AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: I-49 in Arkansas  (Read 720263 times)

M86

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 500
  • Livin' the dream, in my dreams

  • Location: South Dakota
  • Last Login: October 31, 2019, 02:50:39 AM
Re: I-49 in Arkansas
« Reply #475 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 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. 
Logged

english si

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3535
  • Age: 33
  • Location: Buckinghamshire, England
  • Last Login: November 14, 2019, 06:36:07 PM
Re: I-49 in Arkansas
« Reply #476 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.
Logged

Road Hog

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1163
  • Location: Collin County, TX
  • Last Login: November 10, 2019, 01:58:28 PM
Re: I-49 in Arkansas
« Reply #477 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.
Logged

M86

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 500
  • Livin' the dream, in my dreams

  • Location: South Dakota
  • Last Login: October 31, 2019, 02:50:39 AM
Re: I-49 in Arkansas
« Reply #478 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.
Logged

NE2

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 13898
  • fuck

  • Age: 11
  • Location: central Florida
  • Last Login: Today at 02:17:14 PM
Re: I-49 in Arkansas
« Reply #479 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)?
Logged
Florida route log | pre-1945
I will do my best to not make America hate again.
Global warming denial is barely worse than white privilege denial.

english si

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3535
  • Age: 33
  • Location: Buckinghamshire, England
  • Last Login: November 14, 2019, 06:36:07 PM
Re: I-49 in Arkansas
« Reply #480 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.
Logged

US71

  • Road Scholar , Master of Snark
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 8690
  • Sign Inspector

  • Age: 59
  • Location: On the road again
  • Last Login: Today at 01:49:09 PM
    • The Road Less Taken
Re: I-49 in Arkansas
« Reply #481 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.
Logged
a man hears what he wants to hear
And disregards the rest -- Simon & Garfunkel

M86

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 500
  • Livin' the dream, in my dreams

  • Location: South Dakota
  • Last Login: October 31, 2019, 02:50:39 AM
Re: I-49 in Arkansas
« Reply #482 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.
Logged

HandsomeRob

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 34
  • Location: Madison, WI
  • Last Login: November 30, 2016, 03:10:59 PM
Re: I-49 in Arkansas
« Reply #483 on: October 08, 2013, 11:41:56 AM »

AHTD has posted its September 30 presentation to the Springdale Rotary Club 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?
Logged

Grzrd

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3424
  • Interested Observer

  • Location: Atlanta, GA
  • Last Login: July 31, 2019, 11:24:20 AM
Re: I-49 in Arkansas
« Reply #484 on: October 08, 2013, 12:20:49 PM »

September 30 presentation to the Springdale Rotary Club
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 and a map.

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.
« Last Edit: October 08, 2013, 12:37:29 PM by Grzrd »
Logged

M86

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 500
  • Livin' the dream, in my dreams

  • Location: South Dakota
  • Last Login: October 31, 2019, 02:50:39 AM
Re: I-49 in Arkansas
« Reply #485 on: October 09, 2013, 03:16:10 AM »

September 30 presentation to the Springdale Rotary Club
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.
Logged

Henry

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 5145
  • Age: 49
  • Location: Chicago, IL/Seattle, WA
  • Last Login: Today at 12:22:23 PM
    • Henry Watson's Online Freeway
Re: I-49 in Arkansas
« Reply #486 on: October 09, 2013, 09:52:20 AM »

September 30 presentation to the Springdale Rotary Club
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.
Logged
Go Cubs Go! Go Cubs Go! Hey Chicago, what do you say? The Cubs are gonna win today!

NE2

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 13898
  • fuck

  • Age: 11
  • Location: central Florida
  • Last Login: Today at 02:17:14 PM
Re: I-49 in Arkansas
« Reply #487 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?
Logged
Florida route log | pre-1945
I will do my best to not make America hate again.
Global warming denial is barely worse than white privilege denial.

Grzrd

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3424
  • Interested Observer

  • Location: Atlanta, GA
  • Last Login: July 31, 2019, 11:24:20 AM
Re: I-49 in Arkansas
« Reply #488 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", 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.
Logged

agentsteel53

  • invisible hand
  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 15374
  • long live button copy!

  • Age: 38
  • Location: San Diego, CA
  • Last Login: November 21, 2016, 09:58:39 AM
    • AARoads Shield Gallery
Re: I-49 in Arkansas
« Reply #489 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.
Logged
live from sunny San Diego.

http://shields.aaroads.com

jake@aaroads.com

NE2

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 13898
  • fuck

  • Age: 11
  • Location: central Florida
  • Last Login: Today at 02:17:14 PM
Re: I-49 in Arkansas
« Reply #490 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).
Logged
Florida route log | pre-1945
I will do my best to not make America hate again.
Global warming denial is barely worse than white privilege denial.

O Tamandua

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 363
  • Location: Bella Vista, AR
  • Last Login: Today at 02:06:01 PM
    • A-B-P Ministries - An evangelical Christian ministry serving Angola, Brazil, Portugal.
Re: I-49 in Arkansas
« Reply #491 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?
Logged

Grzrd

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3424
  • Interested Observer

  • Location: Atlanta, GA
  • Last Login: July 31, 2019, 11:24:20 AM
Re: I-49 in Arkansas
« Reply #492 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.
Logged

O Tamandua

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 363
  • Location: Bella Vista, AR
  • Last Login: Today at 02:06:01 PM
    • A-B-P Ministries - An evangelical Christian ministry serving Angola, Brazil, Portugal.
Re: I-49 in Arkansas
« Reply #493 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.
Logged

Grzrd

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3424
  • Interested Observer

  • Location: Atlanta, GA
  • Last Login: July 31, 2019, 11:24:20 AM
Re: I-49 in Arkansas
« Reply #494 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):

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!:

« Last Edit: October 22, 2013, 05:01:42 PM by Grzrd »
Logged

Road Hog

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1163
  • Location: Collin County, TX
  • Last Login: November 10, 2019, 01:58:28 PM
Re: I-49 in Arkansas
« Reply #495 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).
Logged

O Tamandua

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 363
  • Location: Bella Vista, AR
  • Last Login: Today at 02:06:01 PM
    • A-B-P Ministries - An evangelical Christian ministry serving Angola, Brazil, Portugal.
Re: I-49 in Arkansas
« Reply #496 on: October 22, 2013, 08:41:10 PM »

Well done, Grzrd!  Thank you.
Logged

txstateends

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1081
  • Location: north TX, not far from an interstate interchange and a US terminus
  • Last Login: June 05, 2019, 11:30:28 AM
Re: I-49 in Arkansas
« Reply #497 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?
Logged
\/ \/ click for a bigger image \/ \/

Grzrd

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3424
  • Interested Observer

  • Location: Atlanta, GA
  • Last Login: July 31, 2019, 11:24:20 AM
Re: I-49 in Arkansas
« Reply #498 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.
Logged

Grzrd

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3424
  • Interested Observer

  • Location: Atlanta, GA
  • Last Login: July 31, 2019, 11:24:20 AM
Re: I-49 in Arkansas
« Reply #499 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):



* 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.
« Last Edit: October 24, 2013, 03:16:49 PM by Grzrd »
Logged

 


Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.