DOCSLIB.ORG

The Urban Morphology of Northwest Arkansas: a Geospatial Analysis

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Urban Morphology of Northwest Arkansas: a Geospatial Analysis University of Arkansas, Fayetteville ScholarWorks@UARK Theses and Dissertations 8-2017 The rbU an Morphology of Northwest Arkansas: A Geospatial Analysis Jason McCollum University of Arkansas, Fayetteville Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.uark.edu/etd Part of the Geographic Information Sciences Commons, Spatial Science Commons, Transportation Commons, and the Urban Studies and Planning Commons Recommended Citation McCollum, Jason, "The rU ban Morphology of Northwest Arkansas: A Geospatial Analysis" (2017). Theses and Dissertations. 2421. http://scholarworks.uark.edu/etd/2421 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@UARK. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@UARK. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. The Urban Morphology of Northwest Arkansas: A Geospatial Analysis A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Geography by Jason McCollum University of Arkansas Bachelor of Arts in Geography, 2015 August 2017 University of Arkansas This thesis is approved for recommendation to the Graduate Council _______________________________________ Dr. Thomas R. Paradise Thesis Director ______________________________________ ______________________________________ Dr. Fiona Davidson Dr. Xuan Shi Committee member Committee member Abstract Research on the impacts of transport infrastructure is limited, and most of it is either focused on rural areas or on developed areas before modern geospatial technologies were available. This study aimed to fill this gap in transport research by providing a holistic look at the regional changes that occurred due to new transport infrastructure construction in Northwest Arkansas between 1980 and 2011. The National Land Cover Database was used to create a time-series of land cover across the region between 1992 and 2011. These data were then used to predict future growth in the region. Additionally, growth patterns of the four largest cities (Bentonville, Fayetteville, Rogers, and Springdale) were studied, and monocentricity values for the region were calculated to study population movement. Data on income, retail trade, gross merchandise trade, and worker flows were used to economically characterize the region for the time period of study. The results show that development is mostly occurring on top of agricultural land, though higher intensity developments do are often replacing lower intensity uses. A third of all development occurs within a half-mile of a US highway, with a third of these developments occurring within a half-mile of I-540/I-49. The main cities of Northwest Arkansas are expanding their borders at a rate that maintains roughly 50% developed land cover, such expansion and land use track could make for an easily quantifiable measure of urban sprawl that could be combined with other factors to better quantify sprawl than current methods. Economically, Madison County, AR and McDonald County, MO both saw up to 80% permanent drops in economic trade that align with major milestones in the construction of I-540. This is further supported by a ten point drop in residents who chose to work outside of Benton or Washington County once the bypass was completed. Meanwhile, Benton County saw a short-lived doubling of trade, and Washington County saw a smaller, lagged effect that was also not permanent. These findings suggest that the I-540/I- 49 created severe spatial and economic competition in the region with no obvious winner. Acknowledgements I’d like to express my gratitude to the multitude of people that made this thesis possible. Dr. Tom Paradise for bringing me into the program and allowing me to work under him. Dr. Fiona Davidson for guiding me along the way and helping me work through the many roadblocks that came up as I developed the earliest forms of this thesis. Dr. Xuan Shi for helping me with the many quirks and oddities that can come up when working with geospatial data. To everyone in my office, who have all at some point discussed my research with me and provided some much needed input, especially Jamey Voorhees, for his historical knowledge on the region, and Bradley Wilson, for helping me during the writing of this thesis. Dedication This thesis is dedicated to my always loving and supportive family. Table of Contents 1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................................. 1 2. Literature Review .................................................................................................................................... 2 Metropolitan Statistical Areas and Urban Growth Factors ............................................................... 2 Transport and the Built Environment ............................................................................................... 3 The Economic Impact of Transport Infrastructure ........................................................................... 4 Quantifying the Urban Form ............................................................................................................. 5 3. Study Site ................................................................................................................................................. 8 Physical Geography ......................................................................................................................... 9 Economy ........................................................................................................................................ 10 Transportation in Northwest Arkansas ........................................................................................... 11 Area of Study ................................................................................................................................. 12 4. Methodology .......................................................................................................................................... 16 Data Collection ............................................................................................................................... 16 Classification of Developed Land ................................................................................................... 17 Changes in Developed Land Cover ............................................................................................... 18 Sources of Newly Developed Land ................................................................................................ 18 Corridors of Growth ........................................................................................................................ 19 Centrality ........................................................................................................................................ 19 Economic Performance .................................................................................................................. 21 5. Results ................................................................................................................................................... 22 Classification of Developed Land ................................................................................................... 22 Changes in Developed Land Cover ............................................................................................... 22 Changes in Land Cover Type ........................................................................................................ 27 Sources of Newly Developed Land ................................................................................................ 29 Corridors of Growth ........................................................................................................................ 33 Centrality ........................................................................................................................................ 35 Economic Performance .................................................................................................................. 37 6. Discussion ............................................................................................................................................. 40 Regional Development ................................................................................................................... 40 Local Development ........................................................................................................................ 43 Limitations and Future Study ......................................................................................................... 45 7. Conclusions ........................................................................................................................................... 47 Bibliography .............................................................................................................................................. 49 Appendices ................................................................................................................................................ 55 Appendix A: National Land Cover Database Legend .................................................................... 55 Appendix B: National Land Cover Database Comparisons ........................................................... 60 Appendix C: Land
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Effects of Agricultural Practices on Nutrient Concentrations and Loads in Two Small Watersheds, Northwestern Arkansas Robin G
    Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science Volume 52 Article 15 1998 Effects of Agricultural Practices on Nutrient Concentrations and Loads in Two Small Watersheds, Northwestern Arkansas Robin G. Roggio University of Arkansas, Fayetteville Kenneth F. Steele University of Arkansas, Fayetteville P. F. Vendrell University of Arkansas, Fayetteville M. A. Nelson University of Arkansas, Fayetteville Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.uark.edu/jaas Part of the Environmental Monitoring Commons, Fresh Water Studies Commons, and the Water Resource Management Commons Recommended Citation Roggio, Robin G.; Steele, Kenneth F.; Vendrell, P. F.; and Nelson, M. A. (1998) "Effects of Agricultural Practices on Nutrient Concentrations and Loads in Two Small Watersheds, Northwestern Arkansas," Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science: Vol. 52 , Article 15. Available at: http://scholarworks.uark.edu/jaas/vol52/iss1/15 This article is available for use under the Creative Commons license: Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-ND 4.0). Users are able to read, download, copy, print, distribute, search, link to the full texts of these articles, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without asking prior permission from the publisher or the author. This Article is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@UARK. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science by an authorized editor of ScholarWorks@UARK. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science, Vol. 52 [1998], Art. 15 Effects of Agricultural Practices on Nutrient Concentrations and Loads in Two Small Watersheds, Northwestern Arkansas Robin G.
    [Show full text]
  • Action Recommendation
    City of Fayetteville Staff Review Form 2016-0419 Legistar File ID 9/20/2016 City Council Meeting Date - Agenda Item Only N/A for Non-Agenda Item Utilities Director / Tim Nyander 9/7/2016 Utilities Department Submitted By Submitted Date Division / Department Action Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of a Resolution authorizing the City Attorney to seek possession by condemnation of easements on of portions of properties necessary for Construction Contract, BID 16-49, Construction, Porter RD – HWY 112/71B Widening and Interchange Water and Sewer Relocations for an estimated cost of $525,900.00 - 87.06% is reimbursable from the AHTD and approval of a budget adjustment. AHTD cost is $457,848.00 and City cost is $68,052.00. Budget Impact: 5400.720.5700-5810.00 Water/Sewer Account Number Fund 11011.1501 Water/Sewer Relocations-Bond Projects Project Number Project Title Budgeted Item? Yes Current Budget $ 1,074,496.00 Funds Obligated $ 89,559.84 Current Balance $ 984,936.16 Does item have a cost? Yes Item Cost $ 525,900.00 Budget Adjustment Attached? Yes Budget Adjustment $ 457,848.00 Remaining Budget $ 916,884.16 Must Attach Completed Budget Adjustment! V20140710 Previous Ordinance or Resolution # Original Contract Number: Approval Date: Comments: MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 20, 2016 TO: Mayor Jordan and City Council THRU: Don Marr, Chief of Staff Tim Nyander, Utilities Director Water & Sewer Committee FROM: Jim Beavers, P.E. DATE: September 6, 2016 SUBJECT: Approval of a Resolution authorizing the City Attorney to seek condemnation and orders of possession for water and sewer easements necessary for the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas; Construction Contract, BID 16-49, Construction, Porter RD – HWY 112/71B Widening and Interchange Water and Sewer Relocations for an estimated cost of $525,900.00 and approval of a budget adjustment.
    [Show full text]
  • 002.01.20-012P-20015.Pdf
    Christian N. Parks James F. Goodhart General Counsel Assistant General Counsel John P. Marks Rob Brown Sr. Assistant General Counsel Assistant General Counsel Phone: 501-223-6327 Fax: 501-223-6463 April 17, 2020 Ms. Jayme Franco Arkansas Secretary of State, Rules & Regulation Filing 500 Woodlane Drive, Room 26 Little Rock, AR 72201 Via email only: [email protected] RE: Legal Notice for Proposed Rules or Regulations – May 2020 meeting Dear Ms. Franco: Attached please find for filing and immediate publication on the Secretary of State’s website the following: Legal Notice for upcoming Commission Meeting to be held on May 21, 2020, which will run in the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette on April 19, 20, and 21, 2020. Yesterday April Soman provided a link to the proposed regulation changes that will be reviewed by the Commission at the upcoming meeting (96 proposals). Please get in touch which her if you have any difficulty accessing the file. Should you have any questions or comments concerning this filing, please do not hesitate to contact me at (501) 223-6327 at your convenience. Sincerely, James F. Goodhart General Counsel Cc: Ms. Barbara Brown, Bureau of Legislative Research [email protected] ARKANSAS REGISTER Proposed Rule Cover Sheet Secretary of State John Thurston 500 Woodlane, Suite 026 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-1094 (501) 682-5070 www.sos.arkansas.gov Name of Department Legal Division Agency or Division Name Arkansas Game & Fish Commission Other Subdivision or Department, If Applicable Previous Agency Name, If Applicable Contact Person April M. Soman Contact E-mail [email protected] Contact Phone 501-223-6327 Name of Rule 1.00-C Definition of Terms Newspaper Name Arkansas Democrat Gazette Date of Publishing March 22, 23, and 24, 2020 and April 19, 20, and 21, 2020 Final Date for Public Comment May 21, 2020 Location and Time of Public Meeting AGFC Auditorium, 2 Natural Resources Drive, Little Rock AR 72205, at 10:00 a.m.
    [Show full text]
  • 2017-18 Arkansas Hunting Guidebook
    2017-18 Arkansas Hunting Guidebook Pick up an AGFC conservation license plate at your c=85 m=19 y=0 k=0 c=57 m=80 y=100 k=45 c=20 m=0 y=40 k=6 local revenue office. Learn more atwww.agfc.com. c=15 m=29 y=33 k=0 c=100 m=0 y=91 k=42 c=30 m=0 y=5 k=0 Arkansas Game and Fish Commission Main Office Contact Information 2 Natural Resources Drive • Little Rock, AR 72205 501-223-6300 • 800-364-4263 • www.agfc.com Important Numbers Regional Office Contact Information Stop Poaching Hotline WMD Region 1 • Northeast Office 600-B East Lawson • Jonesboro, AR 72404 Toll-free: 800-482-9262 Toll-free: 877-972-5438 #TIP (#847) for AT&T users (charges apply) 24 hours a day, 7 days a week WMD Region 2 • East Central Office Text a Tip (TIP411) 1201 North Highway 49 • Brinkley, AR 72021 Toll-free: 877-734-4581 Text AGFC and your tip to TIP411 (847411) Texts are completely anonymous WMD Region 3 • Southeast Office Game Checking 771 Jordan Drive • Monticello, AR 71655 Toll-free: 877-731-5627 Toll-free: 877-367-3559 24 hours a day, 7 days a week WMD Region 4 • South Central Office www.agfc.com 500 Ben Lane • Camden, AR 71701 Wildlife Hotline Toll-free: 877-836-4612 Toll-free: 800-440-1477 WMD Region 5 • Southwest Office Deer, Turkey or Elk Permits 7004 Highway 67 East • Perrytown, AR 71801 Toll-free: 877-777-5580 501-223-6359 (office hours only) WMD Region 6 • Hot Springs Office Boating Education Classes 350 Fish Hatchery Road • Hot Springs, AR 71913 Toll-free: 877-493-6424 (office hours only) Toll-free: 877-525-8606 Triple Trophy Program 501-223-6351 (office hours only) WMD Region 6 • Fort Smith Office 8000 Taylor Ave.
    [Show full text]
  • Minutes.Form
    MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE UNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS BOARD OF TRUSTEES UNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS AT LITTLE ROCK DONAGHEY STUDENT CENTER CALVIN R. LEDGETTER JR. ASSEMBLY HALL LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 1:00 P.M., MARCH 17, 2015 AND 8:30 A.M., MARCH 18, 2015 TRUSTEES PRESENT: Chairman Ben Hyneman; Trustees Jane Rogers; Reynie Rutledge; David Pryor; John Goodson; Stephen A. Broughton, MD; Cliff Gibson; Morril Harriman; and Jim von Gremp. TRUSTEE ABSENT: Mark Waldrip. UNIVERSITY ADMINISTRATORS AND OTHERS PRESENT: System Administration: President Donald R. Bobbitt, Vice President for Agriculture Mark J. Cochran, Vice President for Academic Affairs Michael K. Moore, Vice President for Finance and CFO Barbara Goswick, Vice President for Administration Ann Kemp, Director of Internal Audit Jacob Flournoy, Interim Director of Communications Nate Hinkel, General Counsel Fred Harrison, Assistant to the President Angela Hudson and Associate for Administration Sylvia White. UAF Representatives: Chancellor G. David Gearhart, Provost and Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs Sharon L. Gaber, Interim Vice Chancellor for Finance and Administration Tim O’Donnell, Vice Chancellor for Advancement Chris Wyrick, and Vice Chancellor for Governmental Relations Randy Massanelli. Board of Trustees Meeting March 17-18, 2015 Page 2 UAMS Representatives: Chancellor Daniel W. Rahn; Dean, College of Medicine Richard Smith; Chief Executive Officer Roxane Townsend; Chief Medical Quality Officer Chris Cargile; Chief Financial Officer Hospital Daniel J. Riley; Vice Chancellor and Chief Financial Officer Bill Bowes; Vice Chancellor Communications and Marketing Leslie Taylor and Professor Ron Robertson, M.D. UALR Representatives: Chancellor Joel E. Anderson, Director Budget and Strategic Initiatives Sandra Robertson, Executive Vice Chancellor and Provost Zulma Toro, and Vice Chancellor for Finance and Administration Bob Adams.
    [Show full text]
  • An Economic Analysis of Madison County in Northwest Arkansas
    November 1, 2003 PART TWO MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS FOR REGIONAL SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT PLANS FOR SUBMITTAL TO AND APPROVAL OF THE ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT DIVISION Post Office Box 8913 Little Rock AR 72219-8913 Phone (501) 682-0602 Fax (501) 682-0611 www.adeq.state.ar.us Minimum Requirements for Regional Solid Waste Management Plans 1 November 1, 2003 Due Date November 1, 2004, Followed By Annual Updates Minimum Requirements for Regional Solid Waste Management Plans 2 November 1, 2003 PART TWO MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS Regional Solid Waste Management Plans Preface Part Two – Minimum Requirements for Regional Solid Waste Management Plans, is presented pursuant to the requirements set forth by the 83rd Arkansas General Assembly in Act 1376 of 2001, codified in Statute as Arkansas Code Annotated (A.C.A.) §8-6-1901 et al. Act 1376 of 2001 specifically charges the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality with establishing minimum requirements for the development of new waste management plans by Regional Solid Waste Management Boards. The new plans will replace those previously required by Act 870 of 1989, codified as A.C.A. §8-6-701 et al. Act 1376 of 2001 directs that the requirements include, at a minimum, requirements for: 1. STRATEGIC PLANNING 2. REPORTING 3. PUBLIC NOTICE AND PARTICIPATION 4. SERVICES 5. SOLUTIONS TO PROBLEMS AND ISSUES The Department addresses this directive by requiring that each Regional Solid Waste Management Board respond to the established requirements set forth in this document, known as Part Two – Minimum Requirements for Regional Solid Waste Management Plans, which is a supplement to Part One – The Statewide Solid Waste Management Plan for Arkansas.
    [Show full text]
  • An Economic Analysis of Washington County in Northwest Arkansas
    AN ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF WASHINGTON COUNTY IN NORTHWEST ARKANSAS Center for Business and Economic Research Reynolds Center Building 217 Sam M. Walton College of Business 1 University of Arkansas Fayetteville, Arkansas 72701-1201 (479) 575-4151 August 30, 2002 An Economic Analysis of Washington County in Northwest Arkansas I. Geographic Description Washington County is comprised of 950 square miles and is located along the Oklahoma- Arkansas border in the physiographic regions of the Springfield Plateau in the northern portion of the county and the Boston Mountains in the southern portion of the county. Figure 1 highlights the counties that comprise the Northwest Arkansas region, as defined by the Arkansas Department of Economic Development. Washington County is shown in red; all other counties in the region are shown in yellow. Figure 1 – Washington County’s Location A small portion of the Ozark National forest is located in extreme northern and southern Washington County. The White River flows north from Madison County through Washington County into Beaver Lake. Sources: United States Census Bureau. State and County QuickFacts. http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/05/05143.html Chart 2-5: Physiographic Regions. Arkansas Statistical Abstract – 2000. April 2000. Census State Data Center, University of Arkansas at Little Rock. Page 72. The Rand McNally Road Atlas, 2002 Edition. Page 10. II. Demographic Characteristics Population In 1980, the population of Washington County was 100,494 persons. The county ranked second in terms of population among Arkansas’ 75 counties behind Pulaski County and first among the 16 counties in Northwest Arkansas. By 1990, the population of the county had increased 12.9 percent to 113,409 to rank second among Arkansas’ counties behind Pulaski County and first among the counties in Northwest Arkansas.
    [Show full text]
  • Proposed 2013-2014 General Hunting Regulations Approval
    Proposed 2013-2014 General Hunting Regulations Approval Committee: Regulations Date: April 17, 2013 Explanation: Recommended revisions for hunting related regulations and new proposals were presented at the March meeting for Commission review and consideration. The regulations committee voted unanimous to strike the recommendation to change the checking time from 24 to 12 hours from the proposals last month. The amended proposals will be presented at this meeting for Commission approval. These proposals include calendar adjustments, code revisions and code clarifications. Included, with the backup material, is a summary of recommended changes and a color coded copy of affected codes. Prepared by: David Goad 2013-2014 HUNTING REGULATIONS SUMMARY OF PROPOSALS Deer 1. Add all states and Canadian Provinces to the carcass importation restriction list in code 05.26, by adding this language addendum S1.01 can be deleted. The lands between the Mississippi River levees in neighboring states of Tennessee and Mississippi will be excluded. Code/Addendum: 05.26, S1.01 Justification The Arkansas Game and Fish Commission approved the carcass importation restriction in October 2005 as an attempt to decrease Arkansas’s chances of acquiring CWD via infected carcass importation. Currently, 36 states and five Canadian provinces have a ban or restriction on the importation of hunter harvested cervid parts. With the spread of CWD, new states are becoming positive on an annual basis. The spread of this disease is directly linked to the transportation of live cervids and cervid carcasses. In order to increase Arkansas’s protection and increase consistency in our regulations, this proposal would place all states and Canadian provinces on the carcass importation restriction list.
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Register / Vol. 51, No. 66 / Monday, April 7, 1986 / Proposed Rules 11753
    Federal Register / Vol. 51, No. 66 / Monday, April 7, 1986 / Proposed Rules 11753 DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY SUMMARY: The Bureau of Alcohol, geographical features (climate, soil, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) is elevation, physical features, etc.) which Internal Revenue Service considering the establishment of a distinguish the viticultural features of viticultural area in the State of Arkansas 26 CFR Part 1 the proposed area from surrounding to be known as "Arkansas Mountain." areas; ILR-19-80] This proposal is the result of a petition (d) A description of the specific submitted by Mr. Al Wiederkehr, a boundaries of the viticultural area, Unisex Annuity Tables winery owner and grape grower in the based on features which can be found proposed area. The establishment Corrections of on United States Geological Survey viticultural areas and the subsequent (U.S.G.S.) maps of the largest applicable In FR Doc. 86-6294, beginning on page use of viticultural area names in wine scale; and 9978 in the issue of Monday, March 24, labeling and advertising will enable (e) A copy of the appropriate U.S.G.S. 1986, make the following corrections: winemakers to label wines more map(s) with the boundaries prominently 1. On page 9983, in the second column. precisely and will help consumers to marked. in the fourteenth line of § 1.72-5(a)(2)(i), better identify the wines they purchase. insert "be" after "to"; DATES: Written comments must be Petition 2. On page 9984, in the third column, received by May 22, 1986. ATF has received a petition from Mr.
    [Show full text]
  • ARKANSAS REGISTER Proposed Rule Cover Sheet
    ARKANSAS REGISTER Proposed Rule Cover Sheet Secretary of State John Thurston 500 Woodlane, Suite 026 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-1094 (501) 682-5070 www.sos.arkansas.gov Name of Department Legal Division Agency or Division Name Arkansas Game & Fish Commission Other Subdivision or Department, If Applicable Previous Agency Name, If Applicable Contact Person April M. Soman Contact E-mail [email protected] Contact Phone 501-223-6327 Name of Rule _____ E1.02 Turkey Zone Descriptions ________________________________________________________ Newspaper Name Arkansas Democrat Gazette Date of Publishing March 22, 23, and 24, 2020 and April 19, 20, and 21, 2020 Final Date for Public Comment May 21, 2020 Location and Time of Public Meeting AGFC Auditorium, 2 Natural Resources Drive, Little Rock AR 72205, at 10:00 a.m. E1.02 Turkey Zone Descriptions Zone 1A – Northwest Arkansas. Start at northwest corner of Arkansas; then south on Arkansas-Oklahoma state line to U.S. Highway 62; east on U.S. Highway 62 to Interstate 49 near Fayetteville; north on Interstate 49to U.S. Highway 62; northeast on U.S. Highway 62 to Arkansas Highway 37 at Gateway; north on Arkansas Highway 37 to Arkansas-Missouri state line; west along line to northwest corner of Arkansas. Zone 1 – Western portion of north-central Arkansas. Start at junction of Arkansas- Missouri state line and Arkansas Highway 37; south on Arkansas Highway 37 to U.S. Highway 62 at Gateway; west on U.S. Highway 62 to Interstate 49; south on Interstate 49 to Arkansas Highway 16 at Fayetteville; east on Arkansas Highway 16 to Arkansas Highway 74; east on Arkansas Highway 74 to U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Beaver Lake and Its Watershed 2010
    Beaver Lake And Its Watershed 2010 Table of Contents Introduction 4 History of Beaver Lake Development 6 Project Authorization 6 Dam Construction & Water Storage 6 Public Water Suppliers 6 Time Line of Drinking Water Development 7 Beaver Lake Watershed Characteristics 8 Physiography 8 Geology 8 Soils 10 Climate 12 Population 14 Landuse 16 Beaver Lake As A Resource 18 Authorization and Allocation of Water Storage 18 Authority to Reallocate 18 Hydropower Generation 20 Flood Control 21 Recreation 22 Public Water Supply 24 Water Quality Concerns and Streams Listed as Impaired 26 Water Quality Monitoring 27 Subwatersheds 28 Beaver Lake-White River 28 Headwaters-White River 30 Lake Sequoyah-White River 32 Middle Fork-White River 34 Richland Creek 36 War Eagle Creek 38 West Fork-White River 40 Beaver Lake and Its Watershed: Who’s Doing What 42 The following individuals and institutions provided photography used in this publication: Randy Paris, Cheryl Barton, Clifton Eoff, Shiloh Museum of Ozark History and Beaver Water District 2 A Letter To Readers of Beaver Lake and its Watershed From Alan D. Fortenberry, P.E., CEO, Beaver Water District Northwest Arkansas has an ample supply of fresh, clean water in Beaver Lake. The value of this resource cannot be overstated. While many areas of the country are struggling to provide enough water to residents and industries and entering into legal battles over water rights, we enjoy abundance. But what would happen if the water wasn’t there? Isn’t it interesting how many of us take water for granted, water that is necessary for human life and health, water that fuels economic prosperity and defines quality of life in the Ozarks? While it’s true that Beaver Lake is an outstanding resource, we cannot expect it to stay that way if we are not proactive.
    [Show full text]
  • NW AR Society of Professional Engineers Thursday, December 5, 2019 Statewide Program Updates
    Chad Adams District 4 Engineer NW AR Society of Professional Engineers Thursday, December 5, 2019 Statewide Program Updates 2 Interstate Rehabilitation Program Completed Number of Projects: 47 Miles: 291 Amount (Millions): $1,027 Interstate Rehabilitation Program Under Construction Number of Projects: 5 Miles: 53 Amount (Millions): $287 Let To Contract Number of Projects: 52 Miles: 344 Amount (Millions): $1,314 Interstate Rehabilitation Program Scheduled Number of Projects: 27 Miles: 160 Amount (Millions): $219 Total Program Number of Projects: 79 Miles: 504 Amount (Millions): $1,533 Connecting Arkansas Program $175 Million Scheduled $533 Million $1.26 Billion Completed Under Construction Local Updates 7 Interstate 49 Corridor Completed 22 Projects 73 Miles $527 Million Under Construction 4 Projects 15 Miles $157 Million Scheduled 2 Projects Estimated $43 Million Bella Vista Bypass Completed 3 Projects 12 Miles $87 Million Under Construction 3 Projects 14 Miles $130 Million Interstate 49 Scheduled 1 Project 4 Miles Estimated $5-10 Million Interstate 49 Scheduled 1 Project 4 Miles Estimated $5-10 Million NWAR Regional Airport Access Scheduled 1 Project Estimated $30-40 Million Springdale Bypass Completed Programmed 1 Project 1 Project 5 Miles 4 Miles $101 Million Estimated $50-75 Million Arkansas Highway 112 Programmed 6 Projects 17 Miles Estimated $100 Million 2 Preliminary Engineering Projects 13 Miles Springdale Bypass – Hwy 12 Van Asche Dr. – Hwy 412 Arkansas Highway 112 Scheduled 1 Project 1 Mile Estimated $1-5 Million Arkansas Highway 112 Completed 1 Project 1 Mile $3 Million Arkansas Highway 16 Scheduled 1 Project 1 Mile Estimated $5-10 Million Arkansas Highway 265 Completed 5 Projects 10 Miles $52 Million U.S.
    [Show full text]