itk

I'm not sure, but I know they have been trying to get it designated as I-49... but with the current gap between Pineville and Bella Vista, I'm not what they may sign it as

City planners don't reserve land for future highways-- they can plan to their hearts content, but that doesn't mean anything without money. Government agencies (like a state DOT) do... and they can only do that when there's money available. There's very, very limited money to do that right now. The only way to get money to do that is for political action and public support. [off soapbox]

It is currently under design. Expect a public hearing over the proposed design most likely late this year.

Just FYI in case anyone is curious once again why the DOT don't build enough highways in Ark (or anywhere else for that matter): http://public.cq.com/docs/cqt/news110-000002496872.html Capka Says Bush Has a Highway Contingency Funding Plan

I don't know why the reporter that wrote the article for the NWA Times got it wrong-- it will be four lanes with a center turn lane (i.e. 5 lanes) through Farmington all the way to the bridge near Prairie Grove. Plus, if I remember correctly, it will also have bicycle lanes in Farmington.

That's not what I heard. The article I read quotes one or two people. That hardly constitutes as "many". (Not to sound like I'm picking on you )

There basically already is. 48th St.

Yep... the NWA Council is leading the charge. If there's any organization that you want to contact to find out more info, they would be the place to start. They have a website somewhere... but it's in its very infancy right now. Also, you could try the NWARPC-- they may help.

I generally agree with Coody on this one.

I can't believe no one has mentioned the upcoming election over the proposed road impact fees in Fayetteville. Mith must be on vacation! I'm curious if anyone has an opinion on the matter. I think it's interesting that Fayetteville, being the unique town that it is, is finally recognizing the need for more and wider roads. There's a lot of people in Fayetteville, and on this board, that don't like that I'm sure. But in the real world, Fayetteville can't just keep doing that and expect to be competitive. People drive cars, people will continue to drive cars, and more people and jobs are moving into Fayetteville. It's not like we're talking about widening an 8-lane freeway. We're talking about widening two-lane roads. On one hand, Fayetteville, which didn't invest in road widenings for as long as I can remember as a child until very recently, needs to catch up. The fees that I have seen in the papers don't seem as outrageous as critics make them out to be-- residential prices will surely be passed along to the buyers, but the costs to new business don't seem that much. For a 50,000 sq ft commercial/office, for instance, would be about $50,000. Is that going to deter a developer from building an office or retail in Fayetteville?? On the other hand, there is no tiering system for residential units, nor for areas of town (further out, closer in, etc). The fact is, Fayetteville, in the real world, to continue to attract businesses and thus tax dollars, must build or help fund *wider* roads and highways (4-lane roads). That's reality. The money has to come from somewhere. More money isn't going to come from the feds, or the state, for the foreseeable future. An RMA may or may not help out. Fayetteville has to help themselves.

Huh! I wouldn't have thought that the new Crystal Bridges site would require rock excavation... guess it is built into a hillside? Anyway, gotta put it somewhere. Whenever construction does start on the Bella Vista Bypass, though, there is going to be a whole heck of a lot of earthwork involved. Probably almost as much as was done for I-540 in certain places. Consequently, there will be a lot of trucks around, so at some point you may be inconvenienced with more trucks around your neighborhood.

That is a valid concern. But that's where some good politicking (sp?) will have to happen. Perhaps instead of selling a sales tax increase in the two county region to the voters, they could try and sell a package of projects spread across the region. Of course, there is a larger voting base in a town like Springdale, than in a town like Siloam Springs.

double post Pretty decent article this morning about RMAs. http://www.nwarktimes.com/adg/News/186058/ The article correctly gives the impression of what an RMA will almost certainly function as in Arkansas. That is, as a seperate authority to levy taxes with voter approval. Previous media articles gave the impression that it would build and operate toll roads. Rather, it could raise millions and millions of dollars for specific project(s) in their region, which then would go to AHTD for them to do their thing. That's why an agency like AHTD will be just fine to see RMAs-- it could mean expedited projects that would've taken years or decades to get built.

Hello? I'm here now! Nope, construction has definitely not begun. Right-of-way appraisal and acquisition will take a bit of time by itself. Design is still undergoing. Construction won't begin until sometime next year. Typically, I think AHTD will only improve the portion that's within their right-of-way. Otherwise, it will be the responsibility of the county or, now, perhaps the city (if it's in the city limits).

This is exactly what I was referring to in an earlier post about Coody. It just irks me (a pet peeve of mine), when people in a leadership position, don't resemble qualities that are often associated with proper leadership. Just like the article quoted, if Coody really felt this about Clark, he should have taken care of it at the appropriate time by bringing it up, instead of like this. Oh well.

It's anything but mute! Moot, perhaps!

I don't speak for AHTD, since I never admitted, and don't admit, to being affiliated or being employed by them. But, IF I did, I imagine AHTD has no opposition to it. It does not reduce their power, or allow the establishment of another agency which may "compete" with them. If anything, they would welcome it. An RMA would be used to help fund projects that would normally not get built for years or decades, because of lack of funding. AHTD has no authority to, for example, raise the state gas tax for funding-- only legislators and the governor can approve that. An RMA allows the people to levy extra taxes within their region for transportation improvements and/or to levy tolls on a new highway. I'm not exactly sure how the tolling authority portion will work out. Highway tolling varies from state to state, region to region-- sometimes it's a private company, sometimes a DOT, sometimes an RMA. However, no matter what taxes or tolling or whatever any RMA might do (with authority approval from the voters in the region), the RMA will have to work with AHTD and, in their best interest, be on their good side.

Did anyone else read this article this morning in the NWATimes: Morale matters: Mayor concerned about staff following proposed change This is what irks me about Fayetteville, as seen from the article. (1) The fact that the city councilmen are, in whole, nearly disfunctional, (2) the way the city councilmen don't follow their own land use/development/transportation plans, (3) the environment of Fayetteville which discourage other talented and qualified planners/engineers, and (4) the fact that Coody won't do squat, or at least publicly so, to remedy this problem, because IMO he's soft. The problem of the city council not following their own approved policy. This is why I would never consider working for the City of Fayetteville. I imagine it would be very frustrating at times, slightly frustrating the rest of the time.

Who in particular is not happy? This is the RMA legislation that will allow regions to establish RMAs to help fund transportation projects. We'll see how this goes. It will be up to the local leaders to make this happen. In the case of NWA, the NWA Council has been active in this, and may likely take (or support) the lead in creating an RMA for NWA.

I can't believe I would ever say this, but... where are the lawyers? Or maybe the case would be too weak.

I doubt at Steamboat, since it is so close to the interchange, and putting extra signals close to them will further screw up traffic congestion. That area near Harps is a classic case where it just was poorly planned, plain and simple. They SHOULD have allowed a connection between all that and Shiloh and Salem. But they didn't. So, like you say, people have to turn left out there without a signal. Great. You're right, those lights at the interchange have visors over the signal lenses to prevent confusing people. This is because, again, the lights are too close to each other. In other words, you don't want to show a green light to someone who should have a red light at the signal a few hundred feet up.

The deal is, is the people who live in SW Springdale are worried that an interchange there would add traffic to their neighborhood (to my understanding). Which I can sympathize with. So the admin doesn't have a strong leg to stand on to justify building an interchange there.... yet. When the ballpark goes in, and more development occurs, and traffic gets worse, then they'll likely have better justification for building an interchange. But I'm not sure what informal agreement was made between the admin and citizens. Traffic will certainly get worse before it gets better at those two interchanges-- the western portion of the 412 bypass won't be built anytime soon, and widening of Main St in Johnson won't happen for several more years. The best way to express your opinion right now on the situation is to write a letter, email, or call your local officials. The only way it would ever come to a "vote", is if there was a bond proposal that required an increase in sales tax (or something like that) to pay for the interchange (and likely other projects in the city).

Dude, did you read my previous posts? LISTEN. I'll do you a favor. Just 'cause I'm a nice guy. It's NOT the planners. It's politics. You don't like it? Call the Mayor's office. Write him a letter. Write your councilman. Planners can plan all they want. Doesn't mean jack squat if politicians c*ckblock it.

I have seen that. It is not a traffic engineering analysis. It would not be, and frankly was not, accepted by engineering professionals. The way I understand it, the staff convinced the mayor that it wasn't a hot idea, and it was subsequently abandoned. Also, the state's goal, as you put it, is a bit misleading. Again, Fay could take responsibility for College Ave-- then they could do almost whatever they wanted. BUT, if they did that, and they "shrank" College, and it was a disaster, guess who gets the heat and risks not getting re-elected? BUT, if the City wanted to do that NOW, they could tell people, or let people think, that it was the big, bad State that wouldn't allow them to do that. Make them the bad guys. That's called smart politics. But here's whats misleading-- there are plenty of examples of state/US highways in Arkansas that were made more ped friendly in a downtown area-- for example, US Hwy 64 in downtown Fort Smith-- several years ago, they re-did the on-street parking, added landscaping, sidewalks, crosswalks, bulb-outs, new curb line, etc. And that's in AHTD District 4, the same as Fay. West Memphis did the same not too long ago too (US Hwy 70). Hwy 7 in Hot Springs is ped friendly with a sense of place. There are other examples too, mostly in smaller towns...