Birmingham Northern Beltline (I-422, I-959)

[Strider]

Yes, you have to zoom it really close enough to see the dashed lines. It is there.

[ARMOURERERIC]

Could I ask as a favor that you post a link to the map.  I know it requires a large zoom, I just still could not find it.

[froggie]

Yes, you have to zoom it really close enough to see the dashed lines. It is there.

I just checked, the Birmingham Beltline dashed lines are not there.

[codyg1985]

Updated photos from the construction for the grade and drain between AL 75 and AL 79: http://www.al.com/news/birmingham/index.ssf/2014/10/northern_beltline_construction_2.html

[ARMOURERERIC]

Can you see any signs of work via google satellite yet?

[codyg1985]

A banking website has named the Northern Beltine the 7th largest boondoogle in the US:

The 7th biggest boondoggle in the U.S. is Alabama's

[freebrickproductions]

A banking website has named the Northern Beltine the 7th largest boondoogle in the US:

The 7th biggest boondoggle in the U.S. is Alabama's

Yea, we could use that 5 billion on Huntsville's northern bypass instead!
Though in all honesty, the 5 billion would be much better spent on a Memphis-Huntsville-Atlanta freeway.

[codyg1985]

Heck, even in Birmingham several projects come to mind:

- Expanding I-65 through Birmingham metro
- Redoing I-20/59 either with a cut and cover tunnel through downtown or rerouting it around downtown
- Upgrading US 280 to a freeway

My biggest beef with the road, besides the cost, is the route it takes. It doesn't even really function as a good bypass unless you are going from I-20 Westbound to I-65 northbound, or I-65 southbound to I-20/59 westbound. A bypass for through I-65 traffic (traffic headed to the beach) would be great, but that would be very difficult to achieve.

[codyg1985]

Also, of interest to this thread, there is updated aerial imagery showing construction along the portion between AL 79 and Al 75: https://www.google.com/maps/@33.7353253,-86.6786126,3759m/data=!3m1!1e3

[froggie]

Instead of building new roads, how about using that $5B (which in reality is much less since very little of the Northern Beltline is actually funded) to improve existing roads?  Would directly benefit more people and spread to more areas of the state than just one or two corridors.

I'd also argue that, if that money actually existed and were to remain in the Birmingham area, there would be far more benefit to using it to reroute 20/59 out of downtown Birmingham than in building this Northern Beltline.

[codyg1985]

Yet another item of interest. ALDOT has created a website that talks about the beltway and the progress of the entire project. http://betterbeltline.org/

I figure that was only created because that was one thing that ALDOT had to do from one of the environmental lawsuits that was levied against them.

[mvak36]

Instead of building new roads, how about using that $5B (which in reality is much less since very little of the Northern Beltline is actually funded) to improve existing roads?  Would directly benefit more people and spread to more areas of the state than just one or two corridors.

I'd also argue that, if that money actually existed and were to remain in the Birmingham area, there would be far more benefit to using it to reroute 20/59 out of downtown Birmingham than in building this Northern Beltline.

Either that or completely rebuild that Malfunction Junction.

[codyg1985]

Instead of building new roads, how about using that $5B (which in reality is much less since very little of the Northern Beltline is actually funded) to improve existing roads?  Would directly benefit more people and spread to more areas of the state than just one or two corridors.

I'd also argue that, if that money actually existed and were to remain in the Birmingham area, there would be far more benefit to using it to reroute 20/59 out of downtown Birmingham than in building this Northern Beltline.

Either that or completely rebuild that Malfunction Junction.

The current plan for rebuilding I-20/59 through downtown actually calls for adding MORE ramps to Malfunction Junction.

[freebrickproductions]

Instead of building new roads, how about using that $5B (which in reality is much less since very little of the Northern Beltline is actually funded) to improve existing roads?  Would directly benefit more people and spread to more areas of the state than just one or two corridors.

I'd also argue that, if that money actually existed and were to remain in the Birmingham area, there would be far more benefit to using it to reroute 20/59 out of downtown Birmingham than in building this Northern Beltline.

Either that or completely rebuild that Malfunction Junction.

The current plan for rebuilding I-20/59 through downtown actually calls for adding MORE ramps to Malfunction Junction.

Oh god. That interchange will be a mess when it's all said and done.

Instead of building new roads, how about using that $5B (which in reality is much less since very little of the Northern Beltline is actually funded) to improve existing roads?  Would directly benefit more people and spread to more areas of the state than just one or two corridors.

Or paying off Alabama's budget deficit.

[The Ghostbuster]

Will the Interstate 20/59/65 interchange be reconstructed with right-handed only exit and entrance ramps?

[codyg1985]

As part of this upcoming project, no.

[Henry]

I sure miss the old days when proposed highways used to have a white dashed line denoting their routings, like Rand McNally used to have back in the 60s and 70s. As for the Northern Beltline, while I won't argue that it's badly needed, $5 billion is certainly too much for a project of its magnitude. This is where tolls would've helped funding-wise, but I read somewhere that AL has been opposed to them for years.

[clong]

I think part of what's being forgotten here is that the project (at least the current portion) is 100% federally funded since the Northern Beltline is Appalachian Regional Commission Corridor X-1. So we can all have great ideas about better ways to use the money, but the bottom line is that this money is dedicated to this project and there's no guarantee that we would get any of it if ALDOT declined to build the Beltline.

[The Ghostbuster]

How many want to bet that Interstate 422 won't be completed for decades to come, if ever?

[froggie]

is 100% federally funded since the Northern Beltline is Appalachian Regional Commission Corridor X-1.

This means far less today than most people think.  Congress got rid of having a dedicated ARC funding pot a few years ago.  Sure, it's 100% Federally funded, but that's because Congress changed things to where states can use 100% Federal funding for a given ARC project...they no longer need to provide a state/local match.  And that funding now comes from each state's NHS (National Highway System) allotment...there is no more ARC dedicated funding.  So yeah, ALDOT could use "100% Federal funding" on the Northern Beltline.  But that means they'd be pulling money from other potential projects on Alabama's Interstates and major 4 lane corridors (Interstates are automatically on the NHS...most of the state's 4 lane corridors are as well).

but the bottom line is that this money is dedicated to this project

No it's not, for the reasons I cited above.

[Henry]

How many want to bet that Interstate 422 won't be completed for decades to come, if ever?

I have a feeling that you might be right.

[clong]

is 100% federally funded since the Northern Beltline is Appalachian Regional Commission Corridor X-1.

This means far less today than most people think.  Congress got rid of having a dedicated ARC funding pot a few years ago.  Sure, it's 100% Federally funded, but that's because Congress changed things to where states can use 100% Federal funding for a given ARC project...they no longer need to provide a state/local match.  And that funding now comes from each state's NHS (National Highway System) allotment...there is no more ARC dedicated funding.  So yeah, ALDOT could use "100% Federal funding" on the Northern Beltline.  But that means they'd be pulling money from other potential projects on Alabama's Interstates and major 4 lane corridors (Interstates are automatically on the NHS...most of the state's 4 lane corridors are as well).

but the bottom line is that this money is dedicated to this project

No it's not, for the reasons I cited above.

So, to clarify, would Alabama receive the same amount of federal funding/NHS allotment if they didn't have this project?

[froggie]

Correct, they'd receive the same amount.  It's ALDOT's choice (probably pressured by the Governor and local politicians) to use their NHS allotment on the Northern Beltline.  They don't receive any special funding anymore JUST for the Beltline.

[lordsutch]

Note however that Hillary Clinton, at least, has promised that she will restore a dedicated ARC funding stream if elected (whether she can deliver on this promise, of course, is a completely open question given that Congress has the power of the purse, not the president). If that happens, I'd imagine projects on the slow or back burner like the remainder of Corridor V (and maybe even the Interstate upgrade for the Batesville-Tupelo section - I'm not sure how that would interact with the 100% federal funding rule), I-99 north of I-80, and the Beltline will get renewed attention.

[clong]

Correct, they'd receive the same amount.  It's ALDOT's choice (probably pressured by the Governor and local politicians) to use their NHS allotment on the Northern Beltline.  They don't receive any special funding anymore JUST for the Beltline.

Admittedly, not knowing the inner workings of this process, I would have imagined that those states having ARC Corridors that haven't been completed would get somewhat of a bump in their NHS funding over the same state without the ARC Corridor. I now realize it isn't earmarked, just thought it would be more - even if only a slight bit.