News:

The AARoads Wiki is live! Come check it out!

Main Menu

Interstate 22

Started by Snappyjack, January 26, 2009, 11:56:04 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

froggie

QuoteWhat upgrades does MS have to do? I figured they were done.

Nope, not done.  About half the distance in Mississippi lacks paved shoulders, so that's the main thing needing to be done.  There's also the median through New Albany, which (unless it's been upgraded recently) is effectively a 1-ft wide curb.  DEFINITELY sub-standard and needing upgrading to at least a Jersey barrier.

QuoteAnd what are TN's plans on their end?

No plans in Tennessee.  I-22 will either end at I-269 (once it's built), or will follow I-269 to end at I-55/69.


Alex

Quote from: froggie on June 22, 2010, 12:13:15 PM
QuoteWhat upgrades does MS have to do? I figured they were done.

Nope, not done.  About half the distance in Mississippi lacks paved shoulders, so that's the main thing needing to be done.  There's also the median through New Albany, which (unless it's been upgraded recently) is effectively a 1-ft wide curb.  DEFINITELY sub-standard and needing upgrading to at least a Jersey barrier.


Definitely still as is.

Anthony_JK

Quote from: Tourian on June 22, 2010, 11:30:21 AM
Quote from: codyg1985 on June 14, 2010, 10:43:04 AM
If the interchange in AL is completed before MS completes its upgrading, then will AL be allowed to sign its sections as I-22 or will they have to wait until the upgrades in MS are completed?

What upgrades does MS have to do? I figured they were done. And what are TN's plans on their end? The road just kind of dumps down to the surface on to a four lane road/highway. Will there be an interchange on their end at all? Or only if Memphis gets an outer loop?


From what I am seeing, the plan is to run I-22 through the southernmost portion of the proposed Memphis Outer Loop (I-269) which would extend from the current I-69/I-55/MS 304 interchange eastward to meet with current US 78/Corridor X.

Personally, I'd like to see it extended along the rest of US 78 all the way to I-240 or even westward to where I-240, I-55, and the proposed routing for I-69 would meet...but that would involve a major upgrade of US 78 which would be pretty costly.


Anthony

golden eagle

The problem with 78 in the very southern end of Memphis is that it's in an industrialized area.

I did find an article, however, on the study of possible upgrades for 78 through Memphis.

TheStranger

Quote from: golden eagle on June 22, 2010, 05:41:27 PM
The problem with 78 in the very southern end of Memphis is that it's in an industrialized area.

I did find an article, however, on the study of possible upgrades for 78 through Memphis.

Interesting quote here, though I suspect it's just a typo (or optimistic speculation) -

Discovery period
In its study, Cambridge Systematics researchers will look at several components of the Lamar corridor, which doubles as U.S. 78 and someday will become Interstate 22. First, the firm will take an inventory of existing conditions, such as truck traffic counts from the state line to I-240, as well as on arterial roads.
Chris Sampang

froggie

Or just a case of a journalist either making an assumption or speculation...

SSF

Yea, that stretch of 78 just off  I-240 is unusable as a upgrade while still providing a high level of service.  It being farily level would make grade separation very tough, the intermodal yard would complain to no end, and Mississippi-Tennessee would have to coordinate their work(always fun getting two states to cooperate on a project; right Illinois-Missouri).

froggie

No real need to coordinate work...Mississippi's stretch is already freeway.  This is fully a Tennessee/Shelby County/Memphis thing.  But ROW costs alone, especially near I-240, would be considerable.

jdb1234

A few observations I made over the weekend:

1.  New signs on I-65. 



New signs have been put up on I-65 North of I-20/59.  Exit 264 is now noted for Daniel Payne Drive which is what most locals and media refer to this exit as.

2.


In the past month signs advising trucks not to use Coalburg Rd to get to the freeway have been put up.

Tourian

Interesting signs. For so long when I was young everything 65 North referenced Nashville and that sign would have said 41st avenue.

golden eagle

I-65 north used to have Nashville as a control city until around ten years ago when ALDOT started using Huntsville. I don't know why it was never Huntsville all the time, despite that the city is a little ways away from I-65.

TheStranger

Quote from: golden eagle on July 10, 2010, 11:27:26 PM
I-65 north used to have Nashville as a control city until around ten years ago when ALDOT started using Huntsville. I don't know why it was never Huntsville all the time, despite that the city is a little ways away from I-65.

From what I've read here, the construction of I-565 was what spurred the control city change.
Chris Sampang

jdb1234

Not quite, I-65 used Nashville as a control city for a time after I-565 was built.  The reason it was changed to Huntsville, if I remember correctly, was politics. 

Tomahawkin

I love the Fact that a majority of that stretch from Jasper to its current terminus is three lanes on both sides, despite small traffic volumes...I'd guess they are expecting future development in that area (sometime, but not in this economy) because I love the landscape of that area with all the hills...

codyg1985

Quote from: Tomahawkin on July 11, 2010, 04:34:15 PM
I love the Fact that a majority of that stretch from Jasper to its current terminus is three lanes on both sides, despite small traffic volumes...I'd guess they are expecting future development in that area (sometime, but not in this economy) because I love the landscape of that area with all the hills...

The hills are what make development difficult in that area. Jasper is trying to develop a second industrial park within its city limits close to the existing Bevill Industrial Park, but the hilly terrain is posing challenges in getting it ready for development.
Cody Goodman
Huntsville, AL, United States

Tourian

Quote from: jdb1234 on July 11, 2010, 12:30:26 AM
Not quite, I-65 used Nashville as a control city for a time after I-565 was built.  The reason it was changed to Huntsville, if I remember correctly, was politics. 

This may be crazy off the wall and totally untrue, but I will throw it out there. I had heard rumors that Huntsville wasn't on there because of the Redstone Arsenal. That if ever there were a land invasion, they figured it would make it a tad more difficult for an invading force to use our interstate system to find it.

RoadWarrior56

The justification mentioned in the previous post for not using Hunstville as a control city on I-65 sounds so ridiculous and absurd that it probably is true.

As far as I am concerned, it should be Birmingham, anyway, but it probably was politics that changed it, as well as growth in the Huntsville metropolitan area.

RoadWarrior56

One more post, this time germaine to the I-22 topic.  I last drove the section of US 78 between Birmingham and Memphis in 1998.  At that time, the entire freeway was complete in Mississippi, but most of the roadway had the infamous gravel shoulders, except for the last sections completed, where the shoulders were paved from the start.

Have any sections of US 78 in Mississippi had their shoulders paved or other improvements made to the roadway to bring them up to interstate standards since 1998?  Once I-22 is complete and signed in Alabama, will I-22 be signed as I-22 immediately in Mississippi, or will we still be dealing with "Future" signs, etc for years to come in that state?

codyg1985

Quote from: RoadWarrior56 on July 12, 2010, 05:31:11 PM
Have any sections of US 78 in Mississippi had their shoulders paved or other improvements made to the roadway to bring them up to interstate standards since 1998?  Once I-22 is complete and signed in Alabama, will I-22 be signed as I-22 immediately in Mississippi, or will we still be dealing with "Future" signs, etc for years to come in that state?

The section between New Albany and Tupelo has recently been upgraded with paved shoulders.
Cody Goodman
Huntsville, AL, United States

lamsalfl

#119
bone, shag, and/or generally engage in sexual congress with the northern beltline.  I'd much rather see that money (or some of it) to extend I-22 to I-20 near the airport.  That's a much more critical link for NATIONAL movements.

if you're going to censor an obscenity, please do so in a manner a bit more creative than the initial-asterisk-asterisk-asterisk method!

froggie

Whether extending I-22 to I-20/59 is a "much more critical link" than the Northern Beltline is arguable.  Both would effectively accomplish the same mission...that of connecting I-22 to the west with I-59 to the northeast or I-20 to the east.  And both have major hurdles to overcome.  While the Northern Beltline is *A LOT* of new-mileage construction to accomplish, extending I-22 faces major right-of-way and environmental cleanup issues, nevermind how to adequately tie it into I-20/59 (likely with C/D roads, which also runs into the ROW issue).

The Premier

Quote from: froggie on July 17, 2010, 07:13:52 AM
Whether extending I-22 to I-20/59 is a "much more critical link" than the Northern Beltline is arguable.  Both would effectively accomplish the same mission...that of connecting I-22 to the west with I-59 to the northeast or I-20 to the east.  And both have major hurdles to overcome.  While the Northern Beltline is *A LOT* of new-mileage construction to accomplish, extending I-22 faces major right-of-way and environmental cleanup issues, nevermind how to adequately tie it into I-20/59 (likely with C/D roads, which also runs into the ROW issue).
Not to mention the number of homes and businesses in that area. While it makes sense to terminate I-22 at either I-20/59 or at I-20, it will require a lot of work in terms of ROW.
Alex P. Dent

codyg1985

Quote from: froggie on July 17, 2010, 07:13:52 AM
Whether extending I-22 to I-20/59 is a "much more critical link" than the Northern Beltline is arguable.  Both would effectively accomplish the same mission...that of connecting I-22 to the west with I-59 to the northeast or I-20 to the east.  And both have major hurdles to overcome.  While the Northern Beltline is *A LOT* of new-mileage construction to accomplish, extending I-22 faces major right-of-way and environmental cleanup issues, nevermind how to adequately tie it into I-20/59 (likely with C/D roads, which also runs into the ROW issue).


Extending I-22 to I-20/59 would give trucks a shorter route to I-20 and Atlanta that avoids Malfunction Junction at I-65 (which is another argument for building the northern beltline). I think that a beltway needs to be built that handles I-65 through traffic as well as through traffic along I-20, I-22, and I-59. I-459 is a great bypass for I-20 and I-59 traffic, but none exists for I-65 traffic or I-22 traffic. Building a bypass for I-65 traffic would be crazy expensive, given the terrain and ROW challenges.

Maybe build an express lane setup for I-65 that goes through the metro area.
Cody Goodman
Huntsville, AL, United States

UptownRoadGeek

Would it have been possible to extend I-22 to I-459's eastern terminus?

froggie

#124
Not really.  To the south, Birmingham airport is in the way (which also blocks a direct connection to the 20/59 split).  To the north, there are rail yards, mining pits, and residential areas.



Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.