AARoads Forum

Regional Boards => Mid-South => Topic started by: Grzrd on May 26, 2017, 02:44:34 PM

Title: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: Grzrd on May 26, 2017, 02:44:34 PM
So whatever happened to the I-55/Crump upgrade?  IIRC, plans were published that showed the details of the rework -- as of a few short years ago, this seemed to be a done deal!  Obviously funding (and in-state priorities) had something to do with the inaction here -- if any local/regional posters have any further info regarding this project's status, please let the rest of us know! (apologies for using this thread to ask a Mid-South question)
(above quote from I-67: TN, KY, IN (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=5513.msg2230327#msg2230327) thread)

I decided to start a Mid-South thread for a Mid-South question. Here is the latest from TDOT:

http://www.tn.gov/tdot/topic/i-55-crump

The project is temporarily on hold for the reasons stated in the link.
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: sparker on May 27, 2017, 03:49:42 PM
So whatever happened to the I-55/Crump upgrade?  IIRC, plans were published that showed the details of the rework -- as of a few short years ago, this seemed to be a done deal!  Obviously funding (and in-state priorities) had something to do with the inaction here -- if any local/regional posters have any further info regarding this project's status, please let the rest of us know! (apologies for using this thread to ask a Mid-South question)
(above quote from I-67: TN, KY, IN (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=5513.msg2230327#msg2230327) thread)

I decided to start a Mid-South thread for a Mid-South question. Here is the latest from TDOT:

http://www.tn.gov/tdot/topic/i-55-crump

The project is temporarily on hold for the reasons stated in the link.

So it looks like the last physical traffic counts done at/near the location didn't correspond with the modeling algorithm of the Memphis MPO planners -- and either they're going to change the projection methodology, take another physical count, or both.  Sounds like a way to affect a postponement until they actually have available funding -- or, in an alternate scenario, there are factions in the MPO (or elsewhere in the TN transportation arena) who don't think this project (which does principally benefit out-of-state traffic movement) warrants priority.  Either way, it looks like I-55 NB traffic will be "looping it" for the near term. 
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: intelati49 on May 28, 2017, 09:30:02 PM
 :-D

I actually looked this up a week ago. (Before this thread was made)

We drove around the interchange (SB I-55) and I thought "why isn't this project started yet?" :pan:

Even my family was like "Wow, this is awfully narrow roadway here"
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: bwana39 on April 28, 2021, 12:16:00 PM
It seems to still slowly be inching through the process. Hopefully it might even be a priority item in Biden's idea of infrastructure.

https://www.bizjournals.com/memphis/news/2021/02/16/i-55-crump-boulevard-update.html
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: codyg1985 on May 13, 2021, 04:17:45 PM
It seems to still slowly be inching through the process. Hopefully it might even be a priority item in Biden's idea of infrastructure.

https://www.bizjournals.com/memphis/news/2021/02/16/i-55-crump-boulevard-update.html

Just imagine if this project would have been under construction as originally proposed with the I-55 bridge being closed and then the I-40 bridge fracture occurred. That would have been crippling for Memphis and beyond.
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: Wayward Memphian on May 13, 2021, 04:29:30 PM
It seems to still slowly be inching through the process. Hopefully it might even be a priority item in Biden's idea of infrastructure.

https://www.bizjournals.com/memphis/news/2021/02/16/i-55-crump-boulevard-update.html

Just imagine if this project would have been under construction as originally proposed with the I-55 bridge being closed and then the I-40 bridge fracture occurred. That would have been crippling for Memphis and beyond.

I made that point on the other thread.  The only real option is a new southern bridge first.
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: Avalanchez71 on May 15, 2021, 07:45:05 AM
Why not add ferry service?
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: Wayward Memphian on May 15, 2021, 08:42:05 AM
Why not add ferry service?

That's funny
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: bwana39 on May 15, 2021, 11:13:34 AM
Why not add ferry service?

Don't think ferry service is a good fit for an interstate. Besides. The bank structure on the Tennessee side is nor really conducive for it.  The river is too swift too.
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: MikieTimT on May 15, 2021, 11:51:48 AM
Why not add ferry service?

That's funny

Any solution other than to build, maintain, or repair roads/bridges with this one.
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: roadman65 on May 15, 2021, 11:57:01 AM
I do not know why they don't build a bridge at the west end of MS 304.  Extend the freeway into AR and make it tie into I-40 west of West Memphis.   You could apply I-269 to it or make it another x40 interstate.  Then you would have another route for I-55 NB to I-40 WB, or EB I-40 to I-55 SB and have a three quarter  outer beltway around Memphis.
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: Avalanchez71 on May 15, 2021, 01:03:56 PM
Why not add ferry service?

That's funny

Any solution other than to build, maintain, or repair roads/bridges with this one.

I think they should repair the Desoto bridge.  I just don't agree with a I-69 or I-269 additional bridge.
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: sprjus4 on May 15, 2021, 01:08:56 PM
Why not add ferry service?

That's funny

Any solution other than to build, maintain, or repair roads/bridges with this one.

I think they should repair the Desoto bridge.  I just don't agree with a I-69 or I-269 additional bridge.
Redundancy is needed across the river. There’s only 2 bridges in a hundred mile span, let alone those in a major urban area. What happens when both I-40 and I-55 fail?
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: bwana39 on May 15, 2021, 01:59:12 PM
Why not add ferry service?

That's funny

Any solution other than to build, maintain, or repair roads/bridges with this one.

I think they should repair the Desoto bridge.  I just don't agree with a I-69 or I-269 additional bridge.

At some point, they are going to have to replace both of them. The M&A was opened in 1949. It is 72 + years old. The HDB was opened in 1973. It is 48+ years old. It makes a lot of sense to build an additional span and then when replacement or major overhaul is required, that closing it will not be so painful. The capacity of the M&A is already a problem even before the HDB was closed. A new span just south of Memphis would solve much if not all of that capacity issue.
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: rte66man on May 15, 2021, 03:50:19 PM
Reopen the Harahan lanes!!!  <ducks for cover>  :bigass:
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: froggie on May 15, 2021, 11:18:06 PM
Reopen the Harahan lanes!!!  <ducks for cover>  :bigass:

They already did.  It's the only way to bike across the Mississippi for 200 miles (Helena, AR to the south and Cairo, IL to the north...the I-155 bridge prohibits bikes).
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: Finrod on May 16, 2021, 05:29:21 AM
I do not know why they don't build a bridge at the west end of MS 304.  Extend the freeway into AR and make it tie into I-40 west of West Memphis.   You could apply I-269 to it or make it another x40 interstate.  Then you would have another route for I-55 NB to I-40 WB, or EB I-40 to I-55 SB and have a three quarter  outer beltway around Memphis.

I would presume that it's because Mississippi and Arkansas would have to build it, and neither of them have any motivation to spend money to make traffic better in Tennessee.
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: sprjus4 on May 16, 2021, 05:56:44 AM
I honestly think the previously proposed crossing tying into TN-300 (the stub where I-69 would split off I-40) would be a reasonable proposal to be built, as opposed to the outer crossings. Less new location freeway needed on the Arkansas side.
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: Wayward Memphian on May 16, 2021, 03:23:28 PM
Get all three states a piece. Go south of West Memphis across Presidents Islandand curve it down to US 61 at the MS. Line and upgrade it to interstate standard to the I- 69 junction. There's huge container port proposed for the old Allen Fossil Fuel plant on President's along with CN's intermodal yard. Would make a good route for I-22 one day to continue through Arkansas. The road should connect to I-40 between Lehi and the US 79 south exit. Extend it north to US 64 and near the UP intermodal and eventually up to I-55/I-5544 around between Clarkdale and Turrell where it would eventually then meet a new northern crossing one day.

Anywho, Rep Crawford's words here:
“There’s some question about the global integrity of this structure. So, we’re going to have to start having a conversation about the costs associated with a new bridge, and then, are we in a position now with the amount of the volume of traffic that traverses the Mississippi River at that point, do we need to think about a third bridge? And, so this is a major national concern because of the significance of this logistics hub.”
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: bwana39 on May 16, 2021, 05:56:32 PM
I honestly think the previously proposed crossing tying into TN-300 (the stub where I-69 would split off I-40) would be a reasonable proposal to be built, as opposed to the outer crossings. Less new location freeway needed on the Arkansas side.

The river and the oxbow lakes are way too wide / involved there.  A bridge in that location would be more expensive than any amount of road that would be built to the south. Not to mention the airport it would have to close.

Get all three states a piece. Go south of West Memphis across Presidents Islandand curve it down to US 61 at the MS. Line and upgrade it to interstate standard to the I- 69 junction. There's huge container port proposed for the old Allen Fossil Fuel plant on President's along with CN's intermodal yard. Would make a good route for I-22 one day to continue through Arkansas. The road should connect to I-40 between Lehi and the US 79 south exit. Extend it north to US 64 and near the UP intermodal and eventually up to I-55/I-5544 around between Clarkdale and Turrell where it would eventually then meet a new northern crossing one day.

Anywho, Rep Crawford's words here:
“There’s some question about the global integrity of this structure. So, we’re going to have to start having a conversation about the costs associated with a new bridge, and then, are we in a position now with the amount of the volume of traffic that traverses the Mississippi River at that point, do we need to think about a third bridge? And, so this is a major national concern because of the significance of this logistics hub.”


While the idea of sharing the costs might be notable, the route stinks AND the more principals you involve, the greater the problems.
I think the US congress should give them the 80 or 90 percent specifically for a bridge. Then, I bet they come up with their cost sharing portions whatever it takes....
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: codyg1985 on May 16, 2021, 06:05:55 PM
Reopen the Harahan lanes!!!  <ducks for cover>  :bigass:

They already did.  It's the only way to bike across the Mississippi for 200 miles (Helena, AR to the south and Cairo, IL to the north...the I-155 bridge prohibits bikes).

I saw a post on the Memphis subreddit where they had to close the Big River crossing due to motorcycles trying to use it to bypass the I-55 traffic.
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: The Ghostbuster on May 17, 2021, 01:39:46 PM
I do like that they will eliminate Exit 12C since I think it is too close to the Crump Blvd./Riverside Dr. interchange. If they ever do replace the Memphis & Arkansas Bridge, the new bridge should have full shoulders on both sides.
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: sprjus4 on May 17, 2021, 01:42:49 PM
Agreed, and a minimum of 3 lanes in each direction, ideally 4. Same with the I-40 bridge.
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: sparker on May 18, 2021, 08:34:41 PM
Agreed, and a minimum of 3 lanes in each direction, ideally 4. Same with the I-40 bridge.

Since I-55 -- and I-240 beyond their shared interchange -- is the direct truck route from the west to the FedEx hub as well as the rail offloading facilities in the south end of Memphis -- dedicated truck lanes might be a part of any full-scale expansion of the river crossing itself -- possibly a 3rd (or even 3rd/4th) parallel span, with one or more reserved for trucks.  Crump east of the 55 interchange is a direct route to a number of these offload facilities (CN, BNSF/CSX in particular) so a significant portion of the commercial traffic would likely diverge from I-55 at that location.   
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: sprjus4 on May 18, 2021, 08:36:10 PM
In that case, two truck and two car lanes in each direction could work. Question is how you tie into the Crump interchange.
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: edwaleni on May 23, 2021, 02:50:22 PM
After the DeSoto settles down, this interchange needs to be completely torn out.

- Remove the Metal Museum exit ramp
- Remove the Alston Street ramp
- Condemn the square block of DeSoto/Illinois/Pennsylvania Streets
- Remove the Riverside South to Crump East ramp

After the condemnation, shift the highway east and create a primary bridged curve towards the A-M bridge.

- Create a eastbound Crump Exit from I-55 that goes under the new bridge
- Create a Crump westbound to I-55 that passes under the new bridge and provide enough merge lane space before crossing the A-M bridge.
- Shift all remaining local traffic to the Riverside/McLemore exit. Start the exit lane for southbound I-55 right after the turn south to give trucks enough exit room
- Move the Riverside South to I-55 west ramp to merge with Westbound Crump traffic under the new bridge.
- New ramp to Riverside north and allow left turn from eastbound Crump after it goes under the new I-55 bridge or if traffic volume warrants it, put it as a viaduct under Crump due to the limited room due to the railroad bridge on north Riverside.

Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: sparker on May 23, 2021, 03:15:03 PM
After the DeSoto settles down, this interchange needs to be completely torn out.

- Remove the Metal Museum exit ramp
- Remove the Alston Street ramp
- Condemn the square block of DeSoto/Illinois/Pennsylvania Streets
- Remove the Riverside South to Crump East ramp

After the condemnation, shift the highway east and create a primary bridged curve towards the A-M bridge.

- Create a eastbound Crump Exit from I-55 that goes under the new bridge
- Create a Crump westbound to I-55 that passes under the new bridge and provide enough merge lane space before crossing the A-M bridge.
- Shift all remaining local traffic to the Riverside/McLemore exit. Start the exit lane for southbound I-55 right after the turn south to give trucks enough exit room
- Move the Riverside South to I-55 west ramp to merge with Westbound Crump traffic under the new bridge.
- New ramp to Riverside north and allow left turn from eastbound Crump after it goes under the new I-55 bridge or if traffic volume warrants it, put it as a viaduct under Crump due to the limited room due to the railroad bridge on north Riverside.



IIRC, TDOT has a plan in place that was back-burnered because of the agency's deeming necessary the closing down of the full A-M bridge to effect a new approach to the revamped interchange.  The recent I-40 shutdown -- and the ensuing repairs -- may well prompt a revisiting of the 55/Crump project -- and it would be expected that the original rebuild plans would be followed.  As would have been the case if and when the A-M bridge shut down, I-55 traffic would, naturally, be detoured via I-240(69) and west on I-40 across the DeSoto, which has intrinsically 50% more capacity than I-55 over the river.  Once the DeSoto opens again, it would be an optimal time to shut down I-55 for the rebuild; the current Crump situation is likely causing local and interstate drivers considerable grief while the current detour is operating; maximizing the potential of I-55 via the modification would probably get a lot of public support right now, even if it means closing down the A-M bridge for a while.  But since the letting process would take some time before actual construction began and the bridge closed; both would be in operation for a protracted period, letting any steam off prior to addressing I-55.  Since the Crump project has been designed, building it to those specifications would at least speed up the whole process; doing it sooner than later is simply a matter of striking while the "iron" is hot as regards the necessity for doing so.
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: bwana39 on May 24, 2021, 12:13:59 AM
The full closure was shelved a couple of years ago. Not sure why they have not started the construction.

https://www.tn.gov/tdot/projects/region-4/interstate-55-crump-boulevard-interchange.html
https://www.tn.gov/content/tn/tdot/projects/region-4/interstate-55-crump-boulevard-interchange/interstate-55-crump-boulevard-interchange-library.html


http://theeveningtimes.com/theeveningtimes/2019/10/28/tdot-moving-forward-with-bridge-project/
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: bwana39 on May 24, 2021, 12:15:35 AM
They have made some tweaks to the exits and entrances onto/ off of I-55 near the Crump Interchange.

https://www.fox13memphis.com/news/local/some-i-55-lanes-ramps-will-close-restriping-during-i-40-bridge-shutdown-officials-say/2ZHEPTXUBBEFXOS6522BDGIC5A/
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: Lyon Wonder on May 24, 2021, 02:55:15 AM
Think the old I-55 bridge across the river will be replaced in its entirety in the next 10 years with a completely new 6 lane bridge or, if the old bridge is found to still be structurally sound, twinned with a new bridge immediately south of it as a parallel span for 3 lanes of eastbound/southbound and the old bridge rehabbed for 3 lanes of westbound/northbound traffic?
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: Tom958 on May 24, 2021, 06:25:01 AM
They have made some tweaks to the exits and entrances onto/ off of I-55 near the Crump Interchange.

https://www.fox13memphis.com/news/local/some-i-55-lanes-ramps-will-close-restriping-during-i-40-bridge-shutdown-officials-say/2ZHEPTXUBBEFXOS6522BDGIC5A/

Nice. That westbound-to-southbound loop ramp ought to have been closed decades ago, especially after they put two lanes on the I-55 loop ramp in 2011-12. Hopefully they never reopen it.
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: bwana39 on May 24, 2021, 07:56:23 AM
Think the old I-55 bridge across the river will be replaced in its entirety in the next 10 years with a completely new 6 lane bridge or, if the old bridge is found to still be structurally sound, twinned with a new bridge immediately south of it as a parallel span for 3 lanes of eastbound/southbound and the old bridge rehabbed for 3 lanes of westbound/northbound traffic?

I agree the "I-55 bridge" should be replaced.  Replaced at a different location farther south. The Memphis and Arkansas Bridge should remain to service the local streets.
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: sparker on May 24, 2021, 12:20:54 PM
Think the old I-55 bridge across the river will be replaced in its entirety in the next 10 years with a completely new 6 lane bridge or, if the old bridge is found to still be structurally sound, twinned with a new bridge immediately south of it as a parallel span for 3 lanes of eastbound/southbound and the old bridge rehabbed for 3 lanes of westbound/northbound traffic?

That configuration would certainly be an improvement; but there doesn't seem to be any momentum for actually doing this or something similar from either side of the river.  If any expansion idea does gain traction, I'd guess the schedule for doing so would be more like 20 years (give or take a few), given (a) TN reluctance to spend money down Memphis way, and (b) other priorities occupying ARDOT's agenda for the near term. 
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: bwana39 on May 24, 2021, 12:46:28 PM
Think the old I-55 bridge across the river will be replaced in its entirety in the next 10 years with a completely new 6 lane bridge or, if the old bridge is found to still be structurally sound, twinned with a new bridge immediately south of it as a parallel span for 3 lanes of eastbound/southbound and the old bridge rehabbed for 3 lanes of westbound/northbound traffic?

That configuration would certainly be an improvement; but there doesn't seem to be any momentum for actually doing this or something similar from either side of the river.  If any expansion idea does gain traction, I'd guess the schedule for doing so would be more like 20 years (give or take a few), given (a) TN reluctance to spend money down Memphis way, and (b) other priorities occupying ARDOT's agenda for the near term.

There is less possibility to actually put six lanes either in a same location replacement or a twinned span. The neighborhoods around the Riverside / Crump intersection south of Crump are seemingly sacrosanct.  The French Fort area itself is not open for any incursion (and the boundaries of this area are not as fixed as it would appear) .  Simply anything south of the current I-55 (Crump) and west of Riverside (I-55 going south) is not even a possibility to be considered.  It would be seemingly less difficult to finish I-40 / Sam Cooper Blvd on through than to touch this area. (By-the-way, much of it is mid-twentieth century dwellings, not  antiquities.)
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: Avalanchez71 on May 24, 2021, 12:55:03 PM
I say mark I-55 from the I-40/I-55 split in the West Memphis area as I-55 Business Loop.  That way you take away the deficiency.  I-55 would now run along I-40 to I-69 back to where it is now.
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: sparker on May 24, 2021, 01:05:16 PM
I say mark I-55 from the I-40/I-55 split in the West Memphis area as I-55 Business Loop.  That way you take away the deficiency.  I-55 would now run along I-40 to I-69 back to where it is now.

Considering business-loop freeways to be something of an oxymoron, IMO I-240 and I-55 should be swapped, with I-55 continuing north in Memphis to I-40 then turning left to share the DeSoto bridge.  I-240 then would be signed over the former I-55, serving as a "mileage shortcut" as well as the direct route to the FedEx hub from the west.  At least it directs I-55 through traffic away from the decidedly substandard configuration.  If both the Crump interchange and the substandard bridge are successfully addressed, the matter could be revisited or even reversed down the line. 
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: US 89 on May 24, 2021, 01:07:41 PM
I say mark I-55 from the I-40/I-55 split in the West Memphis area as I-55 Business Loop.  That way you take away the deficiency.  I-55 would now run along I-40 to I-69 back to where it is now.

That's dumb though and it's not how business loops are really supposed to be used. Business loops are supposed to take you to... businesses... that got bypassed by interstates, not be routed along freeways that got replaced.

Yes, I know a few freeway-grade business routes that were old interstate alignments do exist. That doesn't make them any less dumb. If we're moving I-55 to I-40 and I-240/unsigned I-69, I'd rather post the old route as a 3di. Something like I-255. (EDIT: or just reroute 240 that way per sparker's suggestion above.)
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: bwana39 on May 24, 2021, 02:59:30 PM
I say mark I-55 from the I-40/I-55 split in the West Memphis area as I-55 Business Loop.  That way you take away the deficiency.  I-55 would now run along I-40 to I-69 back to where it is now.

If you want to talk technical minimums for an modern Interstate, sure. The problem is the HDB doesn't have the capacity for the combined traffic. While its traffic count is minimally lower than the M&A, The HDB is already carrying more traffic than its design. It was built as a proper 2X2 and is striped as 3x3 without significant shoulders. The HDB is actually the downtown bridge and the M&A is "out south of the railroads".  Even with the seeming superiority of the  HDB, the lanes are less than a foot wider.

As far as that goes, I-240's western portion through mid-town (that Google Maps may prematurely identify as I-69) was originally I-255, It only extended from the point I-55 split off from US-51 to the junction with US-78/ 72 /79/64 in Midtown.  When it eventually was extended, it became I-240. 

I-55 went across to meet US-61 and Crossed the M&A Bridge.

Both bridges fail to meet the modern standards for their width versus the number of lanes and shoulders available.  The real gain of the new bridge over the old one (beyond the extra two lanes) is the fact there is a horrible intersection on I-55 just east of the bridge.  The new bridge's truss structure also is more open and you sense that it is far less closed in and close to the truss or center barrier than you FEEL on the old bridge.


Previous to 2015, they were both (called) functionally obsolete. That term is disused as it left those who did not understand the term feeling that the bridges were old and ready to break. Do you want anything obsolete? Functionally obsolete only meant that if failed to meet current design standards for width, clearance above the deck, and traffic capacity. None of them relate to the bridges' ability to hold the weight of the traffic, but instead a bridge's ability to conveniently allow traffic to flow in a safe and efficient manner.  The bridges have not changed, the terminology did.

Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: MikeTheActuary on May 24, 2021, 03:28:09 PM
Folks...despite what Google Maps may claim, I-69 does not currently exist in Memphis, according to TDOT.  (I asked a few years ago, when I was sucked into a Wikipedia edit war over the extension of the I-269 designation.)

While they may have approvals to extend the designation up to the TN300/US51 interchange, TDOT has no plans to do so until SIU9 is completed (assuming it is ever completed).
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: sprjus4 on May 24, 2021, 03:34:14 PM
Folks...despite what Google Maps may claim, I-69 does not currently exist in Memphis, according to TDOT.
Not to mention, I-69 is not even signposted in Tennessee. It's still I-240 and I-40.
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: The Ghostbuster on May 24, 2021, 04:13:02 PM
Tennessee probably thought it would be overkill to sign Interstate 69 along Interstates 55, 240 and 40 before any of the Memphis-to-Dyersburg segments were built. Mississippi probably signed 69 along 55 so that 69 would not terminate at 269, as it would have after 2018.
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: Avalanchez71 on May 24, 2021, 04:28:53 PM
As far as I am concerned I see no use for I-69 in Tennessee anyway.  US 51 already covers the West Tennessee and does a fine job.
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: rte66man on May 24, 2021, 06:19:34 PM
As far as I am concerned I see no use for I-69 in Tennessee anyway.  US 51 already covers the West Tennessee and does a fine job.

I'll remember that next time I'm stuck in traffic in Covington, Brighton, Atoka, etc.
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: US 89 on May 24, 2021, 06:42:34 PM
As far as I am concerned I see no use for I-69 in Tennessee anyway any new building or expansion project ever

FTFY
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: Lyon Wonder on May 24, 2021, 09:42:51 PM
As far as I am concerned I see no use for I-69 in Tennessee anyway.  US 51 already covers the West Tennessee and does a fine job.

IMO, I-69's southern terminus should be at I-40 in TN with the proposed sections in MS, AR and LA cancelled and the various branches of I-69 in TX renumbered  with new numbers.
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: Avalanchez71 on May 25, 2021, 08:01:01 AM
As far as I am concerned I see no use for I-69 in Tennessee anyway.  US 51 already covers the West Tennessee and does a fine job.

IMO, I-69's southern terminus should be at I-40 in TN with the proposed sections in MS, AR and LA cancelled and the various branches of I-69 in TX renumbered  with new numbers.

I say that it should terminate that the state line KY/TN.
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: sprjus4 on May 25, 2021, 08:57:46 AM
As far as I am concerned I see no use for I-69 in Tennessee anyway.  US 51 already covers the West Tennessee and does a fine job.

IMO, I-69's southern terminus should be at I-40 in TN with the proposed sections in MS, AR and LA cancelled and the various branches of I-69 in TX renumbered  with new numbers.

I say that it should terminate that the state line KY/TN.
I say that it should be at the Mexico border  :D
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: zzcarp on May 25, 2021, 09:33:43 AM
As far as I am concerned I see no use for I-69 in Tennessee anyway.  US 51 already covers the West Tennessee and does a fine job.

IMO, I-69's southern terminus should be at I-40 in TN with the proposed sections in MS, AR and LA cancelled and the various branches of I-69 in TX renumbered  with new numbers.

I say that it should terminate that the state line KY/TN.
I say that it should be at the Mexico border  :D

I second Mexico. All those in favor say "aye".
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: froggie on May 25, 2021, 10:30:35 AM
Nay.

Given the unlikely construction (and questionable need) between Shreveport and Memphis, the sections in Texas should be given different numbers.

But this is really for another thread.


Back on topic, it's worth noting that the proposed temporary changes to I-55 in the area will restrict the Metal Museum Dr interchange to a single southbound off-ramp.
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: edwaleni on May 25, 2021, 11:18:05 AM
If the Crump Park/Metal Museum/French Fort area are untouchable, then i would look at the options TDOT are looking at for a proposed south bypass of Memphis and redirect I-55 on it.

Rip out the existing I-55 from the M-A Bridge all the way to McLemore and turn it into a park. Reconnect Crump to the M-A but make it 1 lane each way with no access to Riverside. Remove the interstate access in Arkansas so it becomes more local. (or just tear down the M-A completely and terminate Crump at Riverside)

Have the former I-55 from McLemore to I-240 be a stub. There is too much industrial between McLemore and I-240 with the need for heavy truck access, so ripping out the whole thing is a non-starter.
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: bwana39 on May 25, 2021, 12:15:18 PM
Nay.

Given the unlikely construction (and questionable need) between Shreveport and Memphis, the sections in Texas should be given different numbers.

But this is really for another thread.


Back on topic, it's worth noting that the proposed temporary changes to I-55 in the area will restrict the Metal Museum Dr interchange to a single southbound off-ramp.

I agree with the lack of need from Shreveport to Memphis. The real question is what to do with the I-69 Gulf Coast traffic. It might be as expensive to upgrade I-30 / I-40 to handle the I-69 traffic as it would be to actually build I-69 through NW Louisiana and across Arkansas.  Mississippi is another problem altogether.
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: sprjus4 on May 25, 2021, 12:43:58 PM
The real question is what to do with the I-69 Gulf Coast traffic. It might be as expensive to upgrade I-30 / I-40 to handle the I-69 traffic as it would be to actually build I-69 through NW Louisiana and across Arkansas.
Well see, you could build I-69 to accommodate that I-69 traffic... which is why it was proposed.

The only problem is funding. It's not a useless segment, it will have viability once completed, if ever.
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: bwana39 on May 25, 2021, 03:58:29 PM
The real question is what to do with the I-69 Gulf Coast traffic. It might be as expensive to upgrade I-30 / I-40 to handle the I-69 traffic as it would be to actually build I-69 through NW Louisiana and across Arkansas.
Well see, you could build I-69 to accommodate that I-69 traffic... which is why it was proposed.

The only problem is funding. It's not a useless segment, it will have viability once completed, if ever.

I agree with you. The problem is Arkansas and Louisiana are not going to build it until the feds force their hands.  Mississippi might not be able to come up with any money for it even if it was.  I will add one thing. The traffic volume demands a new road somewhere. I just am unsure that west of I-55 in Mississippi is the right place for a multitude of reasons.
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: sparker on May 25, 2021, 04:53:58 PM
The real question is what to do with the I-69 Gulf Coast traffic. It might be as expensive to upgrade I-30 / I-40 to handle the I-69 traffic as it would be to actually build I-69 through NW Louisiana and across Arkansas.
Well see, you could build I-69 to accommodate that I-69 traffic... which is why it was proposed.

The only problem is funding. It's not a useless segment, it will have viability once completed, if ever.

I agree with you. The problem is Arkansas and Louisiana are not going to build it until the feds force their hands.  Mississippi might not be able to come up with any money for it even if it was.  I will add one thing. The traffic volume demands a new road somewhere. I just am unsure that west of I-55 in Mississippi is the right place for a multitude of reasons.

OK -- presume that the end points of I-69's central segment remain static -- Shreveport & Memphis.  The most direct route more or less follows US 79 through Pine Bluff; in fact ages ago congressman Dickey tried to get that road approved at least as a branch of the corridor, but was rebuffed because at the time (mid-'90's) Trent Lott, using his bully position in the Senate, wanted to make sure his state got a "piece of the pie".  AR reconsidered their position and opted for a compromise:  I-69 would cross the southern tier of their state before entering MS, there would be considerable mileage within MS as a result, but AR would get an extension of I-530 (AR 530 for the time being) down to the I-69 corridor at Monticello, which satisfied their wish to serve Pine Bluff and LR as well.  Well, Lott had to skedaddle in disgrace, his power dissipated (now lying with McConnell), so sliding funds through the back door to MS was no longer a given.  So MS is back to its impecunious state, AR is juggling previously prioritized projects (say that three times in a row!), and I-69, except for a short section of 2-lane expressway (and the Clarksdale bypass freeway) remains a dotted line on a planning map.  But that dotted line has to go somewhere; at least Lott did recognize that the MS Delta region along US 61 could benefit from a bit of "make-work" money input, so US 61 became, at least in part, the default alignment.  But the potential alternatives within MS just aren't that great either -- if the corridor headed east along MS 8 to Grenada, it would still involve about 56 miles of construction from US 61 to I-55, while the current plan features a 30-mile stretch north to Clarksdale and its bypass freeway.  If taken directly east from there on US 278, it's still another 36 miles or so to get to I-55.  But it's only 50 miles from Clarksdale to the stub-end of extant I-69 northeast of Tunica.  So there's about 80 miles of construction between Cleveland and current I-69 versus 56 miles east to Grenada and 66 miles to Batesville via Clarksdale.  Something of a mileage saving for sure by shunting directly to I-55 -- but at a distinct inconvenience in terms of both mileage and time to the driver -- particularly the commercial driver who is concerned about such things. 

In a policy world more rational than seen today, IMO the optimal solution from a C/B basis would be to (a) relegate the current construction along US 278 in AR to local use, and (b) reroute I-69 straight south on US 61 to US 82, where it could (c) cross the river on a nice new multilane bridge before continuing to US 425 before (d) turning south to Bastrop and Monroe, LA (and extending 530 south to the new US 82 alignment in the process).  (e) I-69 would multiplex with I-20 west to Barksdale AFB, where it could turn south onto its Shreveport bypass alignment per existing plans.  AR would still get its N-S "spine" 530 freeway, and MS would be spared a bunch of new-terrain construction west from Cleveland.  Yeah, it drags commercial I-69 traffic through less of southern AR, but the prospects of using that corridor to provoke development was at best purely speculative anyway.  However, the chances of that scenario happening are pretty slim; too many folks have reputations tied up with the current proposal.   I for one think we're going to be looking at that dotted line for some time to come!   
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: MikieTimT on May 25, 2021, 05:26:30 PM
The real question is what to do with the I-69 Gulf Coast traffic. It might be as expensive to upgrade I-30 / I-40 to handle the I-69 traffic as it would be to actually build I-69 through NW Louisiana and across Arkansas.
Well see, you could build I-69 to accommodate that I-69 traffic... which is why it was proposed.

The only problem is funding. It's not a useless segment, it will have viability once completed, if ever.

I agree with you. The problem is Arkansas and Louisiana are not going to build it until the feds force their hands.  Mississippi might not be able to come up with any money for it even if it was.  I will add one thing. The traffic volume demands a new road somewhere. I just am unsure that west of I-55 in Mississippi is the right place for a multitude of reasons.

OK -- presume that the end points of I-69's central segment remain static -- Shreveport & Memphis.  The most direct route more or less follows US 79 through Pine Bluff; in fact ages ago congressman Dickey tried to get that road approved at least as a branch of the corridor, but was rebuffed because at the time (mid-'90's) Trent Lott, using his bully position in the Senate, wanted to make sure his state got a "piece of the pie".  AR reconsidered their position and opted for a compromise:  I-69 would cross the southern tier of their state before entering MS, there would be considerable mileage within MS as a result, but AR would get an extension of I-530 (AR 530 for the time being) down to the I-69 corridor at Monticello, which satisfied their wish to serve Pine Bluff and LR as well.  Well, Lott had to skedaddle in disgrace, his power dissipated (now lying with McConnell), so sliding funds through the back door to MS was no longer a given.  So MS is back to its impecunious state, AR is juggling previously prioritized projects (say that three times in a row!), and I-69, except for a short section of 2-lane expressway (and the Clarksdale bypass freeway) remains a dotted line on a planning map.  But that dotted line has to go somewhere; at least Lott did recognize that the MS Delta region along US 61 could benefit from a bit of "make-work" money input, so US 61 became, at least in part, the default alignment.  But the potential alternatives within MS just aren't that great either -- if the corridor headed east along MS 8 to Grenada, it would still involve about 56 miles of construction from US 61 to I-55, while the current plan features a 30-mile stretch north to Clarksdale and its bypass freeway.  If taken directly east from there on US 278, it's still another 36 miles or so to get to I-55.  But it's only 50 miles from Clarksdale to the stub-end of extant I-69 northeast of Tunica.  So there's about 80 miles of construction between Cleveland and current I-69 versus 56 miles east to Grenada and 66 miles to Batesville via Clarksdale.  Something of a mileage saving for sure by shunting directly to I-55 -- but at a distinct inconvenience in terms of both mileage and time to the driver -- particularly the commercial driver who is concerned about such things. 

In a policy world more rational than seen today, IMO the optimal solution from a C/B basis would be to (a) relegate the current construction along US 278 in AR to local use, and (b) reroute I-69 straight south on US 61 to US 82, where it could (c) cross the river on a nice new multilane bridge before continuing to US 425 before (d) turning south to Bastrop and Monroe, LA (and extending 530 south to the new US 82 alignment in the process).  (e) I-69 would multiplex with I-20 west to Barksdale AFB, where it could turn south onto its Shreveport bypass alignment per existing plans.  AR would still get its N-S "spine" 530 freeway, and MS would be spared a bunch of new-terrain construction west from Cleveland.  Yeah, it drags commercial I-69 traffic through less of southern AR, but the prospects of using that corridor to provoke development was at best purely speculative anyway.  However, the chances of that scenario happening are pretty slim; too many folks have reputations tied up with the current proposal.   I for one think we're going to be looking at that dotted line for some time to come!

Until those with the reputations die off.  And maybe us too!
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: sparker on May 25, 2021, 06:05:25 PM
The real question is what to do with the I-69 Gulf Coast traffic. It might be as expensive to upgrade I-30 / I-40 to handle the I-69 traffic as it would be to actually build I-69 through NW Louisiana and across Arkansas.
Well see, you could build I-69 to accommodate that I-69 traffic... which is why it was proposed.

The only problem is funding. It's not a useless segment, it will have viability once completed, if ever.

I agree with you. The problem is Arkansas and Louisiana are not going to build it until the feds force their hands.  Mississippi might not be able to come up with any money for it even if it was.  I will add one thing. The traffic volume demands a new road somewhere. I just am unsure that west of I-55 in Mississippi is the right place for a multitude of reasons.

OK -- presume that the end points of I-69's central segment remain static -- Shreveport & Memphis.  The most direct route more or less follows US 79 through Pine Bluff; in fact ages ago congressman Dickey tried to get that road approved at least as a branch of the corridor, but was rebuffed because at the time (mid-'90's) Trent Lott, using his bully position in the Senate, wanted to make sure his state got a "piece of the pie".  AR reconsidered their position and opted for a compromise:  I-69 would cross the southern tier of their state before entering MS, there would be considerable mileage within MS as a result, but AR would get an extension of I-530 (AR 530 for the time being) down to the I-69 corridor at Monticello, which satisfied their wish to serve Pine Bluff and LR as well.  Well, Lott had to skedaddle in disgrace, his power dissipated (now lying with McConnell), so sliding funds through the back door to MS was no longer a given.  So MS is back to its impecunious state, AR is juggling previously prioritized projects (say that three times in a row!), and I-69, except for a short section of 2-lane expressway (and the Clarksdale bypass freeway) remains a dotted line on a planning map.  But that dotted line has to go somewhere; at least Lott did recognize that the MS Delta region along US 61 could benefit from a bit of "make-work" money input, so US 61 became, at least in part, the default alignment.  But the potential alternatives within MS just aren't that great either -- if the corridor headed east along MS 8 to Grenada, it would still involve about 56 miles of construction from US 61 to I-55, while the current plan features a 30-mile stretch north to Clarksdale and its bypass freeway.  If taken directly east from there on US 278, it's still another 36 miles or so to get to I-55.  But it's only 50 miles from Clarksdale to the stub-end of extant I-69 northeast of Tunica.  So there's about 80 miles of construction between Cleveland and current I-69 versus 56 miles east to Grenada and 66 miles to Batesville via Clarksdale.  Something of a mileage saving for sure by shunting directly to I-55 -- but at a distinct inconvenience in terms of both mileage and time to the driver -- particularly the commercial driver who is concerned about such things. 

In a policy world more rational than seen today, IMO the optimal solution from a C/B basis would be to (a) relegate the current construction along US 278 in AR to local use, and (b) reroute I-69 straight south on US 61 to US 82, where it could (c) cross the river on a nice new multilane bridge before continuing to US 425 before (d) turning south to Bastrop and Monroe, LA (and extending 530 south to the new US 82 alignment in the process).  (e) I-69 would multiplex with I-20 west to Barksdale AFB, where it could turn south onto its Shreveport bypass alignment per existing plans.  AR would still get its N-S "spine" 530 freeway, and MS would be spared a bunch of new-terrain construction west from Cleveland.  Yeah, it drags commercial I-69 traffic through less of southern AR, but the prospects of using that corridor to provoke development was at best purely speculative anyway.  However, the chances of that scenario happening are pretty slim; too many folks have reputations tied up with the current proposal.   I for one think we're going to be looking at that dotted line for some time to come!

Until those with the reputations die off.  And maybe us too!

I've got 6 dozen years behind me; the odds against my seeing I-69 completed in any fashion are pretty damn steep!   Maybe some of you young whippersnappers will see it done north of Memphis and within TX, but that's probably going to be it for most of us posters (save for the introduction of a cure for the byproducts of aging!).
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: MikieTimT on May 26, 2021, 10:11:39 AM
The real question is what to do with the I-69 Gulf Coast traffic. It might be as expensive to upgrade I-30 / I-40 to handle the I-69 traffic as it would be to actually build I-69 through NW Louisiana and across Arkansas.
Well see, you could build I-69 to accommodate that I-69 traffic... which is why it was proposed.

The only problem is funding. It's not a useless segment, it will have viability once completed, if ever.

I agree with you. The problem is Arkansas and Louisiana are not going to build it until the feds force their hands.  Mississippi might not be able to come up with any money for it even if it was.  I will add one thing. The traffic volume demands a new road somewhere. I just am unsure that west of I-55 in Mississippi is the right place for a multitude of reasons.

OK -- presume that the end points of I-69's central segment remain static -- Shreveport & Memphis.  The most direct route more or less follows US 79 through Pine Bluff; in fact ages ago congressman Dickey tried to get that road approved at least as a branch of the corridor, but was rebuffed because at the time (mid-'90's) Trent Lott, using his bully position in the Senate, wanted to make sure his state got a "piece of the pie".  AR reconsidered their position and opted for a compromise:  I-69 would cross the southern tier of their state before entering MS, there would be considerable mileage within MS as a result, but AR would get an extension of I-530 (AR 530 for the time being) down to the I-69 corridor at Monticello, which satisfied their wish to serve Pine Bluff and LR as well.  Well, Lott had to skedaddle in disgrace, his power dissipated (now lying with McConnell), so sliding funds through the back door to MS was no longer a given.  So MS is back to its impecunious state, AR is juggling previously prioritized projects (say that three times in a row!), and I-69, except for a short section of 2-lane expressway (and the Clarksdale bypass freeway) remains a dotted line on a planning map.  But that dotted line has to go somewhere; at least Lott did recognize that the MS Delta region along US 61 could benefit from a bit of "make-work" money input, so US 61 became, at least in part, the default alignment.  But the potential alternatives within MS just aren't that great either -- if the corridor headed east along MS 8 to Grenada, it would still involve about 56 miles of construction from US 61 to I-55, while the current plan features a 30-mile stretch north to Clarksdale and its bypass freeway.  If taken directly east from there on US 278, it's still another 36 miles or so to get to I-55.  But it's only 50 miles from Clarksdale to the stub-end of extant I-69 northeast of Tunica.  So there's about 80 miles of construction between Cleveland and current I-69 versus 56 miles east to Grenada and 66 miles to Batesville via Clarksdale.  Something of a mileage saving for sure by shunting directly to I-55 -- but at a distinct inconvenience in terms of both mileage and time to the driver -- particularly the commercial driver who is concerned about such things. 

In a policy world more rational than seen today, IMO the optimal solution from a C/B basis would be to (a) relegate the current construction along US 278 in AR to local use, and (b) reroute I-69 straight south on US 61 to US 82, where it could (c) cross the river on a nice new multilane bridge before continuing to US 425 before (d) turning south to Bastrop and Monroe, LA (and extending 530 south to the new US 82 alignment in the process).  (e) I-69 would multiplex with I-20 west to Barksdale AFB, where it could turn south onto its Shreveport bypass alignment per existing plans.  AR would still get its N-S "spine" 530 freeway, and MS would be spared a bunch of new-terrain construction west from Cleveland.  Yeah, it drags commercial I-69 traffic through less of southern AR, but the prospects of using that corridor to provoke development was at best purely speculative anyway.  However, the chances of that scenario happening are pretty slim; too many folks have reputations tied up with the current proposal.   I for one think we're going to be looking at that dotted line for some time to come!

Until those with the reputations die off.  And maybe us too!

I've got 6 dozen years behind me; the odds against my seeing I-69 completed in any fashion are pretty damn steep!   Maybe some of you young whippersnappers will see it done north of Memphis and within TX, but that's probably going to be it for most of us posters (save for the introduction of a cure for the byproducts of aging!).

Or alter your definition of "completed"!
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: froggie on May 26, 2021, 10:37:33 AM
(save for the introduction of a cure for the byproducts of aging!).

Given that the two major political parties are continuing further and further down the rabbit hole of partisan bickering, you're more likely to see your cure happen than you are funding to fully finish I-69...
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: Ryctor2018 on May 26, 2021, 02:14:36 PM
You will hopefully be around in 5 years. By then I-69 will be completed in Indiana, Kentucky, Tennessee from Dyersburg-Fulton and the bridge over the Ohio started.

Back to the topic, how much are we talking in $$$ to reconstruct the I-55/Crump Blvd interchange. Could a flyover ramp for I-55 nb-wb work? Widening for I-55 eb-sb ramp? This is assuming that the money is not there for a full reconstruction.
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: sprjus4 on May 26, 2021, 03:36:14 PM
You will hopefully be around in 5 years. By then I-69 will be completed in Indiana, Kentucky, Tennessee from Dyersburg-Fulton and the bridge over the Ohio started.
Is Troy - Union City in planning stages / funded / under construction already?

Back to the topic, how much are we talking in $$$ to reconstruct the I-55/Crump Blvd interchange. Could a flyover ramp for I-55 nb-wb work? Widening for I-55 eb-sb ramp? This is assuming that the money is not there for a full reconstruction.
https://www.tn.gov/tdot/projects/region-4/interstate-55-crump-boulevard-interchange.html

This was TDOT's original plans for the project... not sure if anything has changed.
(http://i.imgur.com/AH4WVMy.jpg)
(https://www.tn.gov/content/tn/tdot/projects/region-4/interstate-55-crump-boulevard-interchange/jcr%3acontent/content/tn_columnctrl/column_parsys1/tn_image_2128980325.img.jpg/1508356666417.jpg)
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: edwaleni on May 26, 2021, 04:41:27 PM
You will hopefully be around in 5 years. By then I-69 will be completed in Indiana, Kentucky, Tennessee from Dyersburg-Fulton and the bridge over the Ohio started.
Is Troy - Union City in planning stages / funded / under construction already?

Back to the topic, how much are we talking in $$$ to reconstruct the I-55/Crump Blvd interchange. Could a flyover ramp for I-55 nb-wb work? Widening for I-55 eb-sb ramp? This is assuming that the money is not there for a full reconstruction.
https://www.tn.gov/tdot/projects/region-4/interstate-55-crump-boulevard-interchange.html

This was TDOT's original plans for the project... not sure if anything has changed.
(http://i.imgur.com/AH4WVMy.jpg)
(https://www.tn.gov/content/tn/tdot/projects/region-4/interstate-55-crump-boulevard-interchange/jcr%3acontent/content/tn_columnctrl/column_parsys1/tn_image_2128980325.img.jpg/1508356666417.jpg)

I like this. I am not a big fan of roundabouts in high traffic areas, especially when large truck volumes are in play.

Just too many accidents between trucks trying to navigate the circle properly against white knucklers who don't know how to merge.

I would deny trucks an exit for Crump Eastbound and make them exit at McLemore instead.

But I like that the I-55 flows better and leaves just enough room for a replacement bridge next to the M-A at Crump Park.
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: MikeTheActuary on May 26, 2021, 05:04:15 PM
I think the only change would have been to adjust the design to permit keeping the bridge open during construction. 

I don't know if the present circumstances will impact West Memphis' feelings about a bridge closure.  They're getting to see first hand what sorts of backups can form with only one bridge open...and a traffic situation made worse due to the existing I-55/Crump interchange.
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: MikeTheActuary on May 26, 2021, 05:08:46 PM
I like this. I am not a big fan of roundabouts in high traffic areas, especially when large truck volumes are in play.

Just too many accidents between trucks trying to navigate the circle properly against white knucklers who don't know how to merge.

I would deny trucks an exit for Crump Eastbound and make them exit at McLemore instead.

But I like that the I-55 flows better and leaves just enough room for a replacement bridge next to the M-A at Crump Park.

Given the qualities of Memphis drivers, and how road rage in the Memphis area has become blood sport...I don't know whether to cringe in thought about what would happen with that roundabout if built, or to hope someone keeps a traffic cam on the circle for us watch over fresh popcorn.
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: bwana39 on May 26, 2021, 05:43:37 PM
You will hopefully be around in 5 years. By then I-69 will be completed in Indiana, Kentucky, Tennessee from Dyersburg-Fulton and the bridge over the Ohio started.
Is Troy - Union City in planning stages / funded / under construction already?

Back to the topic, how much are we talking in $$$ to reconstruct the I-55/Crump Blvd interchange. Could a flyover ramp for I-55 nb-wb work? Widening for I-55 eb-sb ramp? This is assuming that the money is not there for a full reconstruction.
https://www.tn.gov/tdot/projects/region-4/interstate-55-crump-boulevard-interchange.html

This was TDOT's original plans for the project... not sure if anything has changed.
(http://i.imgur.com/AH4WVMy.jpg)
(https://www.tn.gov/content/tn/tdot/projects/region-4/interstate-55-crump-boulevard-interchange/jcr%3acontent/content/tn_columnctrl/column_parsys1/tn_image_2128980325.img.jpg/1508356666417.jpg)

I like this. I am not a big fan of roundabouts in high traffic areas, especially when large truck volumes are in play.

Just too many accidents between trucks trying to navigate the circle properly against white knucklers who don't know how to merge.

I would deny trucks an exit for Crump Eastbound and make them exit at McLemore instead.

But I like that the I-55 flows better and leaves just enough room for a replacement bridge next to the M-A at Crump Park.

I cannot find the media I read it from, but the plan supposedly has been changed in a couple of ways. The first is that there will not have to be a 100% shutdown.  The second is that the roundabout may not be built.  It appears there would be single lane exits from I-55 EB to Crump and from Crump to I-55WB. I realize the freeway is N-S but he geography at that point is E-W. These ramps would be built first then all of the traffic would be routed along them as the E/W portion was built. Then they would do the same thing on the North / South portion of I-55.
They could run out of money and leave the current intersection in place with just narrowing the lanes going toward I-55.  The yellow lines (which are existing I-55 and the to-be constructed ramps) outside the roundabout would constitute the through I-55 route during construction.
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: Ryctor2018 on May 30, 2021, 09:19:48 AM
You will hopefully be around in 5 years. By then I-69 will be completed in Indiana, Kentucky, Tennessee from Dyersburg-Fulton and the bridge over the Ohio started.
Is Troy - Union City in planning stages / funded / under construction already?

Construction started on I-69 around Union City in the last year or two. It should be completed in 2022 or '23. Troy will probably start after Union City is opened.
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: sprjus4 on May 30, 2021, 12:12:17 PM
I knew about Union City, that’s been going on for over a decade at this point, then they finally restarted to finish the portion connecting either end of US-51 around the town.

I was not aware of anything south of there, but good news to hear if they are indeed starting soon.

Then of course, Troy to I-155 is already interstate standards.

Also, any plans as far as the state line at Kentucky goes?
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: sparker on June 02, 2021, 04:29:53 PM
I knew about Union City, that’s been going on for over a decade at this point, then they finally restarted to finish the portion connecting either end of US-51 around the town.

I was not aware of anything south of there, but good news to hear if they are indeed starting soon.

Then of course, Troy to I-155 is already interstate standards.

Also, any plans as far as the state line at Kentucky goes?

AFAIK, the alignment has been chosen (just east of the current end of the Purchase Pkwy) but not let as of now (if anyone has an update regarding this, please chime in!).  That and the Wingo "bowtie" replacement are the two major issues for this last section of KY's share of I-69 to be addressed before it's ready for prime time, after which, except for the Ohio River bridge/approaches, will complete KY's portion of the corridor.
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: edwaleni on June 02, 2021, 04:56:50 PM
I knew about Union City, that’s been going on for over a decade at this point, then they finally restarted to finish the portion connecting either end of US-51 around the town.

I was not aware of anything south of there, but good news to hear if they are indeed starting soon.

Then of course, Troy to I-155 is already interstate standards.

Also, any plans as far as the state line at Kentucky goes?

AFAIK, the alignment has been chosen (just east of the current end of the Purchase Pkwy) but not let as of now (if anyone has an update regarding this, please chime in!).  That and the Wingo "bowtie" replacement are the two major issues for this last section of KY's share of I-69 to be addressed before it's ready for prime time, after which, except for the Ohio River bridge/approaches, will complete KY's portion of the corridor.

From 2018:

Kentucky Transportation Cabinet District One Chief Engineer Mike McGregor said the agency is now turning attention to completing upgrades along the remaining 20 miles of the parkway. He said they have started design work for upgrades to the Kentucky 339 Exit 14 Wingo Interchange and upgrades that will extend I-69 southward toward the Kentucky-Tennessee state line.

The work at the Wingo interchange is included in the highway plan and is labeled as "Improve the Purchase Parkway from southwest of the U.S. 51 interchange to Cardinal Road near Mayfield, including the Ky. 339 interchange in Wingo. (I-69 corridor improvement.)" Right of way funding is listed as $1 million with additional utility funding of $500,000. The project is listed for 2023-2024.
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: sparker on June 02, 2021, 07:22:49 PM
I knew about Union City, that’s been going on for over a decade at this point, then they finally restarted to finish the portion connecting either end of US-51 around the town.

I was not aware of anything south of there, but good news to hear if they are indeed starting soon.

Then of course, Troy to I-155 is already interstate standards.

Also, any plans as far as the state line at Kentucky goes?

AFAIK, the alignment has been chosen (just east of the current end of the Purchase Pkwy) but not let as of now (if anyone has an update regarding this, please chime in!).  That and the Wingo "bowtie" replacement are the two major issues for this last section of KY's share of I-69 to be addressed before it's ready for prime time, after which, except for the Ohio River bridge/approaches, will complete KY's portion of the corridor.

From 2018:

Kentucky Transportation Cabinet District One Chief Engineer Mike McGregor said the agency is now turning attention to completing upgrades along the remaining 20 miles of the parkway. He said they have started design work for upgrades to the Kentucky 339 Exit 14 Wingo Interchange and upgrades that will extend I-69 southward toward the Kentucky-Tennessee state line.

The work at the Wingo interchange is included in the highway plan and is labeled as "Improve the Purchase Parkway from southwest of the U.S. 51 interchange to Cardinal Road near Mayfield, including the Ky. 339 interchange in Wingo. (I-69 corridor improvement.)" Right of way funding is listed as $1 million with additional utility funding of $500,000. The project is listed for 2023-2024.


So it's still in the ROW acquisition phase; that makes an actual construction start of FY '23-24 more or less in line with that.  Given the "leisurely" pace TDOT is making progress on Troy-Union City- S. Fulton, the sections in the two states just might be completed at or near the same time.  When that occurs, the pressure to at least finalize an alignment south to Memphis might be ratcheted up -- especially when commercial drivers start complaining about the slog along US 51 or the alternative all-freeway 155/55 combination through MO and AR, which adds substantial mileage. 
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: CtrlAltDel on June 02, 2021, 09:30:00 PM
This was TDOT's original plans for the project... not sure if anything has changed.
(http://i.imgur.com/AH4WVMy.jpg)

(https://www.tn.gov/content/tn/tdot/projects/region-4/interstate-55-crump-boulevard-interchange/jcr%3acontent/content/tn_columnctrl/column_parsys1/tn_image_2128980325.img.jpg/1508356666417.jpg)

Interestingly, it looks like the land for the curve just to the west of the Hershey plant has already been acquired.
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: bwana39 on June 03, 2021, 01:34:03 AM
Quote

Interestingly, it looks like the land for the curve just to the west of the Hershey plant has already been acquired.

From what I rremember from 2 or 3 years ago, they were ready to start. As I understood it they had all or virtually all of the ROW.  They had a plan in place that did NOT require a total bridge shutdown except for spot closures.

Then they announced a delay of the project. There wasn't much discussion as to the hows and whys.
The statement given is "Federally funded projects, they kind of take their own time." said MPO administrator Pragati Srivastav

There is more there than the feds Dragging their feet. Either someone powerful hates the project or Memphis just lacks the pull (with Nashville) to get this portion of federal funds.  I know the people on the French Fort community were originally opposed to it. But it seemed they had compromise on that. There were issues of stop orders if archeological finds were uncovered by the construction, but that is a given on any federally funded project. There MIGHT be a greater chance here, but I don't think this was the issue.
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: Avalanchez71 on June 03, 2021, 07:51:03 AM
I wish a Congressman could introduce a bill to repeal the mandated completion of I-69.  The routing is just ridiculous and now serves no real purpose with the dog legs and zig-zags.
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: sprjus4 on June 03, 2021, 08:07:23 AM
I wish a Congressman could introduce a bill to repeal the mandated completion of I-69.  The routing is just ridiculous and now serves no real purpose with the dog legs and zig-zags.
There's certainly purpose and viability north of Memphis, and south of Texarkana. And debatably viability between Memphis and Texas assuming the corridor is complete.

"Dog legs" and "zig-zags"... the section between Memphis and Indianapolis has a shorter mileage than I-55, I-57, and I-70, and the section between Memphis and Texas is roughly the same, if not a few miles shorter than I-40 and I-30, and avoids that congested corridor entirely for southeastern Texas-bound traffic. The Texas portion of the corridor is the most direct path. Overall, I'd say the most "zig zag" portion is in Kentucky taking the 90 degree turn it does, and that's merely cause it was either use those existing freeways or build 50+ miles of new location route for over a billion dollars. And even with the right angle, it's still shorter than the existing interstate route.

You being the anti-highway, anti-expansion person you are, now, I don't expect much support from you regarding... well anything new, but the odds of Congress canceling an entire corridor that has had billions funded into its completion over the last 3 decades now... just because an anti-progress poster says they should... very slim to none. But good luck  :bigass:
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: edwaleni on June 03, 2021, 10:36:12 AM
I wish a Congressman could introduce a bill to repeal the mandated completion of I-69.  The routing is just ridiculous and now serves no real purpose with the dog legs and zig-zags.

Feel free to start a new thread called "Why I-69 should be cancelled" and let the world respond in kind.
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: Avalanchez71 on June 03, 2021, 10:47:48 AM
So what will be completed first I-73, I-74 or I-69?
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: edwaleni on June 03, 2021, 11:07:16 AM
So what will be completed first I-73, I-74 or I-69?

What does that have to do with the I-55 Crump Boulevard Interchange?
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: sprjus4 on June 03, 2021, 01:54:03 PM
So what will be completed first I-73, I-74 or I-69?

What does that have to do with the I-55 Crump Boulevard Interchange?
It’s just become a troll at this point.
Title: Re: Interstate 55/Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: The Ghostbuster on June 03, 2021, 01:59:31 PM
Maybe Interstate 55 should have followed Interstate 240 northward, and then followed Interstate 40 westward into Arkansas. Existing 55 between 240 and 40 in West Memphis could have been Interstate 255 (which Interstate 240 was between Exits 25 and 31 prior to 1974). An interchange like Crump Blvd. should not exist on a two-digit mainline Interstate Highway.
Title: Re: Interstate 55/Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: Avalanchez71 on June 03, 2021, 03:25:27 PM
Maybe Interstate 55 should have followed Interstate 240 northward, and then followed Interstate 40 westward into Arkansas. Existing 55 between 240 and 40 in West Memphis could have been Interstate 255 (which Interstate 240 was between Exits 25 and 31 prior to 1974). An interchange like Crump Blvd. should not exist on a two-digit mainline Interstate Highway.

I proposed this very thing.  The old I-55 would then become Business Loop I-55.
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: sparker on June 03, 2021, 05:00:09 PM
Maybe Interstate 55 should have followed Interstate 240 northward, and then followed Interstate 40 westward into Arkansas. Existing 55 between 240 and 40 in West Memphis could have been Interstate 255 (which Interstate 240 was between Exits 25 and 31 prior to 1974). An interchange like Crump Blvd. should not exist on a two-digit mainline Interstate Highway.

I proposed this very thing.  The old I-55 would then become Business Loop I-55.

Or, even simpler, just reroute I-240 over the old I-55 between West Memphis and the current 55/240 interchange.  There's no I-240 in AR, so it shouldn't pose an issue.   Of course, the DeSoto Bridge will have to be appropriately repaired before this would take place.  Please, no more freeway-bound business loops! 
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: edwaleni on June 03, 2021, 10:03:34 PM
Maybe Interstate 55 should have followed Interstate 240 northward, and then followed Interstate 40 westward into Arkansas. Existing 55 between 240 and 40 in West Memphis could have been Interstate 255 (which Interstate 240 was between Exits 25 and 31 prior to 1974). An interchange like Crump Blvd. should not exist on a two-digit mainline Interstate Highway.

I proposed this very thing.  The old I-55 would then become Business Loop I-55.

Or, even simpler, just reroute I-240 over the old I-55 between West Memphis and the current 55/240 interchange.  There's no I-240 in AR, so it shouldn't pose an issue.   Of course, the DeSoto Bridge will have to be appropriately repaired before this would take place.  Please, no more freeway-bound business loops!

I would be interested in finding out some history around that I-55/Crump Exit. Why did TnDOT have it included in the interstate highway system and then leave it this way? Surely the AADT for this intersection has been high enough to justify a change?  I remember driving down to/from New Orleans in 1995 and seeing this and wondering how it ended up like this. I get that it used to be a US route and they wanted to use the M-A bridge, but is there a website that goes through all the failed attempts to modernize it and why it never happened?
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: MikeTheActuary on June 03, 2021, 11:13:43 PM
I would be interested in finding out some history around that I-55/Crump Exit. Why did TnDOT have it included in the interstate highway system and then leave it this way? Surely the AADT for this intersection has been high enough to justify a change?  I remember driving down to/from New Orleans in 1995 and seeing this and wondering how it ended up like this. I get that it used to be a US route and they wanted to use the M-A bridge, but is there a website that goes through all the failed attempts to modernize it and why it never happened?

I'm not aware of such a site...but I'm also not aware of there having historically been too many efforts to upgrade the interchange (aside from the construction of the original cloverleaf, and the removal of the WB»NB petal), up until the past few years.

I-55 hasn't been much of a priority for TDOT for the obvious reason.  And in terms of interstate interchanges in Memphis...there were other interchanges that demanded greater attention for TDOT's limited funds.
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: edwaleni on June 04, 2021, 03:01:31 AM
I would be interested in finding out some history around that I-55/Crump Exit. Why did TnDOT have it included in the interstate highway system and then leave it this way? Surely the AADT for this intersection has been high enough to justify a change?  I remember driving down to/from New Orleans in 1995 and seeing this and wondering how it ended up like this. I get that it used to be a US route and they wanted to use the M-A bridge, but is there a website that goes through all the failed attempts to modernize it and why it never happened?

I'm not aware of such a site...but I'm also not aware of there having historically been too many efforts to upgrade the interchange (aside from the construction of the original cloverleaf, and the removal of the WB»NB petal), up until the past few years.

I-55 hasn't been much of a priority for TDOT for the obvious reason.  And in terms of interstate interchanges in Memphis...there were other interchanges that demanded greater attention for TDOT's limited funds.

Looking at the historical aerials, it appears when the M-A bridge was built, it simply did the "dump on Crump" with a signal at Riverside.

Around 1963 the city started clearing out the rail yards north of Crump (now Rivermont Park) and the row houses west of Riverside south of Crump along the French Fort neighborhood. (now part of DeSoto Park)

Interestingly, the city left behind the rail bridge for that yard over Riverside and that is now Channel 3 Drive.

Shortly after the 1963 urban renewal effort, the city cleared out entire blocks between Illinois and Alston except for 1 spot. It appears there was a large hotel-restaurant at the corner of Illinois, Crump and Riverside.

This lot appears to have caused a problem because it was the only lot not taken in the renewal effort. By not taking it, it kept highway planners later on from allowing I-55 to take a safe, graduated turn south once you cross the M-A bridge.

Mysteriously, when I-55 was finally built, this same hotel was in the way of the new ramp coming off the bridge and going south on the new ROW. It was condemned and removed to make room for the exit ramp. Today it is a vacant lot with a billboard on it.

Seeing how they went all out to maintain that access to Crump in 1967 when I-55 was built, I can only speculate that the city fathers did not want I-55 to become a "passthrough" road from Arkansas to Mississippi.

Since the M-A bridge was designed in the 1950's to bring people into the city from the west, I suspect the city fathers saw I-55 as a way for more people to reach the city from the south and forced the highway planners into the abbreviated clover that it is today.

This makes sense now. M-A brings in people from the west, I-55 brings people from the south, why would anyone want to just drive through without stopping?

But looking back, in 1963 they most definitely had the opportunity to make I-55 a smooth transition to go south.  All the land they cleared out eventually became a typical suburban neighborhood.

The land between Alston and Illinois is vacant once again today. A new hotel was built in 1970 but sat as a vacant hulk for several years until it was torn down in 2017.

Makes me wonder if that was a land swap with the hotel that was condemned for the new ramps.



Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: bwana39 on June 04, 2021, 11:54:03 AM
I would be interested in finding out some history around that I-55/Crump Exit. Why did TnDOT have it included in the interstate highway system and then leave it this way? Surely the AADT for this intersection has been high enough to justify a change?  I remember driving down to/from New Orleans in 1995 and seeing this and wondering how it ended up like this. I get that it used to be a US route and they wanted to use the M-A bridge, but is there a website that goes through all the failed attempts to modernize it and why it never happened?

I'm not aware of such a site...but I'm also not aware of there having historically been too many efforts to upgrade the interchange (aside from the construction of the original cloverleaf, and the removal of the WB»NB petal), up until the past few years.

I-55 hasn't been much of a priority for TDOT for the obvious reason.  And in terms of interstate interchanges in Memphis...there were other interchanges that demanded greater attention for TDOT's limited funds.

Looking at the historical aerials, it appears when the M-A bridge was built, it simply did the "dump on Crump" with a signal at Riverside.

Around 1963 the city started clearing out the rail yards north of Crump (now Rivermont Park) and the row houses west of Riverside south of Crump along the French Fort neighborhood. (now part of DeSoto Park)

Interestingly, the city left behind the rail bridge for that yard over Riverside and that is now Channel 3 Drive.

Shortly after the 1963 urban renewal effort, the city cleared out entire blocks between Illinois and Alston except for 1 spot. It appears there was a large hotel-restaurant at the corner of Illinois, Crump and Riverside.

This lot appears to have caused a problem because it was the only lot not taken in the renewal effort. By not taking it, it kept highway planners later on from allowing I-55 to take a safe, graduated turn south once you cross the M-A bridge.

Mysteriously, when I-55 was finally built, this same hotel was in the way of the new ramp coming off the bridge and going south on the new ROW. It was condemned and removed to make room for the exit ramp. Today it is a vacant lot with a billboard on it.

Seeing how they went all out to maintain that access to Crump in 1967 when I-55 was built, I can only speculate that the city fathers did not want I-55 to become a "passthrough" road from Arkansas to Mississippi.

Since the M-A bridge was designed in the 1950's to bring people into the city from the west, I suspect the city fathers saw I-55 as a way for more people to reach the city from the south and forced the highway planners into the abbreviated clover that it is today.

This makes sense now. M-A brings in people from the west, I-55 brings people from the south, why would anyone want to just drive through without stopping?

But looking back, in 1963 they most definitely had the opportunity to make I-55 a smooth transition to go south.  All the land they cleared out eventually became a typical suburban neighborhood.

The land between Alston and Illinois is vacant once again today. A new hotel was built in 1970 but sat as a vacant hulk for several years until it was torn down in 2017.

Makes me wonder if that was a land swap with the hotel that was condemned for the new ramps.

In 1963, you have to remember, the HDB was still a decade away. Crump BLVD was still the path for the E/W roads.  It was the crossing for US-72, US-78, US-70, US-72, and US-79 which crossed Memphis from east to west. US-61 was the only crossing that linked to the south.  The PRIMARY road from the M&A bridge was CRUMP. US-61 (I-55) was secondary back then. 

The real question is why it has taken them nearly 50 years since the HDB opened to address the fact that most of the E/W traffic no longer crosses on the M&A.

As an aside, so I understand TDOT already has the ROW for the new flyover set up. It is a monetary / priority (state AND local) issue.
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: Avalanchez71 on June 04, 2021, 01:16:08 PM
The political clout died off in West Tennessee starting around 2010.  They had to power and the cash to get that done years ago.  I wonder if they just don't want the traffic using the route and they are keeping it as is?
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: edwaleni on June 04, 2021, 01:26:52 PM
I would be interested in finding out some history around that I-55/Crump Exit. Why did TnDOT have it included in the interstate highway system and then leave it this way? Surely the AADT for this intersection has been high enough to justify a change?  I remember driving down to/from New Orleans in 1995 and seeing this and wondering how it ended up like this. I get that it used to be a US route and they wanted to use the M-A bridge, but is there a website that goes through all the failed attempts to modernize it and why it never happened?

I'm not aware of such a site...but I'm also not aware of there having historically been too many efforts to upgrade the interchange (aside from the construction of the original cloverleaf, and the removal of the WB»NB petal), up until the past few years.

I-55 hasn't been much of a priority for TDOT for the obvious reason.  And in terms of interstate interchanges in Memphis...there were other interchanges that demanded greater attention for TDOT's limited funds.

Looking at the historical aerials, it appears when the M-A bridge was built, it simply did the "dump on Crump" with a signal at Riverside.

Around 1963 the city started clearing out the rail yards north of Crump (now Rivermont Park) and the row houses west of Riverside south of Crump along the French Fort neighborhood. (now part of DeSoto Park)

Interestingly, the city left behind the rail bridge for that yard over Riverside and that is now Channel 3 Drive.

Shortly after the 1963 urban renewal effort, the city cleared out entire blocks between Illinois and Alston except for 1 spot. It appears there was a large hotel-restaurant at the corner of Illinois, Crump and Riverside.

This lot appears to have caused a problem because it was the only lot not taken in the renewal effort. By not taking it, it kept highway planners later on from allowing I-55 to take a safe, graduated turn south once you cross the M-A bridge.

Mysteriously, when I-55 was finally built, this same hotel was in the way of the new ramp coming off the bridge and going south on the new ROW. It was condemned and removed to make room for the exit ramp. Today it is a vacant lot with a billboard on it.

Seeing how they went all out to maintain that access to Crump in 1967 when I-55 was built, I can only speculate that the city fathers did not want I-55 to become a "passthrough" road from Arkansas to Mississippi.

Since the M-A bridge was designed in the 1950's to bring people into the city from the west, I suspect the city fathers saw I-55 as a way for more people to reach the city from the south and forced the highway planners into the abbreviated clover that it is today.

This makes sense now. M-A brings in people from the west, I-55 brings people from the south, why would anyone want to just drive through without stopping?

But looking back, in 1963 they most definitely had the opportunity to make I-55 a smooth transition to go south.  All the land they cleared out eventually became a typical suburban neighborhood.

The land between Alston and Illinois is vacant once again today. A new hotel was built in 1970 but sat as a vacant hulk for several years until it was torn down in 2017.

Makes me wonder if that was a land swap with the hotel that was condemned for the new ramps.

In 1963, you have to remember, the HDB was still a decade away. Crump BLVD was still the path for the E/W roads.  It was the crossing for US-72, US-78, US-70, US-72, and US-79 which crossed Memphis from east to west. US-61 was the only crossing that linked to the south.  The PRIMARY road from the M&A bridge was CRUMP. US-61 (I-55) was secondary back then. 

The real question is why it has taken them nearly 50 years since the HDB opened to address the fact that most of the E/W traffic no longer crosses on the M&A.

As an aside, so I understand TDOT already has the ROW for the new flyover set up. It is a monetary / priority (state AND local) issue.

Excellent point on the HDB and I had that in mind when I was literally thinking out loud on this.

I just wanted to highlight that the opportunity did exist back in 1963 when they started their urban renewal project on the southside. But by 1967 they clearly didn't put to much thought into regional logistics.

Auto traffic between Memphis and New Orleans was probably not as significant and the railroads still had a large share of freight at the time so trucks didn't play such a large role as it does today.

Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: Avalanchez71 on June 04, 2021, 01:43:06 PM
Fed Ex wasn't a thing at the time either.
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: sparker on June 04, 2021, 03:38:55 PM
Fed Ex wasn't a thing at the time either.

I wonder how much of the push for the original Crump/55 rebuild plan came from FedEx, since their hub is more accessible from the west via I-55 than I-40 through downtown. 
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: MikeTheActuary on June 04, 2021, 05:06:09 PM
Looking at the historical aerials, it appears when the M-A bridge was built, it simply did the "dump on Crump" with a signal at Riverside.

Around 1963 the city started clearing out the rail yards north of Crump (now Rivermont Park) and the row houses west of Riverside south of Crump along the French Fort neighborhood. (now part of DeSoto Park)

Interestingly, the city left behind the rail bridge for that yard over Riverside and that is now Channel 3 Drive.

Shortly after the 1963 urban renewal effort, the city cleared out entire blocks between Illinois and Alston except for 1 spot. It appears there was a large hotel-restaurant at the corner of Illinois, Crump and Riverside.

This lot appears to have caused a problem because it was the only lot not taken in the renewal effort. By not taking it, it kept highway planners later on from allowing I-55 to take a safe, graduated turn south once you cross the M-A bridge.

Mysteriously, when I-55 was finally built, this same hotel was in the way of the new ramp coming off the bridge and going south on the new ROW. It was condemned and removed to make room for the exit ramp. Today it is a vacant lot with a billboard on it.

Seeing how they went all out to maintain that access to Crump in 1967 when I-55 was built, I can only speculate that the city fathers did not want I-55 to become a "passthrough" road from Arkansas to Mississippi.

Since the M-A bridge was designed in the 1950's to bring people into the city from the west, I suspect the city fathers saw I-55 as a way for more people to reach the city from the south and forced the highway planners into the abbreviated clover that it is today.

This makes sense now. M-A brings in people from the west, I-55 brings people from the south, why would anyone want to just drive through without stopping?

But looking back, in 1963 they most definitely had the opportunity to make I-55 a smooth transition to go south.  All the land they cleared out eventually became a typical suburban neighborhood.

The land between Alston and Illinois is vacant once again today. A new hotel was built in 1970 but sat as a vacant hulk for several years until it was torn down in 2017.

Makes me wonder if that was a land swap with the hotel that was condemned for the new ramps.

A couple of points:

First, the bridge opened in 1949, rather than having been developed in the 1950's.   Crump Blvd was created as a new approach road to the "new" bridge.  There was indeed a complex-for-the day intersection at the foot of the bridge between Crump and Pennsylvania, and aerial photos from 1949 show hints of an upgrade as they started work on the creation of Riverside Drive.

I've mentioned in another thread the Crème de Memph blog, which is maintained by one of my father's former coworkers from the Memphis/Shelby County Office of Planning and Development.  He's run three articles on the "old bridge"; the one that's relevant to our discussion is here: http://cremedememph.blogspot.com/2014/10/memphis-arkansas-bridge-3.html?q=bridge

Josh also has a post dedicated to the now-demolished hotel at Alston and Illinois: http://cremedememph.blogspot.com/2017/07/lost-memphis-31-quality-inn.html?q=riverside  ... and the French Fort neighborhood: http://cremedememph.blogspot.com/2015/10/french-fort.html
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: I-39 on June 04, 2021, 10:27:51 PM
I wish a Congressman could introduce a bill to repeal the mandated completion of I-69.  The routing is just ridiculous and now serves no real purpose with the dog legs and zig-zags.

For once, I actually agree with you. I-69 is a complete waste even between Indianapolis and Memphis, considering the I-57 extension will serve the purpose as well. TDOT needs to spend their money elsewhere, including full replacements of both the I-40 and I-55 bridges.
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: sprjus4 on June 04, 2021, 11:41:01 PM
I-69 is a complete waste even between Indianapolis and Memphis
Disagree, and given INDOT, KYTC, and TDOT all have invested into the corridor and have virtually completed the vast majority of it, they disagree as well.
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: froggie on June 05, 2021, 12:43:33 AM
Worth noting that the 1955 Yellow Book (http://www.ajfroggie.com/roads/yellowbook/memphis.jpg) did not envision any Interstate utilizing the M&A, nor did it envision what is now I-240 through Midtown.  The proposal at the time had I-55 continuing north of Crump along the Riverside corridor, intersecting I-40 in the middle of Mud Island then crossing the river concurrent with I-40.
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: sprjus4 on June 05, 2021, 01:51:50 AM
Worth noting that the 1955 Yellow Book (http://www.ajfroggie.com/roads/yellowbook/memphis.jpg) did not envision any Interstate utilizing the M&A, nor did it envision what is now I-240 through Midtown.  The proposal at the time had I-55 continuing north of Crump along the Riverside corridor, intersecting I-40 in the middle of Mud Island then crossing the river concurrent with I-40.
Was the original cloverleaf constructed with the intent to eventually continue said freeway north along Riverside Dr up to I-40, or had that section of Downtown freeway been canceled by the time it was built?

Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: bwana39 on June 05, 2021, 12:16:09 PM
Worth noting that the 1955 Yellow Book (http://www.ajfroggie.com/roads/yellowbook/memphis.jpg) did not envision any Interstate utilizing the M&A, nor did it envision what is now I-240 through Midtown.  The proposal at the time had I-55 continuing north of Crump along the Riverside corridor, intersecting I-40 in the middle of Mud Island then crossing the river concurrent with I-40.
Was the original cloverleaf constructed with the intent to eventually continue said freeway north along Riverside Dr up to I-40, or had that section of Downtown freeway been canceled by the time it was built?


Worth noting that the 1955 Yellow Book (http://www.ajfroggie.com/roads/yellowbook/memphis.jpg) did not envision any Interstate utilizing the M&A, nor did it envision what is now I-240 through Midtown.  The proposal at the time had I-55 continuing north of Crump along the Riverside corridor, intersecting I-40 in the middle of Mud Island then crossing the river concurrent with I-40.
Was the original cloverleaf constructed with the intent to eventually continue said freeway north along Riverside Dr up to I-40, or had that section of Downtown freeway been canceled by the time it was built?

In 1955 the vision was to use the Riverside Expressway (Freeway). I think it is safe to say that I-55 would not have followed Riverside to the south if they had not still had that in mind.  In the sixties, they would have just gone ahead and either followed 3rd street to Crump or extended the freeway to the eventual I-155, I-240, I-69 (MLK / Midtown Freeway) or to East Parkway.

Regardless, everything EXCEPT US-61 (I-55) that crossed the river at that point utilized Crump.  In 1963 when I-55 opened, the HDB was, as I said before, still a decade off.  While ALL of the plans had the HDB in them, it was by no means a certainty.
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: Revive 755 on June 05, 2021, 12:37:18 PM
Was the original cloverleaf constructed with the intent to eventually continue said freeway north along Riverside Dr up to I-40, or had that section of Downtown freeway been canceled by the time it was built?

IIRC the Riverside Drive corridor was still proposed after I-55 had been opened on its current alignment.
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: bwana39 on June 05, 2021, 01:22:51 PM
Was the original cloverleaf constructed with the intent to eventually continue said freeway north along Riverside Dr up to I-40, or had that section of Downtown freeway been canceled by the time it was built?

IIRC the Riverside Drive corridor was still proposed after I-55 had been opened on its current alignment.

They even built the ramps off of the approaches to the HDB for it.
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: Avalanchez71 on June 05, 2021, 01:56:13 PM
Does the traffic actually warrant another lane?  Seems like there really isn't anything wrong with the interchange.
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: sprjus4 on June 05, 2021, 02:01:26 PM
Does the traffic actually warrant another lane?  Seems like there really isn't anything wrong with the interchange.
You CLEARLY have never driven through the area, and it shows.

Or simply believe that the congestion is acceptable.
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: edwaleni on June 05, 2021, 02:27:21 PM
Looking at the historical aerials, it appears when the M-A bridge was built, it simply did the "dump on Crump" with a signal at Riverside.

Around 1963 the city started clearing out the rail yards north of Crump (now Rivermont Park) and the row houses west of Riverside south of Crump along the French Fort neighborhood. (now part of DeSoto Park)

Interestingly, the city left behind the rail bridge for that yard over Riverside and that is now Channel 3 Drive.

Shortly after the 1963 urban renewal effort, the city cleared out entire blocks between Illinois and Alston except for 1 spot. It appears there was a large hotel-restaurant at the corner of Illinois, Crump and Riverside.

This lot appears to have caused a problem because it was the only lot not taken in the renewal effort. By not taking it, it kept highway planners later on from allowing I-55 to take a safe, graduated turn south once you cross the M-A bridge.

Mysteriously, when I-55 was finally built, this same hotel was in the way of the new ramp coming off the bridge and going south on the new ROW. It was condemned and removed to make room for the exit ramp. Today it is a vacant lot with a billboard on it.

Seeing how they went all out to maintain that access to Crump in 1967 when I-55 was built, I can only speculate that the city fathers did not want I-55 to become a "passthrough" road from Arkansas to Mississippi.

Since the M-A bridge was designed in the 1950's to bring people into the city from the west, I suspect the city fathers saw I-55 as a way for more people to reach the city from the south and forced the highway planners into the abbreviated clover that it is today.

This makes sense now. M-A brings in people from the west, I-55 brings people from the south, why would anyone want to just drive through without stopping?

But looking back, in 1963 they most definitely had the opportunity to make I-55 a smooth transition to go south.  All the land they cleared out eventually became a typical suburban neighborhood.

The land between Alston and Illinois is vacant once again today. A new hotel was built in 1970 but sat as a vacant hulk for several years until it was torn down in 2017.

Makes me wonder if that was a land swap with the hotel that was condemned for the new ramps.

A couple of points:

First, the bridge opened in 1949, rather than having been developed in the 1950's.   Crump Blvd was created as a new approach road to the "new" bridge.  There was indeed a complex-for-the day intersection at the foot of the bridge between Crump and Pennsylvania, and aerial photos from 1949 show hints of an upgrade as they started work on the creation of Riverside Drive.

I've mentioned in another thread the Crème de Memph blog, which is maintained by one of my father's former coworkers from the Memphis/Shelby County Office of Planning and Development.  He's run three articles on the "old bridge"; the one that's relevant to our discussion is here: http://cremedememph.blogspot.com/2014/10/memphis-arkansas-bridge-3.html?q=bridge

Josh also has a post dedicated to the now-demolished hotel at Alston and Illinois: http://cremedememph.blogspot.com/2017/07/lost-memphis-31-quality-inn.html?q=riverside  ... and the French Fort neighborhood: http://cremedememph.blogspot.com/2015/10/french-fort.html

Thanks for the links. I enjoy highway history so i will definitely take a look at these. I could only surmise based on the aerials, but really needed some newspaper or historical recollections to understand the thinking behind it, Much appreciated.
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: ran4sh on June 05, 2021, 03:07:49 PM
Does the traffic actually warrant another lane?  Seems like there really isn't anything wrong with the interchange.
You CLEARLY have never driven through the area, and it shows.

Or simply believe that the congestion is acceptable.

Or is just an extremist who believes in not building any new roads or any new lanes for existing roads.
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: sprjus4 on June 05, 2021, 03:08:47 PM
Does the traffic actually warrant another lane?  Seems like there really isn't anything wrong with the interchange.
You CLEARLY have never driven through the area, and it shows.

Or simply believe that the congestion is acceptable.

Or is just an extremist who believes in not building any new roads or any new lanes for existing roads.
It’s merely trolling, it’s obvious.
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: Avalanchez71 on June 05, 2021, 08:21:27 PM
I have certainly driven over the M/A bridge.  I am merely stating that the situation has been ongoing for years and I am not sure if it needs a change.  Not every road needs to be fully controlled access from point A to point B. 
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: bwana39 on June 05, 2021, 10:43:51 PM
Not every road needs to be fully controlled access from point A to point B.

I agree with you BUT this one is and has been a problem.

I question the need for some of the rural segments of US-59 north of Cleveland needing to be Controlled access. The small town bypasses are badly needed.  Likewise for US-287 east of Amarillo. Much of the port-to-plains south of Lubbock (and north of Amarillo). There are numerous others in Texas and out of it.

On the other hand, The Crump interchange is a relic from the early sixties. It might be better if there were a traffic signal there instead of the mess that is there. It was designed for US-61  through traffic to be secondary. The intent at the time was for I-55 to continue north there and cross at the Hernando Desoto Bridge.  The connecting freeway along the riverside was never completed (and probably a good thing ).  Even if this intersection were "good enough" (it isn't), the condition of the elements is such that it needs replacing regardless. 

The traffic patterns in Memphis are such that this routing is a heavier traffic routing than the new bridge. For a casual driver, it might be unexceptional. For someone who drives this route regularly or driver a TT Combo, it is entirely unacceptable and needs to be done!

Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: I-39 on June 05, 2021, 11:36:24 PM
I-69 is a complete waste even between Indianapolis and Memphis
Disagree, and given INDOT, KYTC, and TDOT all have invested into the corridor and have virtually completed the vast majority of it, they disagree as well.

Just because they built it doesn’t mean it necessary. It reeks of pork barrel spending. The extension is very redundant to the I-70 > I-57 corridor (which will be cheaper and easier to extend to Little Rock than building I-69 in TN).
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: sprjus4 on June 06, 2021, 12:49:51 AM
I-69 is a complete waste even between Indianapolis and Memphis
Disagree, and given INDOT, KYTC, and TDOT all have invested into the corridor and have virtually completed the vast majority of it, they disagree as well.

Just because they built it doesn’t mean it necessary. It reeks of pork barrel spending. The extension is very redundant to the I-70 > I-57 corridor (which will be cheaper and easier to extend to Little Rock than building I-69 in TN).
No different in the I-57 extension being “redundant” to I-55 and I-40.

Having a redundant corridor to 2 busy interstate highways is not a bad thing. I fully support the completion of both I-57 and I-69 for these reasons. It will take pressure off of the current main routes.

Both routes certainly have more importance, particularly on the national level, than “I-39”.
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: Revive 755 on June 06, 2021, 01:49:44 PM
May have found an EIS for the Riverside facility:  https://hdl.handle.net/2027/ien.35556030804082 (https://hdl.handle.net/2027/ien.35556030804082)

The map on Page 43 of 154 also shows what appears to be a higher type facility almost reaching the Crump Boulevard Interchange from the east.
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: ilpt4u on June 06, 2021, 05:46:17 PM
On April 27, 2021, TDOT released its proposed Comprehensive Multimodal Program for FY 2022–2024. That document can be found here. (https://www.tn.gov/content/dam/tn/tdot/programdevelopment/Final%20TDOT%20FY%2022-24%20Comprehensive%20Multimodal%20Program%204-27-21.pdf) There are no I-69 projects listed.
ITB made this post over on the I-69 in TN thread.

Quickly reading thru the projects, the I-55/Crump interchange IS listed, for 2022

The document is dated April 27, 2021 - I think that was before the I-40 Bridge closure
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: Plutonic Panda on June 06, 2021, 07:52:47 PM
Does the traffic actually warrant another lane?  Seems like there really isn't anything wrong with the interchange.
You CLEARLY have never driven through the area, and it shows.

Or simply believe that the congestion is acceptable.

Or is just an extremist who believes in not building any new roads or any new lanes for existing roads.
Or is just a troll who people here keep feeding.
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: Tom958 on June 06, 2021, 09:03:31 PM
May have found an EIS for the Riverside facility:  https://hdl.handle.net/2027/ien.35556030804082 (https://hdl.handle.net/2027/ien.35556030804082)

Thanks for that!  :clap:
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: froggie on June 06, 2021, 10:24:04 PM
In true form for Google-scanned docs, though, the maps in that EIS do not properly show the proposed alignment.

However, the aforementioned Crème de Memph blog (http://cremedememph.blogspot.com/2018/06/mud-island-history-2.html?q=bridge) has a piece discussing Mud Island which also includes maps of the 1971 Location and Design Report for the Riverside Expressway between 55/Crump and I-40.
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: bwana39 on June 12, 2021, 02:04:36 PM
They are supposed to be adding an additional ramp lane temporarily to alleviate some of the EB (SB ) backup
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: Avalanchez71 on June 12, 2021, 02:21:01 PM
Will it be a temporary increase of lanes or will it remain?
Title: Re: Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange
Post by: I-55 on June 12, 2021, 05:41:03 PM
Will it be a temporary increase of lanes or will it remain?

It will likely remain until a complete rebuild of the interchange.