AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

The next forum trivia night will take place on OCTOBER 30, 2019 at 8:15 PM Eastern.

Author Topic: Are the Little Rock FWYs/Interstates technically a Beltway?  (Read 2105 times)

TheArkansasRoadgeek

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1065
  • The Dude

  • Age: 20
  • Location: Fort Smith, Arkansas
  • Last Login: November 19, 2019, 07:52:41 PM
Are the Little Rock FWYs/Interstates technically a Beltway?
« on: April 23, 2017, 08:46:49 PM »

I have been wondering this for sometime now, can they be considered one or not? Is it that a beltway is one designation going around a city?

Thanks!
Logged
Well, that's just like your opinion man...

silverback1065

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3023
  • Age: 30
  • Location: Indianapolis
  • Last Login: November 20, 2019, 06:30:36 PM
Re: Are the Little Rock FWYs/Interstates technically a Beltway?
« Reply #1 on: April 23, 2017, 08:55:10 PM »

I have been wondering this for sometime now, can they be considered one or not? Is it that a beltway is one designation going around a city?

Thanks!
Yes

Nexus 6P

Logged

TheArkansasRoadgeek

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1065
  • The Dude

  • Age: 20
  • Location: Fort Smith, Arkansas
  • Last Login: November 19, 2019, 07:52:41 PM
Re: Are the Little Rock FWYs/Interstates technically a Beltway?
« Reply #2 on: April 23, 2017, 09:17:27 PM »

I have been wondering this for sometime now, can they be considered one or not? Is it that a beltway is one designation going around a city?

Thanks!
Yes

Nexus 6P

Ah, ok I was always intregged by the possible answer.
Logged
Well, that's just like your opinion man...

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6107
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: Today at 02:57:48 AM
Re: Are the Little Rock FWYs/Interstates technically a Beltway?
« Reply #3 on: April 23, 2017, 09:17:56 PM »

I have been wondering this for sometime now, can they be considered one or not? Is it that a beltway is one designation going around a city?

Thanks!
Yes

Nexus 6P



That begs the question:  would the 494/694/94 continuum around Minneapolis/St. Paul be considered a beltway inasmuch as it carries three distinct designations (but basically functions as a bypass facility)?   
Logged

silverback1065

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3023
  • Age: 30
  • Location: Indianapolis
  • Last Login: November 20, 2019, 06:30:36 PM
Re: Are the Little Rock FWYs/Interstates technically a Beltway?
« Reply #4 on: April 23, 2017, 09:18:38 PM »

I'd say yes. I'm not sure why 694 exists at all it should be all 494

Nexus 6P

Logged

TheArkansasRoadgeek

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1065
  • The Dude

  • Age: 20
  • Location: Fort Smith, Arkansas
  • Last Login: November 19, 2019, 07:52:41 PM
Re: Are the Little Rock FWYs/Interstates technically a Beltway?
« Reply #5 on: April 23, 2017, 09:21:27 PM »

I'd say yes. I'm not sure why 694 exists at all it should be all 494

Nexus 6P

As pre- Interstate Highway setup they can establish 3 digit shields based on heading, location, and geological factors.
Logged
Well, that's just like your opinion man...

US71

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

  • Posts: 8704
  • Sign Inspector

  • Age: 59
  • Location: On the road again
  • Last Login: November 20, 2019, 10:16:09 PM
    • The Road Less Taken
Re: Are the Little Rock FWYs/Interstates technically a Beltway?
« Reply #6 on: April 24, 2017, 07:41:45 PM »

I have been wondering this for sometime now, can they be considered one or not? Is it that a beltway is one designation going around a city?

Thanks!

There is a proposal to extend AR 440 (I-440) west of US 67 looping back to I-40, but as with many other projects, there is no money (except for the Broadway Bridge)
Logged
a man hears what he wants to hear
And disregards the rest -- Simon & Garfunkel

broadhurst04

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 161
  • Age: 48
  • Location: Raleigh, NC
  • Last Login: May 21, 2017, 10:22:16 PM
Re: Are the Little Rock FWYs/Interstates technically a Beltway?
« Reply #7 on: April 24, 2017, 08:53:30 PM »

I have been wondering this for sometime now, can they be considered one or not? Is it that a beltway is one designation going around a city?

Thanks!

If the answer is yes, then you should also consider the three interstates that surround Columbia, SC (20/26/77) to be a beltway, even though they form more of a triangle than a circle.
Logged

Henry

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 5154
  • Age: 49
  • Location: Chicago, IL/Seattle, WA
  • Last Login: Today at 09:28:57 AM
    • Henry Watson's Online Freeway
Re: Are the Little Rock FWYs/Interstates technically a Beltway?
« Reply #8 on: April 25, 2017, 10:56:13 PM »

Also, I-275 and I-696 around Detroit could be considered a beltway for that city. After all, they are connected by I-96.
Logged
Go Cubs Go! Go Cubs Go! Hey Chicago, what do you say? The Cubs are gonna win today!

capt.ron

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 222
  • Age: 48
  • Location: Central Arkansas
  • Last Login: November 19, 2019, 11:01:22 PM
Re: Are the Little Rock FWYs/Interstates technically a Beltway?
« Reply #9 on: April 26, 2017, 12:00:10 PM »

I have been wondering this for sometime now, can they be considered one or not? Is it that a beltway is one designation going around a city?

Thanks!

There is a proposal to extend AR 440 (I-440) west of US 67 looping back to I-40, but as with many other projects, there is no money (except for the Broadway Bridge)
In addition to the money problem, they were trying to agree on several alignments for the last addition of I-440. They kept running into NIMBY's and so on.
Logged

Bobby5280

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1896
  • Location: Lawton, OK
  • Last Login: November 20, 2019, 11:05:48 PM
Re: Are the Little Rock FWYs/Interstates technically a Beltway?
« Reply #10 on: April 26, 2017, 01:20:58 PM »

I-44 works as a sort-of beltway for Oklahoma City, especially when you consider a bunch of it used to be I-240 before I-44 was extended in the early 1980's. The Kilpatrick Turnpike could have grown into a larger beltway for OKC if it not planners for ODOT, Mustang, Norman, etc. being asleep for the past 15-20 years.

Quote from: capt.ron
In addition to the money problem, they were trying to agree on several alignments for the last addition of I-440. They kept running into NIMBY's and so on.

Between NIMBY's, New Urbanists who think we can ride bicycles and walk everywhere and the generally skyrocketing costs of building new highways it's going to count as small miracles for any new stretches of super highway to open. 20 years ago it would not have been nearly such an impossible problem to extend I-440 from US-67 and loop it back West over to the I-40/I-430 interchange.
« Last Edit: April 26, 2017, 01:23:39 PM by Bobby5280 »
Logged

TheArkansasRoadgeek

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1065
  • The Dude

  • Age: 20
  • Location: Fort Smith, Arkansas
  • Last Login: November 19, 2019, 07:52:41 PM
Re: Are the Little Rock FWYs/Interstates technically a Beltway?
« Reply #11 on: April 26, 2017, 04:32:58 PM »

We have I-440, but what happened to I-420, we just doubled it...
Logged
Well, that's just like your opinion man...

US71

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

  • Posts: 8704
  • Sign Inspector

  • Age: 59
  • Location: On the road again
  • Last Login: November 20, 2019, 10:16:09 PM
    • The Road Less Taken
Re: Are the Little Rock FWYs/Interstates technically a Beltway?
« Reply #12 on: April 26, 2017, 08:06:17 PM »

We have I-440, but what happened to I-420, we just doubled it...

420 doubled would be 840
Logged
a man hears what he wants to hear
And disregards the rest -- Simon & Garfunkel

TheArkansasRoadgeek

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1065
  • The Dude

  • Age: 20
  • Location: Fort Smith, Arkansas
  • Last Login: November 19, 2019, 07:52:41 PM
Re: Are the Little Rock FWYs/Interstates technically a Beltway?
« Reply #13 on: April 27, 2017, 02:25:29 PM »

We have I-440, but what happened to I-420, we just doubled it...

420 doubled would be 840

I have had ACT Aspire testing, so my brain was fried, I meant we just added 20 I-40> I-440 > (We could have an I-420, just saying.)
Logged
Well, that's just like your opinion man...

plain

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 798
  • Age: 41
  • Location: Richmond Virginia
  • Last Login: November 20, 2019, 11:15:05 PM
Re: Are the Little Rock FWYs/Interstates technically a Beltway?
« Reply #14 on: April 27, 2017, 04:05:50 PM »

I would consider the Little Rock example a beltway.

I could also see the controversy behind me or anyone else saying that. This has actually sparked some great debates in certain circles (no pun intended).
Me and some buddies actually talked about this last week. Looking at it map or satellite-wise I-295 & VA 288 together seems to indeed form a beltway but such a beltway needs a little "help" in forming the loop. In this case a 2 mile stretch of I-64 as well as either VA 895 or VA 10 (VA 10 however is NOT a freeway) is needed to complete it... looking at it, VA 10 actually looks much better in making such a loop actually look the part.

As for whether or not the beltway should have the same route number throughout, I would say no. The Minneapolis example given earlier can and should easily be considered a beltway. There's also DC's capital beltway which for a while carried I-495 only on one part and I-95 only on the other. Also the Hampton Roads Beltway which carries I-64 on one part and I-664 on the other.

Wikipedia of course also has an article on the subject but a few of their examples I would never consider a beltway or anything even close to such
Logged
Newark born, Richmond bred

silverback1065

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3023
  • Age: 30
  • Location: Indianapolis
  • Last Login: November 20, 2019, 06:30:36 PM
Re: Are the Little Rock FWYs/Interstates technically a Beltway?
« Reply #15 on: April 27, 2017, 05:04:07 PM »

I would consider the Little Rock example a beltway.

I could also see the controversy behind me or anyone else saying that. This has actually sparked some great debates in certain circles (no pun intended).
Me and some buddies actually talked about this last week. Looking at it map or satellite-wise I-295 & VA 288 together seems to indeed form a beltway but such a beltway needs a little "help" in forming the loop. In this case a 2 mile stretch of I-64 as well as either VA 895 or VA 10 (VA 10 however is NOT a freeway) is needed to complete it... looking at it, VA 10 actually looks much better in making such a loop actually look the part.

As for whether or not the beltway should have the same route number throughout, I would say no. The Minneapolis example given earlier can and should easily be considered a beltway. There's also DC's capital beltway which for a while carried I-495 only on one part and I-95 only on the other. Also the Hampton Roads Beltway which carries I-64 on one part and I-664 on the other.

Wikipedia of course also has an article on the subject but a few of their examples I would never consider a beltway or anything even close to such
the 64 one is an example of a bad one, since it loops in on itself, it makes it hard to define the direction, i believe at one point 64 is posted with no direction on the southern part, easily could have been fixed with calling it 664 and throwing 64 on 264 east of the loop.
Logged

kphoger

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 10832
  • Location: Wichita, KS
  • Last Login: November 20, 2019, 05:01:29 PM
Logged
Keep right except to pass.  Yes.  You.

plain

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 798
  • Age: 41
  • Location: Richmond Virginia
  • Last Login: November 20, 2019, 11:15:05 PM
Re: Are the Little Rock FWYs/Interstates technically a Beltway?
« Reply #17 on: April 27, 2017, 09:18:34 PM »

I would consider the Little Rock example a beltway.

I could also see the controversy behind me or anyone else saying that. This has actually sparked some great debates in certain circles (no pun intended).
Me and some buddies actually talked about this last week. Looking at it map or satellite-wise I-295 & VA 288 together seems to indeed form a beltway but such a beltway needs a little "help" in forming the loop. In this case a 2 mile stretch of I-64 as well as either VA 895 or VA 10 (VA 10 however is NOT a freeway) is needed to complete it... looking at it, VA 10 actually looks much better in making such a loop actually look the part.

As for whether or not the beltway should have the same route number throughout, I would say no. The Minneapolis example given earlier can and should easily be considered a beltway. There's also DC's capital beltway which for a while carried I-495 only on one part and I-95 only on the other. Also the Hampton Roads Beltway which carries I-64 on one part and I-664 on the other.

Wikipedia of course also has an article on the subject but a few of their examples I would never consider a beltway or anything even close to such
the 64 one is an example of a bad one, since it loops in on itself, it makes it hard to define the direction, i believe at one point 64 is posted with no direction on the southern part, easily could have been fixed with calling it 664 and throwing 64 on 264 east of the loop.

There was much debate on that as well... actually your suggestion was one of four proposals floating around about the designation of the beltway but Virginia ultimately decided to leave it as is smdh. Me personally I would've just had I-64 stop in Hampton and designate the entire belt as I-664 (this was NOT one of those 4 proposals) but of course no city wants to lose a 2di.
Logged
Newark born, Richmond bred

 


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.