Oy vey!!
http://www.wmcactionnews5.com/story/26740818/tdot-leaders-consider-shutting-down-old-i-55-bridge-for-two-years
More like...
OH SHIT!
That narrows it down to just the I-40 bridge there.
If they are going to do that, why not just replace one side at a time and detour the nb traffic onto 240. If they are smart, they would wait until Arkansas is completely done with the construction in West Memphis to lessen the traffic impact.
Might as well just wait until the New Madrid lets go and build a new bridge from there.
Quote from: Charles2 on October 09, 2014, 08:34:58 PM
Oy vey!!
http://www.wmcactionnews5.com/story/26740818/tdot-leaders-consider-shutting-down-old-i-55-bridge-for-two-years
BAD IDEA ! :banghead:
Quote from: robbones on October 09, 2014, 11:07:34 PM
If they are going to do that, why not just replace one side at a time and detour the nb traffic onto 240. If they are smart, they would wait until Arkansas is completely done with the construction in West Memphis to lessen the traffic impact.
If you are refering to replacing the I-55 bridge over the Mississippi, it is a truss bridge (streetview) (https://www.google.com/maps?q=memphis,+tn&hl=en&ll=35.128942,-90.077501&spn=0.014215,0.021865&sll=35.517491,-86.580447&sspn=7.241089,11.195068&hnear=Memphis,+Shelby+County,+Tennessee&t=m&z=16&layer=c&cbll=35.128942,-90.077501&panoid=s6RvCWJHj-Nnh54yhE_IdA&cbp=12,321.03,,0,-2.47) and could not be replaced without either a complete closure or building a new bridge off to the side.
What is TNDOT doing that it would take two years to replace the existing interchange with a full closure anyway? If the new interchange design shown with the article is accurate, it appears the interchange could be built with some temporary runarounds to keep I-55 open, and only some of the other ramps would need to be closed.
As all have said, this would be a complete disaster to close the bridge for so long, given that there is only one other crossing in the area.
If they are working on the bridge itself, it must be done. However, if they are only working the interchange, they should try to keep the bridge open for local traffic. I-55 thru traffic and all trucks should be rerouted on 240/40. The old bridge should be kept open to access Crump Blvd while they work on the I-55 flyover. Riverside Drive should be closed south of Carolina Ave and the Fowler should be closed at McLemore.
WHen the flyover opens, all bridge traffic should be led to the flyover while they close Crump and Riverside to work on the traffic circle.
Quote from: mrsman on October 14, 2014, 08:59:53 AM
As all have said, this would be a complete disaster to close the bridge for so long, given that there is only one other crossing in the area.
If they are working on the bridge itself, it must be done. However, if they are only working the interchange, they should try to keep the bridge open for local traffic. I-55 thru traffic and all trucks should be rerouted on 240/40. The old bridge should be kept open to access Crump Blvd while they work on the I-55 flyover. Riverside Drive should be closed south of Carolina Ave and the Fowler should be closed at McLemore.
WHen the flyover opens, all bridge traffic should be led to the flyover while they close Crump and Riverside to work on the traffic circle.
From what I understood, this would be for the realignment of the intersection of Crump and I-55 on the eastside of the bridge where it basically becomes a one lane exit for southbound traffic and a horrifically tight 360 degree exit for northbound traffic and not work on the bridge itself. Memphis just turned Riverside Dr into a two lane road instead of 4. Arkansas should raise hell and demand a third bridge that connects US 63 to TN 385 at Millington or TN 300 a little bit north of the New Bridge or a bridge south of West Memphis that feeds off I-40 and crosses over to Presidents Island to the US 51 area south of the refinery on the I 69 Dead end before anything like that ever happens. This will cripple Arkansas's intermodal facility and those that commute across the river to work. I wouldn't be surprised to see Arkansas fight it
.
^ I would love to see a third bridge built before any work is done on the I-55 Memphis-Arkansas Bridge.
I could see I-55 being kept open during the interchange construction as mrsman suggests, but maybe they want to shorten the time frame of the work, or maybe they want to throw in some sort of improvements to the I-55 bridge which would require a total closure?
This reminds me of the time Professor Frink sent that missile to destroy the asteroid, but instead it hit the only bridge out of town.
So this is a close second, although only just, because that's a cartoon.
http://www.tdot.state.tn.us/TrafficHistory/
Both bridges carry equal traffic, approximately 55,000 vehicles per day each.
One six-lane bridge (such as I-40) could carry 110,000 vehicles per day. Sure, it would be busy, but there are six-lane freeways with higher traffic counts. The problem though, is the overpass at Riverside Drive, it has only four lanes and no shoulders to turn into additional temporary lanes.
Quote from: Chris on October 30, 2014, 04:59:27 PM
http://www.tdot.state.tn.us/TrafficHistory/
Both bridges carry equal traffic, approximately 55,000 vehicles per day each.
One six-lane bridge (such as I-40) could carry 110,000 vehicles per day. Sure, it would be busy, but there are six-lane freeways with higher traffic counts. The problem though, is the overpass at Riverside Drive, it has only four lanes and no shoulders to turn into additional temporary lanes.
Even though that is the case, it means that there is a single point of failure (the I-40 corridor between I-240 and I-55, specifically the MS River Bridge and the brief stretch over Riverside Drive) which would mean that if an incident occurred along that corridor, traffic would be snarled.
TDOT would also need to restripe the I-240N to I-40W and I-40E to I-240S ramps for two lanes throughout, similar to what was done in Knoxville at the I-40/640 interchanges when I-40 was rebuilt there. At least there you have enough of a shoulder to accommodate two lanes.
AHTD would also probably need to restripe I-40 through the I-40/55 east split as three lanes throughout, too.
Quote from: codyg1985 on October 31, 2014, 07:05:16 AM
Even though that is the case, it means that there is a single point of failure (the I-40 corridor between I-240 and I-55, specifically the MS River Bridge and the brief stretch over Riverside Drive) which would mean that if an incident occurred along that corridor, traffic would be snarled.
That's already true on the 40/55 overlap.
Quote from: NE2 on October 31, 2014, 07:22:07 AM
Quote from: codyg1985 on October 31, 2014, 07:05:16 AM
Even though that is the case, it means that there is a single point of failure (the I-40 corridor between I-240 and I-55, specifically the MS River Bridge and the brief stretch over Riverside Drive) which would mean that if an incident occurred along that corridor, traffic would be snarled.
That's already true on the 40/55 overlap.
That's true on I-40...PERIOD!
Quote from: NE2 on October 31, 2014, 07:22:07 AM
Quote from: codyg1985 on October 31, 2014, 07:05:16 AM
Even though that is the case, it means that there is a single point of failure (the I-40 corridor between I-240 and I-55, specifically the MS River Bridge and the brief stretch over Riverside Drive) which would mean that if an incident occurred along that corridor, traffic would be snarled.
That's already true on the 40/55 overlap.
And it's a mess.
Quote from: Charles2 on October 09, 2014, 08:34:58 PM
Oy vey!!
http://www.wmcactionnews5.com/story/26740818/tdot-leaders-consider-shutting-down-old-i-55-bridge-for-two-years
Quote from: Brandon on October 09, 2014, 09:53:36 PM
More like...
OH SHIT!
That narrows it down to just the I-40 bridge there.
Apologies if this story has already been linked in another thread, but this December 22, 2014 article (http://www.myfoxmemphis.com/story/27688684/fbi-bulletin-warns-of-possible-isis-terror-plot-in-memphis) reports that the FBI recently warned local authorities that ISIS might beat TDOT to the punch and try to close the I-55 bridge in a sudden and unannounced manner:
Quote
The Federal Bureau of Investigation's Memphis Division is warning police officers about a threat to blow up the Memphis-Arkansas Bridge sometime in December. FOX13 News obtained the FBI bulletin sent to Mid-South Law Enforcement agencies warning about a possible Islamic State terror plot targeting the I-55 Bridge.
"According to an anonymous complainant, as of December 2014, ISIS instructed an ISIS member, a presumed USPER in Memphis, with a direct order to blow up the Memphis-Arkansas bridge on an unknown date, activating ISIS terror cells in the United States," the warning reads.
USPER is a law enforcement acronym for U.S. person ....
A Memphis Police spokesperson told FOX13 the department is aware of the threat and officers are patrolling the area around the bridge looking for suspicious activity. Surveillance cameras linked the MPD's Real Time Crime Center are focused on the bridge 24 hours a day.
Quote from: Grzrd on January 06, 2015, 03:26:25 PM
Quote from: Charles2 on October 09, 2014, 08:34:58 PM
Oy vey!!
http://www.wmcactionnews5.com/story/26740818/tdot-leaders-consider-shutting-down-old-i-55-bridge-for-two-years
Quote from: Brandon on October 09, 2014, 09:53:36 PM
More like...
OH SHIT!
That narrows it down to just the I-40 bridge there.
Apologies if this story has already been linked in another thread, but this December 22, 2014 article (http://www.myfoxmemphis.com/story/27688684/fbi-bulletin-warns-of-possible-isis-terror-plot-in-memphis) reports that the FBI recently warned local authorities that ISIS might beat TDOT to the punch and try to close the I-55 bridge in a sudden and unannounced manner:
Quote
The Federal Bureau of Investigation's Memphis Division is warning police officers about a threat to blow up the Memphis-Arkansas Bridge sometime in December. FOX13 News obtained the FBI bulletin sent to Mid-South Law Enforcement agencies warning about a possible Islamic State terror plot targeting the I-55 Bridge.
"According to an anonymous complainant, as of December 2014, ISIS instructed an ISIS member, a presumed USPER in Memphis, with a direct order to blow up the Memphis-Arkansas bridge on an unknown date, activating ISIS terror cells in the United States," the warning reads.
USPER is a law enforcement acronym for U.S. person ....
A Memphis Police spokesperson told FOX13 the department is aware of the threat and officers are patrolling the area around the bridge looking for suspicious activity. Surveillance cameras linked the MPD's Real Time Crime Center are focused on the bridge 24 hours a day.
I drove across it multiple times this past weekend, the bridge itself is narrow and dangroup and quite frankly needs replaced period, end of story, for the I 55 aspect of it.
The Memphis-Arkansas Bridge (which carries I-55) was opened in 1949. It was not built to Interstate standards. AFAIK, it was never modified.
Is this project happening for sure? I like the idea, the current interchange is terrible.
2 years of pain for a lot less pain in the long run?
Sign me up. I'll use the 40 bridge instead. Will they be doing any work to the bridge itself during this period? would make sense to redeck it, and paint it.
Quote from: silverback1065 on January 14, 2015, 11:26:45 AM
Is this project happening for sure? I like the idea, the current interchange is terrible.
This project is one of several projects that TDOT will delay for at least one year (http://www.tdot.state.tn.us/documents/funding/Statusof13ShiftedProjects-10-30-14.pdf). Commissioner Schroer of TDOT explained the reason for the delay in this letter to the Tennessee General Assembly (http://www.tdot.state.tn.us/documents/funding/HwyTrustFundandDelayedProjectsLetterOct%2024-2014.pdf).
Quote from: SteveG1988 on January 14, 2015, 11:40:51 AMWill they be doing any work to the bridge itself during this period? would make sense to redeck it, and paint it.
Yes, it would, but if there's not enough funding for the interchange project alone...
...unless the closure would save enough money from the interchange project to do something nice for the bridge. :hmmm:
They have another year to think about it now. Maybe common sense will prevail. :bigass:
There isn't much they can do to improve the bridge other than replace that interchange, but a redecking would be nice, maybe upgrading the lighting.
I would also put some money towards improving the pier protection and river navigation under it and the other bridges, maybe make it so all three bridges have skirting around the piers that are almost in line with each other, that way water cannot get around them and carve out mud and such from underneath them.
Also, why doesn't memphis have another road connection to Arkansas? The nearest one north is the I-155 bridge, and the nearest one south is in Helena. I'd like to see a bypass bridge be built, going from I-55 to I-40 way south of the city, or even a full upgrade of US49 to interstate standards to connect the two roads would be useful.
There's a fairly recent study for a third Memphis crossing on TDoT's website, but I'm too lazy to look it up now. Maybe tomorrow. IIRC, what amounted to a westward extension of TN 300 was the preferred location. The big problem was that it would be difficult to finance without tolls but impossible to charge adequate tolls on what would be the least conveniently located of three Memphis crossings.
http://www.tdot.state.tn.us/documents/MRCstudy.pdf (first Goog result for third Memphis crossing)
Maps on pages 52, 59, and 80.
Quote from: SteveG1988 on January 15, 2015, 12:01:39 AM
I would also put some money towards improving the pier protection and river navigation under it and the other bridges, maybe make it so all three bridges have skirting around the piers that are almost in line with each other, that way water cannot get around them and carve out mud and such from underneath them.
Also, why doesn't memphis have another road connection to Arkansas? The nearest one north is the I-155 bridge, and the nearest one south is in Helena. I'd like to see a bypass bridge be built, going from I-55 to I-40 way south of the city, or even a full upgrade of US49 to interstate standards to connect the two roads would be useful.
Pier and scour protection would be nice. Scour is the number one cause of bridge failure.
As for a third bridge. I would like to see either end of I-269 extended west across the Mississippi to reconnect with I-40 west of West Memphis. For through I-40 traffic and I-55 traffic, it would make sense to build the bridge along the southern portion of I-69 where it diverges near US 61. (Corridor 2 in the document that NE2 linked to)
Quote from: Tom958 on January 15, 2015, 01:13:53 AM
There's a fairly recent study for a third Memphis crossing on TDoT's website
Quote from: NE2 on January 15, 2015, 01:46:25 AM
http://www.tdot.state.tn.us/documents/MRCstudy.pdf (first Goog result for third Memphis crossing)
Maps on pages 52, 59, and 80.
The Southern Gateway Project is a more recent study of a third Mississippi River crossing for Memphis and here is the Southern Gateway Project website. (http://www.southerngatewayproject.com/index.asp) The Southern Gateway project is currently on hold due to lack of money, and they were in the process of narrowing down from seven corridor alternatives to three alternatives when it was placed on hold. Here is a snip of a map of the seven alternatives:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FXyM3S.jpg&hash=29decb8e5648af5f06ebbf498837b45c696f60ca)
(above map from page 38/112 of PURPOSE AND NEED AND STUDY AREA PACKAGE pdf (page 34 of document) (http://www.southerngatewayproject.com/library/CP-1%20Package%20with%20Agency%20Lts%20and%20Responses.pdf))
Quote from: Tom958 on January 15, 2015, 01:13:53 AM
IIRC, what amounted to a westward extension of TN 300 was the preferred location.
An additional problem for Corridors V1-6 (possible TN 300 extension) and V1-7 is that those corridors would arguably require the construction of I-69 in the Memphis area as a prerequisite for the selection of either one, as reflected in documents discussed in this post from a dormant Southern Gateway thread (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3523.msg237931#msg237931).
Maybe if Congress will enact a new multi-year reauthorization, then the Southern Gateway project and the Crump Boulevard interchange (trying to keep this post on topic :awesomeface:) will both be able to proceed in a timely manner.
So apparently up river in St. Louis, they are replacing the I 55 ramps
Quote from: Grzrd on January 15, 2015, 09:04:55 AMThe Southern Gateway Project is...
Thanks for that. :sombrero:
Quote from: GrzrdQuote from: Tom958 on January 15, 2015, 01:13:53 AM
IIRC, what amounted to a westward extension of TN 300 was the preferred location.
An additional problem for Corridors V1-6 (possible TN 300 extension) and V1-7 is that those corridors would arguably require the construction of I-69 in the Memphis area as a prerequisite for the selection of either one, as reflected in documents discussed in this post from a dormant Southern Gateway thread.
After looking at the truck volume maps from the previous study, it's hard for me to imagine that to be a serious issue. Traffic on the I-40 axis seems dominant. IOW,
Quote from: GrzrdMaybe if Congress will enact a new multi-year reauthorization, then the Southern Gateway project and the Crump Boulevard interchange (trying to keep this post on topic :awesomeface:) will both be able to proceed in a timely manner.
Here's hoping. :poke:
Official: I-55 bridge will close for 9 months starting in Spring 2017
http://www.commercialappeal.com/news/local-news/tdot-plans-ninemonth-closure-of-memphis-arkansas-bridge_95097101
This is going to be a clusterfudge. How are they gonna fit 55K+ cars onto I-40 without causing a major headache?
Quote from: golden eagle on May 30, 2015, 01:12:18 PM
This is going to be a clusterfudge. How are they gonna fit 55K+ cars onto I-40 without causing a major headache?
There, that was easy! :-D
I wonder just how bad the congestion will be when the I-55 bridge is closed? I wonder if it would warrant placing message boards far away from the bridge to encourage through motorists to use other bridges? An alternate that could work would be I-40 to US 412 to I-155 to I-55 for I-40 through traffic.
Quote from: codyg1985 on June 03, 2015, 05:39:07 PM
I wonder just how bad the congestion will be when the I-55 bridge is closed? I wonder if it would warrant placing message boards far away from the bridge to encourage through motorists to use other bridges? An alternate that could work would be I-40 to US 412 to I-155 to I-55 for I-40 through traffic.
The combined AADT assuming no diversions would be 110k or so; at rush hour things might get dicey but the "new" bridge, with 6 lanes, should have capacity for 8k vph or more in each direction. West Memphis really doesn't have much of a commuter population.
The bottleneck is likely to be the Memphis approach span which narrows to 4 lanes for a few thousand feet through the first exit. TDOT could probably close the shoulder and a ramp or two and restripe it for 6 through lanes temporarily and the bridge and Arkansas approach could be restriped to add a lane each way if absolutely needed.
Well at least it is only going to be closed for 9 months instead of the original 2 year span of closure. :clap:
Our friends over at TDOT have produced this illustration of the project:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Br8U_m3OEg&feature=youtu.be
Quote from: AHTD on June 05, 2015, 07:14:25 PM
Our friends over at TDOT have produced this illustration of the project:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Br8U_m3OEg&feature=youtu.be
Nice PR film. I would rather have seen more details on the interim traffic flows instead of he verbal descriptions.
It has been announced that the 55 bridge will NOT close.
http://www.arkansasonline.com/news/2015/jul/25/plan-dropped-to-shut-bridge-at-memphis-/
They are talking about design-build as it if it is this radical new form of construction that would magically allow the bridge to not have to close at all. It still doesn't answer the question as to how traffic would be maintained through the area without closing the bridge.
Closing the bridge would be hugely disruptive, but looking at the satellite photos, there are just so many constraints in the area (French Fort in the SW quadrant of the interchange and the BNSF and UP rail lines to the north of the interchange) that it would be extremely difficult to maintain even two lanes through the area unless you somehow cut off access to Crump Blvd and Riverside Drive to allow I-55 to flow freely through there.
Quote from: codyg1985 on July 26, 2015, 04:04:24 PM
They are talking about design-build as it if it is this radical new form of construction that would magically allow the bridge to not have to close at all.
Heh. This disease affects NY as well. You say "design-build" and all of a sudden engineers start thinking that you can do a major bridge replacement in two weeks or less. Reality hits sooner or later.
Quote from: US71 on July 26, 2015, 06:16:02 AM
It has been announced that the 55 bridge will NOT close.
http://www.arkansasonline.com/news/2015/jul/25/plan-dropped-to-shut-bridge-at-memphis-/ (http://www.arkansasonline.com/news/2015/jul/25/plan-dropped-to-shut-bridge-at-memphis-/)
Gotta love editors and their headlines. Nowhere in this story is there an official comment from TDOT that the bridge won't close. Read the story again carefully.
Quote from: codyg1985 on July 26, 2015, 04:04:24 PM
They are talking about design-build as it if it is this radical new form of construction that would magically allow the bridge to not have to close at all. It still doesn't answer the question as to how traffic would be maintained through the area without closing the bridge.
Closing the bridge would be hugely disruptive, but looking at the satellite photos, there are just so many constraints in the area (French Fort in the SW quadrant of the interchange and the BNSF and UP rail lines to the north of the interchange) that it would be extremely difficult to maintain even two lanes through the area unless you somehow cut off access to Crump Blvd and Riverside Drive to allow I-55 to flow freely through there.
From what we understand, closing the bridge for only 9 months= a three-year project. Not closing the bridge = a six-year project.
Quote from: AHTD on July 28, 2015, 12:30:30 AM
Quote from: codyg1985 on July 26, 2015, 04:04:24 PM
They are talking about design-build as it if it is this radical new form of construction that would magically allow the bridge to not have to close at all. It still doesn't answer the question as to how traffic would be maintained through the area without closing the bridge.
Closing the bridge would be hugely disruptive, but looking at the satellite photos, there are just so many constraints in the area (French Fort in the SW quadrant of the interchange and the BNSF and UP rail lines to the north of the interchange) that it would be extremely difficult to maintain even two lanes through the area unless you somehow cut off access to Crump Blvd and Riverside Drive to allow I-55 to flow freely through there.
From what we understand, closing the bridge for only 9 months= a three-year project. Not closing the bridge = a six-year project.
That is what I have heard as well.
I have lived in Memphis and in Marked Tree. The amount of folklore in east Arkansas commuting to work across that bridge is significant to the region. Take the health care considerations that many depend on is in Memphis as well. If the Old Bridge is closed for any length of time it is going to have an adverse effect on thousands of folks. The easy to see nightmare senario is a major wreck eastbound over the New Bridge. It may literally cost lives outside of the wreck itself.
The only way that bridge should allowed to be closed outside of it's actual failure is a third bridge first. The obvious choice is the V1-1 option. That connects to the I-69 area in Tunica, as it would provide a I-40 relief route as it will tie into the southern leg of I-269 and curve up to I-40.
It would also connect the Intermodal facilities due north of the Lehi exit just west of West Memphis to the DCs in North Miss and open up another area for growth on the Arkansas side.
Think about this, Little Rock has how many bridges over the Arkansas? Isn't there a replacement underway around the rivermarket/ ballpark/arena area? Add the new I-30 bridge in addition to the the other two and there's going to be just one across the Mississippi to Memphis for nearly a year? That's truly a WTF situation. There should be four minimum with the other up north from US 63 /I-55 that would tie into the the I-69/I-269 interchange in Millington.
Think about this. FT. Smith has more bridge crossing than Arkansas/Tennessee. And...that's not including the I-49 bridge that seems to be en vouge to push to get built. It's insane.
It makes the silliness of the I-69 bridge seem even more absurd that it might happen before a third Memphis bridge. In fact, the V1-1 option should be the I-69 bridge as well.
If you compare St. Louis with Memphis: the 2014 St. Louis MSA population estimate is 2,806,207, and the Memphis MSA population estimate is 1,343,230, which is more than half the size of STL. STL has eight bridge crossings (four of which are interstate crossings and another which is a divided highway) while there are only two for Memphis.
I guess one other factor is that there is more population across the river from STL than across the river from Memphis.
Still, I agree 100% that there should be more bridges and more redundancy for river crossings in Memphis, and it is ludicrous that there aren't any.
FWIW, I don't think the I-69 bridge will be built anytime soon either.
Quote from: AHTD on July 27, 2015, 11:53:21 PM
Quote from: US71 on July 26, 2015, 06:16:02 AM
It has been announced that the 55 bridge will NOT close.
http://www.arkansasonline.com/news/2015/jul/25/plan-dropped-to-shut-bridge-at-memphis-/ (http://www.arkansasonline.com/news/2015/jul/25/plan-dropped-to-shut-bridge-at-memphis-/)
Gotta love editors and their headlines. Nowhere in this story is there an official comment from TDOT that the bridge won't close. Read the story again carefully.
TDOT has announced they were going to study bridge closure impacts further. http://www.tn.gov/tdot/news/16480
Quote from: codyg1985 on July 30, 2015, 07:54:38 AM
If you compare St. Louis with Memphis: the 2014 St. Louis MSA population estimate is 2,806,207, and the Memphis MSA population estimate is 1,343,230, which is more than half the size of STL. STL has eight bridge crossings (four of which are interstate crossings and another which is a divided highway) while there are only two for Memphis.
I guess one other factor is that there is more population across the river from STL than across the river from Memphis.
Still, I agree 100% that there should be more bridges and more redundancy for river crossings in Memphis, and it is ludicrous that there aren't any.
FWIW, I don't think the I-69 bridge will be built anytime soon either.
The vast majority of the StL MSA that you cite live on the western side. West Memphis and East St. Louis are nearly identical in size you throw out Belleville, I'll come back with Jonesboro. Come back with O'Fallon, I'll answer with Marion, and on and on...
The simple fact of the matter is that Arkansas' Washington delegation did a piss poor job of selling out with little bacon to sizzle back home over the years. Little Rock was more concerned with Little Rock or pet projects like 67, which still will not still not completely connect with Jonesboro on an all interstate standard road. Look at the growth of North Mississippi over the past 30 years, all because of connectivity. There wasn't much difference between the two areas in the early 80s. If there would have been one or two more crossings , Arkansas could have got in on that and the State as a whole benefited from it. There is zero reasons Arkansas should not demand be part of a third loop around Memphis instead only Tennessee and Mississippi will benefit once I-269 is complete. Yeah, I count the Parkways in Memphis as the first loop. .
Rant complete
Jonesboro is like an hour+ from even downtown Memphis. It's not even counted in the same MSA by the Census Bureau.
The thing that kills West Memphis as a Memphis suburb is the floodplain, not access (it's much harder to get to Olive Branch than most of West Memphis from downtown, but Olive Branch has grown far more). It also doesn't help that TN lacks a (general) income tax, so there's a disincentive for people to leave the state because they have to pay state income tax on their TN earnings if they do, unlike MO versus IL where it's more of a wash.
And the AR delegation had no juice to get things so they squabbled over nonsense like the Dickey Split to try to get a freeway from Pine Bluff to West Memphis that mostly would duplicate I-40, and prioritizing roads to Little Rock (US 67, I-530) and NW Ark over developing the Delta and the West Memphis area (in fairness, because that's where the voters are in Arkansas). Plus BRAC kicked Blytheville in the nuts and the place has never recovered, further pushing the state's political center of gravity west. AR also hung its hat on Clinton initiatives like the DRC that was supposed to be the Mississippi Valley's version of ARC but hasn't done anything much except generate studies after studies (which has helped drag down I-69 with it, since that was supposed to be the big centerpiece of DRC).
By contrast, the MS delegation had to pay attention to the Southaven area because it was one of the 3-4 largest in the state (even back in the 80s, Southaven + Horn Lake was bigger than W Memphis). And they had juice: MS had seniority in both the House and Senate for decades, MS and TN both had senate majority leaders, MS and TN went Republican with the 1994 wave while AR stuck with Democrats well past the time they'd lost the majority due to Clinton's coattails. And of course MS invested in roads in the 1987 Four-Lane program, which means MS has effectively had a completed I-22 for over a decade while AR is still piddling around trying to get US 67 up to Walnut Ridge and half-assing I-530 after half-assing parallel US 425 before it.
An hour is nothing , it's 70 miles. I grew at the half way point in Marked Tree. I've lived in Memphis. Attended ASU. I have made the trip numerous times.
You say floodplain, not really. Sure, there's the levee and the area between but much of area isn't going undergoing, there's little area between Marion and West Memphis that has an issue but there plenty of land that doesn't. You bring something else up, when hasn't Arkansas ever pursued building up faux Islands between the two interstates. Mud Island is mostly built up. 2013 showed it needed to be a foot or two higher . I struck me why it wS never done when Arkansas built the new scales on each bridge approach. The State should have bought up all the land in between the interstates and made islands on the portion east and west of the rail lines and set aside the land dissected by the tracks as wetland mitigation land. Possibly awarded to companies that build superprojects in east Arkansas. I have been told the thing that tilted the Toyota suv plant to Tupelo was Mississippi offering a piece of land in honor of Toyota to conservation. Marketing issues landed the truck line in San Antonio. Marion got the axle plant for both facilities.
But it still doesn't address the shear need for another crossing or two. I suppose it will actually take an earthquake to get it done. If Tenn had the old bridge closed and a barge got loose in high water and slammed into the new bridge pier and caused it to close the chaos will be elightening.
There are too few ways to cross in the area, period, end of story. Realize this, when ADHT does there little I-30 improvement, there will be able 10 lanes across the Arkansas on I-30 alone not counting the other 12 lanes of Interstate across it. Total crossing into Memphis 5 lanes each way total of ten. 22 to 10 and one side wanted to close 40 percent of them down for 9 months in one of the highest traffic truck corridors around.
Again, assinine.
Suppose the Memphis-Arkansas bridge were closed. Could the Hernando Desoto bridge handle all the traffic?
Quote from: cbalducc on August 10, 2015, 01:22:37 PM
Suppose the Memphis-Arkansas bridge were closed. Could the Hernando Desoto bridge handle all the traffic?
I think the bridge itself could as long as all six lanes are in service (it usually does fine even with a lane closed when they're doing seismic retrofit work). The Tennessee approaches, though, probably would be a bottleneck at rush hour since they narrow to two lanes for a few thousand feet.
Quote from: lordsutch on August 10, 2015, 01:34:22 PM
Quote from: cbalducc on August 10, 2015, 01:22:37 PM
Suppose the Memphis-Arkansas bridge were closed. Could the Hernando Desoto bridge handle all the traffic?
I think the bridge itself could as long as all six lanes are in service (it usually does fine even with a lane closed when they're doing seismic retrofit work). The Tennessee approaches, though, probably would be a bottleneck at rush hour since they narrow to two lanes for a few thousand feet.
Refer to earlier in the thread for a similar discussion about this.
Quote from: lordsutch on August 10, 2015, 01:34:22 PM
Quote from: cbalducc on August 10, 2015, 01:22:37 PM
Suppose the Memphis-Arkansas bridge were closed. Could the Hernando Desoto bridge handle all the traffic?
I think the bridge itself could as long as all six lanes are in service (it usually does fine even with a lane closed when they're doing seismic retrofit work). The Tennessee approaches, though, probably would be a bottleneck at rush hour since they narrow to two lanes for a few thousand feet.
All three lanes on each side would look like a Daytona 500 restart at all times just waiting for the Big One it would bottle neck at the I 240 junction and as well at the 1-55/I-40 merge in West Memphis. It's got a massive cluster×!&* written all over it. I know how the ADHT will tell you how the traffic count didn't facilitate a need for 4 lanes on each side through the West Memphis merge but it's crazy. The last few trips home, the I-40 eastbound reduction from two to one lane has been backed up pretty good at the interchange where it meets I-55.
Hopefully some lessons were learned and there's no drama with this one:
Routine Inspection of Interstate 55 Mississippi River Bridge (https://www.ardot.gov/news/21-321/)
Quote from: Wayward Memphian on August 10, 2015, 04:07:45 PM
Quote from: lordsutch on August 10, 2015, 01:34:22 PM
Quote from: cbalducc on August 10, 2015, 01:22:37 PM
Suppose the Memphis-Arkansas bridge were closed. Could the Hernando Desoto bridge handle all the traffic?
I think the bridge itself could as long as all six lanes are in service (it usually does fine even with a lane closed when they're doing seismic retrofit work). The Tennessee approaches, though, probably would be a bottleneck at rush hour since they narrow to two lanes for a few thousand feet.
All three lanes on each side would look like a Daytona 500 restart at all times just waiting for the Big One it would bottle neck at the I 240 junction and as well at the 1-55/I-40 merge in West Memphis. It's got a massive cluster×!&* written all over it. I know how the ADHT will tell you how the traffic count didn't facilitate a need for 4 lanes on each side through the West Memphis merge but it's crazy. The last few trips home, the I-40 eastbound reduction from two to one lane has been backed up pretty good at the interchange where it meets I-55.
Sounds like I-49 during Rush Hour.
There are several points here. This is an old thread and the one about the interchange that would have MADE this needed is on this thread.https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=20377.msg2622992#msg2622992 (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=20377.msg2622992#msg2622992)
They have figured out how to do it without closing the bridge. I probably would do it differently than they are, but I am neither P.E. nor in Tennessee
Both the I-55 and I-40 bridges need to be fully replaced with modern structures ASAP. Even with the retrofits, I don't trust the I-40 bridge at all.
The problem is $$$ and cooperation between AR and TN is non-existent. Thus, I fear another, worse I-35W situation will occur when the New Madrid fault erupts.
Quote from: I-39 on October 06, 2021, 10:19:18 PM
Both the I-55 and I-40 bridges need to be fully replaced with modern structures ASAP. Even with the retrofits, I don’t trust the I-40 bridge at all.
The problem is $$$ and cooperation between AR and TN is non-existent. Thus, I fear another, worse I-35W situation will occur when the New Madrid fault erupts.
There are two points here. First if the New Madrid goes off big enough to knock these bridges down, the infrastructure to get to them will be impassible. I doubt they are actually the first things that are going to fail.
Second, additional bridges can give redundancy to the grid and in the intermediate, THE EXISTING (OLD) BRIDGES will have several years of life. We have to remember that when the World Series Earthquake hit San Francisco, that the Embarcadero freeway completely failed. There was damage to the Bay Bridge, but not a total collapse. I feel that unless Memphis is reduced to rubble that would be the outcome with the bridges in Memphis.
More lives could be lost on the railroad bridges if one of them failed with a passenger train crossing at Cairo than if both of the highway bridges at Memphis fell into the river.
I will add we really don't have real world experience with cable stayed bridges in earthquakes.
Quote from: bwana39 on October 07, 2021, 03:48:41 PM
More lives could be lost on the railroad bridges if one of them failed with a passenger train crossing at Cairo than if both of the highway bridges at Memphis fell into the river.
Since there are 1,440 minutes in a day, and only about 4 minutes of passenger train exposure a day on the Cairo Bridge, the odds seem to be in favor of a train being at the wrong place at the right time. And if the signals are working right, similar odds of a run-off crash into a vacated space where the bridge used to be, especially with the slow approach of trains over the bridge. The odds of dozens of motor vehicles being on the I-40 or I-55 bridges during the "big one" are substantially higher, with less casualties than a passenger train accident but more certainty that there will be some.
Some points here as a kid that grew up near directly on top of the fault line. The likely hood of bridge failure rises the north north you are from Memphis.
Draw a line from the St Francis Lake/Marked Tree to Real foot Lake and that is No Man's Land of a big one breaks off.
That is why I favor any single new bridge to run west of West Memphis to Tunica and the current terminus of I-69 there even when map looking tells you to run it between Marion and West Memphis to Fraser/Millington. That also rules out even if a new northern bridge survives the infrastructure connecting to it is still at greater risk. It is the longer way but the southern crossing provides a way to loop around Greater Memphis.
That is also why Helena as a 4 lane bridge appeals to me. That acts another fail safe to even a new bridge in Memphis failing. I much prefer they push down the I-69 crossing to Lake Village and they build one or both of those I mention
If a big one hits the I-155 Bridge is toast.
The I-55 Mississippi River bridge will be closed this weekend, from Friday 10/6 at 8PM to Monday 10/9 at 6AM:
https://www.tn.gov/tdot/news/2023/10/2/i-55-mississippi-river-bridge-closure.html
Quote from: wriddle082 on October 03, 2023, 09:54:59 PM
The I-55 Mississippi River bridge will be closed this weekend, from Friday 10/6 at 8PM to Monday 10/9 at 6AM:
https://www.tn.gov/tdot/news/2023/10/2/i-55-mississippi-river-bridge-closure.html
(https://www.tn.gov/content/tn/tdot/news/2023/10/2/i-55-mississippi-river-bridge-closure/jcr%3acontent/newsContent/tn_textandimage/image.img.jpg/1696267923742.jpg)
TDOT uses the I-69 shield on the detour route map. Is Tennessee signing 69 in Memphis now, or are they planning to soon?
Quote from: ilpt4u on October 03, 2023, 10:26:14 PM
Quote from: wriddle082 on October 03, 2023, 09:54:59 PM
The I-55 Mississippi River bridge will be closed this weekend, from Friday 10/6 at 8PM to Monday 10/9 at 6AM:
https://www.tn.gov/tdot/news/2023/10/2/i-55-mississippi-river-bridge-closure.html
(https://www.tn.gov/content/tn/tdot/news/2023/10/2/i-55-mississippi-river-bridge-closure/jcr%3acontent/newsContent/tn_textandimage/image.img.jpg/1696267923742.jpg)
TDOT uses the I-69 shield on the detour route map. Is Tennessee signing 69 in Memphis now, or are they planning to soon?
AFAIK, I-69 is not signed anywhere in Memphis. In fact, it's still signed as I-55 and I-240. (https://www.google.com/maps/@35.0733864,-90.0312641,3a,15y,107.43h,95.75t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sTooweji0GfjxlXMYolD_Lw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu)
Just interesting how TDOT is advertising the detour route...
Quote from: ilpt4u on October 03, 2023, 10:38:40 PM
Just interesting how TDOT is advertising the detour route...
Good catch! I didn't bother to notice that!
Quote from: Henry on October 03, 2023, 10:36:53 PM
Quote from: ilpt4u on October 03, 2023, 10:26:14 PM
Quote from: wriddle082 on October 03, 2023, 09:54:59 PM
The I-55 Mississippi River bridge will be closed this weekend, from Friday 10/6 at 8PM to Monday 10/9 at 6AM:
https://www.tn.gov/tdot/news/2023/10/2/i-55-mississippi-river-bridge-closure.html
(https://www.tn.gov/content/tn/tdot/news/2023/10/2/i-55-mississippi-river-bridge-closure/jcr%3acontent/newsContent/tn_textandimage/image.img.jpg/1696267923742.jpg)
TDOT uses the I-69 shield on the detour route map. Is Tennessee signing 69 in Memphis now, or are they planning to soon?
AFAIK, I-69 is not signed anywhere in Memphis. In fact, it's still signed as I-55 and I-240. (https://www.google.com/maps/@35.0733864,-90.0312641,3a,15y,107.43h,95.75t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sTooweji0GfjxlXMYolD_Lw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu)
Yeah just like Virginia don't sign I-74 like NC does is the same here. MS signs I-69 and once over the line it is dropped.
It could be signed in lieu of the western part of I-240, but then you would have at TN 300 a change in number. If Tennessee even built I-69 up US 51 to Future I-269, it could be done. However there is no chance of us ever seeing I-69 built between Tenaha, TX and Dyersburg, TN in even our grandkids life. I-55 will be for a long time the north way out on freeway to Memphis with I-155 being the connector to I-69 to Canada.
Oh come on, It (I-69) MAY reach Haughton LA......
Quote from: bwana39 on October 04, 2023, 09:20:05 AM
Oh come on, It (I-69) MAY reach Haughton LA......
The southeastern bypass of Sherveport/Bossier (I-49S to I-20E) I think has a better chance of being built than any other section of I-69 between Memphis and Tenaha, save for the stretch in Arkansas that's being built out to 2 lanes between Monticello and McGehee.
Quote from: abqtraveler on October 04, 2023, 11:35:45 AM
Quote from: bwana39 on October 04, 2023, 09:20:05 AM
Oh come on, It (I-69) MAY reach Haughton LA......
The southeastern bypass of Shreveport/Bossier (I-49S to I-20E) I think has a better chance of being built than any other section of I-69 between Memphis and Tenaha, save for the stretch in Arkansas that's being built out to 2 lanes between Monticello and McGehee.
They would probably build the rest of it into Texas if the entire Shreveport / Bossier part gets built. It will probably only be around 14 miles from the state line to I-49. I agree fully with you on the I-49 to I-20 part being the only part with
any urgency. The I-49 to the Port is almost set in stone. It looks like there MAY be a toll bridge built too. SO I-49 to US-71. The rest of it?????
I could see Louisiana eventually building Interstate 69 in their state between Interstate 20 and Interstate 49, and possibly to connect with Texas's segment of Interstate 69. Beyond Interstate 20 seems less likely to me. Even then, I don't expect Interstate 69 within Louisiana to be built in any shape or form anytime soon.
Quote from: Henry on October 03, 2023, 10:36:53 PM
AFAIK, I-69 is not signed anywhere in Memphis. In fact, it's still signed as I-55 and I-240. (https://www.google.com/maps/@35.0733864,-90.0312641,3a,15y,107.43h,95.75t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sTooweji0GfjxlXMYolD_Lw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu)
When I asked TDOT about that several years ago, I was told that from TDOT's official perspective, they don't consider I-69 to exist in Memphis. They weren't planning to make it official until that stretch of future I-69 connected up to a not-yet-constructed standalone stretch of I-69, and that it wouldn't be official until signs were posted, the installation inspected, and an announcement made.
(Months later they failed to ever make that public announcement for the changeover of part of TN 385 to I-269.)
Arkansas DOT and TDOT have requested funding for a new I-55 bridge and it looks like it will be expanded to at least six lanes: https://www.arkansasonline.com/news/2023/dec/10/arkansas-tennessee-seek-i-55-bridge-aid/
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=6952.msg2889407#msg2889407
From mid-south
Kinda seems like this should have its own thread.
https://wreg.com/news/mid-south/tn-ar-work-together-on-proposed-new-i-55-bridge/ (https://wreg.com/news/mid-south/tn-ar-work-together-on-proposed-new-i-55-bridge/)
MEMPHIS, Tenn. — Arkansas and Tennessee are teaming up on a plan to use federal dollars to replace the 75-year-old bridge that carries Interstate 55 across the Mississippi River between the two states.
Dave Parker with the Arkansas Department of Transportation says the states have applied for an $800 million grant. The total cost for bridge replacement would be an estimated $1.5 billion, according to TDOT documents.
"Replacing the I-55 bridge would be incredible," Parker said. "The bridge was opened to traffic in 1949. It's just time for this to happen. We need a better alternative to go with the Interstate 40 bridge."
For residents, workers, and freight, the Memphis Arkansas Bridge between Memphis, Tennessee and West Memphis, Arkansas is a critical connector. The Tennessee Department of Transportation says 64,000 vehicles cross over the Mississippi River daily.
If approved, the federal grant money would come from the 2021 bipartisan infrastructure law.
"We feel very confident, working with TDOT, we feel confident in this grant and think it's going to be approved," Parker said.
In May of 2021, traffic on the newer I-40 bridge in Memphis was halted for weeks after inspectors found a crack in the structural steel of the bridge.
All traffic was diverted to the I-55 bridge, causing hourslong traffic backups and highlighting the need for another crossing point.
The goal of this project is for a wider, safer I-55 bridge that cuts maintenance cost, withstands earthquakes, and gives drivers alternate routes.
Parker says wheels are already turning on how to make it happen.
"If we found out tomorrow for example that the grant would be approved, we would not waste any time to get this going. It needs to be taken care of," he said.
TDOT is currently building a new on-ramp to get traffic on I-55 onto the Memphis side of the bridge.
According to TDOT documents, the proposed replacement bridge could be built just south of the current bridge and use that interchange, though several approaches are under consideration.
How would a new Memphis & Arkansas Bridge be configurated? I imagine it would be a six-lane bridge with full emergency shoulders. Currently, the bridge is four lanes with no shoulders. Could the right-of-way be expanded enough so that a six-lane bridge could be constructed without infringing on the rail bridge that exists adjacent to the Memphis * Arkansas Bridge?
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on December 13, 2023, 10:45:34 AM
How would a new Memphis & Arkansas Bridge be configurated? I imagine it would be a six-lane bridge with full emergency shoulders. Currently, the bridge is four lanes with no shoulders. Could the right-of-way be expanded enough so that a six-lane bridge could be constructed without infringing on the rail bridge that exists adjacent to the Memphis * Arkansas Bridge?
It might be possible, but it would be a very tight fit. There is only 150 feet of separation from the I-55 bridge and the Frisco Rail Bridge, and about the same distance separates the Frisco Bridge from the Harrihan Bridge. The existing I-55 bridge is only about 56 feet in width with four narrow lanes and no shoulders. For a single, standard width 6-lane bridge with full shoulders, it would have to be a minimum of 116 feet in width, assuming 3x12 foot travel lanes plus 10-foot inside and outside shoulders in each direction. The other option would be to build two new parallel spans. The first one for northbound traffic built immediately to the north of the existing bridge and the southbound span built within the footprint of the existing bridge after it has been demolished. Alternatively, the existing bridge can be rehabilitated and reconfigured for southbound traffic after the new northbound span is completed.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on December 13, 2023, 10:45:34 AM
How would a new Memphis & Arkansas Bridge be configurated? I imagine it would be a six-lane bridge with full emergency shoulders. Currently, the bridge is four lanes with no shoulders. Could the right-of-way be expanded enough so that a six-lane bridge could be constructed without infringing on the rail bridge that exists adjacent to the Memphis * Arkansas Bridge?
Since they're talking about building immediately to the south rather than the north, squeezing it in between the existing bridges wouldn't be a consideration. There's really plenty of space there due to the curve I-55 takes before the crossing. The only minor issue I can see is that the new Crump/Riverside interchange isn't designed for three through lanes, but I don't think they're strictly needed and you'd mostly be adding the 3rd lane over the bridge for future-proofing and the marginal incremental cost anyway.
If they did have to build it to the north due to space constraints, I think they'd seriously look at consolidating the rail bridges on a new structure as well. There's actually a pretty strong case for moving the railroad lines out of downtown anyway.
Quote from: lordsutch on December 13, 2023, 02:38:21 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on December 13, 2023, 10:45:34 AM
How would a new Memphis & Arkansas Bridge be configurated? I imagine it would be a six-lane bridge with full emergency shoulders. Currently, the bridge is four lanes with no shoulders. Could the right-of-way be expanded enough so that a six-lane bridge could be constructed without infringing on the rail bridge that exists adjacent to the Memphis * Arkansas Bridge?
Since they're talking about building immediately to the south rather than the north, squeezing it in between the existing bridges wouldn't be a consideration. There's really plenty of space there due to the curve I-55 takes before the crossing. The only minor issue I can see is that the new Crump/Riverside interchange isn't designed for three through lanes, but I don't think they're strictly needed and you'd mostly be adding the 3rd lane over the bridge for future-proofing and the marginal incremental cost anyway.
If they did have to build it to the north due to space constraints, I think they'd seriously look at consolidating the rail bridges on a new structure as well. There's actually a pretty strong case for moving the railroad lines out of downtown anyway.
The plans show it to the south of the existing bridge. The French Fort area will bw disturbed. I just do not see this as viable.
Quote from: bwana39 on December 13, 2023, 03:12:49 PM
The plans show it to the south of the existing bridge. The French Fort area will bw disturbed. I just do not see this as viable.
If you're referring to the 5A and 5B routes shown on the study, they'd disturb a portion of Crump Park and one building, shown as "Economy Boat Store" on Google Maps. I don't think either would be particularly problematic.
Surely it'll somehow have to tie in Crump Boulevard Interchange improvements.
At one time there were three railroad bridges across the river at Memphis.
One was torn down and is where the DeSoto Bridge is today.
The Harahan Bridge is all UP and is used to reach their exchange with CSX and NS. CN comes through town but I am not aware any large amount of interchange between the two anymore at Yale Yard..
The Frisco Bridge is all BNSF and is used to reach Tennessee Yard SE of town and where they bring up traffic from Birmingham and CSX from Atlanta.
If you could get UP to share the Harahan Bridge with BNSF (they have switches with each other on both sides just in case), as the Harahan is double track, the Frisco single track.
The Frisco Bridge could be demolished permanently and/or replaced as part of a new combo highway/rail bridge. That would eliminate the clearance issues.
BNSF just invested millions replacing the west approach in 2017. The bridge was started in 1882 and it took 4 years to finish.
Seeing that it is over 120 years old and a registered landmark may make the thought of replacement unbearable, and is a testament to the quality of the engineering used at the time, but someday it will need to be replaced, if not physically, at least operationally.
Just my $0.02, but I think Tennessee and Arkansas should focus on building a third Mississippi River crossing before addressing the I-55 bridge. The shutdown of the I-40 bridge for for months for emergency repairs highlighted the urgent need for a third crossing in the Memphis area.
The question is, where would the new bridge be built? I would agree Memphis should have a third Mississippi River Bridge built, but the existing two bridges need to be maintained as well.
Quote from: edwaleni on December 13, 2023, 05:35:24 PM
At one time there were three railroad bridges across the river at Memphis.
One was torn down and is where the DeSoto Bridge is today.
No.
The DeSoto bridge is more-or-less where one of the old rail ferries used to run, but the only rail bridges to have ever crossed the Mississippi at Memphis are the Harahan and Frisco bridges.
FWIW, there was also another rail ferry that used to run at the site of the Harahan and Frisco bridges.
Quote from: MikeTheActuary on December 14, 2023, 04:56:17 PM
Quote from: edwaleni on December 13, 2023, 05:35:24 PM
At one time there were three railroad bridges across the river at Memphis.
One was torn down and is where the DeSoto Bridge is today.
No.
The DeSoto bridge is more-or-less where one of the old rail ferries used to run, but the only rail bridges to have ever crossed the Mississippi at Memphis are the Harahan and Frisco bridges.
FWIW, there was also another rail ferry that used to run at the site of the Harahan and Frisco bridges.
Thanks for the correction.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on June 27, 2023, 11:51:12 AM
Ignore the removal of the existing I-55 bridge in this image. (Haven't got around to finishing the version of this that retains the old bridge.) This location solves any problems related to impacting desirable land uses near the existing bridge.
(https://triplemultiplex.files.wordpress.com/2019/01/55-bridge-final.jpg)
Move a few light industrial buildings and the approach spans bridge over other industrial uses. Nothing but floodplain on the AR side. Third bridge achieved.
This is a better choice. It is a little more expensive, but it will clear the environmental hurdles. Should be fine USACOE. and would have better through I-55 flow. If you did not put freeway to freeway exits between the T&A bridge from the new freeway (only continue the current traffic movements) the intersection should be fairly inexpensive and easy to build. It would separate the Downtown and midtown traffic before the bridge. Rebuilding in-place is just going to create a huge political storm and marginally make the traffic better. One of the savings they mention is the approaches. The approaches (which are all on the Arkansas side) are narrow 2x2 without shoulders.
Most of the rest into West Memphis is
elevated 2x2 with shoulders (2' inner Maybe 6' outer) Yep... They will suffice. (snark) We are being fed a line so they can say it is cheap then add on the overruns later (or immediately upon completion.) It is true that all fo the infrastructure will be ready in Tennessee.
Do any of you think triplemultiplex's new Interstate 55 alignment and bridge would ever be constructed? While I would agree with making the portion of 55 bypassed by this realignment Interstate 355, I would not tear down the old bridge. Instead, I would retain it as a two-lane bridge for local traffic (connecting it with Dacus Lake Rd. and Bridgeport Rd.). The left lane in each direction on the old bridge would become the main traffic lane, and the right lane in each direction being converted into an emergency shoulder.
While I personally like triplemultiplex's idea....I think it's clear from the most recent presentation deck that the two state DOTs mostly want to minimize costs, and the options 5a and 5b are most likely cheaper than the idea presented here (even if you go with the variation that removes the old bridge).
Even so...if it were possible to get some traffic modeling done, it might be interesting to see what would happen to projected congestion levels with the triplemultiplex option -- presumably traffic flow would be better on I-55 and new I-355, but I wonder how much traffic might shift to I-40 due to the new alignment, and I suspect that West Memphis would object to the potential reduced access to Memphis' medical center (especially when the I-40 bridge is taken out of service for one reason or another).
Not to mention, I doubt TDOT would be replacing the Crump interchange if there was actually a decent chance of I-55 being moved out of the area.
Quote from: vdeane on December 15, 2023, 09:35:26 PM
Not to mention, I doubt TDOT would be replacing the Crump interchange if there was actually a decent chance of I-55 being moved out of the area.
I wonder if it's a case of the two DOTs having reached the conclusion that the bridge just needs to be replaced, independent of the question of needing a third bridge. The entire proposal presentation seems to be geared around showing that bridge replacement is cheap when compared to building a new crossing....although there is one new crossing option presented that appears to have a better return on investment if the feds want to throw a couple of billion dollars the states' way.....
Alternatively, it could be a question of sequencing. The Crump interchange project has been in the works and mostly-committed to for a good decade at this point. Something occurring after the interchange rebuild project was in motion (I assume the Hernando-Desoto bridge issue) must have started some serious discussion about a new bridge, more serious than the discussions that have happened sporadically over the past 40 years...
Quote from: MikeTheActuary on December 15, 2023, 11:11:03 PM
Quote from: vdeane on December 15, 2023, 09:35:26 PM
Not to mention, I doubt TDOT would be replacing the Crump interchange if there was actually a decent chance of I-55 being moved out of the area.
I wonder if it's a case of the two DOTs having reached the conclusion that the bridge just needs to be replaced, independent of the question of needing a third bridge. The entire proposal presentation seems to be geared around showing that bridge replacement is cheap when compared to building a new crossing....although there is one new crossing option presented that appears to have a better return on investment if the feds want to throw a couple of billion dollars the states' way.....
Alternatively, it could be a question of sequencing. The Crump interchange project has been in the works and mostly-committed to for a good decade at this point. Something occurring after the interchange rebuild project was in motion (I assume the Hernando-Desoto bridge issue) must have started some serious discussion about a new bridge, more serious than the discussions that have happened sporadically over the past 40 years...
I think the Crump Boulevard interchange project kept getting put off to because they sensed hope a new bridge in a new alignment was possible. They have likely given up. If you read closely, this is still in the request for funds stages. Funds may not come. The savings on the approaches seem to be fictional in the realm of capacity because the Arkansas side elevated sections are not anywhere close to 3x3. The actual approach immediate to the through truss section is 2x2 without ANY shoulders. The rest of the Arkansas side elevated structures (primarily over an oxbow / slough / old riverbed) are 2X2 + around 8 total feet of shoulders on each. I guess you could PROBABLY stripe 3 almost 11' lanes on each side.
Do I like this solution? No not really . Is it better than what is currently on place? Yes.
I still have concerns about the local input from the French Fort keeping them from getting EIS approved.
On the Tennessee side, the bridge butts hard up against the bank.
Quote from: MikeTheActuary on December 15, 2023, 11:11:03 PM
I wonder if it's a case of the two DOTs having reached the conclusion that the bridge just needs to be replaced, independent of the question of needing a third bridge. The entire proposal presentation seems to be geared around showing that bridge replacement is cheap when compared to building a new crossing....although there is one new crossing option presented that appears to have a better return on investment if the feds want to throw a couple of billion dollars the states' way.....
Alternatively, it could be a question of sequencing. The Crump interchange project has been in the works and mostly-committed to for a good decade at this point. Something occurring after the interchange rebuild project was in motion (I assume the Hernando-Desoto bridge issue) must have started some serious discussion about a new bridge, more serious than the discussions that have happened sporadically over the past 40 years...
If you look through the study document (https://www.tn.gov/content/dam/tn/tdot/i55-bridge-/MSRiver%20Bridge%20Final%20Report%20202310.pdf), just maintaining the existing bridge for the next few decades will cost tens of millions of dollars. On top of that, the data shows that unless the new bridge is where the existing I-55 bridge is located, the new bridge won't divert enough traffic to be worth building. Of course, the unspoken part is that if a new bridge is built elsewhere, eventually the Big One will hit and the existing I-55 bridge will collapse and Memphis will have one bridge that is convenient for local traffic (I-40) and one bridge nobody will use unless they're avoiding the city entirely.
Quote from: lordsutch on December 16, 2023, 07:14:05 PM
Quote from: MikeTheActuary on December 15, 2023, 11:11:03 PM
I wonder if it's a case of the two DOTs having reached the conclusion that the bridge just needs to be replaced, independent of the question of needing a third bridge. The entire proposal presentation seems to be geared around showing that bridge replacement is cheap when compared to building a new crossing....although there is one new crossing option presented that appears to have a better return on investment if the feds want to throw a couple of billion dollars the states' way.....
Alternatively, it could be a question of sequencing. The Crump interchange project has been in the works and mostly-committed to for a good decade at this point. Something occurring after the interchange rebuild project was in motion (I assume the Hernando-Desoto bridge issue) must have started some serious discussion about a new bridge, more serious than the discussions that have happened sporadically over the past 40 years...
If you look through the study document (https://www.tn.gov/content/dam/tn/tdot/i55-bridge-/MSRiver%20Bridge%20Final%20Report%20202310.pdf), just maintaining the existing bridge for the next few decades will cost tens of millions of dollars. On top of that, the data shows that unless the new bridge is where the existing I-55 bridge is located, the new bridge won't divert enough traffic to be worth building. Of course, the unspoken part is that if a new bridge is built elsewhere, eventually the Big One will hit and the existing I-55 bridge will collapse and Memphis will have one bridge that is convenient for local traffic (I-40) and one bridge nobody will use unless they're avoiding the city entirely.
The point I have tried to make about the roundabouts that quickly follow the exit to Riverside and Crump. Is this exactly. The new lanes on just the bridge could be acceleration / deceleration lanes leading up to / from the 2X2 in Arkansas.
The fact is that most of the traffic during rush follows either Riverside or Crump. I see these roundabouts as traffic jams waiting to happen. Most of the newer US roundabouts are on lower use roads and are there for speed control, not traffic flow.
Yes for the local traffic. The existing bridge probably has to stay. I have said this before, I will say it again. If this bridge were to collapse during a seismic event, the roads leading up to it would probably be impassible. In great likelihood, the river would re-route so dramatically that it might not even run under this or any of the other bridges at all. While seismic retrofit is a good investment, unless all of the other infrastructure is seismically ready, you really have not accomplished anything by replacing a bridge on a highway that is not seismically prepared in the lesser bridge structures.
Quote from: bwana39 on December 13, 2023, 03:12:49 PM
Quote from: lordsutch on December 13, 2023, 02:38:21 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on December 13, 2023, 10:45:34 AM
How would a new Memphis & Arkansas Bridge be configurated? I imagine it would be a six-lane bridge with full emergency shoulders. Currently, the bridge is four lanes with no shoulders. Could the right-of-way be expanded enough so that a six-lane bridge could be constructed without infringing on the rail bridge that exists adjacent to the Memphis * Arkansas Bridge?
Since they're talking about building immediately to the south rather than the north, squeezing it in between the existing bridges wouldn't be a consideration. There's really plenty of space there due to the curve I-55 takes before the crossing. The only minor issue I can see is that the new Crump/Riverside interchange isn't designed for three through lanes, but I don't think they're strictly needed and you'd mostly be adding the 3rd lane over the bridge for future-proofing and the marginal incremental cost anyway.
If they did have to build it to the north due to space constraints, I think they'd seriously look at consolidating the rail bridges on a new structure as well. There's actually a pretty strong case for moving the railroad lines out of downtown anyway.
The plans show it to the south of the existing bridge. The French Fort area will bw disturbed. I just do not see this as viable.
This is a political no go. Two Republican Govs and the City ran poorly by Dems will fight over the destruction of a black neighborhood. Grab your popcorn.
Quote from: Wayward Memphian on December 18, 2023, 05:01:27 PM
Quote from: bwana39 on December 13, 2023, 03:12:49 PM
Quote from: lordsutch on December 13, 2023, 02:38:21 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on December 13, 2023, 10:45:34 AM
How would a new Memphis & Arkansas Bridge be configurated? I imagine it would be a six-lane bridge with full emergency shoulders. Currently, the bridge is four lanes with no shoulders. Could the right-of-way be expanded enough so that a six-lane bridge could be constructed without infringing on the rail bridge that exists adjacent to the Memphis * Arkansas Bridge?
Since they're talking about building immediately to the south rather than the north, squeezing it in between the existing bridges wouldn't be a consideration. There's really plenty of space there due to the curve I-55 takes before the crossing. The only minor issue I can see is that the new Crump/Riverside interchange isn't designed for three through lanes, but I don't think they're strictly needed and you'd mostly be adding the 3rd lane over the bridge for future-proofing and the marginal incremental cost anyway.
If they did have to build it to the north due to space constraints, I think they'd seriously look at consolidating the rail bridges on a new structure as well. There's actually a pretty strong case for moving the railroad lines out of downtown anyway.
The plans show it to the south of the existing bridge. The French Fort area will bw disturbed. I just do not see this as viable.
This is a political no go. Two Republican Govs and the City ran poorly by Dems will fight over the destruction of a black neighborhood. Grab your popcorn.
Take a closer look at pages 13 and 14 of the report. It looks like the preferred alignments would sacrifice a riverfront commercial building, possibly a dock, and part of a park.
I expect the neighborhood to complain about additional disruption, after having gone through the current construction project, and there will be resistance to the loss of part of Crump Park....but it won't rise to the level of actual destruction of a neighborhood.
Quote from: MikeTheActuary on December 18, 2023, 06:48:53 PM
Quote from: Wayward Memphian on December 18, 2023, 05:01:27 PM
Quote from: bwana39 on December 13, 2023, 03:12:49 PM
Quote from: lordsutch on December 13, 2023, 02:38:21 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on December 13, 2023, 10:45:34 AM
How would a new Memphis & Arkansas Bridge be configurated? I imagine it would be a six-lane bridge with full emergency shoulders. Currently, the bridge is four lanes with no shoulders. Could the right-of-way be expanded enough so that a six-lane bridge could be constructed without infringing on the rail bridge that exists adjacent to the Memphis * Arkansas Bridge?
Since they're talking about building immediately to the south rather than the north, squeezing it in between the existing bridges wouldn't be a consideration. There's really plenty of space there due to the curve I-55 takes before the crossing. The only minor issue I can see is that the new Crump/Riverside interchange isn't designed for three through lanes, but I don't think they're strictly needed and you'd mostly be adding the 3rd lane over the bridge for future-proofing and the marginal incremental cost anyway.
If they did have to build it to the north due to space constraints, I think they'd seriously look at consolidating the rail bridges on a new structure as well. There's actually a pretty strong case for moving the railroad lines out of downtown anyway.
The plans show it to the south of the existing bridge. The French Fort area will bw disturbed. I just do not see this as viable.
This is a political no go. Two Republican Govs and the City ran poorly by Dems will fight over the destruction of a black neighborhood. Grab your popcorn.
Take a closer look at pages 13 and 14 of the report. It looks like the preferred alignments would sacrifice a riverfront commercial building, possibly a dock, and part of a park.
I expect the neighborhood to complain about additional disruption, after having gone through the current construction project, and there will be resistance to the loss of part of Crump Park....but it won't rise to the level of actual destruction of a neighborhood.
This was a fight to get to build the new intersection. Much more is not going ot go well.
Quote from: bwana39 on December 18, 2023, 10:49:19 PM
This was a fight to get to build the new intersection. Much more is not going ot go well.
TDOT and ArDOT are not going to spend hundreds of millions of dollars more building a bridge somewhere else to appease a few dozen residents of a neighborhood they could buy up and level for a tiny fraction of that price tag. They will either be bought off or bought out if it comes to it.
Quote from: bwana39 on December 18, 2023, 10:49:19 PM
This was a fight to get to build the new intersection. Much more is not going ot go well.
There was a fight because some of the possibilities considered involved reducing access to the historic / historically disadvantaged neighborhood.
I would expect a fight because of the additional disruption to the neighborhood...but the report does, at least, show no impact to the neighborhood aside from the construction mess. Claims that options 5A/5B would destroy the neighborhood are grossly exaggerated.
Quote from: lordsutch on December 19, 2023, 12:02:11 AM
TDOT and ArDOT are not going to spend hundreds of millions of dollars more building a bridge somewhere else to appease a few dozen residents of a neighborhood they could buy up and level for a tiny fraction of that price tag. They will either be bought off or bought out if it comes to it.
How much of the additional expense and delay for the Crump interchange project is the result of responding to community pressure regarding that neighborhood?
I don't see such pressures as driving the states and the feds to be willing to spend an extra billion dollars for an entirely new alignment, but I do think that there would have to be a significant change in political and judicial climate before any plan that would impact the former veterans' hospital, erode access to the neighborhood, impact the Chickasaw Heritage (formerly Desoto, formerly Jackson) Park, or require residences to be removed.
Quote from: lordsutch on December 19, 2023, 12:02:11 AM
Quote from: bwana39 on December 18, 2023, 10:49:19 PM
This was a fight to get to build the new intersection. Much more is not going ot go well.
TDOT and ArDOT are not going to spend hundreds of millions of dollars more building a bridge somewhere else to appease a few dozen residents of a neighborhood they could buy up and level for a tiny fraction of that price tag. They will either be bought off or bought out if it comes to it.
If you say so. This was supposed to be I-40.....
https://maps.app.goo.gl/AXptQ2z8yfyzcQP3A
The Supreme Court put the kibosh on Interstate 40 through Overton Park. Even if the Supreme Court hadn't intervened, I highly doubt the original alignment of Interstate 40 through Memphis would have been constructed. The exits east of the eastern Interstate 40/240 interchange should have been renumbered to reflect Interstate 40's relocation on former Interstate 240's northern alignment.
BUILD A FUCKING TUNNEL LIKE EVERY OTHER COUNTRY!!!! lol but yes I would support a tunnel believe it or not. Connect it with Sam Cooper. Toll it. I'd pay a toll.
Quote from: MikeTheActuary on December 19, 2023, 09:26:35 AM
I don't see such pressures as driving the states and the feds to be willing to spend an extra billion dollars for an entirely new alignment, but I do think that there would have to be a significant change in political and judicial climate before any plan that would impact the former veterans' hospital, erode access to the neighborhood, impact the Chickasaw Heritage (formerly Desoto, formerly Jackson) Park, or require residences to be removed.
Since the new bridge location just south of the existing bridge would have none of those impacts, I think it would not be an issue. Compared to the interchange modification work, the impact on the French Fort neighborhood would be minimal (as you note).
Quote from: bwana39 on December 19, 2023, 04:44:55 PM
If you say so. This was supposed to be I-40.....
https://maps.app.goo.gl/AXptQ2z8yfyzcQP3A
I-40 through Overton Park was not in the same league as building a new bridge 200 feet south of an existing bridge and tying into the existing infrastructure.
That said a more creative TDOT would have cut and covered I-40 under North Parkway, but that's not the TDOT we had or have.
Since it was referenced recently, a more updated version of my thoughts on I-55 in Memphis:
[url]https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3618.msg2855492#msg2855492[/i]
Quote from: Wayward Memphian on January 06, 2015, 03:56:04 PM
Quote from: Grzrd on January 06, 2015, 03:26:25 PM
Quote from: Charles2 on October 09, 2014, 08:34:58 PM
Oy vey!!
http://www.wmcactionnews5.com/story/26740818/tdot-leaders-consider-shutting-down-old-i-55-bridge-for-two-years
Quote from: Brandon on October 09, 2014, 09:53:36 PM
More like...
OH SHIT!
That narrows it down to just the I-40 bridge there.
Apologies if this story has already been linked in another thread, but this December 22, 2014 article (http://www.myfoxmemphis.com/story/27688684/fbi-bulletin-warns-of-possible-isis-terror-plot-in-memphis) reports that the FBI recently warned local authorities that ISIS might beat TDOT to the punch and try to close the I-55 bridge in a sudden and unannounced manner:
Quote
The Federal Bureau of Investigation's Memphis Division is warning police officers about a threat to blow up the Memphis-Arkansas Bridge sometime in December. FOX13 News obtained the FBI bulletin sent to Mid-South Law Enforcement agencies warning about a possible Islamic State terror plot targeting the I-55 Bridge.
"According to an anonymous complainant, as of December 2014, ISIS instructed an ISIS member, a presumed USPER in Memphis, with a direct order to blow up the Memphis-Arkansas bridge on an unknown date, activating ISIS terror cells in the United States," the warning reads.
USPER is a law enforcement acronym for U.S. person ....
A Memphis Police spokesperson told FOX13 the department is aware of the threat and officers are patrolling the area around the bridge looking for suspicious activity. Surveillance cameras linked the MPD's Real Time Crime Center are focused on the bridge 24 hours a day.
I drove across it multiple times this past weekend, the bridge itself is narrow and dangroup and quite frankly needs replaced period, end of story, for the I 55 aspect of it.
i don't mean to turn this into a geopolitical point, but there is a danger to having only one bridge open. the current hamas/israel war, and the current conflict with us naval ships in yemen, there was reports of global terror being on the rise for the next few years because of it. with the I-55 bridge closed to traffic, that I-40 bridge becomes a prime target for any terrorist groups both foreign and domestic, i don't think TDOT is thinking straight, they are thinking with their head in a engineering book instead of a more broader brush. and considering how I-40 is a truck corridor for mostly the entire state and a lot of points due east, it shouldn't come as a surprise if NC and maybe even Georgia start chiming in on such a bottleneck.
i imagine even mississippi would raise some hell with tennessee legislatures over it as well, all that traffic going to 1 bridge, and that one bridge not only becomes a much more critical corridor than what it was designed to be, but it becomes a target for any would be terrorist organizations. lets hope TDOT understands how silly that is and impliments a through traffic for I-40 and local traffic uses the I-55 bridge, which would help keep the peace locally, and give some options. hell i imagine the move might even make arkansas start on a mississippi river crossing for I-69 much sooner and it might push both arkansas and tennessee to build a 4th bridge across the mississippi to complete a bypass around the memphis metro area, that way I-269 becomes a full loop around memphis metro area.
Quote from: civilengineeringnerd on January 01, 2024, 12:30:46 AM
Quote from: Wayward Memphian on January 06, 2015, 03:56:04 PM
Quote from: Grzrd on January 06, 2015, 03:26:25 PM
Quote from: Charles2 on October 09, 2014, 08:34:58 PM
Oy vey!!
http://www.wmcactionnews5.com/story/26740818/tdot-leaders-consider-shutting-down-old-i-55-bridge-for-two-years
Quote from: Brandon on October 09, 2014, 09:53:36 PM
More like...
OH SHIT!
That narrows it down to just the I-40 bridge there.
Apologies if this story has already been linked in another thread, but this December 22, 2014 article (http://www.myfoxmemphis.com/story/27688684/fbi-bulletin-warns-of-possible-isis-terror-plot-in-memphis) reports that the FBI recently warned local authorities that ISIS might beat TDOT to the punch and try to close the I-55 bridge in a sudden and unannounced manner:
Quote
The Federal Bureau of Investigation's Memphis Division is warning police officers about a threat to blow up the Memphis-Arkansas Bridge sometime in December. FOX13 News obtained the FBI bulletin sent to Mid-South Law Enforcement agencies warning about a possible Islamic State terror plot targeting the I-55 Bridge.
"According to an anonymous complainant, as of December 2014, ISIS instructed an ISIS member, a presumed USPER in Memphis, with a direct order to blow up the Memphis-Arkansas bridge on an unknown date, activating ISIS terror cells in the United States," the warning reads.
USPER is a law enforcement acronym for U.S. person ....
A Memphis Police spokesperson told FOX13 the department is aware of the threat and officers are patrolling the area around the bridge looking for suspicious activity. Surveillance cameras linked the MPD's Real Time Crime Center are focused on the bridge 24 hours a day.
I drove across it multiple times this past weekend, the bridge itself is narrow and dangroup and quite frankly needs replaced period, end of story, for the I 55 aspect of it.
i don't mean to turn this into a geopolitical point, but there is a danger to having only one bridge open. the current hamas/israel war, and the current conflict with us naval ships in yemen, there was reports of global terror being on the rise for the next few years because of it. with the I-55 bridge closed to traffic, that I-40 bridge becomes a prime target for any terrorist groups both foreign and domestic, i don't think TDOT is thinking straight, they are thinking with their head in a engineering book instead of a more broader brush. and considering how I-40 is a truck corridor for mostly the entire state and a lot of points due east, it shouldn't come as a surprise if NC and maybe even Georgia start chiming in on such a bottleneck.
i imagine even mississippi would raise some hell with tennessee legislatures over it as well, all that traffic going to 1 bridge, and that one bridge not only becomes a much more critical corridor than what it was designed to be, but it becomes a target for any would be terrorist organizations. lets hope TDOT understands how silly that is and impliments a through traffic for I-40 and local traffic uses the I-55 bridge, which would help keep the peace locally, and give some options. hell i imagine the move might even make arkansas start on a mississippi river crossing for I-69 much sooner and it might push both arkansas and tennessee to build a 4th bridge across the mississippi to complete a bypass around the memphis metro area, that way I-269 becomes a full loop around memphis metro area.
It's not just terrorists that see this as a weak point in our nation's road system. The idiot Hamas protestors picked the I-55 bridge closure last weekend to shut down the I-40 bridge with their protest, so tell me how we have sufficient resiliency in the Memphis area even in peacetime? Don't think for a second that this didn't get noticed and won't be repeated.
There are much smaller cities north and east of Memphis with roads less choked that have many more river crossing lanes serving their areas. It just boggles the mind why we have the infrastructure we do at such a critical point of the IHS.
Quote from: MikieTimT on February 06, 2024, 09:03:54 AM
It just boggles the mind why we have the infrastructure we do at such a critical point of the IHS.
Because in the first 30 years of the IHS we intentionally built net excess capacity anticipating growth, but since then we have been consuming net capacity and yet still absorbing the growth.
So instead of build in anticipation, we wait and build until its way past needed.
Quote from: MikieTimT on February 06, 2024, 09:03:54 AM
Quote from: civilengineeringnerd on January 01, 2024, 12:30:46 AM
Quote from: Wayward Memphian on January 06, 2015, 03:56:04 PM
Quote from: Grzrd on January 06, 2015, 03:26:25 PM
Quote from: Charles2 on October 09, 2014, 08:34:58 PM
Oy vey!!
http://www.wmcactionnews5.com/story/26740818/tdot-leaders-consider-shutting-down-old-i-55-bridge-for-two-years
Quote from: Brandon on October 09, 2014, 09:53:36 PM
More like...
OH SHIT!
That narrows it down to just the I-40 bridge there.
Apologies if this story has already been linked in another thread, but this December 22, 2014 article (http://www.myfoxmemphis.com/story/27688684/fbi-bulletin-warns-of-possible-isis-terror-plot-in-memphis) reports that the FBI recently warned local authorities that ISIS might beat TDOT to the punch and try to close the I-55 bridge in a sudden and unannounced manner:
Quote
The Federal Bureau of Investigation's Memphis Division is warning police officers about a threat to blow up the Memphis-Arkansas Bridge sometime in December. FOX13 News obtained the FBI bulletin sent to Mid-South Law Enforcement agencies warning about a possible Islamic State terror plot targeting the I-55 Bridge.
"According to an anonymous complainant, as of December 2014, ISIS instructed an ISIS member, a presumed USPER in Memphis, with a direct order to blow up the Memphis-Arkansas bridge on an unknown date, activating ISIS terror cells in the United States," the warning reads.
USPER is a law enforcement acronym for U.S. person ....
A Memphis Police spokesperson told FOX13 the department is aware of the threat and officers are patrolling the area around the bridge looking for suspicious activity. Surveillance cameras linked the MPD's Real Time Crime Center are focused on the bridge 24 hours a day.
I drove across it multiple times this past weekend, the bridge itself is narrow and dangroup and quite frankly needs replaced period, end of story, for the I 55 aspect of it.
i don't mean to turn this into a geopolitical point, but there is a danger to having only one bridge open. the current hamas/israel war, and the current conflict with us naval ships in yemen, there was reports of global terror being on the rise for the next few years because of it. with the I-55 bridge closed to traffic, that I-40 bridge becomes a prime target for any terrorist groups both foreign and domestic, i don't think TDOT is thinking straight, they are thinking with their head in a engineering book instead of a more broader brush. and considering how I-40 is a truck corridor for mostly the entire state and a lot of points due east, it shouldn't come as a surprise if NC and maybe even Georgia start chiming in on such a bottleneck.
i imagine even mississippi would raise some hell with tennessee legislatures over it as well, all that traffic going to 1 bridge, and that one bridge not only becomes a much more critical corridor than what it was designed to be, but it becomes a target for any would be terrorist organizations. lets hope TDOT understands how silly that is and impliments a through traffic for I-40 and local traffic uses the I-55 bridge, which would help keep the peace locally, and give some options. hell i imagine the move might even make arkansas start on a mississippi river crossing for I-69 much sooner and it might push both arkansas and tennessee to build a 4th bridge across the mississippi to complete a bypass around the memphis metro area, that way I-269 becomes a full loop around memphis metro area.
It's not just terrorists that see this as a weak point in our nation's road system. The idiot Hamas protestors picked the I-55 bridge closure last weekend to shut down the I-40 bridge with their protest, so tell me how we have sufficient resiliency in the Memphis area even in peacetime? Don't think for a second that this didn't get noticed and won't be repeated.
There are much smaller cities north and east of Memphis with roads less choked that have many more river crossing lanes serving their areas. It just boggles the mind why we have the infrastructure we do at such a critical point of the IHS.
All the more reason why TN and AR need to prioritize building a third bridge across the Mississippi River in the Memphis area.
The trick is finding a good place for a third bridge to be constructed. It also depends on whether the bridge will be a freeway bridge or a local street bridge. If there weren't barriers in the way, bridges connecting the TN 300/future Interstate 69 stub and the TN 385/future Interstate 269 stub would be no brainers, though both would have to connect with Interstate 55 in Arkansas to likely be well-utilized.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on February 07, 2024, 11:45:21 AM
The trick is finding a good place for a third bridge to be constructed. It also depends on whether the bridge will be a freeway bridge or a local street bridge. If there weren't barriers in the way, bridges connecting the TN 300/future Interstate 69 stub and the TN 385/future Interstate 269 stub would be no brainers, though both would have to connect with Interstate 55 in Arkansas to likely be well-utilized.
I know that Mississippi is broke, but the right place for the bridge is in Desoto County MS. The growth in Metro Memphis is there and along I-22. Perhaps to connect to I-40 around Forrest City
https://wreg.com/video/pro-palestinian-demonstrators-shut-down-lanes-on-i-40-bridge/9399726/
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on December 19, 2023, 08:10:01 PM
BUILD A FUCKING TUNNEL LIKE EVERY OTHER COUNTRY!!!! lol but yes I would support a tunnel believe it or not. Connect it with Sam Cooper. Toll it. I'd pay a toll.
Quote from: lordsutch on December 20, 2023, 06:11:32 PM
That said a more creative TDOT would have cut and covered I-40 under North Parkway, but that's not the TDOT we had or have.
Three problems with that:
1. Local geology. I'm not an engineer or a geologist, but I suspect that the loess that Memphis sits upon, plus seismic concerns would make construction of any big tunnel difficult.
2. Depending on the specific alignment of the tunnel, a portion of North Parkway abuts a hoity-toity neighborhood that is home to several locally-influential people.
3. Also depending on the specific alignment, the need to not further disrupt the remnants of old growth in Overton Park would be a consideration.
I lived through the arguments and the alternative plans explored, since I grew up within walking distance of Overton Park, and my father worked in the Shelby County planning office, while my mother worked at the zoo. I think I remember tunneling being considered and quickly rejected due to expense, geology, and inability to avoid the concerns that caused the preferred plan to be blocked.
Now that the two I-40/I-240 interchanges have been redesigned, the current alignment is good enough, and is probably quite a bit less congested than the original alignment would have been (especially with the shift of the de facto CBD away from downtown to around Poplar and I-240).
Quote from: MikeTheActuary on February 08, 2024, 09:38:30 AM
I lived through the arguments and the alternative plans explored, since I grew up within walking distance of Overton Park, and my father worked in the Shelby County planning office, while my mother worked at the zoo. I think I remember tunneling being considered and quickly rejected due to expense, geology, and inability to avoid the concerns that caused the preferred plan to be blocked.
Now that the two I-40/I-240 interchanges have been redesigned, the current alignment is good enough, and is probably quite a bit less congested than the original alignment would have been (especially with the shift of the de facto CBD away from downtown to around Poplar and I-240).
I also grew up in Memphis, although out by Memphis State (as it was called at the time). I remember a lot of discussion about a cut-and-cover tunnel through Overton Park and it being rejected for several reasons (exhaust fumes in the zoo and park, flooding concerns during heavy rains, cost and maintenance, etc.). And this was before there were a lot of seismic concerns about Memphis' proximity to the New Madrid fault.
On my infrequent trips back to Memphis now, I'm really glad they didn't build I-40 through that area.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on February 07, 2024, 11:45:21 AM
The trick is finding a good place for a third bridge to be constructed. It also depends on whether the bridge will be a freeway bridge or a local street bridge. If there weren't barriers in the way, bridges connecting the TN 300/future Interstate 69 stub and the TN 385/future Interstate 269 stub would be no brainers, though both would have to connect with Interstate 55 in Arkansas to likely be well-utilized.
That's a big part of the problem about building a third bridge to the north of the existing ones. A bridge at TN-300 would be difficult because DeWitt Spain Airport sits directly between the end of TN-300 and the river. A bridge at the north end of TN-385 has to deal with the Meeman-Shelby Forest State Park. Technically both could be built, but to avoid the airport and the state forest would mean building the bridge and its approaches in a manner that is so far out of the way that it ends up being underutilized, with no substantial relief for the two bridges in Memphis.
There's always the option to get rid of that tiny airport. How many planes are even using it? If Chicago can ditch Meigs Field (albeit thru a bit of chicanery) then Memphis can certainly consign their tiny airport to the dustbin in favor of a much more valuable piece of transportation infrastructure. Lot more small planes fly to Chicago than Memphis.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on February 09, 2024, 11:50:29 AM
There's always the option to get rid of that tiny airport. How many planes are even using it? If Chicago can ditch Meigs Field (albeit thru a bit of chicanery) then Memphis can certainly consign their tiny airport to the dustbin in favor of a much more valuable piece of transportation infrastructure. Lot more small planes fly to Chicago than Memphis.
No doubt, if they still need a small general aviation airport in the area, there's a lot of land in Arkansas where one can be built. Or better yet, Fayette County, since that's where all of the big economic development in the area is going these days.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on February 09, 2024, 11:50:29 AM
There's always the option to get rid of that tiny airport. How many planes are even using it? If Chicago can ditch Meigs Field (albeit thru a bit of chicanery) then Memphis can certainly consign their tiny airport to the dustbin in favor of a much more valuable piece of transportation infrastructure. Lot more small planes fly to Chicago than Memphis.
The could close DeWitt-Spain Airport, since you have the Millington-Memphis Airport near the US-51/TN-385 interchange, and Charles W. Baker Airport even closer than that. Doing so would open up an option for a future bridge, which also just so happens to be right on the proposed alignment of I-69 through that area. If that were done, then you have a high-speed interchange roughly where the airport sits today, where I-69 turns northeast and TN-300 continues west to the new bridge.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on February 09, 2024, 11:50:29 AM
There's always the option to get rid of that tiny airport. How many planes are even using it?
Most recent 12 month operation totals for Memphis-area public airports, per the FAA (as-of dates vary):
MEM: 213,418
OLV (Olive Branch): 100,605
M01 (DeWitt-Spain): 57,194
AWM (West Memphis): 50,200
NQA (Millington): 32,226
2MB (Charles Baker): 28,250
54M (Wolf River): 8,000
It's perhaps worth observing that DeWitt-Spain is the replacement airport for the old Mud Island airport that was closed due to the construction of the I-40 bridge. It's a convenient airport for flight training and business travel for those folks who don't want to have to schlep out to airports further out, or deal with all the FedEx traffic at MEM.
Reminds me of that Chicago mayor that just had bulldozers dig big Xs on the Meigs airport runway to get rid of it. Got away with it because of the Chicago Machine...
Quote from: abqtraveler on February 09, 2024, 09:14:30 AM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on February 07, 2024, 11:45:21 AM
The trick is finding a good place for a third bridge to be constructed. It also depends on whether the bridge will be a freeway bridge or a local street bridge. If there weren't barriers in the way, bridges connecting the TN 300/future Interstate 69 stub and the TN 385/future Interstate 269 stub would be no brainers, though both would have to connect with Interstate 55 in Arkansas to likely be well-utilized.
That's a big part of the problem about building a third bridge to the north of the existing ones. A bridge at TN-300 would be difficult because DeWitt Spain Airport sits directly between the end of TN-300 and the river. A bridge at the north end of TN-385 has to deal with the Meeman-Shelby Forest State Park. Technically both could be built, but to avoid the airport and the state forest would mean building the bridge and its approaches in a manner that is so far out of the way that it ends up being underutilized, with no substantial relief for the two bridges in Memphis.
Technically you could get a 6 lane urban style highway south of the runway, you would just have to be careful on the elevation rise leading to the bridge and over the sewer plant. Elevate too soon and it would interfere with flight operations, too low and the rise for the bridge would be too abrupt. And I think we all know that there are many, many major highways within yards of the end of a commerical airport runway. This is a general aviation airport (DeWitt-Spain).
Quote from: Rothman on February 09, 2024, 04:00:11 PM
Reminds me of that Chicago mayor that just had bulldozers dig big Xs on the Meigs airport runway to get rid of it. Got away with it because of the Chicago Machine...
And honestly, this is a case where breaking the 'rules' ending up being the right decision. Such a better use of that land now rather than an elitist convenience for rich assholes and their private jets. A large, lakefront park right next to The Loop with a concert venue, beach, and marina. What a great asset.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on February 15, 2024, 09:40:23 AM
Quote from: Rothman on February 09, 2024, 04:00:11 PM
Reminds me of that Chicago mayor that just had bulldozers dig big Xs on the Meigs airport runway to get rid of it. Got away with it because of the Chicago Machine...
And honestly, this is a case where breaking the 'rules' ending up being the right decision. Such a better use of that land now rather than an elitist convenience for rich assholes and their private jets. A large, lakefront park right next to The Loop with a concert venue, beach, and marina. What a great asset.
Meh.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on February 15, 2024, 09:40:23 AM
Such a better use of that land now rather than an elitist convenience for rich assholes and their private jets.
So, you weren't a fan of Flight Simulator back in its classic days? :)
Keep in mind that Meigs did have commercial air service, albeit limited to helicopters and small turboprops.
I flew through CGX a couple of times. It was a helluva lot less miserable than O'Hare, and more convenient than Midway if your destination was in/near the Loop.
I would like to agree with a prior poster who promoted the tunnel effort with a colorful metaphor.
Don't have numbers to support it, but I would suspect the largest user of *any* new north/south driven river crossing would be freight/truck based. Bridges look nice and are used as monuments to political and financial prowess and many cases civic pride, but I do think Memphis already has enough of those today and don't need yet another.
While Memphis and the general area does have some geological issues, tunnel technology has come a long way in the past 30-40 years.
What makes this area an easy, yet tough tunneling environment is caused by the same thing.
It sits in the middle of the Mississippi Embayment, an alluvial plain that dates back millions of years when a super continent of Rodinia tried to split in two. The split failed and the ground sunk into the rift that was formed between the Appalachian and Ouachita Mountains. That rift has filled with ocean and river sediments over the centuries and so the layers of compressed sand and other byproducts go down hundreds of feet below ground level.
Compressed sand make for somewhat easy tunneling compared to trying to work though solid rock or the basalts encountered when going through tall mountain ranges.
But it is this compressed sand that causes other issues. The faults created underneath the failed continental split are still active and move regularly (about a tenth of the movement of the very active San Andreas fault) and when they slip, quakes occur. A tunnel built at about 60-100 feet below ground level is going to have to face a significant amount of vertical pressures as they move up through the weak sand (this is what caused the "sand blows" people saw in 1811).
So any tunnel design is going to have to be able to flex at periodic points to able to absorb the seismic activity. It's the same energy that causes buildings to sway.
Quote from: edwaleni on February 19, 2024, 12:46:24 AM
I would like to agree with a prior poster who promoted the tunnel effort with a colorful metaphor.
Don't have numbers to support it, but I would suspect the largest user of *any* new north/south driven river crossing would be freight/truck based. Bridges look nice and are used as monuments to political and financial prowess and many cases civic pride, but I do think Memphis already has enough of those today and don't need yet another.
While Memphis and the general area does have some geological issues, tunnel technology has come a long way in the past 30-40 years.
What makes this area an easy, yet tough tunneling environment is caused by the same thing.
It sits in the middle of the Mississippi Embayment, an alluvial plain that dates back millions of years when a super continent of Rodinia tried to split in two. The split failed and the ground sunk into the rift that was formed between the Appalachian and Ouachita Mountains. That rift has filled with ocean and river sediments over the centuries and so the layers of compressed sand and other byproducts go down hundreds of feet below ground level.
Compressed sand make for somewhat easy tunneling compared to trying to work though solid rock or the basalts encountered when going through tall mountain ranges.
But it is this compressed sand that causes other issues. The faults created underneath the failed continental split are still active and move regularly (about a tenth of the movement of the very active San Andreas fault) and when they slip, quakes occur. A tunnel built at about 60-100 feet below ground level is going to have to face a significant amount of vertical pressures as they move up through the weak sand (this is what caused the "sand blows" people saw in 1811).
So any tunnel design is going to have to be able to flex at periodic points to able to absorb the seismic activity. It's the same energy that causes buildings to sway.
There are tunnels under SF Bay. Ventilation is a larger issue than seismic activity.
Quote from: bwana39 on February 19, 2024, 01:03:56 PMThere are tunnels under SF Bay.
The Transbay Tube was constructed in sections on land which were then floated out to the right location, submerged into a prepared trench, and then cushioned/fastened to the bottom with sand and gravel.
Constructing this way, and by avoiding bedrock, is thought to cushion the tunnel in such a way as to reduce the chance of failure in an earthquake.
I suppose that something equivalent could be done in Memphis, by cutting a trench, building the highway in the trench, and then covering/cushioning structure, but such a construction tactic would have many of the same park-disruption problems that killed the original I-40 ROW, plus the added disruption to all the houses that have since been constructed in the former right of way. (I haven't paid attention to where things stand with the last un-redeveloped plot of the ROW. Last I heard, neighborhood folks were trying to fix a problem of having no nearby parks, while developers were chomping at the bit at the prospect of being able to build in a part of town seen as up-and-coming.)
The only way you'd get I-40 tunneled under Memphis is by boring through the loess. It'd be easy to bore the tunnels; it'd be far more difficult to bore the tunnels in such a way as to survive various potential causes of collapse. (Although, in fairness, Google tells me that the Chinese have had some success...and a few failures...in this regard.)
I still don't see that happening to save 3 miles in a city that has been pursuing road diets, in a state that tends to be miserly when it comes to transportation projects in that part of the state.
I believe the tunnel discussion is about a third Mississippi crossing, not reviving the rightfully dead Overton Park thing.
Quote from: MikeTheActuary on February 19, 2024, 01:37:16 PM
Quote from: bwana39 on February 19, 2024, 01:03:56 PMThere are tunnels under SF Bay.
The Transbay Tube was constructed in sections on land which were then floated out to the right location, submerged into a prepared trench, and then cushioned/fastened to the bottom with sand and gravel.
Constructing this way, and by avoiding bedrock, is thought to cushion the tunnel in such a way as to reduce the chance of failure in an earthquake.
I suppose that something equivalent could be done in Memphis, by cutting a trench, building the highway in the trench, and then covering/cushioning structure, but such a construction tactic would have many of the same park-disruption problems that killed the original I-40 ROW, plus the added disruption to all the houses that have since been constructed in the former right of way. (I haven't paid attention to where things stand with the last un-redeveloped plot of the ROW. Last I heard, neighborhood folks were trying to fix a problem of having no nearby parks, while developers were chomping at the bit at the prospect of being able to build in a part of town seen as up-and-coming.)
The only way you'd get I-40 tunneled under Memphis is by boring through the loess. It'd be easy to bore the tunnels; it'd be far more difficult to bore the tunnels in such a way as to survive various potential causes of collapse. (Although, in fairness, Google tells me that the Chinese have had some success...and a few failures...in this regard.)
I still don't see that happening to save 3 miles in a city that has been pursuing road diets, in a state that tends to be miserly when it comes to transportation projects in that part of the state.
Not I-40. I was thinking I-55 using one on the recommended crossings posted earlier. One that completely eliminates crossing in the downtown.
While a direct tunnel is preferred usually due to costs, I am thinking of a NW/SE tunnel of I-55 that goes under on the Arkansas side either east of Bridgeport Road and come back out on the TN side either at McLemore, or a longer one with its entry at Bridgeport Road, but directed further SSE with a ventilation section on Presidents Island, going under MLK Park and coming up at Riverport Road.
The longer one becomes a sort of west bypass of downtown Memphis but retains the M-A bridge, the limited access to downtown Memphis, and takes all the pass through trucks off the M-A and the 1 lane circle ramp to go/from the south.
Has the Brent Spence solution been proposed here?
In Cincinnati the existing 8-lane bridge will be relieved by building a new 10-lane bridge to carry the through traffic on I-71/75. The existing bridge will be reduced to 6 lanes with shoulders and limited to local traffic.
The Memphis version would be a new bridge somewhere to the south to carry the I-55 traffic with the old bridge limited to local traffic in and out of the city.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on February 19, 2024, 02:48:45 PM
I believe the tunnel discussion is about a third Mississippi crossing, not reviving the rightfully dead Overton Park thing.
I missed that or I'm getting threads messed up. Mea culpa.
Quote from: wdcrft63 on February 19, 2024, 07:45:14 PM
Has the Brent Spence solution been proposed here?
In Cincinnati the existing 8-lane bridge will be relieved by building a new 10-lane bridge to carry the through traffic on I-71/75. The existing bridge will be reduced to 6 lanes with shoulders and limited to local traffic.
The Memphis version would be a new bridge somewhere to the south to carry the I-55 traffic with the old bridge limited to local traffic in and out of the city.
I don't see what Cincinnati has to do with this, and they're probably not thinking about it right now.
Quote from: Henry on February 19, 2024, 11:47:59 PM
Quote from: wdcrft63 on February 19, 2024, 07:45:14 PM
Has the Brent Spence solution been proposed here?
In Cincinnati the existing 8-lane bridge will be relieved by building a new 10-lane bridge to carry the through traffic on I-71/75. The existing bridge will be reduced to 6 lanes with shoulders and limited to local traffic.
The Memphis version would be a new bridge somewhere to the south to carry the I-55 traffic with the old bridge limited to local traffic in and out of the city.
I don't see what Cincinnati has to do with this, and they're probably not thinking about it right now.
I think the point is to build a new bridge to connect to I-55 south of the French Fort and repurpose The M&A for local traffic. There has been hundreds of comments discussing that possibility. It even SEEMS to make better sense than what they currently have on the table.
Quote from: bwana39 on February 20, 2024, 12:57:37 PM
Quote from: Henry on February 19, 2024, 11:47:59 PM
Quote from: wdcrft63 on February 19, 2024, 07:45:14 PM
Has the Brent Spence solution been proposed here?
In Cincinnati the existing 8-lane bridge will be relieved by building a new 10-lane bridge to carry the through traffic on I-71/75. The existing bridge will be reduced to 6 lanes with shoulders and limited to local traffic.
The Memphis version would be a new bridge somewhere to the south to carry the I-55 traffic with the old bridge limited to local traffic in and out of the city.
I don't see what Cincinnati has to do with this, and they're probably not thinking about it right now.
I think the point is to build a new bridge to connect to I-55 south of the French Fort and repurpose The M&A for local traffic. There has been hundreds of comments discussing that possibility. It even SEEMS to make better sense than what they currently have on the table.
to be fair, they do need a new crossing sometime soon, something 10-laned thats basically cable stayed and a massive widening project east into town, away from downtown, and west around west memphis.
the cable stayed bridge would be much better at resisting earthquakes and tornadoes if done right, and the new crossing would have piles going hundreds of feet in the ground to better withstand liquefaction that would be caused by the mississippi.
and it would obviously need to be tolled. now the city of memphis can basically add whatever they want to the bridge, including billboards, variable message signage, and whatever else they want, including a fancy new sign that showcases memphis' history and culture.
building such a bridge could also in theory jumpstart programs needed to get memphis from a crime ridden, and corrupt city, to basically something a bit better than they got currently and could help bring much needed economic jobs to the area.
Quote from: civilengineeringnerd on March 08, 2024, 08:43:48 AM
Quote from: bwana39 on February 20, 2024, 12:57:37 PM
Quote from: Henry on February 19, 2024, 11:47:59 PM
Quote from: wdcrft63 on February 19, 2024, 07:45:14 PM
Has the Brent Spence solution been proposed here?
In Cincinnati the existing 8-lane bridge will be relieved by building a new 10-lane bridge to carry the through traffic on I-71/75. The existing bridge will be reduced to 6 lanes with shoulders and limited to local traffic.
The Memphis version would be a new bridge somewhere to the south to carry the I-55 traffic with the old bridge limited to local traffic in and out of the city.
I don't see what Cincinnati has to do with this, and they're probably not thinking about it right now.
I think the point is to build a new bridge to connect to I-55 south of the French Fort and repurpose The M&A for local traffic. There has been hundreds of comments discussing that possibility. It even SEEMS to make better sense than what they currently have on the table.
to be fair, they do need a new crossing sometime soon, something 10-laned thats basically cable stayed and a massive widening project east into town, away from downtown, and west around west memphis.
the cable stayed bridge would be much better at resisting earthquakes and tornadoes if done right, and the new crossing would have piles going hundreds of feet in the ground to better withstand liquefaction that would be caused by the mississippi.
and it would obviously need to be tolled. now the city of memphis can basically add whatever they want to the bridge, including billboards, variable message signage, and whatever else they want, including a fancy new sign that showcases memphis' history and culture.
building such a bridge could also in theory jumpstart programs needed to get memphis from a crime ridden, and corrupt city, to basically something a bit better than they got currently and could help bring much needed economic jobs to the area.
I would certainly pay a reasonable toll (up to $8) to completely bypass W. Memphis/Memphis to the south and connect to I-269/I-22. It's that segment alone that incentivized me to take I-530/US-65 to I-20/US-49 to the Gulf Coast from NWA for beach trips every 2-3 years.
A bridge that bypasses Memphis probably doesn't do much to jump start tourism or urban renewal, however, so it'll take tolling or federal funding before it's likely.
https://www.fox13memphis.com/news/i-55-bridge-closing-for-two-weeks-tdot-says/article_174c31cc-da42-11ee-a227-97680dc7e7d8.html
2-week scheduled closure of M&A starting tonight (Sunday 3/10/24)
https://wreg.com/news/local/i-55-bridge-closed-for-construction/
"M&A" is a thing?
Quote from: Rothman on March 12, 2024, 06:59:14 AM
"M&A" is a thing?
Oh yes. Even before I-55 was a thing since the bridge predates the Interstate Highway System. Memphis & Arkansas is what it stands for.
Just hoping we don't have another group of Palestine protestors on the I-40 bridge shutting down all interstate traffic again.
https://www.localmemphis.com/article/traffic/i-55-memphis-bridge-opens-after-two-week-closure-construction-work-nears-end/522-21d29446-940b-4188-bf0e-1cd30a7a3442
Bridge reopened Sunday on schedule
I-55 Mississippi River Bridge replacement project (or as TDOT is calling it, "The America's River Crossing").
All options are in the cable-stayed bridge design, but it's on the number of spans and towers.
1. Two towers with four spans
2. Three towers with four spans
3. Two towers with three spans
The new bridge will have four 12-foot travel lanes with two 12-foot auxiliary lanes and 12-foot shoulders on both sides.
Good deal! I watched the video and there are renderings in it. Your wording did confuse me a bit about the number of travel lanes added. It looks the bridge will have 3 lanes each way with two being GP lanes and one being an auxiliary lane. I'm guessing the third auxiliary lane will exit at Crump BLVD.
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on April 19, 2024, 12:34:46 PMGood deal! I watched the video and there are renderings in it. Your wording did confuse me a bit about the number of travel lanes added. It looks the bridge will have 3 lanes each way with two being GP lanes and one being an auxiliary lane. I'm guessing the third auxiliary lane will exit at Crump BLVD.
Yes I'm assuming that's the case. Extending the third lane further south would be very messy, since 55 run in a concrete canyon for a couple of miles. And Arkansas likely won't extend that third lane much past the first exit, since ultimately there is a duplex with 40 up ahead.
Quote from: wriddle082 on April 19, 2024, 05:23:39 PMAnd Arkansas likely won't extend that third lane much past the first exit, since ultimately there is a duplex with 40 up ahead.
Exit 3B would seem to be a nice place to end it, since that's where US 70 merges in with the West Memphis traffic.
Quote from: vdeane on April 19, 2024, 10:53:33 PMQuote from: wriddle082 on April 19, 2024, 05:23:39 PMAnd Arkansas likely won't extend that third lane much past the first exit, since ultimately there is a duplex with 40 up ahead.
Exit 3B would seem to be a nice place to end it, since that's where US 70 merges in with the West Memphis traffic.
Yeah that might be a good spot. There are some issues with the bridges over the swamps between that point and the river, so this might be an excuse for ArDOT to rebuild those bridges.