News:

Thank you for your patience during the Forum downtime while we upgraded the software. Welcome back and see this thread for some new features and other changes to the forum.

Main Menu

I-57 Approved

Started by US71, October 11, 2017, 09:09:35 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

MikieTimT

ARDOT is holding a public involvement meeting in Corning next week regarding the Corning Bypass, which is the first 4.1 mile segment of the new terrain I-57 facility between Walnut Ridge and the Missouri border.  According to the video, after taking comments into consideration, they are planning on ROW acquisition this year with construction starting next year with completion in 2026.  Seems fast, but it is new terrain and there isn't much if anything in the way of utility movement other than probably near the interchanges and just earthwork to build the roadbed across cropland.  I'd wager that it gets designated either AR-557 or AR-667 in the interim until the whole shebang becomes I-57.

https://future57.transportationplanroom.com/corningbypass


Great Lakes Roads

I could also see ArDOT signing the new bypass as US 67 while the current routing through Corning as US 67B...
-Jay Seaburg

ilpt4u

Quote from: MikieTimT on March 08, 2024, 01:53:33 PM
ARDOT is holding a public involvement meeting in Corning next week regarding the Corning Bypass, which is the first 4.1 mile segment of the new terrain I-57 facility between Walnut Ridge and the Missouri border.  According to the video, after taking comments into consideration, they are planning on ROW acquisition this year with construction starting next year with completion in 2026.  Seems fast, but it is new terrain and there isn't much if anything in the way of utility movement other than probably near the interchanges and just earthwork to build the roadbed across cropland.  I'd wager that it gets designated either AR-557 or AR-667 in the interim until the whole shebang becomes I-57.

https://future57.transportationplanroom.com/corningbypass
Take a cue from TNDOT and go with AR 570 as a temp designation, if that is the chosen method
Quote from: Great Lakes Roads on March 08, 2024, 02:26:19 PM
I could also see ArDOT signing the new bypass as US 67 while the current routing through Corning as US 67B...
Probably will depend if the ultimate plan is to put 67 on the new Interstate or if it will end up designated as the parallel US at-grade route thru town

MikieTimT

Quote from: ilpt4u on March 08, 2024, 08:57:50 PM
Quote from: MikieTimT on March 08, 2024, 01:53:33 PM
ARDOT is holding a public involvement meeting in Corning next week regarding the Corning Bypass, which is the first 4.1 mile segment of the new terrain I-57 facility between Walnut Ridge and the Missouri border.  According to the video, after taking comments into consideration, they are planning on ROW acquisition this year with construction starting next year with completion in 2026.  Seems fast, but it is new terrain and there isn't much if anything in the way of utility movement other than probably near the interchanges and just earthwork to build the roadbed across cropland.  I'd wager that it gets designated either AR-557 or AR-667 in the interim until the whole shebang becomes I-57.

https://future57.transportationplanroom.com/corningbypass
Take a cue from TNDOT and go with AR 570 as a temp designation, if that is the chosen method
Quote from: Great Lakes Roads on March 08, 2024, 02:26:19 PM
I could also see ArDOT signing the new bypass as US 67 while the current routing through Corning as US 67B...
Probably will depend if the ultimate plan is to put 67 on the new Interstate or if it will end up designated as the parallel US at-grade route thru town

If its anything like the Bella Vista Bypass, they'll leave the US highway designation on the existing facility and designate the bypass as AR-557 since ARDOT uses the AR-5** series as placeholders for future interstates until they are connected and designated their ultimate number.  The Bella Vista Bypass was AR-549, much like the existing segment of Future I-49 is in Barling/Ft. Smith until they span the river valley and connect up to Alma.  In south Arkansas, the extension of I-530 to Monticello from Pine Bluff has the Super-2 segments temp designated AR-530 until they are connected and completed.  ARDOT does some wonky stuff with 3DI US highways, like US-412 Bypass is temp designated AR-612.

Road Hog

On the other hand, ARDOT long ago set the precedent of renaming old US 67 as AR 367 and moving the US designation to the new freeway as it was built. Possible they move both US 67 and US 62 to the new route between Pocahontas and Corning, as the 64-67-167 concurrency in White County was.

bwana39

Quote from: MikieTimT on March 09, 2024, 09:59:59 AM
Quote from: ilpt4u on March 08, 2024, 08:57:50 PM
Quote from: MikieTimT on March 08, 2024, 01:53:33 PM
ARDOT is holding a public involvement meeting in Corning next week regarding the Corning Bypass, which is the first 4.1 mile segment of the new terrain I-57 facility between Walnut Ridge and the Missouri border.  According to the video, after taking comments into consideration, they are planning on ROW acquisition this year with construction starting next year with completion in 2026.  Seems fast, but it is new terrain and there isn't much if anything in the way of utility movement other than probably near the interchanges and just earthwork to build the roadbed across cropland.  I'd wager that it gets designated either AR-557 or AR-667 in the interim until the whole shebang becomes I-57.

https://future57.transportationplanroom.com/corningbypass
Take a cue from TNDOT and go with AR 570 as a temp designation, if that is the chosen method
Quote from: Great Lakes Roads on March 08, 2024, 02:26:19 PM
I could also see ArDOT signing the new bypass as US 67 while the current routing through Corning as US 67B...
Probably will depend if the ultimate plan is to put 67 on the new Interstate or if it will end up designated as the parallel US at-grade route thru town

If its anything like the Bella Vista Bypass, they'll leave the US highway designation on the existing facility and designate the bypass as AR-557 since ARDOT uses the AR-5** series as placeholders for future interstates until they are connected and designated their ultimate number.  The Bella Vista Bypass was AR-549, much like the existing segment of Future I-49 is in Barling/Ft. Smith until they span the river valley and connect up to Alma.  In south Arkansas, the extension of I-530 to Monticello from Pine Bluff has the Super-2 segments temp designated AR-530 until they are connected and completed.  ARDOT does some wonky stuff with 3DI US highways, like US-412 Bypass is temp designated AR-612.

It is how they did US-71 from North of Texarkana to the state line at Ida LA.
Let's build what we need as economically as possible.

The Ghostbuster

I wouldn't be surprised if new segments of future Interstate 57 were temporarily signed as AR 557, although I would sign them solely as US 67 (with old 67 becoming 367) and adding the Interstate 57 designation later.

MikieTimT

The next segment of I-57 (Job 101173) looks to be getting funded in 2027 for $64M for the 4.89 miles from the Missouri border to US-67 north of Corning to connect up to the north end of the Corning Bypass.  So the Draft STIP appears to be reshuffling money originally allocated to bridge Future I-49 across the Arkansas River to meet up with Missouri at the border so there isn't another Bella Vista Bypass debacle.  Stinks for western AR, but will benefit Clay County and southern Missouri in the short term.

ARDOT 2025-2028 Draft STIP  Pg. 172 of 269

edwaleni

Quote from: MikieTimT on June 23, 2024, 09:36:30 PMThe next segment of I-57 (Job 101173) looks to be getting funded in 2027 for $64M for the 4.89 miles from the Missouri border to US-67 north of Corning to connect up to the north end of the Corning Bypass.  So the Draft STIP appears to be reshuffling money originally allocated to bridge Future I-49 across the Arkansas River to meet up with Missouri at the border so there isn't another Bella Vista Bypass debacle.  Stinks for western AR, but will benefit Clay County and southern Missouri in the short term.

ARDOT 2025-2028 Draft STIP  Pg. 172 of 269

I saw your post in the I-49 thread and my first thought is exactly what your premise was.  Can do one but can't do both.  I-49 loses, I-57 gains.

If some of the AADT and truck percentages on I-40 east of Little Rock are accurate, I can see why I-57 is getting pushed up.

I can see a finished I-57 link being a big deal if they have another unexpected bridge event in Memphis in the future.

MikieTimT

Quote from: edwaleni on June 23, 2024, 10:19:14 PM
Quote from: MikieTimT on June 23, 2024, 09:36:30 PMThe next segment of I-57 (Job 101173) looks to be getting funded in 2027 for $64M for the 4.89 miles from the Missouri border to US-67 north of Corning to connect up to the north end of the Corning Bypass.  So the Draft STIP appears to be reshuffling money originally allocated to bridge Future I-49 across the Arkansas River to meet up with Missouri at the border so there isn't another Bella Vista Bypass debacle.  Stinks for western AR, but will benefit Clay County and southern Missouri in the short term.

ARDOT 2025-2028 Draft STIP  Pg. 172 of 269

I saw your post in the I-49 thread and my first thought is exactly what your premise was.  Can do one but can't do both.  I-49 loses, I-57 gains.

If some of the AADT and truck percentages on I-40 east of Little Rock are accurate, I can see why I-57 is getting pushed up.

I can see a finished I-57 link being a big deal if they have another unexpected bridge event in Memphis in the future.

It would take some of the pressure off I-40 east of Little Rock, I-55 in NEA, and West Memphis in general, as well as give some resiliency in case of bridge issues in Memphis due to construction, protests, or accidents.  Doesn't really help with seismic activity since I-57 would lead right into the heart of the likely epicenter of any seismic activity.

Bobby5280

I think the Memphis situation is an urgent time bomb that will require a LOT of federal help and funding. The TN state legislature sure isn't going to do anything about the problem on its own. And it wouldn't have the money to do so even if the desire was there (which it isn't).

The existing I-55 bridge over the Mississippi River just sucks: 4 lanes, no shoulders. It's a traffic bottleneck. The Hernando de Soto Bridge (I-40) isn't too much better: 6 lanes, no shoulders, the outer third lanes drop at exit ramps on the East end of the bridge. Both bridges need to be replaced with safer, higher capacity structures. Good arguments can be made for building new Mississippi River bridges North and South of Memphis, extending the I-269 outer loop into Arkansas.

So, yeah, it's smarter of Arkansas to prioritize completing I-57. The project is pretty easy compared to what's involved with I-49. Plus there will probably be a greater, immediate benefit.

Once I-57 is completed it's likely the route will attract a lot more trucks. The I-57 bridge in Cairo is not so great. Again: 4 lanes, no shoulders. The thing was built in 1978, making it 46 years old. The New Madrid area does have a powder keg of seismic potential. But no one has any clue if/when a major earthquake there would occur. Life has to go on in the meantime. But there has to be some redundancy of Mississippi River bridge crossings in that region. It is of nation-wide interest multiple crossings remain functional.

MikieTimT

True, but it's also inevitable that ARDOT prioritizes it.  It ends, after all, in Little Rock.

I-39

Quote from: MikieTimT on June 23, 2024, 09:36:30 PMThe next segment of I-57 (Job 101173) looks to be getting funded in 2027 for $64M for the 4.89 miles from the Missouri border to US-67 north of Corning to connect up to the north end of the Corning Bypass.  So the Draft STIP appears to be reshuffling money originally allocated to bridge Future I-49 across the Arkansas River to meet up with Missouri at the border so there isn't another Bella Vista Bypass debacle.  Stinks for western AR, but will benefit Clay County and southern Missouri in the short term.

ARDOT 2025-2028 Draft STIP  Pg. 172 of 269

When is Missouri going to build their section from Route 158 south to the state line? I thought they had funding to build part of it, but there has been no movement recently.

Bobby5280

It's difficult to tell. Elected "lawmakers" seem more interested in fighting culture war battles in the press (and trying to pander to voters with tax cut candy). They're not so interested in doing anything of substance, such as improving the nation's infrastructure.

splashflash

https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?msg=2930301

See the post in Central States
Quote from: I-39 on June 25, 2024, 11:05:13 AM
Quote from: MikieTimT on June 23, 2024, 09:36:30 PMThe next segment of I-57 (Job 101173) looks to be getting funded in 2027 for $64M for the 4.89 miles from the Missouri border to US-67 north of Corning to connect up to the north end of the Corning Bypass.  So the Draft STIP appears to be reshuffling money originally allocated to bridge Future I-49 across the Arkansas River to meet up with Missouri at the border so there isn't another Bella Vista Bypass debacle.  Stinks for western AR, but will benefit Clay County and southern Missouri in the short term.

ARDOT 2025-2028 Draft STIP  Pg. 172 of 269

When is Missouri going to build their section from Route 158 south to the state line? I thought they had funding to build part of it, but there has been no movement recently.

See the post in Central States.
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?msg=2930301

edwaleni

Quote from: I-39 on June 25, 2024, 11:05:13 AM
Quote from: MikieTimT on June 23, 2024, 09:36:30 PMThe next segment of I-57 (Job 101173) looks to be getting funded in 2027 for $64M for the 4.89 miles from the Missouri border to US-67 north of Corning to connect up to the north end of the Corning Bypass.  So the Draft STIP appears to be reshuffling money originally allocated to bridge Future I-49 across the Arkansas River to meet up with Missouri at the border so there isn't another Bella Vista Bypass debacle.  Stinks for western AR, but will benefit Clay County and southern Missouri in the short term.

ARDOT 2025-2028 Draft STIP  Pg. 172 of 269

When is Missouri going to build their section from Route 158 south to the state line? I thought they had funding to build part of it, but there has been no movement recently.

The funding (Phase 2) to purchase the additional ROW from north of Neelyville to the Arkansas State Line was vetoed by the Missouri Gov. last year. The funding that was made available was to update the exit at MO-158 to a 4 lane interchange from the existing 2 lane.

Road Hog

What's the status of the Jacksonville work? Haven't been through there since January.

ilpt4u

Cross-posting and quoting from the Missouri thread in Central States...
Quote from: splashflash on June 28, 2024, 11:00:18 PMI-44 Gets $577.5M and US 67 South of Poplar Bluff Appears to Get $60M (or is it $150M?)...

I read through the vetoes and didn't see any vetoing of the sizeable earmark for US 67 / Future I-57 widening south of Poplar Bluff to the Arkansas border...

A recent news article states the Butler County US 67 earmark was actually $150M: https://missouriindependent.com/2024/06/27/state-budget-loaded-with-earmarks-nears-deadline-for-action-by-missouri-gov-mike-parson/...


"Other big road items include $150 million to widen U.S. Highway 67 through Butler County and $48 million for work on U.S. 65 between Buffalo and Warsaw.  A previous article in the St. Louis Post in a post above stated $60M, but maybe that was the House bill and the Senate version significantly beefed it up.
So it appears Future I-57 is getting funding to the Arkansas border from Missouri.

Is this enough when combined with other local and federal funds to get the 2-lane upgraded to Freeway to the state line now?

abqtraveler

Quote from: ilpt4u on June 29, 2024, 01:17:01 PMCross-posting and quoting from the Missouri thread in Central States...
Quote from: splashflash on June 28, 2024, 11:00:18 PMI-44 Gets $577.5M and US 67 South of Poplar Bluff Appears to Get $60M (or is it $150M?)...

I read through the vetoes and didn't see any vetoing of the sizeable earmark for US 67 / Future I-57 widening south of Poplar Bluff to the Arkansas border...

A recent news article states the Butler County US 67 earmark was actually $150M: https://missouriindependent.com/2024/06/27/state-budget-loaded-with-earmarks-nears-deadline-for-action-by-missouri-gov-mike-parson/...


"Other big road items include $150 million to widen U.S. Highway 67 through Butler County and $48 million for work on U.S. 65 between Buffalo and Warsaw.  A previous article in the St. Louis Post in a post above stated $60M, but maybe that was the House bill and the Senate version significantly beefed it up.
So it appears Future I-57 is getting funding to the Arkansas border from Missouri.

Is this enough when combined with other local and federal funds to get the 2-lane upgraded to Freeway to the state line now?
Assuming it doesn't get vetoed again by Mike Parson.
2-d Interstates traveled:  4, 5, 8, 10, 15, 20, 24, 25, 27, 29, 35, 39, 40, 41, 43, 45, 49, 55, 57, 64, 65, 66, 69, 70, 71, 72, 74, 75, 76(E), 77, 78, 81, 83, 84(W), 85, 87(N), 89, 90, 91, 93, 94, 95

2-d Interstates Clinched:  12, 22, 30, 37, 44, 59, 80, 84(E), 86(E), 238, H1, H2, H3, H201

ilpt4u

I was under the impression this latest report is what survived the line item veto from Parsons

splashflash

#1120
ARDOT is holding public comment input sessions until August 5th for designating US 67 as I-57 south of Walnut Ridge

https://vpiph01-i57-corridor-designation-2024-en-ardot.hub.arcgis.com/

"ARDOT will seek approval from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) to designate a portion of U.S. Highway 67 as Interstate 57 in accordance with 23 U.S. Code § 103. After FHWA approval, the only physical changes to the current corridor will consist of sign replacement.
"This designation will potentially provide more economic opportunities and increase property value along the corridor.  No existing addresses will be affected.
"This  website will provide a video presentation and information regarding an overview about the Interstate 57 corridor, Interstate designation requirements, how an individual may be affected by the Interstate designation, and lastly how questions and comments can be submitted for consideration.

Road Hog

Quote from: splashflash on July 04, 2024, 12:46:39 AMARDOT is holding public comment input sessions until August 5th for designating US 67 as I-57 south of Walnut Ridge

https://vpiph01-i57-corridor-designation-2024-en-ardot.hub.arcgis.com/

"ARDOT will seek approval from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) to designate a portion of U.S. Highway 67 as Interstate 57 in accordance with 23 U.S. Code § 103. After FHWA approval, the only physical changes to the current corridor will consist of sign replacement.
"This designation will potentially provide more economic opportunities and increase property value along the corridor.  No existing addresses will be affected.
"This  website will provide a video presentation and information regarding an overview about the Interstate 57 corridor, Interstate designation requirements, how an individual may be affected by the Interstate designation, and lastly how questions and comments can be submitted for consideration.
Took 'em long enough.

ilpt4u

Is the Jacksonville rebuild far enough along that Interstate standards now apply to Walnut Ridge?

bugo

That means the iconic US 64-67-167 assemblies will be going away.



Nobody is on the level of the devil.

The Ghostbuster

In the future, I'd expect the Interstate 57 sign would be placed above the US 67 sign, and the US 64 sign would be placed above the US 167 sign. Another possibility would be to eliminate the US Highway signs, and just sign the road as Interstate 57, although I doubt that will happen.



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.