Interstate 22

[rcm195]

Update, as of 2:00pm, westbound lane not open.

[rcm195]

Westbound lane opened around 5:00pm.

[SSF]

the eastbound lanes already had the CMS and barrels up in anticipation for Monday.

[codyg1985]

Poor writing in that article.  AL.com's transportation reporting has really gone downhill since Ginny MacDonald left...

Same for Huntsville area when Keith Clines was let go.

[codyg1985]

I don't think this was linked before, but here is the latest article with pictures of the I-22/65 interchange construction.

[Charles2]

I don't think this was linked before, but here is the latest article with pictures of the I-22/65 interchange construction.

I tried like everything, but honestly it's hard to tell of any discernible progress since the last batch of pictures was posted.

[formulanone]

Normally I don't read much past the first three comments, but since I didn't feel dumber by continuing on, I did like this one:

• FreeMe 22 hours ago / When is the expected completion date?


• fosterkeats 22 hours ago / 1979

[codyg1985]

Normally I don't read much past the first three comments, but since I didn't feel dumber by continuing on, I did like this one:

• FreeMe 22 hours ago / When is the expected completion date?


• fosterkeats 22 hours ago / 1979

I think the al.com comments have been either heavily moderated lately, or a lot of the crazies have left the site. Not sure which.

[hbelkins]

Reading the comments on news stories is like wading through an open sewer. And Facebook authentication doesn't really help. People are just as stupid using their real names as they are anonymously or using a pseudonym.

[Tourian]

Reading the comments on news stories is like wading through an open sewer. And Facebook authentication doesn't really help. People are just as stupid using their real names as they are anonymously or using a pseudonym.

It would have to cut down on it some. So many geniuses on that site have multiple accounts.

[TrevorB]

I couldn't seem to find a definite answer, and I'm not expecting one since I don't think any official decision has been made, but what is the current thinking about I-22's northern terminus?

I've heard 4 possibilities:

1. Terminate at I-269 near Byhalia
2. Follow I-269 west from Byhalia and terminate at the I-55/I-69/I-269 interchange near Hernando
3. Continue following US-78 north/east from Byhalia and terminate at the MS/TN state line near Olive Branch
4. Continue following US-78 north/east from Byhalia, continue into Memphis, and terminate at I-240 (this would require an upgrade to freeway status from the MS/TN state line all of the way to I-240 including constructing interchanges at many at-grade intersections, making this scenario very unlikely)

[Avalanchez71]

End at MS/TN state line; problem solved.  Through traffic follow US 78.

[TrevorB]

That seems like the most logical. However, it seems like I'm seeing more things pointing toward ending at I-269, which doesn't make much sense to me. It seems like they would take advantage of all of the interstate-quality roadway. Maybe we will see the designation of I-22 happen in MS sometime soon.

[codyg1985]

That seems like the most logical. However, it seems like I'm seeing more things pointing toward ending at I-269, which doesn't make much sense to me. It seems like they would take advantage of all of the interstate-quality roadway. Maybe we will see the designation of I-22 happen in MS sometime soon.

There is precedent for extending a 2di interstate past another interstate to have it end at or close to a state line while the existing US route continues into the other state (I-26/US 23 at Kingsport, TN and Gate City, VA). I could very well see I-22 be designated to the TN/MS state line. That way, none of the exit numbers or mileposts on existing US 78 would need to be reset, and it also opens the door for extending I-22 northwest if (big if) or when TDOT upgrades US 78/Lamar Avenue.

[froggie]

There is precedent for extending a 2di interstate past another interstate to have it end at or close to a state line while the existing US route continues into the other state (I-26/US 23 at Kingsport, TN and Gate City, VA).

Not quite a precedent, as I-26 officially ends at the US 11W interchange.  It does not continue to the state line.  The reason it ends at US 11W is because US 11W is on the NHS and thus meets the FHWA's criteria for a "logical termini".

For I-22, #3 from Trevor's list is off the table.  But since MS 302 is on the NHS, a terminus at MS 302 is theoretically possible.  More likely, MDOT will follow list item #2.

Two other possible (but unlikely) outcomes:

#5:  Follow I-269 NORTH to end at I-40/Exit 24 near Arlington.  Unlikely due to the distance involved and "roundabout travel" for through traffic.
#6:  Follow I-269 north to Collierville, then TN 385 to I-240 near Germantown.  Unlikely as TN 385 has substandard shoulders.

[hbelkins]

Also, that northern terminus for I-26 was also the northern terminus of I-181.

[Tourian]

There is just no reasonable plan that involves moving all those factories and businesses and Fed Ex out of the way to turn Lamar into an interstate. So having 22 hit join 269 in Mississippi some time this century maybe is the only viable choice.

After all this time, Alabama is going to be finished with our end first. How nice.

[TrevorB]

Unless I misunderstood, I think Mississippi is already done with their segment. All that's left is the signage.

[froggie]

What's lacking on the Mississippi end is a connection to the rest of the Interstate system.

Though, to be fair, given the continual delays ALDOT is having connecting I-22 to I-65, MDOT just might yet get I-269 done first...

[TrevorB]

Sorry, should have worded that a little differently. I meant that Mississippi shouldn't have to lay anymore pavement to complete I-22 (with the exception of a few interchanges). The last part near Memphis will either continue along US-78 or share pavement with another interstate. Of course if they are going to route it along I-269, there's some work to be done.

[Grzrd]

3. Continue following US-78 north/east from Byhalia and terminate at the MS/TN state line near Olive Branch

End at MS/TN state line; problem solved.  Through traffic follow US 78.

For I-22, #3 from Trevor's list is off the table.

I think there is a strong possibility that it will end at the state line. First, I-22 is statutorily defined as the US 78 corridor, which limits FHWA's discretion because the agency needs to make a good faith effort to implement the Congressional intent:

The United States Route 78 Corridor from Memphis, Tennessee, to Corridor X of the Appalachian Development Highway System near Fulton, Mississippi, and Corridor X of the Appalachian Development Highway System extending from near Fulton, Mississippi, to near Birmingham, Alabama. [I-22]

Next, the redesignation of Loop 20 as US 59 in Laredo, TX as a prerequisite for the I-69W designation indicates that FHWA would not deem I-269 as part of the "US 78 Corridor", particularly at the expense of the currently existing US 78.

Further, having the state line as a logical terminus because that is the end point for controlled access has a recent precedent in the western logical terminus for I-2.  A stronger case can be made for the TN/MS state line than the western end of I-2 because I-22 is statutorily defined, whereas I-2 is not.

I can see FHWA having I-22 terminate at the I-269 interchange in order to avoid having regional and national through traffic plow into Lamar Avenue, but I also see that as a minimal potential problem that could be solved with adequate "informational" signage before the interchange.

In total, I think a western terminus at the MS/TN state line is the most likely outcome.

[codyg1985]

^ There is also this signage.

[Anthony_JK]

3. Continue following US-78 north/east from Byhalia and terminate at the MS/TN state line near Olive Branch

End at MS/TN state line; problem solved.  Through traffic follow US 78.

For I-22, #3 from Trevor's list is off the table.

I think there is a strong possibility that it will end at the state line. First, I-22 is statutorily defined as the US 78 corridor, which limits FHWA's discretion because the agency needs to make a good faith effort to implement the Congressional intent:

The United States Route 78 Corridor from Memphis, Tennessee, to Corridor X of the Appalachian Development Highway System near Fulton, Mississippi, and Corridor X of the Appalachian Development Highway System extending from near Fulton, Mississippi, to near Birmingham, Alabama. [I-22]

Next, the redesignation of Loop 20 as US 59 in Laredo, TX as a prerequisite for the I-69W designation indicates that FHWA would not deem I-269 as part of the "US 78 Corridor", particularly at the expense of the currently existing US 78.

Further, having the state line as a logical terminus because that is the end point for controlled access has a recent precedent in the western logical terminus for I-2.  A stronger case can be made for the TN/MS state line than the western end of I-2 because I-22 is statutorily defined, whereas I-2 is not.

I can see FHWA having I-22 terminate at the I-269 interchange in order to avoid having regional and national through traffic plow into Lamar Avenue, but I also see that as a minimal potential problem that could be solved with adequate "informational" signage before the interchange.

In total, I think a western terminus at the MS/TN state line is the most likely outcome.

Considering that MS has "Future I-22" signs plastered all over US 78, Griz, I'd beg to think that MS would revolt if they didn't get in on the I-22 action. I'd assume that they could still sign it to I-269 and still satisfy the Congressional intent.

It would be much better if they could upgrade Lamar Avenue to a full Interstate and run I-22 all the way to I-40...but I suppose that would be a pipe dream and an impossibility.

[roadman65]

Why not just sign it into law like I-69 and I-99?  Nobody would question it as far as non road geeks go and already have an interstate between two big cities of our great nation.  Even if it is not directly connected at both ends, at least its something.

[froggie]

Why not just sign it into law like I-69 and I-99?

It already is.  See Grzrd's link in his last post (or, if FHWA's website still isn't working, Google "Public Law Number 108-199")

But that just means the route needs to be signed as I-22 upon completion.  FHWA is still free to follow their policies on WHEN to sign Interstate routes.