I-57 Approved

[Molandfreak]

Does anyone wish that the Interstate 30 designation had been extended up the US 67 corridor instead of the Interstate 57 designation? I personally believe that the Interstate 57 designation was the proper one since it mostly runs north-south. However, Interstate 30 parallels US 67 from Dallas to Little Rock, and they would have had to renumber the exits along the US 67 freeway if it had become 30. And since the extension was numbered as part of 57, that means the Interstate 57 designation could potentially replace the Interstate 530 designation south of Little Rock (if Arkansas wanted to go down that route, which until they do, it would be a Fictional Highways proposal).

Yes, I am disappointed that a potential extension of 30 didn't prevail. The downside to that was that there was no real endpoint I-30 could have had where it wouldn't be extremely awkward—I wouldn't have liked a transition from 30 to 57 just by crossing over I-55 in Sikeston. At least in North Little Rock, there is a small amount of separation.

What I was really hoping for was for I-30 to take over the Kentucky turnpikes instead of I-66.

[Rothman]

Fictional blabber.

[Molandfreak]

Fictional blabber.

Not really. An extension of I-30 was the original plan ArDOT preferred.

[sprjus4]

I feel like the current setup was for the best. Little Rock to Dallas is an east-west corridor, and Little Rock to Sikeston is a north-south corridor. Little Rock is the junction of three interstate highways (I-40, I-30, and I-530), and US-67 has always been a separate highway (after all, it doesn't directly connect to I-30 - an extension would've overlapped I-40). Little Rock is a logical point for I-30 and I-57 to switch, as they would have to switch somewhere.

[The Ghostbuster]

The Interstate 30 designation was once proposed for the US 67 corridor. If Interstate 30 had been chosen instead of Interstate 57, there was a plan to upgrade the AR 226 corridor to Interstate Standards and designate it Interstate 730: https://www.aaroads.com/interstate-guide/i-730-ar/. While I think an upgrade of AR 226 into an Interstate Standard freeway would be overkill, it was definitely a real proposal and not a Fictional Highways thread (as it would be today).

[CoreySamson]

The Interstate 30 designation was once proposed for the US 67 corridor. If Interstate 30 had been chosen instead of Interstate 57, there was a plan to upgrade the AR 226 corridor to Interstate Standards and designate it Interstate 730: https://www.aaroads.com/interstate-guide/i-730-ar/. While I think an upgrade of AR 226 into an Interstate Standard freeway would be overkill, it was definitely a real proposal and not a Fictional Highways thread (as it would be today).

I can't help but wonder if that would have been a much better solution than the current situation of US 78 being extended over to AR 226. I bet that Jonesboroian desire to give the AR 226 corridor national recognition that birthed the I-730 proposal also gave rise to the current US 78 mess. Perhaps maybe US 78 could be decommissioned in Arkansas and an I-757 built over the AR 226 to maintain that national route status.

[Road Hog]

I favored I-57 all along because you already had a direct link to Dallas via I-30. I-57 gives you a direct link to an even bigger city, Chicago. Plus, I-30 if routed to St. Louis to parallel US 67 (as was the plan at first) would've ended up being north-south.

[ilpt4u]

My opinion is the Dallas-Chicago corridor via Little Rock should be a unified interstate designation, and even better, an x5. But that is fantasyland fiction on the x5 and just normal fiction of even a unified number.

30 from Dallas to LR. 57 from Chicago to LR. Is what it is. The corridor is more important than the #s on the signs imho

[bugo]

It should have been I-30. I already read a weather report that said "east of I-30/I-57". It would have been much simpler to change the numbers at I-55.

[cenarkbizowner]

Longtime viewer, first time poster.  Glad for this forum.  I recently took some pictures of the new signs up in the Beebe/Ward areas. How do you upload pictures?  I took them on my phone and saved them on my laptop.  I'm learning the nuances of posting here.

[74/171FAN]

Longtime viewer, first time poster.  Glad for this forum.  I recently took some pictures of the new signs up in the Beebe/Ward areas. How do you upload pictures?  I took them on my phone and saved them on my laptop.  I'm learning the nuances of posting here.

You have to upload it to a site such as Flickr and then link it here using the image button. 

You should be able to share it directly via BBCode by copying/pasting the link.

[cenarkbizowner]

Okay, thanks!!

[cenarkbizowner]

https://www.flickr.com/photos/202529434@N06/54417612919/in/dateposted-public/

This is the I-57/U.S. 67/167 sign northbound just past Exit 21 in Cabot.

[cenarkbizowner]

https://www.flickr.com/photos/202529434@N06/54417420121/in/dateposted-public/

ARDOT has already put these signs up in Ward.  This is at the intersection of state highway 319 & I-57(at the convenience store located there).

[cenarkbizowner]

https://www.flickr.com/photos/202529434@N06/54417806810/in/dateposted-public/

Northbound just past Exit 25 in Ward.

[cenarkbizowner]

https://www.flickr.com/photos/202529434@N06/54416552797/in/dateposted-public/

Northbound just past Exit 28 in Beebe.  Notice that there is no U.S. 67 sign.

[cenarkbizowner]

https://www.flickr.com/photos/202529434@N06/54417669083/in/dateposted-public/

This is southbound just past Exit 29 in Beebe.

[edwaleni]

https://www.flickr.com/photos/202529434@N06/54417669083/in/dateposted-public/

This is southbound just past Exit 29 in Beebe.

It actually works like this:

In Flickr, after you photostream your picture, make sure it has public viewing turned on

After it uploads, view the picture by clicking on it.

In the bottom right of the photo you will see an curved arrow, click it

Choose "large" as the image, (this board auto sizes the image)

Copy the link data for the image:

In this case it looks like this;

<a data-flickr-embed="true" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/202529434@N06/54417669083/in/dateposted-public/" title="IMG_0191"><img src="https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/54417669083_96c900963a_b.jpg" width="768" height="1024" alt="IMG_0191"/></a><script async src="//embedr.flickr.com/assets/client-code.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

But you only need to use this piece to embed it:

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/54417669083_96c900963a_b.jpg

Click on the "Insert an Image" button on the Reply text screen and paste that modified URL in the box URL dialog. Leave height and width empty.

Click the Preview button to make sure it can be seen.

If it is seen, click "Post" and you will see this:

[PColumbus73]

Would be nice if Arkansas' I-57 shields looked like this

[Road Hog]

OMG, I-57 shield on storm chaser video!

https://x.com/LiveCamChaser/status/1906494637637808626

[cenarkbizowner]

Thank you very much for that information!!  Hopefully, I'll get better at posting those pictures.

[english si]

OMG, I-57 shield on storm chaser video!

https://x.com/LiveCamChaser/status/1906494637637808626

I-57 has got as far as US78!

I presume shields are, other than that short bit between 6 and 11, now along the whole route to Walnut Ridge? But none of the BGSs or I-440 shields are done?

[Bobby5280]

The delay on I-57 shields being installed on the bigger signs (especially overhead panels) might be a matter of getting the crane trucks and crews booked for the work. Reassurance signs on U-channel posts can be installed by crews in pickup trucks or other smaller work vehicles. That work can be done faster and in a more flexible manner. Those kinds of signs shouldn't involve shutting down any lanes of the highway either. Adding or swapping out highway shields on an existing overhead big green sign might require shutting down a highway lane. Such a thing is very likely if the sign panel has to be replaced.

[bugo]

The 2025 ArDOT map was recently released. It shows two gaps in I-57: from exit 6 at I-440 to exit 16 at AR 5, and across the White River in Jackson County between exits 69 and 74. It also shows AR 440 as I-440.

[abqtraveler]

The 2025 ArDOT map was recently released. It shows two gaps in I-57: from exit 6 at I-440 to exit 16 at AR 5, and across the White River in Jackson County between exits 69 and 74. It also shows AR 440 as I-440.

The stretch through Jacksonville not being signed as I-57 yet would make sense, since the construction project to bring that section up to interstate standards is still ongoing. 

As for the bridge over the White River between Exits 69 and 74, I don't know about that one. It looks like it's already at interstate standards in GSV. Maybe they left it like that in error.

https://www.google.com/maps/@35.4678649,-91.3508241,3a,75y,200.09h,90t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sdyUm0Prz0rOvovpQdK1HLA!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fcb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile%26w%3D900%26h%3D600%26pitch%3D0%26panoid%3DdyUm0Prz0rOvovpQdK1HLA%26yaw%3D200.0935885774956!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu&g_ep=EgoyMDI1MDQwMS4wIKXMDSoASAFQAw%3D%3D