AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

New rules for political content in signatures and user profiles. See this thread for details.

Author Topic: I-69 in AR (and Pine Bluff I-69 Connector/AR 530)  (Read 145510 times)

rte66man

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1118
  • Location: Warr Acres, OK
  • Last Login: November 13, 2019, 10:54:26 PM
Re: I-69 in AR (and Pine Bluff I-69 Connector/AR 530)
« Reply #250 on: November 01, 2016, 09:37:52 PM »

The existing proposed route, even if a bit distorted, at least is more direct and serves as a direct route from Shreveport to Memphis.
False. Using EIS mileage, Shreveport-Memphis via I-49/30/40 is 12 miles SHORTER than the proposed route of I-69.

That's because they refused to send it in a straight line across Arkansas. 

However, I would hope it would provide some traffic relief.  The large number of semis on I40 between Little Rock and Memphis is unreal.
Logged
When you come to a fork in the road... TAKE IT.

                                                               -Yogi Berra

bjrush

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 347
  • Go Hogs

  • Location: Fayetteville, Arkansas
  • Last Login: March 17, 2018, 03:39:50 PM
Re: I-69 in AR (and Pine Bluff I-69 Connector/AR 530)
« Reply #251 on: November 06, 2016, 01:24:14 PM »

Did you know Scott Bennett is Chairman of the eight state I-69 Steering Committee?
Logged
Woo Pig Sooie

US71

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

  • Posts: 8695
  • Sign Inspector

  • Age: 59
  • Location: On the road again
  • Last Login: Today at 04:40:20 PM
    • The Road Less Taken
Re: I-69 in AR (and Pine Bluff I-69 Connector/AR 530)
« Reply #252 on: November 27, 2016, 09:57:34 AM »

Would it be cheaper to widen 30 and 40 rather than building the new terrain 69? It seems more feasible to do IMO.
AHTD is already widening parts of I-40 west of Memphis, or at least widening several bridges.
Logged
a man hears what he wants to hear
And disregards the rest -- Simon & Garfunkel

abqtraveler

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 275
  • US-85 runs thru Albuquerque, but only on paper

  • Location: Albuquerque, NM
  • Last Login: November 15, 2019, 10:10:57 PM
Re: I-69 in AR (and Pine Bluff I-69 Connector/AR 530)
« Reply #253 on: November 29, 2016, 12:13:46 AM »

The existing proposed route, even if a bit distorted, at least is more direct and serves as a direct route from Shreveport to Memphis.
False. Using EIS mileage, Shreveport-Memphis via I-49/30/40 is 12 miles SHORTER than the proposed route of I-69.

That's because they refused to send it in a straight line across Arkansas. 

However, I would hope it would provide some traffic relief.  The large number of semis on I40 between Little Rock and Memphis is unreal.
The routing of I-69 from Memphis to Houston is crookeder than a dog's hind leg, and with the Highway Trust Fund, Tennessee, Mississippi,Arkansas, and Louisiana all being broke, I doubt I'll see this section of I-69 built in my lifetime (maybe my kids might be able to drive on it someday).  Politics definitely played a leading role in defining the I-69 route through Mississippi, Arkansas, Louisiana and northeast Texas.  It would be more logical for I-69 to tie into I-155 at Dyersburg, then follow either I-55 and I-40 (or possibly US-67) to Little Rock, then I-30 to Texarkana, where it would follow its planned alignment to Houston and points south. 
Logged
2-d Interstates traveled:  4, 5, 8, 10, 15, 20, 24, 25, 27, 29, 35, 37, 39, 40, 41, 43, 45, 49, 55, 57, 64, 65, 66, 69, 70, 71, 74, 75, 76(E), 77, 78, 81, 83, 85, 87(N), 89, 90, 91, 93, 94, 95

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

compdude787

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 470
  • Age: 24
  • Location: Lynnwood, WA
  • Last Login: Today at 01:52:19 PM
Re: I-69 in AR (and Pine Bluff I-69 Connector/AR 530)
« Reply #254 on: November 30, 2016, 01:23:46 AM »

Or, just end I-69 in Memphis and renumber the Texas section of I-69 to something like I-47. I totally agree that the portion of I-69 through Arkansas is a waste of money and nothing more than a pork-barrel project. I'm pretty sure that if it does get built, it would get very little use.

The Ghostbuster

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2356
  • Age: 35
  • Location: Madison, WI
  • Last Login: November 15, 2019, 04:49:54 PM
Re: I-69 in AR (and Pine Bluff I-69 Connector/AR 530)
« Reply #255 on: November 30, 2016, 04:20:50 PM »

Maybe Interstate 69 could follow US 61 in Mississippi to Interstate 20, then ride along Interstate 20 to Shreveport, en route to connect with the segment in Texas. The Arkansas segment does seem like the portion of Interstate 69 that is the least likely of all the 69 segments to be constructed. But what would become of the AR 530 connector if that was done?
Logged

jbnv

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3350
  • I take the back roads.

  • Age: 43
  • Location: Independence/Baton Rouge, LA
  • Last Login: November 15, 2019, 12:52:43 PM
    • Photos on Flickr
Re: I-69 in AR (and Pine Bluff I-69 Connector/AR 530)
« Reply #256 on: November 30, 2016, 04:38:03 PM »

Maybe Interstate 69 could follow US 61 in Mississippi to Interstate 20, then ride along Interstate 20 to Shreveport, en route to connect with the segment in Texas.

What benefit would that bring over just going I-55, I-220, I-20?

But what would become of the AR 530 connector if that was done?

What could happen: Make plans to extend it to Monroe, LA. Upgrade US 165. Make the whole corridor an Interstate.

What probably will happen: Nothing.
Logged
🆕 Louisiana Highways on Twitter | Yes, I like Clearview. Deal with it. | Redos: US | La. | Route Challenge

Grzrd

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3424
  • Interested Observer

  • Location: Atlanta, GA
  • Last Login: July 31, 2019, 11:24:20 AM
Re: I-69 in AR (and Pine Bluff I-69 Connector/AR 530)
« Reply #257 on: December 02, 2016, 10:57:45 AM »

AHTD has posted an I-69 FASTLANE grant application for ROW acquisition and design of I-69 from the eastern Monticello Bypass I-69/ US 278 interchange to the western approach of the I-69 Mississippi River (Great River) Bridge.  Here is a snip of the proposed project area (p. 7/17 of pdf; p. 4 of document):

The cost of the project is described as follows (p. 8/17 of document; p. 5 of document):

AHTD is apparently going to try to get FASTLANE funding for this I-69 project again. In Scott Bennett's Nov. 30 presentation to the Arkansas State Highway Commission, this project is one of three that AHTD intends to submit (p. 18/65 of pdf):

« Last Edit: December 02, 2016, 11:02:16 AM by Grzrd »
Logged

Bobby5280

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1890
  • Location: Lawton, OK
  • Last Login: Today at 06:46:03 PM
Re: I-69 in AR (and Pine Bluff I-69 Connector/AR 530)
« Reply #258 on: December 02, 2016, 12:03:43 PM »

Meanwhile I-49 sits on the back burner with all this I-69 nonsense. We may all be dead and buried before the Great River Bridge ever gets built. The only hope of it getting built any time in the foreseeable future is the federal government stepping in and funding the entire thing.

The sections of I-69 in Texas and the spur just to Shreveport are really the only new sections of I-69 that will compliment the Interstate highway system as a whole. The crooked, curvy crap between Indianapolis and Memphis will only be useful to local traffic, and only to a limited extent since the highway is bypassing most places.
Logged

bjrush

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 347
  • Go Hogs

  • Location: Fayetteville, Arkansas
  • Last Login: March 17, 2018, 03:39:50 PM
Re: I-69 in AR (and Pine Bluff I-69 Connector/AR 530)
« Reply #259 on: December 02, 2016, 03:25:35 PM »

Robert S. Moore's personal driveway is a priority for AHTD
Logged
Woo Pig Sooie

The Ghostbuster

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2356
  • Age: 35
  • Location: Madison, WI
  • Last Login: November 15, 2019, 04:49:54 PM
Re: I-69 in AR (and Pine Bluff I-69 Connector/AR 530)
« Reply #260 on: December 02, 2016, 05:01:56 PM »

I made my proposal as a way around an Interstate through Arkansas that may not be needed or constructed. It may be impractical, I'll admit that, but to my thinking, Interstate 69 already exists west of Interstate 55 and is already planned to follow the US 61 corridor. If construction of 69 through Arkansas is unlikely to happen, maybe 69 should avoid the state altogether.
Logged

codyg1985

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2063
  • Age: 33
  • Location: Huntsville, AL
  • Last Login: November 14, 2019, 04:11:03 PM
Re: I-69 in AR (and Pine Bluff I-69 Connector/AR 530)
« Reply #261 on: December 05, 2016, 08:12:32 AM »

I made my proposal as a way around an Interstate through Arkansas that may not be needed or constructed. It may be impractical, I'll admit that, but to my thinking, Interstate 69 already exists west of Interstate 55 and is already planned to follow the US 61 corridor. If construction of 69 through Arkansas is unlikely to happen, maybe 69 should avoid the state altogether.

IMO the orphaned section of I-69 in MS should be incorporated into a westward extension of either I-269 or I-22 that crosses the MS River, terminating at I-40 near Jennette, AR. Maybe even take the loop to the north to I-555 or I-55. This would provide a true bypass of Memphis and a third MS River crossing, which would be good in the event of a New Madrid quake.
Logged
Cody Goodman
Huntsville, AL, United States

rte66man

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1118
  • Location: Warr Acres, OK
  • Last Login: November 13, 2019, 10:54:26 PM
Re: I-69 in AR (and Pine Bluff I-69 Connector/AR 530)
« Reply #262 on: December 05, 2016, 02:11:47 PM »

I made my proposal as a way around an Interstate through Arkansas that may not be needed or constructed. It may be impractical, I'll admit that, but to my thinking, Interstate 69 already exists west of Interstate 55 and is already planned to follow the US 61 corridor. If construction of 69 through Arkansas is unlikely to happen, maybe 69 should avoid the state altogether.

IMO the orphaned section of I-69 in MS should be incorporated into a westward extension of either I-269 or I-22 that crosses the MS River, terminating at I-40 near Jennette, AR. Maybe even take the loop to the north to I-555 or I-55. This would provide a true bypass of Memphis and a third MS River crossing, which would be good in the event of a New Madrid quake.

 :clap:  :clap:  :clap:
Logged
When you come to a fork in the road... TAKE IT.

                                                               -Yogi Berra

Bobby5280

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1890
  • Location: Lawton, OK
  • Last Login: Today at 06:46:03 PM
Re: I-69 in AR (and Pine Bluff I-69 Connector/AR 530)
« Reply #263 on: December 05, 2016, 04:35:41 PM »

One thing is certain, the casinos in Tunica would certainly love a Mississippi River bridge crossing in their immediate area. Keep MS-304 running due West across the river and over to Hughes, AR. I don't know about curving the road up to Jennette however. I think it would probably work better merging into I-40 just East of Forrest City, especially if the road were to carry an I-22 designation. Traffic coming from Little Rock or farther West would have a straight shot into Tunica, or places farther along the I-22 corridor.

In the near term It's certainly easier to make a good case for building a new Mississippi River bridge crossing near the casinos than it is building a bridge 100 miles farther South. I have a feeling it would take Arkansas needing to build out much of its section of I-69 and somehow getting Mississippi to build the 100+ miles of I-69 they need to build between Tunica and Benoit just to set the stage for funding The Great River Bridge.

Meanwhile the old Memphis-Arkansas Bridge (I-55) is really badly in need of replacement itself. It's just two narrow lanes in each direction, has no shoulders and does not comply with modern Interstate standards. The Hernando de Soto Bridge (I-40) has no shoulders either, but has 3 lanes in each direction.
Logged

jbnv

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3350
  • I take the back roads.

  • Age: 43
  • Location: Independence/Baton Rouge, LA
  • Last Login: November 15, 2019, 12:52:43 PM
    • Photos on Flickr
Re: I-69 in AR (and Pine Bluff I-69 Connector/AR 530)
« Reply #264 on: December 05, 2016, 05:22:29 PM »

One thing is certain, the casinos in Tunica would certainly love a Mississippi River bridge crossing in their immediate area. Keep MS-304 running due West across the river and over to Hughes, AR. I don't know about curving the road up to Jennette however. I think it would probably work better merging into I-40 just East of Forrest City, especially if the road were to carry an I-22 designation. Traffic coming from Little Rock or farther West would have a straight shot into Tunica, or places farther along the I-22 corridor.

Perhaps we could get the casinos to pay for a large part of it? Perhaps offer naming rights?
Logged
🆕 Louisiana Highways on Twitter | Yes, I like Clearview. Deal with it. | Redos: US | La. | Route Challenge

silverback1065

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3023
  • Age: 30
  • Location: Indianapolis
  • Last Login: Today at 10:13:38 AM
Re: I-69 in AR (and Pine Bluff I-69 Connector/AR 530)
« Reply #265 on: December 05, 2016, 05:37:56 PM »

isn't the us 278 bridge enough?
Logged

cjk374

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2111
  • The road less travelled is well worn under my feet

  • Age: 45
  • Location: Simsboro, LA
  • Last Login: November 15, 2019, 08:18:28 PM
Re: I-69 in AR (and Pine Bluff I-69 Connector/AR 530)
« Reply #266 on: December 05, 2016, 05:38:55 PM »

One thing is certain, the casinos in Tunica would certainly love a Mississippi River bridge crossing in their immediate area. Keep MS-304 running due West across the river and over to Hughes, AR. I don't know about curving the road up to Jennette however. I think it would probably work better merging into I-40 just East of Forrest City, especially if the road were to carry an I-22 designation. Traffic coming from Little Rock or farther West would have a straight shot into Tunica, or places farther along the I-22 corridor.

Perhaps we could get the casinos to pay for a large part of it? Perhaps offer naming rights?

 :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:

Logged
Runnin' roads and polishin' rails.

codyg1985

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2063
  • Age: 33
  • Location: Huntsville, AL
  • Last Login: November 14, 2019, 04:11:03 PM
Re: I-69 in AR (and Pine Bluff I-69 Connector/AR 530)
« Reply #267 on: December 06, 2016, 08:10:05 AM »

isn't the us 278 bridge enough?

Spend the money on what was going to be the I-69/US 278 bridge over the river and spend it on the bridge near Tunica/Robinsonville.
Logged
Cody Goodman
Huntsville, AL, United States

Road Hog

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1163
  • Location: Collin County, TX
  • Last Login: November 15, 2019, 08:11:19 PM
Re: I-69 in AR (and Pine Bluff I-69 Connector/AR 530)
« Reply #268 on: December 06, 2016, 05:57:37 PM »

I seriously doubt Arkansas will lift a finger to help pay for a conduit that will allow tax money to exit the state more freely.
Logged

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6098
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: Today at 02:04:50 AM
Re: I-69 in AR (and Pine Bluff I-69 Connector/AR 530)
« Reply #269 on: December 08, 2016, 12:59:06 AM »

isn't the us 278 bridge enough?

Spend the money on what was going to be the I-69/US 278 bridge over the river and spend it on the bridge near Tunica/Robinsonville.
I seriously doubt Arkansas will lift a finger to help pay for a conduit that will allow tax money to exit the state more freely.

The above observation is likely correct; Arkansas (as a state as well as a collection of interest groups) has a negative interest in expediting its residents access to out-of-state casinos; support for a Tunica bridge would probably be limited to east of the river.  Alternately, the I-69 route as planned potentially benefits a number of larger towns in southern AR (El Dorado, Warren, Monticello) -- or so its backers contend.  If the FASTLANE grant is approved, that would mean actual construction on about a third of the total AR I-69 mileage (including the Monticello bypass currently underway).  I think those local interests see a combination of Interstate access and relatively cheap land bringing businesses like distribution and/or warehousing to the area (as well as the usual travel-related roadside services); as I've contended in previous posts, that is the primary reason the corridor is what it is between Shreveport and Memphis; efficiency of travel between those two points is, while touted, a secondary consideration. 
Logged

Strider

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 681
  • Location: Greensboro, NC
  • Last Login: November 12, 2019, 04:20:11 PM
Re: I-69 in AR (and Pine Bluff I-69 Connector/AR 530)
« Reply #270 on: December 08, 2016, 02:49:22 PM »

isn't the us 278 bridge enough?

Spend the money on what was going to be the I-69/US 278 bridge over the river and spend it on the bridge near Tunica/Robinsonville.


Isn't the US 278 bridge (Greenville Bridge) up to interstate standards? If so, why spend more money on that bridge? I am not sure I understand what is going on here. Also, aren't they building the Greenville bypass?
Logged

NE2

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 13898
  • fuck

  • Age: 11
  • Location: central Florida
  • Last Login: November 15, 2019, 10:58:36 PM
Re: I-69 in AR (and Pine Bluff I-69 Connector/AR 530)
« Reply #271 on: December 08, 2016, 03:12:35 PM »

I-69 would cross near Benoit, about 25 miles north of the Greenville Bridge. Seems it would make more sense around Rosedale, but pork will be pork.
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.

codyg1985

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2063
  • Age: 33
  • Location: Huntsville, AL
  • Last Login: November 14, 2019, 04:11:03 PM
Re: I-69 in AR (and Pine Bluff I-69 Connector/AR 530)
« Reply #272 on: December 08, 2016, 03:48:49 PM »

isn't the us 278 bridge enough?

Spend the money on what was going to be the I-69/US 278 bridge over the river and spend it on the bridge near Tunica/Robinsonville.


Isn't the US 278 bridge (Greenville Bridge) up to interstate standards? If so, why spend more money on that bridge? I am not sure I understand what is going on here. Also, aren't they building the Greenville bypass?

They were building the US 82 Greenville bypass, but that work seems to have stalled out due to lack of funding and greater needs elsewhere in Mississippi.
Logged
Cody Goodman
Huntsville, AL, United States

silverback1065

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3023
  • Age: 30
  • Location: Indianapolis
  • Last Login: Today at 10:13:38 AM
Re: I-69 in AR (and Pine Bluff I-69 Connector/AR 530)
« Reply #273 on: December 08, 2016, 04:59:03 PM »

I-69 would cross near Benoit, about 25 miles north of the Greenville Bridge. Seems it would make more sense around Rosedale, but pork will be pork.

 :-D :clap:
Logged

Grzrd

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3424
  • Interested Observer

  • Location: Atlanta, GA
  • Last Login: July 31, 2019, 11:24:20 AM
Re: I-69 in AR (and Pine Bluff I-69 Connector/AR 530)
« Reply #274 on: December 13, 2016, 10:48:34 AM »

Or, perhaps Bennett has decided to Keep AHTD Weird, so to speak.  The base and surfacing contract letting no longer appears in the June 22 letting on the Next Three Lettings page, and it does not appear in the August 10 letting, either.  The long wait continues ....................

The grading and structures contract was let in 2011 and this slide from Scott Bennett's December 12 presentation to the Highway Commission and Review Subcommittee estimates that it is 74% complete and that it should be finished in mid-2017 (p.15/21 of pdf):



Time marches on ...........
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.