Metroplan 2030

[Aporkalypse]

So this new stretch of I-440 will be the only divided highway in Pulaski County that is not atleast six lanes, and 5-10 years after completion there will be a bottleneck mess at the 430/440 interchange. Why not go ahead and make it 6 lanes like it is everywhere else in the county?

[hogwash]

These types of issues are exactly the reason why there needs to be more continuity in the planning process. It just seems fragmented decision making causes so many problems. If AHTD designs and builds a trafficway for a designed purpose and Metroplan is also on board, local planning boards should regulate development so as not to exceed the capacities of the infrastructure. This is just an idea, but you could require traffic impact analyses for each development and adjust impact fees on a sliding scale. If an area is near or above capacity, make impact fees prohibitively high. Areas with underutilized infrastructure could have complete waiver of impact fees or be given financial incentives for development. I don't know how equitable this is, but it might have a beneficial outcome.

Why is it so often transportation and land use planning processes do not involve each other?

[itk]

So this new stretch of I-440 will be the only divided highway in Pulaski County that is not atleast six lanes, and 5-10 years after completion there will be a bottleneck mess at the 430/440 interchange. Why not go ahead and make it 6 lanes like it is everywhere else in the county?

[itk]

These types of issues are exactly the reason why there needs to be more continuity in the planning process. It just seems fragmented decision making causes so many problems. If AHTD designs and builds a trafficway for a designed purpose and Metroplan is also on board, local planning boards should regulate development so as not to exceed the capacities of the infrastructure. This is just an idea, but you could require traffic impact analyses for each development and adjust impact fees on a sliding scale. If an area is near or above capacity, make impact fees prohibitively high. Areas with underutilized infrastructure could have complete waiver of impact fees or be given financial incentives for development. I don't know how equitable this is, but it might have a beneficial outcome.

Why is it so often transportation and land use planning processes do not involve each other?

[arkansas_buff]

I read an interesting article from The Arkansas Leader. They said that the Northbelt Freeway project may be postponed (surpise, surprise) due to the competition for funds from other projects such as the $100 million needed for the 630/430 interchange. The article also mentioned that AHTD has requested that MetroPlan do a feasibility study regarding mass transit/light rail into the Jacksonville and Cabot areas. Lots of interesting tidbits in the article, which can be read here.

[LRU1967]

I read an interesting article from The Arkansas Leader. They said that the Northbelt Freeway project may be postponed (surpise, surprise) due to the competition for funds from other projects such as the $100 million needed for the 630/430 interchange. The article also mentioned that AHTD has requested that MetroPlan do a feasibility study regarding mass transit/light rail into the Jacksonville and Cabot areas. Lots of interesting tidbits in the article, which can be read here.

[Aporkalypse]

I read an interesting article from The Arkansas Leader. They said that the Northbelt Freeway project may be postponed (surpise, surprise) due to the competition for funds from other projects such as the $100 million needed for the 630/430 interchange. The article also mentioned that AHTD has requested that MetroPlan do a feasibility study regarding mass transit/light rail into the Jacksonville and Cabot areas. Lots of interesting tidbits in the article, which can be read here.