Ghostbuster on January 24, 2022, 04:50:54 PM
Can someone get pictures of these "new exit numbers" along the Bella Vista Bypass that are a continuation of Interstate 540's old numbers instead of based on Interstate 49's ultimate mileage from the Arkansas/Louisiana border? The "Interstate 49 in Arkansas" Wikipedia page still lists the US 71 north, the 2 AR 72 exits, and the CR 34 Rocky Dell Hollow Road interchanges as being numbered Exit 279 (old 93), Exit 284 (old 99), Exit 287 (old 102) and Exit 289 (old 104): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_49_in_Arkansas.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sprjus4 on January 24, 2022, 05:06:39 PM

Not sure if this helps anything.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: The Ghostbuster on January 24, 2022, 05:23:18 PM
The YouTube video (shown too fast for my liking) shows the four exits on the Missouri portion of the Bella Vista Bypass being numbered as Exits 93, 284, 287, and 289, as they were before the bypass was completed. Have those four exits had their numbers changed since then, since 284, 287 and 289 would be the correct numbers for Interstate 49 mileage-based exits?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Tomahawkin on January 24, 2022, 06:42:39 PM
Good Video, Considering all the rock that had to be blasted, now I see why this stretch too so long to build. And thanks to everyone who provided the 411 on the Super 2

Cant wait to drive 49 from Alma to KC this summer
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: wdcrft63 on January 24, 2022, 07:54:27 PM
I noticed the numbers were changed as well. I imagine we wont see 49 completed in my lifetime


iPhone
Somebody who knows, is there a federal or AASHTO standard for how exit numbers are assigned?

What is this in reply of? I need some context....

https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3324.msg2698027#msg2698027 (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3324.msg2698027#msg2698027)

And in confirmation of my suspicion, I took the entire BVB to Joplin on the way to Cabool, MO to pick up a topper for my truck, and sure enough, there is no longer any I-49 exit in Arkansas greater than 105 now.  But we do have the desirable state of having multiple mile markers that are now duplicates in the range of 20-42!  Can't for the life of me reconcile why they did this.  Now AR-549 from US-71 to AR-22 stands out like a sore thumb of sensibility!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: SkyPesos on January 24, 2022, 08:13:08 PM
If the exits got renumbered, that's definitely a big step backwards imo. The exits that should be renumbered are the ones between I-40 and Bella Vista that are still using old I-540's mileage.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on January 24, 2022, 10:08:25 PM
They did get renumbered in the last couple of weeks.  I'll take some dashboard video from Exit 93 onward to the northern US-71 junction in MO and get it uploaded to YouTube at some point in the next week.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sprjus4 on January 25, 2022, 01:12:00 AM
What was the point of renumbering?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on January 25, 2022, 04:40:48 PM
What was the point of renumbering?

I find it best not to attempt to try to rationalize the irrational.  If I were guessing, someone got some flack for the 180+ mile jump in the 6 miles from Bentonville/Bella Vista to the first Gravette exit and went with the least amount of effort to stop the grumbling until they bridge the Arkansas River between Barling and Alma.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on January 25, 2022, 04:54:02 PM
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3324.msg2698027#msg2698027 (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3324.msg2698027#msg2698027)

And in confirmation of my suspicion, I took the entire BVB to Joplin on the way to Cabool, MO to pick up a topper for my truck, and sure enough, there is no longer any I-49 exit in Arkansas greater than 105 now.  But we do have the desirable state of having multiple mile markers that are now duplicates in the range of 20-42!  Can't for the life of me reconcile why they did this.  Now AR-549 from US-71 to AR-22 stands out like a sore thumb of sensibility!
Your linked post mentions 284 -> 99. What are the new numbers for 287 & 289?
I assume the significance of 105 is that that's the mile number at the Missouri line?

Exit 287 is now Exit 102.  I haven't actually noticed there being mile markers on the BVB portion yet.  Now Google Maps has bad information yet again for the BVB, and it's not even been open that long.  This is why we can't have nice things...

Drove it again today.  There are no mile markers yet for the Arkansas portion of the BVB.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on January 25, 2022, 05:14:01 PM
Here's a pair of videos I shot from my smartphone today of the Bella Vista Bypass complete with the new?/old? exit numbers from Gravette northward.

Northbound from south of Exit 93

Southbound from Exit 5

Shot at 5x speed.  You can adjust speed settings within YouTube to 0.25 speed if you're trying to catch exit numbers.

I also recommend bumping up to 1080p in the settings if your Auto resolution looks crappy.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: abqtraveler on January 25, 2022, 06:31:37 PM
Here's a pair of videos I shot from my smartphone today of the Bella Vista Bypass complete with the new?/old? exit numbers from Gravette northward.

Northbound from south of Exit 93

Southbound from Exit 5

Shot at 5x speed.  You can adjust speed settings within YouTube to 0.25 speed if you're trying to catch exit numbers.

I also recommend bumping up to 1080p in the settings if your Auto resolution looks crappy.
It makes no sense to continue the old I-540 exit numbering scheme along the Arkansas side of the BVB. Actually, I'm surprised the FHWA is letting Arkansas get away with that. When the first section of the I-69 extension in Indiana opened in 2012, I recall the FHWA required INDOT to renumber exits on the original Indy to Michigan section of I-69 (they made it easy and just added 200 to the existing exit numbers).
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: CoolAngrybirdsrio4 on January 26, 2022, 01:46:40 AM
Here's a pair of videos I shot from my smartphone today of the Bella Vista Bypass complete with the new?/old? exit numbers from Gravette northward.

Northbound from south of Exit 93

Southbound from Exit 5

Shot at 5x speed.  You can adjust speed settings within YouTube to 0.25 speed if you're trying to catch exit numbers.

I also recommend bumping up to 1080p in the settings if your Auto resolution looks crappy.
It makes no sense to continue the old I-540 exit numbering scheme along the Arkansas side of the BVB. Actually, I'm surprised the FHWA is letting Arkansas get away with that. When the first section of the I-69 extension in Indiana opened in 2012, I recall the FHWA required INDOT to renumber exits on the original Indy to Michigan section of I-69 (they made it easy and just added 200 to the existing exit numbers).

Interesting   :-/
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on January 26, 2022, 05:22:49 AM
It makes no sense to continue the old I-540 exit numbering scheme along the Arkansas side of the BVB. Actually, I'm surprised the FHWA is letting Arkansas get away with that. When the first section of the I-69 extension in Indiana opened in 2012, I recall the FHWA required INDOT to renumber exits on the original Indy to Michigan section of I-69 (they made it easy and just added 200 to the existing exit numbers).

I wonder if FHWA even knows at this point.  It was just changed days ago, so Covid-induced staffing issues at FHWA could possibly hamper them keeping up with DOTs doing arbitrary things like this that affect several sectors, like marketing for area businesses and mapping systems.  Why couldn't they have just gone ahead and changed mile markers and exits 20-93 like they will eventually have to do anyway, especially once they connect Alma to Barling?  Was it that difficult or expensive a project to do at this point in time?  Are they going to go back and introduce negative mile markers and exits on the Chaffee Crossing section of Future I-49/AR-549 when the river valley is crossed? :-D
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on January 26, 2022, 11:55:10 AM
I emailed ARDOT's Public Information Officer asking about the exit/mile marker numbering system for the northern I-49 segment.  We'll see if I get a response or forwarded to whoever else might shed some light on the situation.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: vdeane on January 26, 2022, 12:51:52 PM
It makes no sense to continue the old I-540 exit numbering scheme along the Arkansas side of the BVB. Actually, I'm surprised the FHWA is letting Arkansas get away with that. When the first section of the I-69 extension in Indiana opened in 2012, I recall the FHWA required INDOT to renumber exits on the original Indy to Michigan section of I-69 (they made it easy and just added 200 to the existing exit numbers).

I wonder if FHWA even knows at this point.  It was just changed days ago, so Covid-induced staffing issues at FHWA could possibly hamper them keeping up with DOTs doing arbitrary things like this that affect several sectors, like marketing for area businesses and mapping systems.  Why couldn't they have just gone ahead and changed mile markers and exits 20-93 like they will eventually have to do anyway, especially once they connect Alma to Barling?  Was it that difficult or expensive a project to do at this point in time?  Are they going to go back and introduce negative mile markers and exits on the Chaffee Crossing section of Future I-49/AR-549 when the river valley is crossed? :-D
Maybe they'll just count down from 20... the US 71 interchange is right around where it would hit 0.

(let's hope, meanwhile, that ARDOT doesn't get any ideas from this comment...)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: abqtraveler on January 26, 2022, 01:10:40 PM
It makes no sense to continue the old I-540 exit numbering scheme along the Arkansas side of the BVB. Actually, I'm surprised the FHWA is letting Arkansas get away with that. When the first section of the I-69 extension in Indiana opened in 2012, I recall the FHWA required INDOT to renumber exits on the original Indy to Michigan section of I-69 (they made it easy and just added 200 to the existing exit numbers).

I wonder if FHWA even knows at this point.  It was just changed days ago, so Covid-induced staffing issues at FHWA could possibly hamper them keeping up with DOTs doing arbitrary things like this that affect several sectors, like marketing for area businesses and mapping systems.  Why couldn't they have just gone ahead and changed mile markers and exits 20-93 like they will eventually have to do anyway, especially once they connect Alma to Barling?  Was it that difficult or expensive a project to do at this point in time?  Are they going to go back and introduce negative mile markers and exits on the Chaffee Crossing section of Future I-49/AR-549 when the river valley is crossed? :-D
Maybe they'll just count down from 20... the US 71 interchange is right around where it would hit 0.

(let's hope, meanwhile, that ARDOT doesn't get any ideas from this comment...)
When they finish Arkansas River Bridge and connecting the Barling segment to I-40 will be right around the time they plan to be constructing at least the first two lanes between Barling and Y City, which would add another 50 miles to what's already there now. At some point they're going to have to address the exit numbers on the Alma to Missouri section.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on January 27, 2022, 06:40:40 PM

When they finish Arkansas River Bridge and connecting the Barling segment to I-40 will be right around the time they plan to be constructing at least the first two lanes between Barling and Y City, which would add another 50 miles to what's already there now. At some point they're going to have to address the exit numbers on the Alma to Missouri section.

I would have thought ARDOT would have addressed this by now. I'm curious what their reasoning is.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: CoolAngrybirdsrio4 on January 27, 2022, 09:01:45 PM
It makes no sense to continue the old I-540 exit numbering scheme along the Arkansas side of the BVB. Actually, I'm surprised the FHWA is letting Arkansas get away with that. When the first section of the I-69 extension in Indiana opened in 2012, I recall the FHWA required INDOT to renumber exits on the original Indy to Michigan section of I-69 (they made it easy and just added 200 to the existing exit numbers).

I wonder if FHWA even knows at this point.  It was just changed days ago, so Covid-induced staffing issues at FHWA could possibly hamper them keeping up with DOTs doing arbitrary things like this that affect several sectors, like marketing for area businesses and mapping systems.  Why couldn't they have just gone ahead and changed mile markers and exits 20-93 like they will eventually have to do anyway, especially once they connect Alma to Barling?  Was it that difficult or expensive a project to do at this point in time?  Are they going to go back and introduce negative mile markers and exits on the Chaffee Crossing section of Future I-49/AR-549 when the river valley is crossed? :-D
Maybe they'll just count down from 20... the US 71 interchange is right around where it would hit 0.

(let's hope, meanwhile, that ARDOT doesn't get any ideas from this comment...)
When they finish Arkansas River Bridge and connecting the Barling segment to I-40 will be right around the time they plan to be constructing at least the first two lanes between Barling and Y City, which would add another 50 miles to what's already there now. At some point they're going to have to address the exit numbers on the Alma to Missouri section.

Taking their sweet time as usual? :D
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on January 27, 2022, 09:39:11 PM
It makes no sense to continue the old I-540 exit numbering scheme along the Arkansas side of the BVB. Actually, I'm surprised the FHWA is letting Arkansas get away with that. When the first section of the I-69 extension in Indiana opened in 2012, I recall the FHWA required INDOT to renumber exits on the original Indy to Michigan section of I-69 (they made it easy and just added 200 to the existing exit numbers).

I wonder if FHWA even knows at this point.  It was just changed days ago, so Covid-induced staffing issues at FHWA could possibly hamper them keeping up with DOTs doing arbitrary things like this that affect several sectors, like marketing for area businesses and mapping systems.  Why couldn't they have just gone ahead and changed mile markers and exits 20-93 like they will eventually have to do anyway, especially once they connect Alma to Barling?  Was it that difficult or expensive a project to do at this point in time?  Are they going to go back and introduce negative mile markers and exits on the Chaffee Crossing section of Future I-49/AR-549 when the river valley is crossed? :-D
Maybe they'll just count down from 20... the US 71 interchange is right around where it would hit 0.

(let's hope, meanwhile, that ARDOT doesn't get any ideas from this comment...)
When they finish Arkansas River Bridge and connecting the Barling segment to I-40 will be right around the time they plan to be constructing at least the first two lanes between Barling and Y City, which would add another 50 miles to what's already there now. At some point they're going to have to address the exit numbers on the Alma to Missouri section.

Taking their sweet time as usual? :D

Oh, they'll punt as long as possible on this now that they've renumbered the northern 3 exits.  Funky having the Chaffee Crossing exits being 187 to 193 with Alma to Rocky Dell Hollow Rd. being 20 to 104.  They'll have to address it before they'll get approved to change the Chaffee Crossing portion of Future I-49 to just I-49 when everything is done in the river valley gap.

Just crickets from the Public Relations Officer with ARDOT on the email I sent about why they chose to make a backwards change.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on January 28, 2022, 03:05:28 PM


Oh, they'll punt as long as possible on this now that they've renumbered the northern 3 exits.  Funky having the Chaffee Crossing exits being 187 to 193 with Alma to Rocky Dell Hollow Rd. being 20 to 104.  They'll have to address it before they'll get approved to change the Chaffee Crossing portion of Future I-49 to just I-49 when everything is done in the river valley gap.

Just crickets from the Public Relations Officer with ARDOT on the email I sent about why they chose to make a backwards change.

Highlands Blvd has the new numbering sequence (or DID)
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51412248224_3feedc52f5_z_d.jpg)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: CoolAngrybirdsrio4 on January 28, 2022, 03:16:26 PM


Oh, they'll punt as long as possible on this now that they've renumbered the northern 3 exits.  Funky having the Chaffee Crossing exits being 187 to 193 with Alma to Rocky Dell Hollow Rd. being 20 to 104.  They'll have to address it before they'll get approved to change the Chaffee Crossing portion of Future I-49 to just I-49 when everything is done in the river valley gap.

Just crickets from the Public Relations Officer with ARDOT on the email I sent about why they chose to make a backwards change.

Highlands Blvd has the new numbering sequence (or DID)
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51412248224_3feedc52f5_z_d.jpg)

Do any of the other exits along the bypass have some of the new numbering?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on January 28, 2022, 04:39:05 PM


Oh, they'll punt as long as possible on this now that they've renumbered the northern 3 exits.  Funky having the Chaffee Crossing exits being 187 to 193 with Alma to Rocky Dell Hollow Rd. being 20 to 104.  They'll have to address it before they'll get approved to change the Chaffee Crossing portion of Future I-49 to just I-49 when everything is done in the river valley gap.

Just crickets from the Public Relations Officer with ARDOT on the email I sent about why they chose to make a backwards change.

Highlands Blvd has the new numbering sequence (or DID)
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51412248224_3feedc52f5_z_d.jpg)

Do any of the other exits along the bypass have some of the new numbering?

They changed all 3 of the exits on the BVB to 99, 102, and 104 since this picture was taken, unless they've changed them again in the last couple of days.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on January 28, 2022, 04:46:04 PM
 :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:

Great job folks making this thread one of only a couple of handfuls to pass 1M views!!

 :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on January 28, 2022, 04:56:45 PM
For those unable to view the videos I shot 3 days ago for the exits:

(https://i.imgur.com/2sAjJQV.jpg)

(https://i.imgur.com/BIDjwXV.jpg)

(https://i.imgur.com/t1KMN9E.jpg)

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on January 28, 2022, 05:05:06 PM
The only possible reason ARDOT did this was to keep the status quo for the majority of exits as long as possible, even though it is just kicking the can down the road.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on January 30, 2022, 09:41:18 PM
It's unfortunate for any new businesses that are about to break ground on any of those new exits.  They'll have to update exit numbers in their marketing unnecessarily as they were correct to begin with, unless there's some sort of rerouting between Texarkana and Rye Hill that hasn't been publicized.  Texas must really want a northern bypass of Texarkana at some point, otherwise, they wouldn't want to cost share a Red River bridge with Arkansas.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bwana39 on January 30, 2022, 11:20:55 PM
It's unfortunate for any new businesses that are about to break ground on any of those new exits.  They'll have to update exit numbers in their marketing unnecessarily as they were correct to begin with, unless there's some sort of rerouting between Texarkana and Rye Hill that hasn't been publicized.  Texas must really want a northern bypass of Texarkana at some point, otherwise, they wouldn't want to cost share a Red River bridge with Arkansas.

This is nothing new. The SB (the older of the two) US-71 Red River bridge Was paid for with designated federal funds. Texas paid its share of the construction. Arkansas provided "in-kind" funding (primarily the ROW). This bridge does actually land in Texas (more or less).
The newer (NB) bridge is absolutely ALL in Arkansas and TXDOT paid half out of the federal 80/20 funds as did Arkansas and paid the 20% from state funds.

This bridge was promised back before Arkansas unilaterally re-routed I-49 from the west side of town to the east side. You help your poor busted brother in law even after he fails to hold up his end of the bargain.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on February 17, 2022, 11:46:23 AM
Here is the proposed schematic for the section with the I-49 Arkansas River Bridge.  Since this was dated prior to the Great Arkansas River Flood of 2019, I wonder about how current the profile charts are that show the distance above the current ground level now that we've had a new high water mark in the area.

https://www.ardot.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/2018-05-01_I49-Schematic_DRAFT2_SpringHillPark-GunClubRoad.pdf (https://www.ardot.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/2018-05-01_I49-Schematic_DRAFT2_SpringHillPark-GunClubRoad.pdf)

Just noticed that the draft plans back in 2018 had a provision under the overpass for Gun Club Rd. for passenger rail.  This is certainly the first I've ever seen about anything for passenger rail ever being considered along the Arkansas River north of the levee.  Interesting concept, but have my doubts as to how serious anyone would be for such a project.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: edwaleni on February 17, 2022, 04:11:29 PM
Here is the proposed schematic for the section with the I-49 Arkansas River Bridge.  Since this was dated prior to the Great Arkansas River Flood of 2019, I wonder about how current the profile charts are that show the distance above the current ground level now that we've had a new high water mark in the area.

https://www.ardot.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/2018-05-01_I49-Schematic_DRAFT2_SpringHillPark-GunClubRoad.pdf (https://www.ardot.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/2018-05-01_I49-Schematic_DRAFT2_SpringHillPark-GunClubRoad.pdf)

Just noticed that the draft plans back in 2018 had a provision under the overpass for Gun Club Rd. for passenger rail.  This is certainly the first I've ever seen about anything for passenger rail ever being considered along the Arkansas River north of the levee.  Interesting concept, but have my doubts as to how serious anyone would be for such a project.

I just looked at the 2021 HSR for Arkansas Report and there is no mention of it. (Little Rock to Texarkana is all)

I also went back and looked at the AASHTO passenger rail report for 2001 and there was nothing about it.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on February 17, 2022, 05:33:17 PM
Here is the proposed schematic for the section with the I-49 Arkansas River Bridge.  Since this was dated prior to the Great Arkansas River Flood of 2019, I wonder about how current the profile charts are that show the distance above the current ground level now that we've had a new high water mark in the area.

https://www.ardot.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/2018-05-01_I49-Schematic_DRAFT2_SpringHillPark-GunClubRoad.pdf (https://www.ardot.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/2018-05-01_I49-Schematic_DRAFT2_SpringHillPark-GunClubRoad.pdf)

Just noticed that the draft plans back in 2018 had a provision under the overpass for Gun Club Rd. for passenger rail.  This is certainly the first I've ever seen about anything for passenger rail ever being considered along the Arkansas River north of the levee.  Interesting concept, but have my doubts as to how serious anyone would be for such a project.

I just looked at the 2021 HSR for Arkansas Report and there is no mention of it. (Little Rock to Texarkana is all)

I also went back and looked at the AASHTO passenger rail report for 2001 and there was nothing about it.

Maybe it was LSR instead?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Rick Powell on February 17, 2022, 06:02:35 PM

Maybe it was LSR instead?

I have worked on plans for a few bridges that included a "future rail corridor" or "future 2nd track" dating back to the 1990's. And still waiting.   
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: skluth on February 17, 2022, 06:16:49 PM
Bentonville wants feedback on plans to extend J Street to I-49 (https://talkbusiness.net/2022/02/bentonville-wants-feedback-on-plans-to-extend-j-street-to-i-49/)
Quote
The city of Bentonville is seeking feedback on a $37.2 million project to extend Northeast J Street to Interstate 49. Preliminary plans show the 1.1-mile project will include an interchange similar to the one at I-49 and Central Avenue (Arkansas Highway 72).

The city is working with Garver on project design and will host a virtual meeting at 5:30 p.m. Thursday (Feb. 17). Meeting attendees can ask staff about the project. Comments also are being accepted online until March 4. Link here for project details.

Northeast J Street will be widened to four lanes and be extended to I-49 between Tiger Boulevard and the interstate.

Dennis Birge, transportation director for the city of Bentonville, said the project was included in the city’s master street plan in 2007, but the money to complete the project wasn’t available then. Since then, the city has worked with Garver to update street project priorities to meet growth projections for the next 20 years. The city is expected to exceed a population of 100,000 by 2040.

Garver identified the extension of Northeast J Street as a top priority. In 2021, Bentonville voters approved a bond issue that includes $173.5 million in street projects. The extension of Northeast J Street is expected to be the largest street project in the bond issue.

Birge cited the relocation of the Walmart home office along J Street and the proximity to Crystal Bridges Museum of American Art as factors supporting the project need. He also pointed to the congestion of existing highways that connect to I-49, including Central Avenue and Arkansas Highway 102.

“We feel like the need for an additional connection to I-49 or inlet or outlet to I-49 was needed,”  he said. “By the time we applied some growth factors to get us out to a 2040 traffic count, we felt like this would be needed.”

The virtual meeting will be the first look at the conceptual design. According to the plans, Northeast J Street, which runs between Allencroft and Chapel Hill subdivisions, will be widened to four lanes with a center median. Side paths and sidewalks will be included. The street will be extended until intersecting with I-49 south of Slaughter Pen Road. Two bridges will be needed for the project.

Birge noted the street will be narrowed to fit between the subdivisions and doesn’t anticipate any homes being affected. However, fences might need to be moved and yards adjusted to make way for the street. He added that the design is preliminary, and the city is working to determine exactly where the street will run before seeking environmental approval.

Design and permitting are expected to be completed over three to five years. The project will need approval from the Arkansas Department of Transportation and the Federal Highway Administration as it will intersect with I-49.

Birge said the project was estimated to cost $37.2 million, but he expects it will be more since the estimate was given in late 2020. A better estimate is expected to be provided during the design. The city will seek state or federal grant money to pay for the project, Birge said.
Link at headline
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: The Ghostbuster on February 18, 2022, 02:09:24 PM
Now that they are planning on connecting the two Interstate 49 segments between Barling and Alma (one of which is currently AR 549), I wonder what exit numbers the new segment of 49/549 will get. Maybe when it's completed, the morons in charge of the exit numbers will finally give the Alma-to-Missouri segment their proper numbers, although I doubt it.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on February 18, 2022, 06:56:04 PM
Now that they are planning on connecting the two Interstate 49 segments between Barling and Alma (one of which is currently AR 549), I wonder what exit numbers the new segment of 49/549 will get. Maybe when it's completed, the morons in charge of the exit numbers will finally give the Alma-to-Missouri segment their proper numbers, although I doubt it.

I'd wager they go back and retroactively change the AR-549 numbers to count down to 0 at US-71 between Rye Hill and Jenny Lind.  'cause that's apparently how ARDOT rolls.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on February 18, 2022, 08:45:49 PM
Now that they are planning on connecting the two Interstate 49 segments between Barling and Alma (one of which is currently AR 549), I wonder what exit numbers the new segment of 49/549 will get. Maybe when it's completed, the morons in charge of the exit numbers will finally give the Alma-to-Missouri segment their proper numbers, although I doubt it.

I'd wager they go back and retroactively change the AR-549 numbers to count down to 0 at US-71 between Rye Hill and Jenny Lind.  'cause that's apparently how ARDOT rolls.

BUT  north of Bentonville, the exits are numbered from Texarkana , as are the exits beginning ending at Barling. So, theoretically, at least, 49 could use the "proper" numbering sequence.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on February 19, 2022, 09:04:33 AM
Now that they are planning on connecting the two Interstate 49 segments between Barling and Alma (one of which is currently AR 549), I wonder what exit numbers the new segment of 49/549 will get. Maybe when it's completed, the morons in charge of the exit numbers will finally give the Alma-to-Missouri segment their proper numbers, although I doubt it.

I'd wager they go back and retroactively change the AR-549 numbers to count down to 0 at US-71 between Rye Hill and Jenny Lind.  'cause that's apparently how ARDOT rolls.

BUT  north of Bentonville, the exits are numbered from Texarkana , as are the exits beginning ending at Barling. So, theoretically, at least, 49 could use the "proper" numbering sequence.

As was stated earlier in the thread and shown by the pictures I posted, the exits north of Bentonville were retroactively changed 3 weeks ago to match the exit numbers between Alma and Bentonville.  Thus, our questioning of ARDOT's logic in general on the subject.  There is no longer an Exit 284, Exit 287, and Exit 289.  The reasoning baffles us all...
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: The Ghostbuster on February 19, 2022, 12:32:36 PM
Wikipedia still lists the exits as 284, 287 and 289 (not that I or anyone else should rely on Wikipedia): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_49_in_Arkansas. The interesting thing I've noticed recently on that page is all the exits with former Interstate 540's numbers have the Interstate 49 "future" numbers posted alongside the existing exits. Maybe (and that's a big maybe) they will still get the correct numbers someday.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: CoolAngrybirdsrio4 on February 20, 2022, 12:11:38 AM
Wikipedia still lists the exits as 284, 287 and 289 (not that I or anyone else should rely on Wikipedia): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_49_in_Arkansas. The interesting thing I've noticed recently on that page is all the exits with former Interstate 540's numbers have the Interstate 49 "future" numbers posted alongside the existing exits. Maybe (and that's a big maybe) they will still get the correct numbers someday.

It is still listed as those exit numbers on Google Maps as well.  :hmmm:
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: yakra on February 20, 2022, 09:14:02 AM
I don't know where they came up with this nonsense about the "former" exit numbers on the BVB. TMK it was never posted with those numbers, going straight to the future I-49 numbers before being *cough* "fixed".
To be charitable, maybe an editor meant to do it right and had a HERP DERP moment.
Beauty of Wikipedia though is any of us can edit it.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: The Ghostbuster on February 21, 2022, 04:44:14 PM
Do we have any Wikipedia editors on the AARoads Fourm? If so, an edit to the "Interstate 49 in Arkansas" page would be much appreciated.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on February 21, 2022, 04:51:53 PM
Do we have any Wikipedia editors on the AARoads Fourm? If so, an edit to the "Interstate 49 in Arkansas" page would be much appreciated.

I think Scott is... or was
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: yakra on February 22, 2022, 12:31:15 PM
I edited it, edit got reverted per “lol look at teh googlz” , then edited it again with the citations more prominently inline with the individual exit numbers. The same IP addx has since edited the page again, allowing the new exit numbers to stand.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: The Ghostbuster on February 22, 2022, 01:49:12 PM
Thank you, yakra. The page looks a lot better now. I would have liked to see old 284, 287, and 289 numberings for the last three exits (hopefully those numbers will be reinstated someday), but the changes already made are sufficient.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on February 27, 2022, 11:08:41 AM
Thank you, yakra. The page looks a lot better now. I would have liked to see old 284, 287, and 289 numberings for the last three exits (hopefully those numbers will be reinstated someday), but the changes already made are sufficient.

Like these?

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51274110175_ff489f08b4_d.jpg)

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51273255798_039d0cb88b_z_d.jpg)

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51412248224_3feedc52f5_z_d.jpg)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on February 27, 2022, 06:01:51 PM
Thank you, yakra. The page looks a lot better now. I would have liked to see old 284, 287, and 289 numberings for the last three exits (hopefully those numbers will be reinstated someday), but the changes already made are sufficient.

Like these?

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51274110175_ff489f08b4_d.jpg)

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51273255798_039d0cb88b_z_d.jpg)

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51412248224_3feedc52f5_z_d.jpg)

Ah, the good old days, before ARDOT removed our hope of a completed I-49 in our lifetimes!  I just wish there was 1 out of the 3 states that it was in that was able to complete it to logical termini with no gaps.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on February 27, 2022, 09:44:34 PM
So what happens to AR 549

(https://live.staticflickr.com/756/21757660872_c85c99354b_d.jpg)

(https://live.staticflickr.com/5772/21757660632_09e5d3322b_d.jpg)

(https://live.staticflickr.com/753/21757659962_bd35b71954_d.jpg)

(https://live.staticflickr.com/632/21146640884_98689658e8_d.jpg)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on February 28, 2022, 11:27:01 AM
So what happens to AR 549

(https://live.staticflickr.com/756/21757660872_c85c99354b_d.jpg)

(https://live.staticflickr.com/5772/21757660632_09e5d3322b_d.jpg)

(https://live.staticflickr.com/753/21757659962_bd35b71954_d.jpg)

(https://live.staticflickr.com/632/21146640884_98689658e8_d.jpg)

That's the million dollar question.  Some of us have half-jokingly postulated that they'll retroactively go back and renumber those once the Arkansas River valley is bridged and connected up at Alma and start the mileage back to 0 at US-71 termination south of Rye Hill until the Ouachitas are connected up in a couple of decades or so.  I guess it depends on whether they do grade separation in the Super-2 portion south of Ft. Smith along with overpasses and exits like they did with the BVB.  If so, then they probably fix everything once there's a Super-2 complete replacement for US-71 to Texarkana with exits and mile markers.  Otherwise, if they do at-grade intersections in the middle of the state like AR-530 in southeast AR, then they likely aren't bothering with exit numbers and signing at that point and they likely want to relieve the nagging they'll get about the subject until everything gets funded to complete the 2nd carriageway, which means that a 2nd set of miles beginning at 0 for AR-549/I-49 in the state isn't totally beyond the realm of possibility given the DOT we're dealing with.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: The Ghostbuster on February 28, 2022, 05:23:26 PM
It is said that after the Barling-to-Alma segment is completed, ARDOT will next try to fund and construct the segment of Interstate 49/AR 549 from White Bluff southward to Y City.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Arkansastravelguy on March 13, 2022, 10:01:09 AM
So what happens to AR 549

(https://live.staticflickr.com/756/21757660872_c85c99354b_d.jpg)

(https://live.staticflickr.com/5772/21757660632_09e5d3322b_d.jpg)

(https://live.staticflickr.com/753/21757659962_bd35b71954_d.jpg)

(https://live.staticflickr.com/632/21146640884_98689658e8_d.jpg)
I’m guessing their plan is to take so long finishing it no one will remember the exit renumbering


iPhone
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bwana39 on March 13, 2022, 08:42:53 PM
You guys need to remember. I-49 has a southern leg in Arkansas!

I am not sure these numbers are not the numbers that eventually will be close to the finished ones!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on March 14, 2022, 01:25:00 PM
You guys need to remember. I-49 has a southern leg in Arkansas!

I am not sure these numbers are not the numbers that eventually will be close to the finished ones!

I remember that well.  That's why the renumbering of the northern 3 exits was insanity.  Anyway, it's fixing to become more of an issue, because ARDOT is fixing to start movement on the small gap over the Arkansas River.

Highway 22 to Interstate 40 Arkansas River|Interstate 49|Crawford & Sebastian Counties Job 040748 Public Involvement Meeting (https://vpiph03-job-040748-hwy-22-i40-ar-rvr-i49-ardot.hub.arcgis.com/)

If I have any availability Thursday, I might make the trek down to Alma and ask the presenters about it since I can't get answers by email.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: GreenLanternCorps on March 14, 2022, 04:20:50 PM
You guys need to remember. I-49 has a southern leg in Arkansas!

I am not sure these numbers are not the numbers that eventually will be close to the finished ones!

I remember that well.  That's why the renumbering of the northern 3 exits was insanity.  Anyway, it's fixing to become more of an issue, because ARDOT is fixing to start movement on the small gap over the Arkansas River.

Highway 22 to Interstate 40 Arkansas River|Interstate 49|Crawford & Sebastian Counties Job 040748 Public Involvement Meeting (https://vpiph03-job-040748-hwy-22-i40-ar-rvr-i49-ardot.hub.arcgis.com/)

If I have any availability Thursday, I might make the trek down to Alma and ask the presenters about it since I can't get answers by email.

I watched the video, I had thought that the section from I-40 to to Y City was going to be a Super 2.

However this video seems to imply that the section from I-40 to the current AR 549 at Fort Chaffee will be a full four lane interstate.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: mvak36 on March 14, 2022, 05:28:44 PM
I found a post from 2014 (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3321.msg293262#msg293262) when an AHTD employee posted the proposed exit list. Unfortunately the links all went away once they went to their new site last year. I'll see if I might have saved those files on my personal laptop by chance.

EDIT: I guess I did save them :biggrin:.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/gallery/12408_14_03_22_6_02_02.png)

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/gallery/12408_14_03_22_5_59_01.png)

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/gallery/12408_14_03_22_6_00_30.png)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: seicer on March 14, 2022, 09:18:09 PM
A 24 mile stretch without interchanges! I had forgotten how rural it gets down there so I did a Google flyover and it's very sparse.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on March 15, 2022, 01:02:36 PM
You guys need to remember. I-49 has a southern leg in Arkansas!

I am not sure these numbers are not the numbers that eventually will be close to the finished ones!

I remember that well.  That's why the renumbering of the northern 3 exits was insanity.  Anyway, it's fixing to become more of an issue, because ARDOT is fixing to start movement on the small gap over the Arkansas River.

Highway 22 to Interstate 40 Arkansas River|Interstate 49|Crawford & Sebastian Counties Job 040748 Public Involvement Meeting (https://vpiph03-job-040748-hwy-22-i40-ar-rvr-i49-ardot.hub.arcgis.com/)

If I have any availability Thursday, I might make the trek down to Alma and ask the presenters about it since I can't get answers by email.

I watched the video, I had thought that the section from I-40 to to Y City was going to be a Super 2.

However this video seems to imply that the section from I-40 to the current AR 549 at Fort Chaffee will be a full four lane interstate.

That video drove me nuts.  Narrator clearly isn't from Arkansas with his pronunciation of Alma and Chaffee.  According to what I read on this site, whether it's a Super-2 or the full 4 lanes for this segment will depend on the funding that is secured in the next 3 years.  They are breaking ground this summer, but it's literally just ROW clearing from the end of the stub up to H St. in Barling along the ROW they already have.  Then, it's a whole lot of nothing for a couple more years other than ROW/engineering.  There really isn't much in the 2021-2024 STIP for I-49 that will get much more accomplished other than engineering and ROW acquisition.  And there's nothing in the STIP for anything south of US-71, so there isn't going to be much progress there at all until after 2024.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on March 15, 2022, 01:09:25 PM
A 24 mile stretch without interchanges! I had forgotten how rural it gets down there so I did a Google flyover and it's very sparse.

Not much of consequence between DeQueen and Ashdown.  Wouldn't be too difficult to buy ROW or built the facility down to the Red River floodplain, other than numerous small bridges and the Little River floodplain crossing.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: GreenLanternCorps on March 15, 2022, 01:21:08 PM
A 24 mile stretch without interchanges! I had forgotten how rural it gets down there so I did a Google flyover and it's very sparse.

(https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRt6SJCkL27vLJeex8NEukHxHPFmmTToy7zNGUlpktTLCL_IxhH3Zq9acnwcAdL_x6Kmgg&usqp=CAU)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on March 15, 2022, 03:04:03 PM
It looks like almost 1/4 of the mileage of the I-40 -> AR-22 section is within the 100 year floodplain.  Thankfully, it looks like they are keeping around 20 ft. above ground level when within the blue sections.  I didn't think about it but probably should have growing up south of the Cecil gasfield downriver, there are a metric buttload of gas wells that will need remediation as part of this project as the earthworks will dig up/bury literally dozens of them when doing the roadbed.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on March 17, 2022, 11:44:52 PM
Talk Business: ARDOT holds I-49 extension session in Alma; no interchange planned at U.S. 64 (https://talkbusiness.net/2022/03/ardot-holds-i-49-extension-session-in-alma-no-interchange-planned-at-u-s-64/)

(https://talkbusiness.net/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/I49alma-732x404.jpg)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on March 18, 2022, 12:12:26 AM
Considering the extremely close proximity of US-64 to the I-40/I-49 interchange it is no wonder there would be no interchange planned for US-64. The final ramp design for the modified I-40/I-49 interchange would likely be a 4-level directional stack. The newer 4 ramps for the Southern half of that interchange will be going partially over US-64 immediately South of the interchange.

US-64 is screwed in the other direction by the nearby freight rail line just to the South. That basically eliminates the idea of a half cloverleaf interchange, similar to the one just North at Collum Lane, but with all the movement loops to the South of the US-64 main line. The problem is that railroad is in the way. One could try building elevated ramps high enough to clear the rail line, but with the railroad being so close to US-64 the grade of those elevated ramps would be too steep going down to meet the US-64 main lanes.

Folks driving on US-64 will just have to suck it up a little bit and drive just slightly to the East where US-71 diverges to the North. There's an entrance to I-40 there. They can get on the Interstate there and back-track just a little bit to get on I-49.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sprjus4 on March 18, 2022, 12:48:17 AM
The final ramp design for the modified I-40/I-49 interchange would likely be a 4-level directional stack. The newer 4 ramps for the Southern half of that interchange will be going partially over US-64 immediately South of the interchange.
A schematic rendering of the complete I-40/I-49 interchange was included in the article, and indeed would have ramps going over US-64.

An interchange with US-64 is not impossible, but would involve likely ramps on the north side of US-64 due to tracks south of the road, and a braided ramp complex. It’s questionable how much the traffic volumes that would use such an interchange would warrant an expensive complex interchange design.
(https://talkbusiness.net/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/49-40interchange.jpg)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on March 18, 2022, 01:56:41 PM
I know that there is a push for some in Alma to include a US-64 interchange, but with the proximity of I-40, Frog Bayou, and the U.P. railroad, there isn't logistically enough room for any kind of interchange with I-49, which is still a bridge from the top stack level by the time it crosses it, and necessarily so with the need to also cross the railroad and Frog Bayou.  This wishful addition (who complain it isn't fair to exclude a US-64 interchange since they were part of the push for I-49, like they single-handedly have brought it this far) cannot come at the expense of the ability to actually build 4 full lanes of I-49 between I-40 and AR-22 this decade.  It would only save having to go half a mile down I-40 to the east to the US-71 interchange, which should be adequate for the local traffic needs for decades.  It's not fair either that Arkansas has to pay essentially twice as much proportionally as those who were part of the original IHS, but you have to play the cards you're dealt.  I just hope to live to see 2 lanes of AR-549 from Texarkana to Ft. Smith.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: msunat97 on March 18, 2022, 02:19:38 PM
A 24 mile stretch without interchanges! I had forgotten how rural it gets down there so I did a Google flyover and it's very sparse.

(https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRt6SJCkL27vLJeex8NEukHxHPFmmTToy7zNGUlpktTLCL_IxhH3Zq9acnwcAdL_x6Kmgg&usqp=CAU)

Similar sign on Highway 85 southbound leaving Newcastle, WY...81 miles to next services.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: triplemultiplex on March 18, 2022, 03:32:35 PM
A four-level stack seems like overkill for this junction.  This has to be the most rural location for one of these in America by a long shot.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on March 18, 2022, 03:37:43 PM
A four-level stack seems like overkill for this junction.  This has to be the most rural location for one of these in America by a long shot.

I-49 goes immediately into the Arkansas River 100 year floodplain as soon as it's south of the UP RR, so there is a need for a very long bridge over I-40, US-64, the UP railroad, and Frog Bayou anyway, so how else would an interchange work there?  I'd be interested to see an alternative.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Plutonic Panda on March 18, 2022, 04:20:06 PM
A four-level stack seems like overkill for this junction.  This has to be the most rural location for one of these in America by a long shot.
Every freeway to freeway interchange should be a stack. Cloverleafs suck.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: rte66man on March 18, 2022, 06:13:26 PM
A four-level stack seems like overkill for this junction.  This has to be the most rural location for one of these in America by a long shot.

Because 1/2 of it is already built as a stack.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on March 18, 2022, 07:27:45 PM
A four-level stack seems like overkill for this junction.  This has to be the most rural location for one of these in America by a long shot.

Because 1/2 of it is already built as a stack.
It’s almost like ARDOT planned it that way in the 1980s.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: wdcrft63 on March 18, 2022, 09:04:14 PM
A four-level stack seems like overkill for this junction.  This has to be the most rural location for one of these in America by a long shot.

Because 1/2 of it is already built as a stack.
It might be the only one. Places where two 2dis cross in a rural area not that common. The ones I know have cloverleafs or cloverleafs modified by one or two flyovers (like I-10/I-75 in Florida).
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on March 19, 2022, 12:38:35 AM
In the case of I-40 and I-49 they're only adding a new "Y" interchange to another "Y" interchange that existed for many years. It's not all that big an extravagance. Judging by the drawing sprjus4 posted it looks like none of the ramps will be wider than a single lane. It's not like urban directional interchanges where you might have 2 or even 3 lanes on a flyover ramp.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: DrSmith on March 20, 2022, 01:57:18 PM
A four-level stack seems like overkill for this junction.  This has to be the most rural location for one of these in America by a long shot.

I-49 goes immediately into the Arkansas River 100 year floodplain as soon as it's south of the UP RR, so there is a need for a very long bridge over I-40, US-64, the UP railroad, and Frog Bayou anyway, so how else would an interchange work there?  I'd be interested to see an alternative.

You could maybe do a trumpet interchange a mile south of Route 64 and then build a connector back up to Route 64. Although there may not be enough room to the south to construct that depending on where the current next exit south of I-40 is planned.  If there isn't room, a compromise could still be a separate connector road.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bwana39 on March 21, 2022, 12:41:08 AM
A four-level stack seems like overkill for this junction.  This has to be the most rural location for one of these in America by a long shot.

Because 1/2 of it is already built as a stack.
It might be the only one. Places where two 2dis cross in a rural area not that common. The ones I know have cloverleafs or cloverleafs modified by one or two flyovers (like I-10/I-75 in Florida).

This is not "THAT rural. It is probably less rural than I-20 and I-35E or I-20 and I-45 were in Dallas County were when the stacks were originally built.  Probably about the same as I-20 and US-67 in Duncanville was back in the seventies when it was built or the I-20 -US175 in eastern Dallas County.

This is a good design for traffic flow. It costs more, but the traffic flows better. A reason you avoid stacks further north is ice and snow remediation / removal. Except for just a few days a year, this is not an issue in Fort Smith.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on March 21, 2022, 12:05:35 PM
Quote from: bwana39
It costs more, but the traffic flows better.

But it doesn't cost any more. Half of the stack already exists. They're only going to add a second Y interchange to an existing Y interchange. Honestly it would be silly and wasteful to take any other approach, such as fully replacing the interchange with something like a pinwheel or cloverleaf design.

Quote from: DrSmith
You could maybe do a trumpet interchange a mile south of Route 64 and then build a connector back up to Route 64.

That wouldn't provide any advantage over motorists just driving a short distance to the US-71 intersection with US-64, going up a couple blocks and getting on I-40 there.

If anything, AR DOT could add a new exit on I-40 to service US-64 traffic to the West of the I-49 interchange. It is a little strange how there is no exits at all on I-40 between the I-540 interchange and I-49 interchange. They could probably add exit ramps at either the AR-60 or Lost Beach Crossing bridges over I-40. Or build a new exit Pleasant Valley Road.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on March 28, 2022, 11:28:08 PM
Quote from: bwana39
It costs more, but the traffic flows better.

But it doesn't cost any more. Half of the stack already exists. They're only going to add a second Y interchange to an existing Y interchange. Honestly it would be silly and wasteful to take any other approach, such as fully replacing the interchange with something like a pinwheel or cloverleaf design.

Quote from: DrSmith
You could maybe do a trumpet interchange a mile south of Route 64 and then build a connector back up to Route 64.

That wouldn't provide any advantage over motorists just driving a short distance to the US-71 intersection with US-64, going up a couple blocks and getting on I-40 there.

If anything, AR DOT could add a new exit on I-40 to service US-64 traffic to the West of the I-49 interchange. It is a little strange how there is no exits at all on I-40 between the I-540 interchange and I-49 interchange. They could probably add exit ramps at either the AR-60 or Lost Beach Crossing bridges over I-40. Or build a new exit Pleasant Valley Road.

I think that part of the reason there isn't any interchanges between I-49 and I-540 from US-64 to I-40 is due to the presence of the weigh station in between enabling overweight trucks having even more of an opportunity to avoid.  A mile to the east for US-71 really isn't much of a burden.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: mgk920 on April 03, 2022, 10:58:45 AM
A couple of years ago, the Wisconsin State Patrol dug out a set of portable scales and nailed a big rig loaded with scrap steel that was about 20 minutes inside of the state from Minnesota on US 10.  It was about 2X overweight - as heavy as a fully loaded railroad car.  It was on US 10 so as to avoid the WisDOT scale on I-94 at Menomonie, WI and was going to an industrial plant in Neenah, WI (near where I live here in the Fox Valley region of NE Wisconsin).  Yes, nefarious drivers will go that far out of the way to avoid scales.

Mike
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on April 27, 2022, 03:00:40 PM
Looks like going to let the contract for construction of the Arkansas Welcome Center on I-49 on Sept. 21.  Still haven't updated the Route to I-49 from Hwy. 549.

https://www.ardot.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/2022-May-Letting-to-Post.pdf (https://www.ardot.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/2022-May-Letting-to-Post.pdf)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on April 28, 2022, 11:05:59 AM
Looks like going to let the contract for construction of the Arkansas Welcome Center on I-49 on Sept. 21.  Still haven't updated the Route to I-49 from Hwy. 549.

https://www.ardot.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/2022-May-Letting-to-Post.pdf (https://www.ardot.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/2022-May-Letting-to-Post.pdf)

They've been talking Welcome Center  for at least 7 years.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: The Ghostbuster on April 28, 2022, 02:13:46 PM
Is the proposed Welcome Center going to be the only rest area constructed along the entire length of Interstate 49 in Arkansas? I've noticed plenty of newer long-distance roadways seem to lack rest areas and weigh stations (Interstate 22 in MS/AL and the Interstate 69 extension in Indiana come to mind, as well as the Interstate 49 segment in Missouri).
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on April 28, 2022, 02:27:16 PM
Is the proposed Welcome Center going to be the only rest area constructed along the entire length of Interstate 49 in Arkansas? I've noticed plenty of newer long-distance roadways seem to lack rest areas and weigh stations (Interstate 22 in MS/AL and the Interstate 69 extension in Indiana come to mind, as well as the Interstate 49 segment in Missouri).

Certainly looks like it for the next 20 years or so at least, unless something dramatically changes in D.C.  There's a rest area at Elm Park, AR where AR-23 has its southern terminus at US-71.  That will be within 3 miles of the projected routing of I-49 through there, so it wouldn't surprise me if they don't just route traffic to that rest area, at least for a few years after actually completing it through there, and definitely while it's in its Super-2 configuration.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sprjus4 on April 28, 2022, 02:54:56 PM
^ I doubt they are going to sign a rest area that is a whole 3 miles away from the main highway. Anything more than a half mile at most, and even that’s pushing it, is too far. It needs to be directly off of the exit to be viable.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on April 28, 2022, 03:18:02 PM
^ I doubt they are going to sign a rest area that is a whole 3 miles away from the main highway. Anything more than a half mile at most, and even that’s pushing it, is too far. It needs to be directly off of the exit to be viable.

When the alternative is no rest area for almost 200 miles, I'd bet they would do just that.  Viability is in the eye of the beholder, and in the budget of the builder.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sprjus4 on April 28, 2022, 06:18:23 PM
^ Maybe, but I still question it. It would have to be clearly spelled out it’s 3 miles away.

I would never drive 3 miles off the highway just for a rest area, when there are other places to stop that are directly off the freeway. That’s 6 miles round trip and no progress made on the trip.

IMO, they’re better off closing that rest area and building a new one with the freeway.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: JREwing78 on April 29, 2022, 08:49:35 AM
^ I doubt they are going to sign a rest area that is a whole 3 miles away from the main highway. Anything more than a half mile at most, and even that’s pushing it, is too far. It needs to be directly off of the exit to be viable.

When the alternative is no rest area for almost 200 miles, I'd bet they would do just that.  Viability is in the eye of the beholder, and in the budget of the builder.

Given few alternatives, truckers will definitely make the 3 mile trip for a place to stop and sleep.

Fixed quote. (http://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=4000.0) - rmf67
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on April 29, 2022, 02:31:54 PM
^ I doubt they are going to sign a rest area that is a whole 3 miles away from the main highway. Anything more than a half mile at most, and even that’s pushing it, is too far. It needs to be directly off of the exit to be viable.

Given few alternatives, truckers will definitely make the 3 mile trip for a place to stop and sleep.

When the alternative is no rest area for almost 200 miles, I'd bet they would do just that.  Viability is in the eye of the beholder, and in the budget of the builder.

The stretch of US-71 from Ft. Smith to DeQueen is pretty sparse, with just that single rest area, other than some declining services in Waldron, and Mena really isn't geared toward interstate travelers with their offerings either for trucks to make camp for the night.  I'm sure that'll change somewhat around the larger town bypasses once a Super-2 is pushed through and the new traffic pattern emerges with a somewhat higher density than current US-71, but there just isn't any money in that part of the world to move/rebuild things in a very expeditious manner.  I grew up within 3 miles of that rest area, and everything required a trip either to Waldron (which no longer even has a Wal-Mart of any type) or Ft. Smith, which was about 40 minutes away until you got to its closest Wal-Mart.  Greenwood didn't even have its first bypass built back then and had little in the way of commerce.  It's very sparse out that way, so it would take the state prioritizing a new rest area, however, even I-49 in Benton County has had to make due until all 4 lanes were pushed through to Pineville before things got serious in replacing the dinky little rest area in Bella Vista, which can't even take a truck pulling in at all.  However Benton County does have the benefit of a large population, which along with Washington County, drew several truck stops along the route to mostly make up for the lack of a decent welcome center for the commercial trucking crowd at least.  Scott County has none of that, so unless they build a rest area to duplicate what's already there on the initial Super-2, to the detriment of funding for the actual other 2 lanes assuming they can't get TIGER/BUILD money for them, I'm wagering that signage is all that happens in the interim, along with an upgraded connector road.  We do things piecemeal here.  It's the Arkansas roadbuilding way it seems.  I'd be shocked if even the Super-2 happens other than certain segments between bypasses of the larger towns until just a few gaps remain in the middle.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bwana39 on April 30, 2022, 03:39:59 PM
US-71 as a Super-2.

ARDOT is making improvements along US-71 with the implementation of passing lanes and shoulder improvements. These rural improvements help SOME. The real issue is still getting loops and bypasses around the small towns and villages.

US-71 is not as bad as US-278 on the opposite side, but every village has a 35-45  MPH zone. The MAXIMUM speed limit on the 2-lane is 55 even on so-called super 2.

In spite of all the discussion on here, I-49 will (except PERHAPS the Acorn to Waldron segment) be built on a mostly greenfield route. There are multiple reasons why. I believe that every mile of significantly upgraded road not on a new route equates to a 6-month delay toward the eventual building of I-49. I am not suggesting that these improvements are not needed. I just suggest that having them done allows the decision to put off the actual building of the freeway more palatable than with what is there today.

It may be what they can afford. I am just saying that these upgrades are like repairing and keeping your old automobile as opposed to buying a new car, Neither are incremental toward getting a new item.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on May 04, 2022, 01:33:36 PM
US 71 (the highway) has always had problems with being too narrow, too twisty, etc.  I-49 was/is supposed to help and does north of Ft Smith which, IMO, is some the toughest terrain in the state.

If you take the time to leisurely drive th road, you can see a few sections south of West Fork that have been  replaced/bypassed.

Upgrading to a Super 2? That will require new terrain or removing all the little shanty-type businesses along the current road .
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on May 04, 2022, 05:41:21 PM
Forget old US 71 between Greenwood and Texarkana.

I'm surprised ARDOT is proposing any improvements to the old road at all. Doing so is a tacit admission that any stage of I-49 isn't in the cards for the next 20 years at least.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on May 04, 2022, 05:56:03 PM
Forget old US 71 between Greenwood and Texarkana.

I'm surprised ARDOT is proposing any improvements to the old road at all. Doing so is a tacit admission that any stage of I-49 isn't in the cards for the next 20 years at least.

When 49 was built,  ARDOT promised  that 71 wouldn't be neglected, which until recently, was a false promise.

There was serious erosion south of West Fork which has finally been resolved.  Also a serious problem below Artists Point which was recently fixed. ARDOT is now working south of Mountainburg to fix an erosion problem. .All of these were long past due.

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bwana39 on May 04, 2022, 10:17:55 PM
Forget old US 71 between Greenwood and Texarkana.

I'm surprised ARDOT is proposing any improvements to the old road at all. Doing so is a tacit admission that any stage of I-49 isn't in the cards for the next 20 years at least.

That is what I said. You were so much more succinct.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on May 05, 2022, 10:30:06 PM
Forget old US 71 between Greenwood and Texarkana.

I'm surprised ARDOT is proposing any improvements to the old road at all. Doing so is a tacit admission that any stage of I-49 isn't in the cards for the next 20 years at least.

That is what I said. You were so much more succinct.

ARDOT has f*cked up priorities.   Ever notice how NWA gets the bulk of the attention? It's because of the UofA, Tyson, Walmart, JBHunt.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: intelati49 on May 05, 2022, 10:34:19 PM


That is what I said. You were so much more succinct.

ARDOT has f*cked up priorities.   Ever notice how NWA gets the bulk of the attention? It's because of the UofA, Tyson, Walmart, JBHunt.

And here I remember reading in this very forum that the LR area gets the bulk of the attention vs the up and coming NWA area (which needed the help).

I don't entirely disagree. In fact, IMO a contiguous I-49 should be the firate priority of AR/LA.

LM-Q730

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on May 05, 2022, 11:22:48 PM


That is what I said. You were so much more succinct.

ARDOT has f*cked up priorities.   Ever notice how NWA gets the bulk of the attention? It's because of the UofA, Tyson, Walmart, JBHunt.

And here I remember reading in this very forum that the LR area gets the bulk of the attention vs the up and coming NWA area (which needed the help).




May well be, but NWA is likely a close second.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on May 06, 2022, 08:46:29 AM


That is what I said. You were so much more succinct.

ARDOT has f*cked up priorities.   Ever notice how NWA gets the bulk of the attention? It's because of the UofA, Tyson, Walmart, JBHunt.

And here I remember reading in this very forum that the LR area gets the bulk of the attention vs the up and coming NWA area (which needed the help).

I don't entirely disagree. In fact, IMO a contiguous I-49 should be the firate priority of AR/LA.

LM-Q730
Depends on where the governor at the time is from.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: abqtraveler on May 06, 2022, 09:18:41 AM


That is what I said. You were so much more succinct.

ARDOT has f*cked up priorities.   Ever notice how NWA gets the bulk of the attention? It's because of the UofA, Tyson, Walmart, JBHunt.

And here I remember reading in this very forum that the LR area gets the bulk of the attention vs the up and coming NWA area (which needed the help).

I don't entirely disagree. In fact, IMO a contiguous I-49 should be the firate priority of AR/LA.

LM-Q730
Depends on where the governor at the time is from.

This is very true. Recent governors and ArDOT commissioners have been from either LR or NWA, which is a big reason why those areas seem to get more attention than other parts of the state.  I recall growing up in Connecticut...the extension of the US-7 freeway ("Super 7") around Brookfield sat on the drawing board for over 30 years until Jodi Rell, who was a resident of Brookfield, became governor in 2005.  Within two years, Connecticut broke ground on the Brookfield Bypass, and it opened to traffic two years later in 2009.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: kphoger on May 06, 2022, 10:08:38 AM
ARDOT has f*cked up priorities.   Ever notice how NWA gets the bulk of the attention? It's because of the UofA, Tyson, Walmart, JBHunt.

So...  The place where all the people are moving to, and where all the money is...  That's the place that's a priority.

Doesn't that actually sound halfway reasonable?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bwana39 on May 06, 2022, 10:40:04 AM
Well over half of the population of Arkansas lives in metro Little Rock or NWA.  Jonesboro is the one significant place out side of those two areas with over 40K.

Even with its geographically outsized favor in transportation spending, it actually is less per capita in those areas than in a lot of the more rural areas.

Before the 2000's virtually everything revolved around Little Rock. When Huckabee became governor, that changed some. About the same time, NWA started to transition from a group of small town to a metropolitan area. After Huckabee left the Governor's Mansion (Triple Wide Trailer) it transitioned back to the the population centers. LRA had lost its seeming exclusivity, but rural Arkansas was once again Rural Arkansas.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: silverback1065 on May 06, 2022, 02:36:24 PM
is 71 still going to be on its own alignment across the state line with missouri?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sprjus4 on May 06, 2022, 03:23:00 PM
is 71 still going to be on its own alignment across the state line with missouri?
Is it not?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on May 06, 2022, 04:45:49 PM
is 71 still going to be on its own alignment across the state line with missouri?

From Bella Vista/ Exit 93 to MM 5 near Pineville, MO ,  US 71 is solo

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52029535058_440ec8f795_d.jpg)
 
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52029762749_437d192581_d.jpg)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: intelati49 on May 06, 2022, 04:49:17 PM


is 71 still going to be on its own alignment across the state line with missouri?

From Bella Vista/ Exit 93 to MM 5 near Pineville, MO ,  US 71 is solo
 
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52029762749_437d192581_d.jpg)

Fun fact, this interchange (half finished for 99% of my life) was the origin story of my "roadgeek"iness (that and the double stack of I-64 in STL)

LM-Q730

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: cbalducc on May 06, 2022, 11:42:35 PM
Well over half of the population of Arkansas lives in metro Little Rock or NWA.  Jonesboro is the one significant place out side of those two areas with over 40K.

Even with its geographically outsized favor in transportation spending, it actually is less per capita in those areas than in a lot of more rural areas.

Before the 2000's virtually everything revolved around Little Rock. When Huckabee became governor, that changed some. About the same time, NWA started to transition from a group of small town to a metropolitan area. After Huckabee left the Governor's Mansion (Triple Wide Trailer) it transitioned back to the the population centers. KRA had lost its seeming exclusivity, but rural Arkansas was once again Rural Arkansas.
What is “KRA” ?  Is Fort Smith part of northwest Arkansas?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on May 07, 2022, 01:00:35 AM
Well over half of the population of Arkansas lives in metro Little Rock or NWA.  Jonesboro is the one significant place out side of those two areas with over 40K.

Even with its geographically outsized favor in transportation spending, it actually is less per capita in those areas than in a lot of more rural areas.

Before the 2000's virtually everything revolved around Little Rock. When Huckabee became governor, that changed some. About the same time, NWA started to transition from a group of small town to a metropolitan area. After Huckabee left the Governor's Mansion (Triple Wide Trailer) it transitioned back to the the population centers. KRA had lost its seeming exclusivity, but rural Arkansas was once again Rural Arkansas.
When Huckabee was governor, NWA was the epicenter of his Republican base and he had to cater to them. Then Mike Beebe (from Searcy) took over and US 67 became his driveway. Now Asa Hutchinson is governor and he is from NWA, but the whole state flipped Republican and now he has to spread the booty across the whole state.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on May 07, 2022, 02:37:54 PM
Well over half of the population of Arkansas lives in metro Little Rock or NWA.  Jonesboro is the one significant place out side of those two areas with over 40K.

Even with its geographically outsized favor in transportation spending, it actually is less per capita in those areas than in a lot of more rural areas.

Before the 2000's virtually everything revolved around Little Rock. When Huckabee became governor, that changed some. About the same time, NWA started to transition from a group of small town to a metropolitan area. After Huckabee left the Governor's Mansion (Triple Wide Trailer) it transitioned back to the the population centers. KRA had lost its seeming exclusivity, but rural Arkansas was once again Rural Arkansas.
When Huckabee was governor, NWA was the epicenter of his Republican base and he had to cater to them. Then Mike Beebe (from Searcy) took over and US 67 became his driveway. Now Asa Hutchinson is governor and he is from NWA, but the whole state flipped Republican and now he has to spread the booty across the whole state.

Actually, John Paul Hammerschmidt  brought home the bacon for 49.  and John Boozman pushed to upgrade 67.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bwana39 on May 07, 2022, 06:00:49 PM
Well over half of the population of Arkansas lives in metro Little Rock or NWA.  Jonesboro is the one significant place out side of those two areas with over 40K.

Even with its geographically outsized favor in transportation spending, it actually is less per capita in those areas than in a lot of more rural areas.

Before the 2000's virtually everything revolved around Little Rock. When Huckabee became governor, that changed some. About the same time, NWA started to transition from a group of small town to a metropolitan area. After Huckabee left the Governor's Mansion (Triple Wide Trailer) it transitioned back to the the population centers. KRA had lost its seeming exclusivity, but rural Arkansas was once again Rural Arkansas.
When Huckabee was governor, NWA was the epicenter of his Republican base and he had to cater to them. Then Mike Beebe (from Searcy) took over and US 67 became his driveway. Now Asa Hutchinson is governor and he is from NWA, but the whole state flipped Republican and now he has to spread the booty across the whole state.

Actually, John Paul Hammerschmidt  brought home the bacon for 49.  and John Boozman pushed to upgrade 67.

I think that the MC's may have had a hand, but both of these freeway projects actually were done after the demise of earmarks.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on May 07, 2022, 06:07:36 PM
Well over half of the population of Arkansas lives in metro Little Rock or NWA.  Jonesboro is the one significant place out side of those two areas with over 40K.

Even with its geographically outsized favor in transportation spending, it actually is less per capita in those areas than in a lot of more rural areas.

Before the 2000's virtually everything revolved around Little Rock. When Huckabee became governor, that changed some. About the same time, NWA started to transition from a group of small town to a metropolitan area. After Huckabee left the Governor's Mansion (Triple Wide Trailer) it transitioned back to the the population centers. KRA had lost its seeming exclusivity, but rural Arkansas was once again Rural Arkansas.
When Huckabee was governor, NWA was the epicenter of his Republican base and he had to cater to them. Then Mike Beebe (from Searcy) took over and US 67 became his driveway. Now Asa Hutchinson is governor and he is from NWA, but the whole state flipped Republican and now he has to spread the booty across the whole state.

Actually, John Paul Hammerschmidt  brought home the bacon for 49.  and John Boozman pushed to upgrade 67.

I think that the MC's may have had a hand, but both of these freeway projects actually were done after the demise of earmarks.

Maybe with he 57 extension, but JPH  was influential in building 49 (aka the John Paul Hammerschmidt Highway)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: jlam on May 16, 2022, 01:40:46 PM
Google Maps now has street view on the Bella Vista Bypass (Only in the southbound lanes)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: The Ghostbuster on May 16, 2022, 07:18:23 PM
The Street View for the southbound lanes of Interstate 49 (then AR 549) is from April 2018. Hopefully, it will be updated in the future, although no one knows when that will happen.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Thegeet on May 17, 2022, 12:10:16 AM
The Street View for the southbound lanes of Interstate 49 (then AR 549) is from April 2018. Hopefully, it will be updated in the future, although no one knows when that will happen.
https://goo.gl/maps/SapYdBKuoT9GoCB7A
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: GreenLanternCorps on May 17, 2022, 10:55:11 AM
Google Maps now has street view on the Bella Vista Bypass (Only in the southbound lanes)
The Street View for the southbound lanes of Interstate 49 (then AR 549) is from April 2018. Hopefully, it will be updated in the future, although no one knows when that will happen.
The Street View for the southbound lanes of Interstate 49 (then AR 549) is from April 2018. Hopefully, it will be updated in the future, although no one knows when that will happen.
https://goo.gl/maps/SapYdBKuoT9GoCB7A

The Streetview images are inconsistent and there are gaps.  In trying to "follow" I-49 from the split with US 71 South the images kept bouncing between 2022 and other years.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sprjus4 on May 17, 2022, 05:20:27 PM
^ Give it a few days, it should all update eventually.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Tomahawkin on May 19, 2022, 07:29:35 PM
I will be making a reunion tour to Fayetteville in 8 weeks. Are the interchanges at US 62 (Fayetteville) and 412 in Springdale still the antiquated bottlenecks they were when I lived there til 2009? Has anything been done or is in the plans to address them?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Wayward Memphian on May 19, 2022, 08:05:53 PM
I will be making a reunion tour to Fayetteville in 8 weeks. Are the interchanges at US 62 (Fayetteville) and 412 in Springdale still the antiquated bottlenecks they were when I lived there til 2009? Has anything been done or is in the plans to address them?

Just wait and get a dose of them. Hit them at 5:15. Weddington is getting the current work.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on May 19, 2022, 10:01:32 PM
I will be making a reunion tour to Fayetteville in 8 weeks. Are the interchanges at US 62 (Fayetteville) and 412 in Springdale still the antiquated bottlenecks they were when I lived there til 2009? Has anything been done or is in the plans to address them?

Just wait and get a dose of them. Hit them at 5:15. Weddington is getting the current work.

Was through there yesterday. Looks like they're mostly playing in the dirt, but there's a lane shift along 49
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on May 20, 2022, 06:19:01 PM
I will be making a reunion tour to Fayetteville in 8 weeks. Are the interchanges at US 62 (Fayetteville) and 412 in Springdale still the antiquated bottlenecks they were when I lived there til 2009? Has anything been done or is in the plans to address them?

Just wait and get a dose of them. Hit them at 5:15. Weddington is getting the current work.

Was through there yesterday. Looks like they're mostly playing in the dirt, but there's a lane shift along 49

They've relocated utilities along the Wedington interchange and closed off the northbound shoulder to prepare the initial dirtwork for the parclo northbound entrance ramp.  Nothing to speak of along MLK although they will be starting on it this year I hear.  There are no changes planned for US-412's interchange at this point.  It and Wedington's offramps southbound back up onto the rightmost lane/shoulder every late afternoon with homebound Benton County traffic.  Nearly every offramp on I-49 in NWA needs to be upgraded to 2 lanes to keep exiting traffic from backing up onto I-49.  Really what needs to happen is that they just need to go ahead and do 4X4 upgrades throughout with the rightmost lane as a forced exit and entrance ramps picking the right lane back up.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Tomahawkin on May 21, 2022, 12:01:14 AM
Multiple lane ramps are a cheap god-send. Those can be easily funded by a 1 cent SPLOST (Special-Local-Option-Sales-Tax). Those funds could also be added to Razorback transit bus stops. But I seriously don't think that has been considered up there?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on May 21, 2022, 10:06:39 PM
Multiple lane ramps are a cheap god-send. Those can be easily funded by a 1 cent SPLOST (Special-Local-Option-Sales-Tax). Those funds could also be added to Razorback transit bus stops. But I seriously don't think that has been considered up there?

They could use more ramps along 540 at Fort Smith. One lane merging at the same time as a lane merging out is BS.  Examples: Phoenix to South 540, which almost immediately becomes an exit ramp  for Zero St. Same with Zero and 71 south, but I doubt much will change
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Tomahawkin on May 22, 2022, 10:01:39 PM
IMO, the 71B interchange south of Fayetteville should be a full interchange where one of the roads could be a full parkway leading to U of A campus and a west Bypass could start there to connect to 112. This would help the back to school traffic and GameDay traffic. Upon thought nothing will happen to improve the 62 and 49 interchange for the next 5+ years or so. And it would give trucks a bypass. It's a pipedream but it's better to be proactive instead of reactive. Both Arizona and Florida do a great job with that philosophy! Georgia and Arkansas fail at that!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on May 22, 2022, 11:44:56 PM
IMO, the 71B interchange south of Fayetteville should be a full interchange where one of the roads could be a full parkway leading to U of A campus and a west Bypass could start there to connect to 112. This would help the back to school traffic and GameDay traffic. Upon thought nothing will happen to improve the 62 and 49 interchange for the next 5+ years or so. And it would give trucks a bypass. It's a pipedream but it's better to be proactive instead of reactive. Both Arizona and Florida do a great job with that philosophy! Georgia and Arkansas fail at that!

 ArDOT didn't think this out very well., but it seems to happen a lot.  ARDOT: planning for yesterday sometime next week
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: The Ghostbuster on June 01, 2022, 10:41:57 PM
I just saw on Wikipedia that the exits on the AR 549/future Interstate 49 segment between US 71 and AR 22 are now numbered 1, 4, 5 and 7 instead of 187, 190, 191, and 193. Is this accurate?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on June 02, 2022, 01:18:28 PM
I just saw on Wikipedia that the exits on the AR 549/future Interstate 49 segment between US 71 and AR 22 are now numbered 1, 4, 5 and 7 instead of 187, 190, 191, and 193. Is this accurate?
I'll have to drive over to document this. Considering how ARDOT renmbered the Bella Vista Bypass, it wouldn't surprise me.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: abqtraveler on June 02, 2022, 10:28:03 PM
I just saw on Wikipedia that the exits on the AR 549/future Interstate 49 segment between US 71 and AR 22 are now numbered 1, 4, 5 and 7 instead of 187, 190, 191, and 193. Is this accurate?
I'll have to drive over to document this. Considering how ARDOT renmbered the Bella Vista Bypass, it wouldn't surprise me.
That leads me to believe that ArDOT is not planning on completing the Texarkana-Fort Smith section of I-49 anytime soon.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on June 03, 2022, 12:10:01 AM
I just saw on Wikipedia that the exits on the AR 549/future Interstate 49 segment between US 71 and AR 22 are now numbered 1, 4, 5 and 7 instead of 187, 190, 191, and 193. Is this accurate?
I'll have to drive over to document this. Considering how ARDOT renmbered the Bella Vista Bypass, it wouldn't surprise me.
That leads me to believe that ArDOT is not planning on completing the Texarkana-Fort Smith section of I-49 anytime soon.
You are likely correct. I-40 to Barling is next on the project list, but it's a year or two away from starting and will only be 2 lanes to start.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on June 08, 2022, 02:35:31 PM
^ I doubt they are going to sign a rest area that is a whole 3 miles away from the main highway. Anything more than a half mile at most, and even that’s pushing it, is too far. It needs to be directly off of the exit to be viable.

Well, so much for that theory as they're doing it right now in Benton County as of a couple of weeks ago.  They have signed the tiny Welcome Center (no trucks) in Bella Vista from both directions on I-49 at the US-71 exit.  Albeit, it's only about 1.2 miles off the Interstate, but it's a pain accessing from the south (which I-49 both directions would be coming from) as it's a left turn that's nearly a U-turn into the Welcome Center (https://goo.gl/maps/PnL3k55ngC7UqJxaA).

As I-49 is completed in NWA, I can guarantee that they will do something similar at Elm Park, especially while it is just Super-2 AR-549.  I have a picture of the sign if I can get some free time to upload to a pic sharing site.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on June 08, 2022, 02:38:30 PM
^ I doubt they are going to sign a rest area that is a whole 3 miles away from the main highway. Anything more than a half mile at most, and even that’s pushing it, is too far. It needs to be directly off of the exit to be viable.

Well, so much for that theory as they're doing it right now in Benton County as of a couple of weeks ago.  They have signed the tiny Welcome Center (no trucks) in Bella Vista from both directions on I-49 at the US-71 exit.  Albeit, it's only about 1.2 miles off the Interstate, but it's a pain accessing from the south (which I-49 both directions would be coming from) as it's a left turn that's nearly a U-turn into the Welcome Center.  As I-49 is completed in NWA, I can guarantee that they will do something similar at Elm Park, especially while it is just Super-2 AR-549.  I have a picture of the sign if I can get some free time to upload to a pic sharing site.

ARDOT posted signs on 49 for the Rest Area?  That's new.

The Bella Vista Rest Area is a little small, but beats the old one at the state line

I wonder when ARDOT is going to start building the new RA at Highlands Blvd?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on June 08, 2022, 03:11:59 PM
^ I doubt they are going to sign a rest area that is a whole 3 miles away from the main highway. Anything more than a half mile at most, and even that’s pushing it, is too far. It needs to be directly off of the exit to be viable.

Well, so much for that theory as they're doing it right now in Benton County as of a couple of weeks ago.  They have signed the tiny Welcome Center (no trucks) in Bella Vista from both directions on I-49 at the US-71 exit.  Albeit, it's only about 1.2 miles off the Interstate, but it's a pain accessing from the south (which I-49 both directions would be coming from) as it's a left turn that's nearly a U-turn into the Welcome Center.  As I-49 is completed in NWA, I can guarantee that they will do something similar at Elm Park, especially while it is just Super-2 AR-549.  I have a picture of the sign if I can get some free time to upload to a pic sharing site.

ARDOT posted signs on 49 for the Rest Area?  That's new.

The Bella Vista Rest Area is a little small, but beats the old one at the state line

I wonder when ARDOT is going to start building the new RA at Highlands Blvd?

Signs just posted about 3 weeks ago about a mile either side of  :banghead: Exit 93:.

The contract for the Welcome Center is still tentatively scheduled for letting on Sept. 21, but looks like they adjusted the contract value since the last posting.

4/14 posting:
Benton    090580    Arkansas Welcome Center (I-49) (S)    --    $5 - $10 Million

5/31 posting: (https://www.ardot.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/2022-June-Letting-to-Post.pdf)
Benton    090580    Arkansas Welcome Center (I-49) (S)    --    $3 - $5 Million
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on June 08, 2022, 03:16:37 PM
[
The contract for the Welcome Center is still tentatively scheduled for letting on Sept. 21, but looks like they adjusted the contract value since the last posting.

4/14 posting:
Benton    090580    Arkansas Welcome Center (I-49) (S)    --    $5 - $10 Million

5/31 posting:
Benton    090580    Arkansas Welcome Center (I-49) (S)    --    $3 - $5 Million

Down to around half. ?  What did they do...replace the restrooms with porta Johns?  :banghead: :pan: :spin:
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on June 08, 2022, 03:18:39 PM
[
The contract for the Welcome Center is still tentatively scheduled for letting on Sept. 21, but looks like they adjusted the contract value since the last posting.

4/14 posting:
Benton    090580    Arkansas Welcome Center (I-49) (S)    --    $5 - $10 Million

5/31 posting:
Benton    090580    Arkansas Welcome Center (I-49) (S)    --    $3 - $5 Million

Down to around half. ?  What did they do...replace the restrooms with porta Johns?  :banghead: :pan: :spin:

Probably removed the truck parking.  That way it better matches the facility in Bella Vista!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on June 08, 2022, 03:20:49 PM
[
The contract for the Welcome Center is still tentatively scheduled for letting on Sept. 21, but looks like they adjusted the contract value since the last posting.

4/14 posting:
Benton    090580    Arkansas Welcome Center (I-49) (S)    --    $5 - $10 Million

5/31 posting:
Benton    090580    Arkansas Welcome Center (I-49) (S)    --    $3 - $5 Million

Down to around half. ?  What did they do...replace the restrooms with porta Johns?  :banghead: :pan: :spin:

Probably removed the truck parking.  That way it better matches the facility in Bella Vista!

At a State Line Rest Area?  Sounds like a load of rubbish to me, but what do I know?  :pan:
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on June 08, 2022, 03:28:36 PM
[
The contract for the Welcome Center is still tentatively scheduled for letting on Sept. 21, but looks like they adjusted the contract value since the last posting.

4/14 posting:
Benton    090580    Arkansas Welcome Center (I-49) (S)    --    $5 - $10 Million

5/31 posting:
Benton    090580    Arkansas Welcome Center (I-49) (S)    --    $3 - $5 Million

Down to around half. ?  What did they do...replace the restrooms with porta Johns?  :banghead: :pan: :spin:

Probably removed the truck parking.  That way it better matches the facility in Bella Vista!

At a State Line Rest Area?  Sounds like a load of rubbish to me, but what do I know?  :pan:

I should have better delineated my sarcasm.  That said, anything still beats what Missouri offers the Interstate traveller along I-49.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on June 08, 2022, 03:39:56 PM
[
The contract for the Welcome Center is still tentatively scheduled for letting on Sept. 21, but looks like they adjusted the contract value since the last posting.

4/14 posting:
Benton    090580    Arkansas Welcome Center (I-49) (S)    --    $5 - $10 Million

5/31 posting:
Benton    090580    Arkansas Welcome Center (I-49) (S)    --    $3 - $5 Million

Down to around half. ?  What did they do...replace the restrooms with porta Johns?  :banghead: :pan: :spin:

Probably removed the truck parking.  That way it better matches the facility in Bella Vista!

At a State Line Rest Area?  Sounds like a load of rubbish to me, but what do I know?  :pan:

I should have better delineated my sarcasm.  That said, anything still beats what Missouri offers the Interstate traveller along I-49.

I like </s>

The MoDOT 49 RA is a joke! It's inside a small real estate office  and you have to drive about a mile and a half off the freeway. But there;s a nice "49 starts here"  sign in thr lobby, I thought I had a photo, but I can't find it.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on June 14, 2022, 02:11:48 PM
I will be making a reunion tour to Fayetteville in 8 weeks. Are the interchanges at US 62 (Fayetteville) and 412 in Springdale still the antiquated bottlenecks they were when I lived there til 2009? Has anything been done or is in the plans to address them?

Just wait and get a dose of them. Hit them at 5:15. Weddington is getting the current work.

Was through there yesterday. Looks like they're mostly playing in the dirt, but there's a lane shift along 49

They've relocated utilities along the Wedington interchange and closed off the northbound shoulder to prepare the initial dirtwork for the parclo northbound entrance ramp.  Nothing to speak of along MLK although they will be starting on it this year I hear.  There are no changes planned for US-412's interchange at this point.  It and Wedington's offramps southbound back up onto the rightmost lane/shoulder every late afternoon with homebound Benton County traffic.  Nearly every offramp on I-49 in NWA needs to be upgraded to 2 lanes to keep exiting traffic from backing up onto I-49.  Really what needs to happen is that they just need to go ahead and do 4X4 upgrades throughout with the rightmost lane as a forced exit and entrance ramps picking the right lane back up.

Actually, info on the MLK/US-62/AR-180 interchange, 15th St. Extension, and continuing the 6 laning south to the southern Fulbright Expressway is posted, with an in-person public meeting today that I'm going to try to attend.  Below is the info on the project.

Highway 62 Interchange Improvements | Interstate 49 | Fayetteville | Washington County Job 040846 Public Involvement Meeting (https://vpiph03-job-040846-hwy-62-interchange-improvements-ardot.hub.arcgis.com/)

Sounds like project starts late 2022 according to the video.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Tomahawkin on June 14, 2022, 03:49:34 PM
Will there be any mentioning of overhead mast lighting? IMO any type of lighting is badly needed!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on June 14, 2022, 07:44:34 PM
Will there be any mentioning of overhead mast lighting? IMO any type of lighting is badly needed!

None mentioned, although I did fill out a comment sheet and included not only that lighting be added to this particular project, but that all of I-49 in NWA needed it.  <s> I'm sure it will be seriously considered before rejected outright. </s>

Upon discussion with the ARDOT rep I had a conversation with, it looks like this will go out to bid late 2023/early 2024, so I wouldn't expect to see utilities moving before 2024.  So I'd wager late 2025 before project completion.  Wedington will be done likely 18-24 months before that, so at least we won't have to suffer 2 congested exits in a row under construction simultaneously.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Tomahawkin on June 15, 2022, 07:23:42 AM
They are just now trying to address the Wedington road issue??? Cheesewhiz, that is 15 years overdue. That area was Sprawling area when I was there from 2006-09...
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on June 15, 2022, 01:53:05 PM
They are just now trying to address the Wedington road issue??? Cheesewhiz, that is 15 years overdue. That area was Sprawling area when I was there from 2006-09...

Now it's just a gridlocked area 5 hours a day.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on June 15, 2022, 03:12:23 PM
They are just now trying to address the Wedington road issue??? Cheesewhiz, that is 15 years overdue. That area was Sprawling area when I was there from 2006-09...

ARDOT: planning for yesterday, sometimes next week.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on June 18, 2022, 01:07:33 PM
In the commission minutes of April this is the one they voted to submit for next to federal highway grant program, I wonder if this the new money total for completing this One project, with the assistance of a consultant, was selected as the best candidate project
in which to prepare and submit an application for consideration:
- Future I-49, Highway 22 — I-40 in Sebastian and Crawford Counties
o Will construct a four-lane interstate facility on new location with a
bridge crossing of the Arkansas River
- 13 -
(Continued)
April 27, 2022
o Total current estimated total project cost is $925 million
o Project will be delivered in phases as funding allows
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Tomahawkin on June 18, 2022, 03:29:00 PM
NWA gazette posted info about interchange improvements at U.S. 62. Included are plans to widen 62 from 1 mile road to IH 49. Adding a overpass and/or ramps with 15th street in addition to making 49, 6 lanes through that corridor. I like the addition of the 15th street bridge but the Bridge widening over US 62 should be widened to 8 lanes. I think the presence of the frontage roads is preventing this from happening???
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: I-39 on June 18, 2022, 04:29:54 PM
They are just now trying to address the Wedington road issue??? Cheesewhiz, that is 15 years overdue. That area was Sprawling area when I was there from 2006-09...

ARDOT: planning for yesterday, sometimes next week.

Same could be said about TDOT.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on June 20, 2022, 02:11:52 PM
NWA gazette posted info about interchange improvements at U.S. 62. Included are plans to widen 62 from 1 mile road to IH 49. Adding a overpass and/or ramps with 15th street in addition to making 49, 6 lanes through that corridor. I like the addition of the 15th street bridge but the Bridge widening over US 62 should be widened to 8 lanes. I think the presence of the frontage roads is preventing this from happening???

There's plenty of space to widen the bridge itself to 8 lanes, but Shiloh and Futrall drive within a mile and a half in either direction are quite close to the mainline lanes in spots, so 8 laning things south of the Mount Comfort/Porter Rd. exit (Exit 65) will get a little tight the further south it would go.  It certainly should happen at least north of MLK (Exit 62) with the amount of local traffic that there is north of Exit 62.  They are looking like they'll close the current entrance/exit ramps south of Exit 62 and have everything exiting northbound onto MLK and entering southbound from MLK utilize the converted 1-way access roads and traffic circles to 15th St. (Exit 61?).  Those current ramps have terrible geometry at Shiloh/Futrall anyway, so they won't be missed as they don't function well for acceleration to/deceleration from 65 MPH.  All of the mainline expansion to 6 lanes down to the Fulbright Expressway southern exit will continue within the median with a barrier just like it is with the current 6/8 lane portions according to the schematics of the website linked above in my previous post.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on June 21, 2022, 05:42:29 PM
i can only think of a couple of 4-lane stretches of interstate in Arkansas, both in the Little Rock area: The 2-mile stretch of I-40 between the I-30 and US 67 interchanges, and the short stretch of I-30 west of the I-430 interchange (that's actually 5 lanes counting the decel lane for Otter Creek). 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sprjus4 on June 21, 2022, 08:56:24 PM
^ 4 lane, as in… 8 total lanes?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: intelati49 on June 21, 2022, 09:05:10 PM
^ 4 lane, as in… 8 total lanes?
I'm assuming so, my initial thought was "four lane is the standard interstate... oh, four lanes for a carriageway"

LM-Q730

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on June 23, 2022, 05:53:03 PM
i can only think of a couple of 4-lane stretches of interstate in Arkansas, both in the Little Rock area: The 2-mile stretch of I-40 between the I-30 and US 67 interchanges, and the short stretch of I-30 west of the I-430 interchange (that's actually 5 lanes counting the decel lane for Otter Creek).

Fayetteville I-49 between Exits 65 and 67 is 8-9 lanes.

https://goo.gl/maps/N9uvFdTfPa5kTzin7 (https://goo.gl/maps/N9uvFdTfPa5kTzin7)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Plutonic Panda on July 15, 2022, 10:22:39 PM
Not really any new information but it should be breaking ground this fall:

Quote
They also heard that solutions have been made to save $65 million on a bridge over the Arkansas River and initial ground-breaking of the 13.7 miles of interstate from Alma to Barling should happen this fall.

- https://talkbusiness.net/2022/07/highway-officials-tout-benefit-of-i-49-completion/?fbclid=IwAR0laPS-iK6cBp7F95Q8JeN_sCZwzgV7nYF6tnZ95rsfVq9yasRSmh2Sfso
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on July 18, 2022, 10:48:53 AM
Not really any new information but it should be breaking ground this fall:

Quote
They also heard that solutions have been made to save $65 million on a bridge over the Arkansas River and initial ground-breaking of the 13.7 miles of interstate from Alma to Barling should happen this fall.

- https://talkbusiness.net/2022/07/highway-officials-tout-benefit-of-i-49-completion/?fbclid=IwAR0laPS-iK6cBp7F95Q8JeN_sCZwzgV7nYF6tnZ95rsfVq9yasRSmh2Sfso

Yeah, this is just ceremonial and clearing some brush for a little over a mile.  It's not going to start in earnest for a while.  2 lanes by the end of the decade leaves a lot of wiggle room on priorities.  Hope they get started before they have to clear the brush again!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: The Ghostbuster on July 18, 2022, 02:55:28 PM
I wonder when one will be able to drive non-stop on Interstate 49 from the Louisiana border to the Missouri border? I suspect one might have to wait until 2050 for that to occur.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Rick Powell on July 18, 2022, 04:18:58 PM
I wonder when one will be able to drive non-stop on Interstate 49 from the Louisiana border to the Missouri border? I suspect one might have to wait until 2050 for that to occur.

2050? Maybe if you include "TO I-49" signed portions of US 71.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on July 20, 2022, 09:46:18 PM
Just getting down from Alma to Y City and bypassing the bigger towns south from there will be a massive timesaver. Won't be as great as a full 2di, but it's not nothing. 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: msunat97 on July 21, 2022, 09:19:20 AM
I wonder when one will be able to drive non-stop on Interstate 49 from the Louisiana border to the Missouri border? I suspect one might have to wait until 2050 for that to occur.

I'm 48 & I don't expect to see it in my lifetime. 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: silverback1065 on July 21, 2022, 09:24:05 AM
I wonder when one will be able to drive non-stop on Interstate 49 from the Louisiana border to the Missouri border? I suspect one might have to wait until 2050 for that to occur.

I'm 48 & I don't expect to see it in my lifetime.

 :-D
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: dariusb on July 23, 2022, 09:18:56 PM
i can only think of a couple of 4-lane stretches of interstate in Arkansas, both in the Little Rock area: The 2-mile stretch of I-40 between the I-30 and US 67 interchanges, and the short stretch of I-30 west of the I-430 interchange (that's actually 5 lanes counting the decel lane for Otter Creek).

Fayetteville I-49 between Exits 65 and 67 is 8-9 lanes.

https://goo.gl/maps/N9uvFdTfPa5kTzin7 (https://goo.gl/maps/N9uvFdTfPa5kTzin7)
Outside of Little Rock, Fayetteville has the highest interstate traffic counts, right?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: rte66man on July 24, 2022, 05:47:34 PM
i can only think of a couple of 4-lane stretches of interstate in Arkansas, both in the Little Rock area: The 2-mile stretch of I-40 between the I-30 and US 67 interchanges, and the short stretch of I-30 west of the I-430 interchange (that's actually 5 lanes counting the decel lane for Otter Creek).

Fayetteville I-49 between Exits 65 and 67 is 8-9 lanes.

https://goo.gl/maps/N9uvFdTfPa5kTzin7 (https://goo.gl/maps/N9uvFdTfPa5kTzin7)
Outside of Little Rock, Fayetteville has the highest interstate traffic counts, right?

I would think I55/I40 in West Memphis would be higher than Fayetteville
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Tomahawkin on July 24, 2022, 06:35:52 PM
55/40 Goes no more than 6 lanes total in West Memphis. If it does go to 7-8 lanes, its only at exit ramps

OT Is anyone suprised that the Skyline in Little Rock hasnt Changed in almost 40 years? Meanwhile the next state over in Nashville and Knoxville both are some of the biggest booming cities in the south along with Fayetteville ( Even though Fayetteville is considered Midsouth)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on July 25, 2022, 02:10:08 PM
55/40 Goes no more than 6 lanes total in West Memphis. If it does go to 7-8 lanes, its only at exit ramps

OT Is anyone suprised that the Skyline in Little Rock hasnt Changed in almost 40 years? Meanwhile the next state over in Nashville and Knoxville both are some of the biggest booming cities in the south along with Fayetteville ( Even though Fayetteville is considered Midsouth)

According to 2021 AADT counts, the stretch that's 9 lanes for the entrance ramp from Fulbright Expressway going southbound in Fayetteville is 90,000 (https://www.ardot.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/Fayetteville.pdf).

And West Memphis the I-40/I-55 multiplex is 80,000 (https://www.ardot.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/Marion_West_Memphis.pdf).
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on July 25, 2022, 02:25:18 PM
Those aren't even the highest I-49 counts in NWA.

Springdale/Lowell is 93,000 (https://www.ardot.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/Springdale.pdf)
Lowell/Rogers is 92,000 (https://www.ardot.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/Rogers.pdf)
Rogers between Exits 81 and 82 is 91,000.

Benton County has higher traffic counts, but the exit spacing is better, so there aren't as many of the merging conflicts that Fayetteville suffers from.  I-4X/I-50 will make Lowell much worse once it's fully fleshed out.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Tomahawkin on July 25, 2022, 06:48:43 PM
Thanks for providing those traffic counts. Is US 71 from Fayetteville up through Springdale still congested from the hours 2pm to 8pm? I remember US71 and Joyce being one of the most congested intersections in the state? This was Circa 2007-08 before I moved back to Georgia...
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on July 25, 2022, 09:06:32 PM
Thanks for providing those traffic counts. Is US 71 from Fayetteville up through Springdale still congested from the hours 2pm to 8pm? I remember US71 and Joyce being one of the most congested intersections in the state? This was Circa 2007-08 before I moved back to Georgia...

It's not quite as bad as it was 2 years ago now that they have opened the left-lane flyover from NB US-71B->Fulbright Expressway/Mall Ave (https://goo.gl/maps/uGTxa2wvSywHpUTL7).  Just as much traffic coming from everywhere other than the protected left from NB US-71B->W. Joyce Blvd., which doesn't have to run as long since there isn't nearly as much U-turn to Fulbright Expressway/Mall Ave. traffic there now. That gives more intersection time for the other movements.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: rte66man on July 30, 2022, 03:05:46 PM
55/40 Goes no more than 6 lanes total in West Memphis. If it does go to 7-8 lanes, its only at exit ramps

OT Is anyone suprised that the Skyline in Little Rock hasnt Changed in almost 40 years? Meanwhile the next state over in Nashville and Knoxville both are some of the biggest booming cities in the south along with Fayetteville ( Even though Fayetteville is considered Midsouth)

According to 2021 AADT counts, the stretch that's 9 lanes for the entrance ramp from Fulbright Expressway going southbound in Fayetteville is 90,000 (https://www.ardot.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/Fayetteville.pdf).

And West Memphis the I-40/I-55 multiplex is 80,000 (https://www.ardot.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/Marion_West_Memphis.pdf).

Would never have guessed that. They must have taken all their data points for the average in West Memphis at 3 a.m. :)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on July 31, 2022, 04:28:16 PM
55/40 Goes no more than 6 lanes total in West Memphis. If it does go to 7-8 lanes, its only at exit ramps

OT Is anyone suprised that the Skyline in Little Rock hasnt Changed in almost 40 years? Meanwhile the next state over in Nashville and Knoxville both are some of the biggest booming cities in the south along with Fayetteville ( Even though Fayetteville is considered Midsouth)

According to 2021 AADT counts, the stretch that's 9 lanes for the entrance ramp from Fulbright Expressway going southbound in Fayetteville is 90,000 (https://www.ardot.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/Fayetteville.pdf).

And West Memphis the I-40/I-55 multiplex is 80,000 (https://www.ardot.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/Marion_West_Memphis.pdf).

Would never have guessed that. They must have taken all their data points for the average in West Memphis at 3 a.m. :)

I'm sure the averaging part of AADT handles time of day issues.  The part that makes W. Memphis worse is the percentage of truck traffic being higher and the need for merging/lane changing within a fairly short distance.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: abqtraveler on July 31, 2022, 09:39:58 PM
55/40 Goes no more than 6 lanes total in West Memphis. If it does go to 7-8 lanes, its only at exit ramps

OT Is anyone suprised that the Skyline in Little Rock hasnt Changed in almost 40 years? Meanwhile the next state over in Nashville and Knoxville both are some of the biggest booming cities in the south along with Fayetteville ( Even though Fayetteville is considered Midsouth)

According to 2021 AADT counts, the stretch that's 9 lanes for the entrance ramp from Fulbright Expressway going southbound in Fayetteville is 90,000 (https://www.ardot.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/Fayetteville.pdf).

And West Memphis the I-40/I-55 multiplex is 80,000 (https://www.ardot.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/Marion_West_Memphis.pdf).

Would never have guessed that. They must have taken all their data points for the average in West Memphis at 3 a.m. :)

I'm sure the averaging part of AADT handles time of day issues.  The part that makes W. Memphis worse is the percentage of truck traffic being higher and the need for merging/lane changing within a fairly short distance.

Which is why it would make sense to complete I-269 as a full outer beltway around Memphis. Two new bridges, one to the north, and one to the south, would relieve traffic on the I-40 and I-55 bridges, which are both overburdened.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Plutonic Panda on August 01, 2022, 12:34:59 AM
^^^ or build I-55 on a new alignment west of Memphis first.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on August 01, 2022, 12:52:44 AM
55/40 Goes no more than 6 lanes total in West Memphis. If it does go to 7-8 lanes, its only at exit ramps

OT Is anyone suprised that the Skyline in Little Rock hasnt Changed in almost 40 years? Meanwhile the next state over in Nashville and Knoxville both are some of the biggest booming cities in the south along with Fayetteville ( Even though Fayetteville is considered Midsouth)

According to 2021 AADT counts, the stretch that's 9 lanes for the entrance ramp from Fulbright Expressway going southbound in Fayetteville is 90,000 (https://www.ardot.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/Fayetteville.pdf).

And West Memphis the I-40/I-55 multiplex is 80,000 (https://www.ardot.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/Marion_West_Memphis.pdf).

Would never have guessed that. They must have taken all their data points for the average in West Memphis at 3 a.m. :)

I'm sure the averaging part of AADT handles time of day issues.  The part that makes W. Memphis worse is the percentage of truck traffic being higher and the need for merging/lane changing within a fairly short distance.

Which is why it would make sense to complete I-269 as a full outer beltway around Memphis. Two new bridges, one to the north, and one to the south, would relieve traffic on the I-40 and I-55 bridges, which are both overburdened.

Here, here!  Once they've taken care of a few of the interchanges in NWA, it'll be about time to add another lane in each direction on I-49, or get serious about an I-x49 western beltway.  At the current rate of growth in the area, I give it 10-12 years before it becomes overdue, but the extra 2 lanes on mainline I-49 are already needed 5 hours out of the day.  I-x49 would likely run from straight south of the E/W bend of the BVB, skirt the edge of XNA, the Illinois River Valley, and run near Prairie Grove and tie back in just south of the Greenland exit winding around a couple of tall hills.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: razorback0308 on August 01, 2022, 08:09:29 PM
55/40 Goes no more than 6 lanes total in West Memphis. If it does go to 7-8 lanes, its only at exit ramps

OT Is anyone suprised that the Skyline in Little Rock hasnt Changed in almost 40 years? Meanwhile the next state over in Nashville and Knoxville both are some of the biggest booming cities in the south along with Fayetteville ( Even though Fayetteville is considered Midsouth)

According to 2021 AADT counts, the stretch that's 9 lanes for the entrance ramp from Fulbright Expressway going southbound in Fayetteville is 90,000 (https://www.ardot.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/Fayetteville.pdf).

And West Memphis the I-40/I-55 multiplex is 80,000 (https://www.ardot.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/Marion_West_Memphis.pdf).

Would never have guessed that. They must have taken all their data points for the average in West Memphis at 3 a.m. :)

I'm sure the averaging part of AADT handles time of day issues.  The part that makes W. Memphis worse is the percentage of truck traffic being higher and the need for merging/lane changing within a fairly short distance.

Which is why it would make sense to complete I-269 as a full outer beltway around Memphis. Two new bridges, one to the north, and one to the south, would relieve traffic on the I-40 and I-55 bridges, which are both overburdened.

Here, here!  Once they've taken care of a few of the interchanges in NWA, it'll be about time to add another lane in each direction on I-49, or get serious about an I-x49 western beltway.  At the current rate of growth in the area, I give it 10-12 years before it becomes overdue, but the extra 2 lanes on mainline I-49 are already needed 5 hours out of the day.  I-x49 would likely run from straight south of the E/W bend of the BVB, skirt the edge of XNA, the Illinois River Valley, and run near Prairie Grove and tie back in just south of the Greenland exit winding around a couple of tall hills.

Co-sign. As a NW Arkansas resident, the beltway needs to be built within the next 10 years. Sadly though, there’s no chance that will actually happen.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Tomahawkin on August 01, 2022, 10:46:38 PM
Im Cosigning as well...I will be out in Fayetteville tomorrow for the 1st time since 2009. A Beltway is needed because its better to be proactive as opposed to reactive! GA has a hard problem understanding this philospoy.

Problem is Arkansas gets little funding for projects like this. its the main reason as to why I suggested a 50 cent toll on IH 49 or on IH 30 in the Bryant area in 2006-09 when I was In college. I find it funny that peolple will pay for 5 dollar gas but refuse to pay for 50 cent tolls that benefit their own state...

And I heard that its the Gov't that Bans tolls in the state. Its night and day when comparing road and interchange improvements between Arkansas and Texas over the last 25 years, IDC about the population gap. Arkansas needs serious road improvements statewide....
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: The Ghostbuster on August 02, 2022, 06:54:30 PM
Would it be possible to extend the Fulbright Expressway into a full Fayetteville beltway? I think there is too much development to the east to make such a route happen. I'm not sure where else a Fayetteville beltway could be alternatively constructed, even hypothetically.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on August 03, 2022, 01:15:18 AM
I don't recall the Y City-Acorn passage as particularly treacherous.

That is called Foran Gap. Black Fork Mountain rises in eastern Oklahoma near Page, and heads into Arkansas and terminates at Eagle Gap. Fourche Mountain begins at the other side of Eagle Gap, and runs all the way into Montgomery County. Foran Gap is a natural pass that runs northwest-southeast and cuts through the rather tall mountain (by Ouachita standards), and that is the reason US 71 and 270 has the huge S curve. in it. Foran Gap isn't bad at all, but if you tried to build a freeway over Fourche Mountain that ran due north from Acorn, it would have some very steep grades and there would be plenty of curves. When I-49 is routed through there, there will only be one really big sweeping curve in it, since it will run due south from CR 70 towards AR 88 east of Mena, and avoiding Acorn entirely. Blue Mountain, which is a peak on Fourche Mountain, is the fifth highest point in the state. A structure will have to be built at Foran Gap where the Ouachita Trail crosses the highway. Hopefully they will somehow retain access to the trail at this point.

Here's a Google Earth shot of Foran Gap, looking northwest. It's easy to see how the mountain has a low spot in it where the highways run.

(https://i.imgur.com/hv0u796.png)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on August 03, 2022, 10:40:25 PM
Would it be possible to extend the Fulbright Expressway into a full Fayetteville beltway? I think there is too much development to the east to make such a route happen. I'm not sure where else a Fayetteville beltway could be alternatively constructed, even hypothetically.

IIRC, that is a future project that has been discussed, but there are no plans at this time.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Tomahawkin on August 04, 2022, 06:00:53 PM
Drove 49 up to KC today. I was impressed with the fact that ARDOT Is proactive in building more bridges and future exits over 49 in the Roger's area. I'm amazed at the Growth there. With that said IMO it's time to think about making 49, 8 total lanes from Fayetteville to center city Roger's. 49 was congested at 1130 am this morning. I'm amazed at all the truck traffic that uses that route. And looking at the BVB I can see how it took so long to build it because of all the rock blasting that had to be done. Assuming the same will need to be done from Ft Smith to Louisiana, it may not be til 2040 until 49 gets built through there...Also the Wedington road bridge needs an overhaul. That is a dangerous intersection. I'd wish they would get rid of those frontage roads at that interchange...
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on August 04, 2022, 06:04:14 PM
Drove 49 up to KC today. I was impressed with the fact that ARDOT Is proactive in building more bridges and future exits over 49 in the Roger's area. I'm amazed at the Growth there. With that said IMO it's time to think about making 49, 8 total lanes from Fayetteville to center city Roger's. 49 was congested at 1130 am this morning. I'm amazed at all the truck traffic that uses that route. And looking at the BVB I can see how it took so long to build it because of all the rock blasting that had to be done. Assuming the same will need to be done from Ft Smith to Louisiana, it may not be til 2040 until 49 gets built through there...Also the Wedington road bridge needs an overhaul. That is a dangerous intersection. I'd wish they would get rid of those frontage roads at that interchange...

Wedington is in the process of being redone. ARDOT made a mess when they built the frontage roads.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on August 04, 2022, 07:01:20 PM
Drove 49 up to KC today. I was impressed with the fact that ARDOT Is proactive in building more bridges and future exits over 49 in the Roger's area. I'm amazed at the Growth there. With that said IMO it's time to think about making 49, 8 total lanes from Fayetteville to center city Roger's. 49 was congested at 1130 am this morning. I'm amazed at all the truck traffic that uses that route. And looking at the BVB I can see how it took so long to build it because of all the rock blasting that had to be done. Assuming the same will need to be done from Ft Smith to Louisiana, it may not be til 2040 until 49 gets built through there...Also the Wedington road bridge needs an overhaul. That is a dangerous intersection. I'd wish they would get rid of those frontage roads at that interchange...

Wedington is in the process of being redone. ARDOT made a mess when they built the frontage roads.

Wedington's interchange is scheduled to complete 05/23 according to the construction information sign at the ends of the zone.  They've got a lot of work to do between now and then to do the parclo portion from E.B. Wedington to N.B. I-49, though.

The frontage roads are a cluster here for sure.  There is a gap from Wedington Dr. all the way to Gregg Ave. for Futrall Dr., and Shiloh Dr. has 2 gaps between Gregg Ave. and Garland Ave. as well as from Mt. Comfort/Porter Rd. and Wedington Dr.  I wouldn't say that any other city in NWA along I-49 has anything that resembles a workable access road design whatsoever.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on August 04, 2022, 09:18:34 PM
Drove 49 up to KC today. I was impressed with the fact that ARDOT Is proactive in building more bridges and future exits over 49 in the Roger's area. I'm amazed at the Growth there. With that said IMO it's time to think about making 49, 8 total lanes from Fayetteville to center city Roger's. 49 was congested at 1130 am this morning. I'm amazed at all the truck traffic that uses that route. And looking at the BVB I can see how it took so long to build it because of all the rock blasting that had to be done. Assuming the same will need to be done from Ft Smith to Louisiana, it may not be til 2040 until 49 gets built through there...Also the Wedington road bridge needs an overhaul. That is a dangerous intersection. I'd wish they would get rid of those frontage roads at that interchange...

Wedington is in the process of being redone. ARDOT made a mess when they built the frontage roads.

Wedington's interchange is scheduled to complete 05/23 according to the construction information sign at the ends of the zone.  They've got a lot of work to do between now and then to do the parclo portion from E.B. Wedington to N.B. I-49, though.

The frontage roads are a cluster here for sure.  There is a gap from Wedington Dr. all the way to Gregg Ave. for Futrall Dr., and Shiloh Dr. has 2 gaps between Gregg Ave. and Garland Ave. as well as from Mt. Comfort/Porter Rd. and Wedington Dr.  I wouldn't say that any other city in NWA along I-49 has anything that resembles a workable access road design whatsoever.

ARDOT is good about planning for yesterday sometime next week :p 
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on August 05, 2022, 10:45:36 AM
Drove 49 up to KC today. I was impressed with the fact that ARDOT Is proactive in building more bridges and future exits over 49 in the Roger's area. I'm amazed at the Growth there. With that said IMO it's time to think about making 49, 8 total lanes from Fayetteville to center city Roger's. 49 was congested at 1130 am this morning. I'm amazed at all the truck traffic that uses that route. And looking at the BVB I can see how it took so long to build it because of all the rock blasting that had to be done. Assuming the same will need to be done from Ft Smith to Louisiana, it may not be til 2040 until 49 gets built through there...Also the Wedington road bridge needs an overhaul. That is a dangerous intersection. I'd wish they would get rid of those frontage roads at that interchange...

I think that Rogers has more to do with the 2 new overpasses than ARDOT does.  Rogers is really the only other city in NWA that has any semblance of access roads, between Exits 82 and 85, but Promenade Ave. is pretty far from I-49 in many areas to be legitimately called an access road.

As far as 8 laning goes between Exits 67 and 88, I would agree.  There's a great many times off-peak that I can't maintain 70MPH due to all 3 lanes being plugged in one direction.  Congestion doesn't just occur due to rush hour or accidents.  It's still world's better than it was when it was just 4 lanes, as I would just use AR-112 regularly at its pitiful ~45MPH limit (out of the towns at least) and almost no passing lanes going to Benton County for jobs.  I don't do that as much anymore, but am probably fixing to start again due to Wedington Dr. construction and a stupid illegally operated red dirt mine that Tom Terminella put in that plugs up Harmon Rd. with dump trucks climbing up a very steep hill at 2MPH, assuming they don't miss a shift and stall altogether.  I just hope they don't start the AR-112 widening until after 5/23 so I have at least one northbound route that isn't bottlenecked by construction zones.  The access road situation at Wedington is in the process of being corrected, along with better flow in the mornings for everyone getting onto I-49 northbound to head to Tyson, J.B. Hunt, and Wal-Mart to work.  They'll get rid of 2 sets of traffic lights at the overpass ends when they fix the interchange.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: edwaleni on August 05, 2022, 02:44:13 PM
I don't recall the Y City-Acorn passage as particularly treacherous.

That is called Foran Gap. Black Fork Mountain rises in eastern Oklahoma near Page, and heads into Arkansas and terminates at Eagle Gap. Fourche Mountain begins at the other side of Eagle Gap, and runs all the way into Montgomery County. Foran Gap is a natural pass that runs northwest-southeast and cuts through the rather tall mountain (by Ouachita standards), and that is the reason US 71 and 270 has the huge S curve. in it. Foran Gap isn't bad at all, but if you tried to build a freeway over Fourche Mountain that ran due north from Acorn, it would have some very steep grades and there would be plenty of curves. When I-49 is routed through there, there will only be one really big sweeping curve in it, since it will run due south from CR 70 towards AR 88 east of Mena, and avoiding Acorn entirely. Blue Mountain, which is a peak on Fourche Mountain, is the fifth highest point in the state. A structure will have to be built at Foran Gap where the Ouachita Trail crosses the highway. Hopefully they will somehow retain access to the trail at this point.

Here's a Google Earth shot of Foran Gap, looking northwest. It's easy to see how the mountain has a low spot in it where the highways run.

(https://i.imgur.com/hv0u796.png)

Excellent perspective on the Foran Gap. Thanks for sharing.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on August 05, 2022, 05:49:03 PM
I don't recall the Y City-Acorn passage as particularly treacherous.

That is called Foran Gap. Black Fork Mountain rises in eastern Oklahoma near Page, and heads into Arkansas and terminates at Eagle Gap. Fourche Mountain begins at the other side of Eagle Gap, and runs all the way into Montgomery County. Foran Gap is a natural pass that runs northwest-southeast and cuts through the rather tall mountain (by Ouachita standards), and that is the reason US 71 and 270 has the huge S curve. in it. Foran Gap isn't bad at all, but if you tried to build a freeway over Fourche Mountain that ran due north from Acorn, it would have some very steep grades and there would be plenty of curves. When I-49 is routed through there, there will only be one really big sweeping curve in it, since it will run due south from CR 70 towards AR 88 east of Mena, and avoiding Acorn entirely. Blue Mountain, which is a peak on Fourche Mountain, is the fifth highest point in the state. A structure will have to be built at Foran Gap where the Ouachita Trail crosses the highway. Hopefully they will somehow retain access to the trail at this point.

Here's a Google Earth shot of Foran Gap, looking northwest. It's easy to see how the mountain has a low spot in it where the highways run.

(https://i.imgur.com/hv0u796.png)

Excellent perspective on the Foran Gap. Thanks for sharing.

And this view give a decent perspective of the elevation relief that this section has to navigate through:

https://goo.gl/maps/kSwfmAEM5uSpUUSG6 (https://goo.gl/maps/kSwfmAEM5uSpUUSG6)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on September 19, 2022, 01:11:07 PM
The 2023-2026 draft STIP was posted by ARDOT.  Looks like 2025 has budgeted $256M for Future I-49 across the Arkansas River from AR-22 to Gun Club Rd.  Almost assuredly 2 lanes initially at that rate.  There's several other items for project development of the other segments, including the I-40/I-49 interchange.  Not a done deal since it's a draft version, but unlikely to be significant changes barring any world changing events.

https://www.ardot.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/2023-2026_STIP_Draft_General_Electronic.pdf (https://www.ardot.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/2023-2026_STIP_Draft_General_Electronic.pdf) Pg. 3 and 4 (Slide 34-35)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on September 28, 2022, 01:21:19 PM
ARDOT Public Involvement Meeting in Alma 9/29 from 4PM-7PM to present the plans for I-40<->AR-22.  Looks like they are changing to a half mile long embankment on the north side of the river to reduce bridging costs of the Arkansas River.  Online materials also include a nice flyover animation of the 4 level stack for I-40/I-49.  Looks like ~2027 before the connection is finished, although there isn't anything in these materials about it being limited to 2 lanes initially, so maybe the federal money fairy is blessing the project?

https://vpiph03-job-040748-hwy-22-i40-arkansas-river-i49-en-ardot.hub.arcgis.com/ (https://vpiph03-job-040748-hwy-22-i40-arkansas-river-i49-en-ardot.hub.arcgis.com/)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: zzcarp on September 28, 2022, 02:33:42 PM
Wow, that is a nicely detailed site with the roll plans and the 3D renderings! Kudos to ARDOT.

Does anyone know the reason why there are two southbound ramps to Clear Creek Road, both of which having full movements?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on September 28, 2022, 02:54:04 PM
Wow, that is a nicely detailed site with the roll plans and the 3D renderings! Kudos to ARDOT.

Does anyone know the reason why there are two southbound ramps to Clear Creek Road, both of which having full movements?

That is a head scratcher, especially for a project that isn't fully funded yet.  Gives options for easier right-turn movements, but certainly seems redundant especially for a road that's 2800 AADT as of 2021.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on September 28, 2022, 10:23:41 PM
Wow, that is a nicely detailed site with the roll plans and the 3D renderings! Kudos to ARDOT.

Does anyone know the reason why there are two southbound ramps to Clear Creek Road, both of which having full movements?

That is a head scratcher, especially for a project that isn't fully funded yet.  Gives options for easier right-turn movements, but certainly seems redundant especially for a road that's 2800 AADT as of 2021.
I'm guessing that part is still in design and the video is incorporating both options.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on September 30, 2022, 09:57:49 AM
Wow, that is a nicely detailed site with the roll plans and the 3D renderings! Kudos to ARDOT.

Does anyone know the reason why there are two southbound ramps to Clear Creek Road, both of which having full movements?

That is a head scratcher, especially for a project that isn't fully funded yet.  Gives options for easier right-turn movements, but certainly seems redundant especially for a road that's 2800 AADT as of 2021.
I'm guessing that part is still in design and the video is incorporating both options.

Makes sense.  And if that's the case, then the best option in my opinion is the straight ramp as most traffic will be turning right toward town anyway.  Unless ROW constraints necessitate the curved option, it's always better to decelerate slowly straight to the intersection.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on October 10, 2022, 08:28:33 AM
ARDOT found hidden water lines, further delaying the Exit 64/Wedington Dr. project.  Now they estimate it's 10% complete with the added delay and they're looking at 2 years until complete.  This likely causes an overlap in construction with the Exit 62/MLK project which was independently developed and funded, so fun times ahead next year in south Fayetteville!

https://www.4029tv.com/article/utilities-hampering-i-49-wedington-project/41537710 (https://www.4029tv.com/article/utilities-hampering-i-49-wedington-project/41537710)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on October 11, 2022, 08:59:03 PM
And we're off...sort of

https://www.nwahomepage.com/river-valley-news/future-interstate-49-to-break-ground-in-barling/
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on October 11, 2022, 10:23:29 PM
It's about damned time.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Tomahawkin on October 12, 2022, 10:56:02 AM
It's 10+ years overdue. Hopefully by 2024 the next phase will already be signed and we can get how they are planning to run the route
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on October 12, 2022, 11:29:37 AM
I think this "groundbreaking" is just for the grubbing and clearing from AR-22 to H Street toward the river as that's all that's the only project budgeted for the next year.  My guess is that we're going to have lots of groundbreaking ceremonies at this rate before we get 2 lanes across the river and up to I-40.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: msunat97 on October 13, 2022, 03:36:16 PM
I think this "groundbreaking" is just for the grubbing and clearing from AR-22 to H Street toward the river as that's all that's the only project budgeted for the next year.  My guess is that we're going to have lots of groundbreaking ceremonies at this rate before we get 2 lanes across the river and up to I-40.
You are 100% correct
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: O Tamandua on October 13, 2022, 08:31:36 PM
The "3 Bs" of Arkansas I-49:

1. The Bella Vista Bypass (counting it as one "B"  :-D, complete)
2. The Bridge (over the Arkansas River - starting, however modestly)
3. The Big one (Greenwood-Texarkana, Greenwood-Y City 2-lane funding allocated(?), after that, ?)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: US71 on October 13, 2022, 09:21:32 PM
I think this "groundbreaking" is just for the grubbing and clearing from AR-22 to H Street toward the river as that's all that's the only project budgeted for the next year.  My guess is that we're going to have lots of groundbreaking ceremonies at this rate before we get 2 lanes across the river and up to I-40.
You are 100% correct

But it's a start, so give ARDOT at least some credit
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on October 14, 2022, 02:28:44 AM
The "3 Bs" of Arkansas I-49:

1. The Bella Vista Bypass (counting it as one "B"  :-D, complete)
2. The Bridge (over the Arkansas River - starting, however modestly)
3. The Big one (Greenwood-Texarkana, Greenwood-Y City 2-lane funding allocated(?), after that, ?)
4. ???
5. PROFIT!
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on October 14, 2022, 06:43:52 PM
I think this "groundbreaking" is just for the grubbing and clearing from AR-22 to H Street toward the river as that's all that's the only project budgeted for the next year.  My guess is that we're going to have lots of groundbreaking ceremonies at this rate before we get 2 lanes across the river and up to I-40.
You are 100% correct

But it's a start, so give ARDOT at least some credit

True, but if it takes more than a couple of years to progress to the southern bridge approach with actual roadbed (Draft STIP isn't clear on what "project development" entails), they'll wind up clearing it again the way vegetation grows in Arkansas everywhere that isn't in the mountains.  I grew up in the river valley, so I know how fast brush can creep back up if it isn't kept mowed.  Pretty much everything can grow there that isn't tropical.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on April 28, 2023, 02:25:39 PM
Excellent perspective on the Foran Gap. Thanks for sharing.

You're welcome. I have family who lives in the immediate area, so I'm quite familiar with it. I-49 will follow US 71/270 through Foran Gap, then it will split off to the south-southeast at about the point where 71/270 curves to the south. It will meet CR 70/FS 76/Posey Hollow Road about a half mile east of current 71/270. The roads will have to be significantly reconfigured, but I haven't seen any maps of the future configuration. My guess is that current 71/270 north of 70/76 will be a dead end road and 71/270 will be routed along 70/76 between I-49 and current 71/270. The current 71/270 and 70/76 intersection will be reconfigured to favor the new 71/270 alignment. I need to make a map of it to explain it better.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on April 28, 2023, 04:22:35 PM
And this view give a decent perspective of the elevation relief that this section has to navigate through:
https://goo.gl/maps/kSwfmAEM5uSpUUSG6 (https://goo.gl/maps/kSwfmAEM5uSpUUSG6)

Here is a Street View image (https://www.google.com/maps/@34.6130714,-94.204543,3a,15y,2.36h,93.21t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sUYhpnADvFLczZYe1bXPlxg!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DUYhpnADvFLczZYe1bXPlxg%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D117.28%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192) from US 59/71 northbound between Mena and Acorn. You can see Fourche Mountain looming in the distance. A tunnel due north of Acorn would be over 2 miles long. A roadcut is out of the question as it would devastate the landscape. This area is part of the Ouachita National Forest, and the Ouachita Trail runs east-west along Fourche Mountain. Speaking of the Ouachita Trail, there will have to be some sort of bridge across I-49 to carry the trail. There is a trailhead at the junction of the trail and US 71/270, which will also have to be addressed in some way.

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on April 28, 2023, 08:12:56 PM
And this view give a decent perspective of the elevation relief that this section has to navigate through:
https://goo.gl/maps/kSwfmAEM5uSpUUSG6 (https://goo.gl/maps/kSwfmAEM5uSpUUSG6)

Here is a Street View image (https://www.google.com/maps/@34.6130714,-94.204543,3a,15y,2.36h,93.21t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sUYhpnADvFLczZYe1bXPlxg!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DUYhpnADvFLczZYe1bXPlxg%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D117.28%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192) from US 59/71 northbound between Mena and Acorn. You can see Fourche Mountain looming in the distance. A tunnel due north of Acorn would be over 2 miles long. A roadcut is out of the question as it would devastate the landscape. This area is part of the Ouachita National Forest, and the Ouachita Trail runs east-west along Fourche Mountain. Speaking of the Ouachita Trail, there will have to be some sort of bridge across I-49 to carry the trail. There is a trailhead at the junction of the trail and US 71/270, which will also have to be addressed in some way.

Funny, both of our views are of the same mountain, but from either side, with the view at 1000'.  The top of that mountain is near 2500', so it sort of disputes the notion that western Arkansas is more hilly than mountainous.  The Ozarks are more very deep hollows and valleys making for the more than 1000' relief that it takes to denote a mountain as opposed to a hill.  The Ouachitas in Arkansas are rather steep ridges in comparison, making the sucker we took the views of 1500' higher than the surrounding valleys.  Even Foran Gap is 1100' below the ridgeline on both sides, which would make either ridge a mountain if the gap itself was considered the elevation of the surroundings.  A tunnel through the mountains on either side of the gap would be deep and long.  Great for certain aspects of adult life, but not for roadbuilding expressways.  So, it will certainly shoot the gap as it would be substantially more difficult and longer than the Hopper Tunnel.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: The Ghostbuster on April 29, 2023, 11:55:50 AM
The Interstate 49 in Arkansas page has been altered again (see exit guide): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_49_in_Arkansas. The segment of Interstate 49/AR 549 that opened in 2015 is back to showing the exits being back to being listed by the mileage from the Arkansas/Louisiana border (present and future). It appears the exits were not renumbered to being a continuation of old 540’s numbers, as was previously marked on Wikipedia. Do correct me if I’m wrong, since I’m basing the information on the Wikipedia page, and the Google Maps Street View, which is dated July 2022.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: abqtraveler on April 29, 2023, 12:46:56 PM
The Interstate 49 in Arkansas page has been altered again (see exit guide): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_49_in_Arkansas. The segment of Interstate 49/AR 549 that opened in 2015 is back to showing the exits being back to being listed by the mileage from the Arkansas/Louisiana border (present and future). It appears the exits were not renumbered to being a continuation of old 540’s numbers, as was previously marked on Wikipedia. Do correct me if I’m wrong, since I’m basing the information on the Wikipedia page, and the Google Maps Street View, which is dated July 2022.
It's highly illogical that they kept the old I-540 exit numbers and mileposts on the stretch of I-49 from I-40 to Missouri. Moreover, I don't know how or why the FHWA is letting ArDOT get away with that, given that the FHWA required Indiana to renumber all of its exits on the original stretch of I-69 between Indianapolis and Michigan when the first part of the extension of I-69 to Evansville opened in 2012. Regardless, once ArDOT completes the connection to the section that goes through Fort Chaffee to I-40, they will need to figure out what to do with the exit numbers on I-49. At that point they might be forced to renumber exits between I-40 and Missouri to reflect I-49's total mileage, assuming the proposed alignment of I-49 between Texarkana and Fort Smith has been finalized.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on May 01, 2023, 12:59:23 PM
The Interstate 49 in Arkansas page has been altered again (see exit guide): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_49_in_Arkansas. The segment of Interstate 49/AR 549 that opened in 2015 is back to showing the exits being back to being listed by the mileage from the Arkansas/Louisiana border (present and future). It appears the exits were not renumbered to being a continuation of old 540’s numbers, as was previously marked on Wikipedia. Do correct me if I’m wrong, since I’m basing the information on the Wikipedia page, and the Google Maps Street View, which is dated July 2022.
It's highly illogical that they kept the old I-540 exit numbers and mileposts on the stretch of I-49 from I-40 to Missouri. Moreover, I don't know how or why the FHWA is letting ArDOT get away with that, given that the FHWA required Indiana to renumber all of its exits on the original stretch of I-69 between Indianapolis and Michigan when the first part of the extension of I-69 to Evansville opened in 2012. Regardless, once ArDOT completes the connection to the section that goes through Fort Chaffee to I-40, they will need to figure out what to do with the exit numbers on I-49. At that point they might be forced to renumber exits between I-40 and Missouri to reflect I-49's total mileage, assuming the proposed alignment of I-49 between Texarkana and Fort Smith has been finalized.

Nothing about this stretch is logical, nor was it ever to begin with, and the "fix" of changing the northernmost 3 exit numbers, even less so.  The original I-540's mile markers increment from the junction of I-40 just like every spur Interstate should, even though it goes to the south-southwest.  I-49/I-540 was screwed up from the get-go with beginning at mile marker/Exit 20, with some convoluted logic of mileage being taken from the Oklahoma border, which is I-540/US-271's mileage being near mile marker 15 at the border.  The mental gymnastics must have included the 5 mile unsigned concurrency of I-40 between the I-540 segments before the final long overdue (always should have been, and maybe this would have been avoided?) ASHTO/FHWA approval of I-49 as a number.  It all stinks of deflecting questions/pressure regarding the middle segment of I-49 for as long as possible.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on May 04, 2023, 03:05:28 AM
Nothing about this stretch is logical, nor was it ever to begin with, and the "fix" of changing the northernmost 3 exit numbers, even less so.  The original I-540's mile markers increment from the junction of I-40 just like every spur Interstate should, even though it goes to the south-southwest.  I-49/I-540 was screwed up from the get-go with beginning at mile marker/Exit 20, with some convoluted logic of mileage being taken from the Oklahoma border, which is I-540/US-271's mileage being near mile marker 15 at the border.  The mental gymnastics must have included the 5 mile unsigned concurrency of I-40 between the I-540 segments before the final long overdue (always should have been, and maybe this would have been avoided?) ASHTO/FHWA approval of I-49 as a number.  It all stinks of deflecting questions/pressure regarding the middle segment of I-49 for as long as possible.

It was signed in one direction.

(https://i.imgur.com/KY4qNBS.jpg)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: rte66man on May 04, 2023, 08:58:54 AM
Nothing about this stretch is logical, nor was it ever to begin with, and the "fix" of changing the northernmost 3 exit numbers, even less so.  The original I-540's mile markers increment from the junction of I-40 just like every spur Interstate should, even though it goes to the south-southwest.  I-49/I-540 was screwed up from the get-go with beginning at mile marker/Exit 20, with some convoluted logic of mileage being taken from the Oklahoma border, which is I-540/US-271's mileage being near mile marker 15 at the border.  The mental gymnastics must have included the 5 mile unsigned concurrency of I-40 between the I-540 segments before the final long overdue (always should have been, and maybe this would have been avoided?) ASHTO/FHWA approval of I-49 as a number.  It all stinks of deflecting questions/pressure regarding the middle segment of I-49 for as long as possible.

It was signed in one direction.

(https://i.imgur.com/KY4qNBS.jpg)

Bugo, how long ago was this?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: The Ghostbuster on May 04, 2023, 11:32:22 AM
It must have been sometime between 1999 and 2014 (the 15-year period when Interstates 40 and 540 were co-designated). It doesn't make sense that it was co-signed in only one direction, although US 71 isn't signed along that stretch either (a common occurrence in Arkansas?).
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on May 04, 2023, 04:31:04 PM
Bugo, how long ago was this?

December, 2009. Here's another sign, on northbound I-540 approaching I-40.

(https://i.imgur.com/OunrjEF.jpg)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on May 05, 2023, 11:37:28 AM
Bugo, how long ago was this?

December, 2009. Here's another sign, on northbound I-540 approaching I-40.

(https://i.imgur.com/OunrjEF.jpg)

Looks like southbound at around Exit 21, Collum Ln. in Alma actually.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on May 16, 2023, 07:20:17 AM
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=410633771
Looks 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.

Well, I drove the BVB yesterday to take care of a couple of clinics in Bella Vista and Gravette yesterday.  I noticed something different this trip than the last one a couple of weeks ago.

Good news:  They have changed out some exit numbers as a result of opening the new stretch.

Bad news:  ARDOT doubled-down on the dumb and clearly didn't bother to read the email I sent them that they didn't respond to about correcting mile markers and exit numbers north of Alma and south of Gravette.  The southern Gravette exit I took to get to Bella Vista that was Exit 284 has become........Exit 99.  I'm sure they changed the other 2 exits as well if they changed everything.  It's clear that they have no intention to correct the mileages to account for the gaps, which means they don't expect to fill them in any sort of timely manner.  Punting to take the pressure off, I guess.  Either that, or they're not confident that the route is set in stone.  Regardless, it's going to make things difficult marketing-wise for the businesses off the exit when it comes time to get it right.

Guess ARDOT will just triple down on the dumb instead.  They are changing the 4 northern exit numbers again, not back to the final mileage like the northern 3 used to have, but correcting the mileage back to the I-540 Oklahoma border as they were off by a couple of miles when they "corrected" the exit numbers last year.

I have no idea how many times a stretch of Interstate can be butchered so badly by a transportation entity.

https://www.4029tv.com/article/i-49-exit-numbers-benton-county/43879280 (https://www.4029tv.com/article/i-49-exit-numbers-benton-county/43879280)

https://www.ardot.gov/news/23-151/ (https://www.ardot.gov/news/23-151/)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: edwaleni on May 16, 2023, 08:59:26 AM
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=410633771
Looks 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.

Well, I drove the BVB yesterday to take care of a couple of clinics in Bella Vista and Gravette yesterday.  I noticed something different this trip than the last one a couple of weeks ago.

Good news:  They have changed out some exit numbers as a result of opening the new stretch.

Bad news:  ARDOT doubled-down on the dumb and clearly didn't bother to read the email I sent them that they didn't respond to about correcting mile markers and exit numbers north of Alma and south of Gravette.  The southern Gravette exit I took to get to Bella Vista that was Exit 284 has become........Exit 99.  I'm sure they changed the other 2 exits as well if they changed everything.  It's clear that they have no intention to correct the mileages to account for the gaps, which means they don't expect to fill them in any sort of timely manner.  Punting to take the pressure off, I guess.  Either that, or they're not confident that the route is set in stone.  Regardless, it's going to make things difficult marketing-wise for the businesses off the exit when it comes time to get it right.

Guess ARDOT will just triple down on the dumb instead.  They are changing the 4 northern exit numbers again, not back to the final mileage like the northern 3 used to have, but correcting the mileage back to the I-540 Oklahoma border as they were off by a couple of miles when they "corrected" the exit numbers last year.

I have no idea how many times a stretch of Interstate can be butchered so badly by a transportation entity.

https://www.4029tv.com/article/i-49-exit-numbers-benton-county/43879280 (https://www.4029tv.com/article/i-49-exit-numbers-benton-county/43879280)

https://www.ardot.gov/news/23-151/ (https://www.ardot.gov/news/23-151/)

Do you mean I-540 Missouri border?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on May 16, 2023, 10:37:40 AM


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.

Well, I drove the BVB yesterday to take care of a couple of clinics in Bella Vista and Gravette yesterday.  I noticed something different this trip than the last one a couple of weeks ago.

Good news:  They have changed out some exit numbers as a result of opening the new stretch.

Bad news:  ARDOT doubled-down on the dumb and clearly didn't bother to read the email I sent them that they didn't respond to about correcting mile markers and exit numbers north of Alma and south of Gravette.  The southern Gravette exit I took to get to Bella Vista that was Exit 284 has become........Exit 99.  I'm sure they changed the other 2 exits as well if they changed everything.  It's clear that they have no intention to correct the mileages to account for the gaps, which means they don't expect to fill them in any sort of timely manner.  Punting to take the pressure off, I guess.  Either that, or they're not confident that the route is set in stone.  Regardless, it's going to make things difficult marketing-wise for the businesses off the exit when it comes time to get it right.

Guess ARDOT will just triple down on the dumb instead.  They are changing the 4 northern exit numbers again, not back to the final mileage like the northern 3 used to have, but correcting the mileage back to the I-540 Oklahoma border as they were off by a couple of miles when they "corrected" the exit numbers last year.

I have no idea how many times a stretch of Interstate can be butchered so badly by a transportation entity.

https://www.4029tv.com/article/i-49-exit-numbers-benton-county/43879280 (https://www.4029tv.com/article/i-49-exit-numbers-benton-county/43879280)

https://www.ardot.gov/news/23-151/ (https://www.ardot.gov/news/23-151/)

Do you mean I-540 Missouri border?

I-540 never made it to Missouri as the section north of I-40 was changed to I-49 even before the BVB moved dirt.  I mean I-540 from the Oklahoma border.

I know, it makes no sense.  The southern (original) I-540 is just a standard spur interstate into the Ft. Smith metro and ends at the Oklahoma border, where it becomes US-271 for a few miles to Pocola.  It is numbered appropriately, with the US-64 Exit #1 for Alma/Van Buren as soon as the on-ramps from I-40 merge together.  Exits count upward from there until the last before the Oklahoma border.  What's jacked up is I-49's exits north of I-40.

Every.  Single.  One.

Starts off with Exit/mile marker 20 and increments northward.  Totally disregarding the mileage between the Louisiana border and Texarkana.  Not to mention the AR-549 segment between Barling and US-71 which will also be connected.  There can be no coherent logic at this point for this renumbering as I-49 is planned to be a contiguous interstate through western Arkansas, but likely after decades of fundraising.  What's particularly aggravating is that the exit numbers for the northernmost 3 exits on the BVB were actually correct from mileage to the Louisiana border while it was AR-549 and for a few months afterwards.  Then they broke it and are not doing a single thing to remedy it with this most recent change other than prevent anyone from relying on the exit numbers for any marketing purposes for the foreseeable future.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: vdeane on May 16, 2023, 12:48:13 PM
^ What's interesting is that, by sheer coincidence, it's actually 20 miles from the south end of AR 549 and I-40.  It makes me wonder if they'll be renumbering those exits too.  I'm guessing they don't think they'll be connecting this piece to Texarkana any time in the foreseeable future.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sprjus4 on May 16, 2023, 01:12:47 PM
^ What's interesting is that, by sheer coincidence, it's actually 20 miles from the south end of AR 549 and I-40.  It makes me wonder if they'll be renumbering those exits too.  I'm guessing they don't think they'll be connecting this piece to Texarkana any time in the foreseeable future.
Perhaps, but I believe the additional 20 miles south of I-40 comes from an overlap west along I-40, then along I-540 to the Oklahoma border, the routing of I-540 before I-49 replaced it.

Honestly, this whole renumbering thing is stupid. I feel bad for any business who has to keep changing their numbers on advertisements - a reason DOTs tend to avoid renumbering to begin with, let alone twice in a few year period. ARDOT should’ve left the 200 series numbering up, and renumbered the old I-540 numbers north of I-40 along I-49, and left it be.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: vdeane on May 16, 2023, 01:24:04 PM
^ No, I measured off the section that isn't built yet.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on May 16, 2023, 01:39:24 PM
^ No, I measured off the section that isn't built yet.

I get your line of thinking.  It's my suspicion as well that there is no intention to do more than Super-2 AR-549 from US-71 south of Ft. Smith to Texarkana in phases over the next couple of decades after they bridge the Arkansas River with a completed I-49 segment connecting the current AR-549 to I-49 in Alma, so the gap in mile markers and exit numbers doesn't pressure anyone when funds just won't exist for a while.  That doesn't change the fact that there would be duplicate exit numbers and mile markers in Arkansas for I-49's 2 completed segments, also likely for decades.  Interstate standards do exist for a reason, but apparently ARDOT can't be bothered by them in this regard.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: The Ghostbuster on May 16, 2023, 02:00:57 PM
AASHTO shouldn't have rejected the Interstate 49 designation in 1999 in favor of extending (temporarily) the Interstate 540 designation. Then the existing exit numbers would not have so screwed up.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on May 16, 2023, 05:00:49 PM
AASHTO shouldn't have rejected the Interstate 49 designation in 1999 in favor of extending (temporarily) the Interstate 540 designation. Then the existing exit numbers would not have so screwed up.

Agreed.  I guess they didn't have faith that Arkansas would follow through with their portion of the funding to make the necessary Interstate connections until further down the road.  Hopefully, funding for the remaining sections exceeds everyone's expectations as well and we see it completed in our lifetimes.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on May 16, 2023, 05:48:22 PM
Technically I-540 never reaches the Oklahoma border. The designation ends at the US 271 interchange and the freeway continues west into Oklahoma as US 271.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: The Ghostbuster on May 16, 2023, 07:09:10 PM
The infamous Google Maps shows Interstate 540 continuing to the US 271 interchange at OK 112, even though it has always ended at Exit 14 (US 271 North/AR 253 South). What I don't understand is why Exit 14 has Interstate 540 South signs in both directions on 253/271, when there should only be a US 271 South sign.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on May 16, 2023, 09:22:07 PM
I-540 ends at the Oklahoma line. This Sebastian County control section map shows that I-540 has an exception over US 271 between the state line and the AR 253 interchange.

(https://i.imgur.com/UN6uVKD.jpg)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: intelati49 on May 16, 2023, 09:32:10 PM


I-540 ends at the Oklahoma line. This Sebastian County control section map shows that I-540 has an exception over US 271 between the state line and the AR 253 interchange.

https://i.imgur.com/UN6uVKD.jpg

What's the source on that? I'm curious to find the originals for the state?

Pixel 7a

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on May 16, 2023, 10:39:47 PM
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1mBV32v63AWKY8zv5IIvlUtJT_H4AohnK/view?usp=share_link
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: intelati49 on May 16, 2023, 10:42:53 PM
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1mBV32v63AWKY8zv5IIvlUtJT_H4AohnK/view?usp=share_link
https://www.ardot.gov/divisions/transportation-planning-policy/gis-mapping/route-and-section-maps/



Pixel 7a

Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: bugo on May 16, 2023, 11:06:21 PM
The newer style maps don't show the exceptions. This is the latest old style map I had on my hard drive.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Gordon on August 31, 2023, 07:17:28 PM
 It looks like the north I49 Welcome Center is not on the bid list for September or even on the STIP anymore. does anybody know why?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on October 12, 2023, 02:40:41 PM
ARDOT found hidden water lines, further delaying the Exit 64/Wedington Dr. project.  Now they estimate it's 10% complete with the added delay and they're looking at 2 years until complete.  This likely causes an overlap in construction with the Exit 62/MLK project which was independently developed and funded, so fun times ahead next year in south Fayetteville!

https://www.4029tv.com/article/utilities-hampering-i-49-wedington-project/41537710 (https://www.4029tv.com/article/utilities-hampering-i-49-wedington-project/41537710)

A little bit of confusion for some folks yesterday as the parclo ramp for EB Wedington->NB I-49 opened up on the new bridge that the EB lanes of Wedington Dr. pass over now.  Quite a few folks can't be bothered to read the VMS trailer warning of the change in on-ramp lanes now that its a right exit instead of a left turn and 1 fewer traffic signal finally.  Hallelujah!  They'll still be working on the bridges for a while, but at least the big payoff has been attained.

https://www.5newsonline.com/article/traffic/i49-onramp-changes-wedington-drive/527-835347f7-7553-4e6e-9331-a2f0cbc0eed5 (https://www.5newsonline.com/article/traffic/i49-onramp-changes-wedington-drive/527-835347f7-7553-4e6e-9331-a2f0cbc0eed5)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: yakra on October 12, 2023, 05:12:20 PM
Guess ARDOT will just triple down on the dumb instead.  They are changing the 4 northern exit numbers again, not back to the final mileage like the northern 3 used to have, but correcting the mileage back to the I-540 Oklahoma border as they were off by a couple of miles when they "corrected" the exit numbers last year.

I have no idea how many times a stretch of Interstate can be butchered so badly by a transportation entity.

https://www.4029tv.com/article/i-49-exit-numbers-benton-county/43879280 (https://www.4029tv.com/article/i-49-exit-numbers-benton-county/43879280)

https://www.ardot.gov/news/23-151/ (https://www.ardot.gov/news/23-151/)
The new numbers are now posted in the field.

A few links to skip ahead to where there's signage:
91 @ 31:47 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=96nm4dzVGzU&t=31m47s)
97 @ 36:32 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=96nm4dzVGzU&t=36m32s)
100 @ 37:56 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=96nm4dzVGzU&t=37m56s)
102 @ 40:02 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=96nm4dzVGzU&t=40m2s)
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on October 13, 2023, 04:15:22 AM
Guess when the bridge is finished, they'll retrofit the AR 549 Barling-Greenwood miles to count up to 20. Probably close to zero at the south end, so they'll think they're smart.

No. Just dumb. Do it right the first time and leave it.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on October 13, 2023, 08:43:30 AM
Guess when the bridge is finished, they'll retrofit the AR 549 Barling-Greenwood miles to count up to 20. Probably close to zero at the south end, so they'll think they're smart.

No. Just dumb. Do it right the first time and leave it.

Which just means that they have no intention of filling the Texarkana<->Ft. Smith gap within the remainder of my lifetime.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: The Ghostbuster on October 13, 2023, 04:27:44 PM
Slight adjustments to the exit numbers on the Bella Vista Bypass segment? They should have just given the entire corridor their future exit numbers based on 49’s mileage from the Arkansas/Louisiana border instead. Are there any old exit signs like they do when exits are renumbered from sequential to mileage-based?
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Road Hog on October 14, 2023, 11:45:06 PM
Guess ARDOT will just triple down on the dumb instead.  They are changing the 4 northern exit numbers again, not back to the final mileage like the northern 3 used to have, but correcting the mileage back to the I-540 Oklahoma border as they were off by a couple of miles when they "corrected" the exit numbers last year.

I have no idea how many times a stretch of Interstate can be butchered so badly by a transportation entity.

https://www.4029tv.com/article/i-49-exit-numbers-benton-county/43879280 (https://www.4029tv.com/article/i-49-exit-numbers-benton-county/43879280)

https://www.ardot.gov/news/23-151/ (https://www.ardot.gov/news/23-151/)
The new numbers are now posted in the field.

A few links to skip ahead to where there's signage:
91 @ 31:47 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=96nm4dzVGzU&t=31m47s)
97 @ 36:32 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=96nm4dzVGzU&t=36m32s)
100 @ 37:56 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=96nm4dzVGzU&t=37m56s)
102 @ 40:02 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=96nm4dzVGzU&t=40m2s)
Not gonna lie, I watched the whole video from start to finish and enjoyed it greatly. Couldn't enjoy the full 4K experience because of my bandwidth issues but it was still pretty good in 1440.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on October 15, 2023, 08:47:55 PM
I always love it when I get to 4:35 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=96nm4dzVGzU&t=4m35s), especially at night.  Feels like I've almost made it home when I see Old Main and Yocum Hall pop into view and the rest of Fayetteville unfold over the hill.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on March 13, 2024, 05:38:04 PM
Cost of I-49 segment between Barling and Alma rises to $1 billion (https://talkbusiness.net/2024/03/cost-of-i-49-segment-between-barling-and-alma-rises-to-1-billion/)

Not exactly warranting optimism that we'll be crossing the Arkansas River on I-49 and driving the top level of the 4 level stack with I-40 this decade.  Nuts that it's 33% higher now than 2 years ago.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: sprjus4 on March 13, 2024, 06:20:01 PM
Cost of I-49 segment between Barling and Alma rises to $1 billion (https://talkbusiness.net/2024/03/cost-of-i-49-segment-between-barling-and-alma-rises-to-1-billion/)

Not exactly warranting optimism that we'll be crossing the Arkansas River on I-49 and driving the top level of the 4 level stack with I-40 this decade.  Nuts that it's 33% higher now than 2 years ago.
The article mentions the bridge portion will cost $330 million and $350 million for the I-49 / I-40 interchange, leaving around $320 million for the 13 miles of rural freeway, coming out to around $25 million per mile, which is fairly reasonable.

The cost issue then, would be the I-49 / I-40 interchange and the river bridge.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: The Ghostbuster on March 13, 2024, 06:53:24 PM
Wikipedia shows that existing Interstate 49 between Interstate 40 and the Arkansas/Missouri border has its eventual exit numbers posted (which even I know is not the case): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_49_in_Arkansas#Exit_list. It even altered the mileage to show the eventual mileage from the Arkansas/Louisiana border (at least to the Elm Springs Rd. interchange, existing Exit 73/future Exit 259). This is probably a case of Wikipedia jumping the gun.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: MikieTimT on March 14, 2024, 09:32:52 AM
Cost of I-49 segment between Barling and Alma rises to $1 billion (https://talkbusiness.net/2024/03/cost-of-i-49-segment-between-barling-and-alma-rises-to-1-billion/)

Not exactly warranting optimism that we'll be crossing the Arkansas River on I-49 and driving the top level of the 4 level stack with I-40 this decade.  Nuts that it's 33% higher now than 2 years ago.
The article mentions the bridge portion will cost $330 million and $350 million for the I-49 / I-40 interchange, leaving around $320 million for the 13 miles of rural freeway, coming out to around $25 million per mile, which is fairly reasonable.

The cost issue then, would be the I-49 / I-40 interchange and the river bridge.

The interchange with I-40 is a 4 level stack, which won't be cheap, although 2 of the ramps are already built to take I-49 south to I-40 east and I-40 east to I-49 north.  Since half of the middle 2 levels are already complete, they need only the 2 I-49 south movements to/from I-40 west and the top level carrying I-49 mainline over the top of it all, which will make for a very long overpass and approaches.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: abqtraveler on March 14, 2024, 04:00:13 PM
Cost of I-49 segment between Barling and Alma rises to $1 billion (https://talkbusiness.net/2024/03/cost-of-i-49-segment-between-barling-and-alma-rises-to-1-billion/)

Not exactly warranting optimism that we'll be crossing the Arkansas River on I-49 and driving the top level of the 4 level stack with I-40 this decade.  Nuts that it's 33% higher now than 2 years ago.
The article mentions the bridge portion will cost $330 million and $350 million for the I-49 / I-40 interchange, leaving around $320 million for the 13 miles of rural freeway, coming out to around $25 million per mile, which is fairly reasonable.

The cost issue then, would be the I-49 / I-40 interchange and the river bridge.

The interchange with I-40 is a 4 level stack, which won't be cheap, although 2 of the ramps are already built to take I-49 south to I-40 east and I-40 east to I-49 north.  Since half of the middle 2 levels are already complete, they need only the 2 I-49 south movements to/from I-40 west and the top level carrying I-49 mainline over the top of it all, which will make for a very long overpass and approaches.
That all depends on the final design of the interchange. If ArDOT decides to leave the two existing flyover ramps as-is, then they could potentially realize some cost savings over a complete reconfiguration of the interchange. Even if they do decide to keep the existing ramps to save cost, those ramps are around 30 years old, so I wouldn't be surprised that ArDOT takes the opportunity to rehabilitate the bridges carrying those ramps as part of the project to connect I-40 and I-49 North with I-49 South.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Bobby5280 on March 14, 2024, 09:15:22 PM
The $350 million estimate sounds a lot like a total re-build of the existing interchange. The existing "Y" interchange between I-49 and I-40 in Alma is over 30 years old. All of the existing flyover ramps are single lane ramps. Two lane flyover ramps are becoming more common with system interchanges between two intersecting Interstates. Then there is an additional problem that the design of those existing flyover ramps did not provide any room for future expansion. There is no room for thru lanes of I-49 to continue South thru the interchange with I-40. Support pylons are all in the way. And then there is the height of the flyover ramps. They were built only high enough to leap over each other and I-40. There was no additional room reserved for an extra level for I-49 thru lanes going farther South.

Sorry to say it, but that existing interchange just has to get scrapped and re-built from scratch.
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Great Lakes Roads on March 14, 2024, 09:19:13 PM
The $350 million estimate sounds a lot like a total re-build of the existing interchange. The existing "Y" interchange between I-49 and I-40 in Alma is over 30 years old. All of the existing flyover ramps are single lane ramps. Two lane flyover ramps are becoming more common with system interchanges between two intersecting Interstates. Then there is an additional problem that the design of those existing flyover ramps did not provide any room for future expansion. There is no room for thru lanes of I-49 to continue South thru the interchange with I-40. Support pylons are all in the way. And then there is the height of the flyover ramps. They were built only high enough to leap over each other and I-40. There was no additional room reserved for an extra level for I-49 thru lanes going farther South.

Sorry to say it, but that existing interchange just has to get scrapped and re-built from scratch.

And the ArDOT plan supports your claim...
Title: Re: I-49 in Arkansas
Post by: Henry on March 14, 2024, 10:05:30 PM
The $350 million estimate sounds a lot like a total re-build of the existing interchange. The existing "Y" interchange between I-49 and I-40 in Alma is over 30 years old. All of the existing flyover ramps are single lane ramps. Two lane flyover ramps are becoming more common with system interchanges between two intersecting Interstates. Then there is an additional problem that the design of those existing flyover ramps did not provide any room for future expansion. There is no room for thru lanes of I-49 to continue South thru the interchange with I-40. Support pylons are all in the way. And then there is the height of the flyover ramps. They were built only high enough to leap over each other and I-40. There was no additional room reserved for an extra level for I-49 thru lanes going farther South.

Sorry to say it, but that existing interchange just has to get scrapped and re-built from scratch.

And the ArDOT plan supports your claim...
As does Streetview (https://www.google.com/maps/@35.481949,-94.2431291,3a,15y,51.63h,94.21t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sInib3Io-N1QR3AeW6nmXjg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu).