Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[edwaleni]

After the DeSoto settles down, this interchange needs to be completely torn out.

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

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

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

[sparker]

After the DeSoto settles down, this interchange needs to be completely torn out.

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

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

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

IIRC, TDOT has a plan in place that was back-burnered because of the agency's deeming necessary the closing down of the full A-M bridge to effect a new approach to the revamped interchange.  The recent I-40 shutdown -- and the ensuing repairs -- may well prompt a revisiting of the 55/Crump project -- and it would be expected that the original rebuild plans would be followed.  As would have been the case if and when the A-M bridge shut down, I-55 traffic would, naturally, be detoured via I-240(69) and west on I-40 across the DeSoto, which has intrinsically 50% more capacity than I-55 over the river.  Once the DeSoto opens again, it would be an optimal time to shut down I-55 for the rebuild; the current Crump situation is likely causing local and interstate drivers considerable grief while the current detour is operating; maximizing the potential of I-55 via the modification would probably get a lot of public support right now, even if it means closing down the A-M bridge for a while.  But since the letting process would take some time before actual construction began and the bridge closed; both would be in operation for a protracted period, letting any steam off prior to addressing I-55.  Since the Crump project has been designed, building it to those specifications would at least speed up the whole process; doing it sooner than later is simply a matter of striking while the "iron" is hot as regards the necessity for doing so.

[bwana39]

The full closure was shelved a couple of years ago. Not sure why they have not started the construction.

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


http://theeveningtimes.com/theeveningtimes/2019/10/28/tdot-moving-forward-with-bridge-project/

[bwana39]

They have made some tweaks to the exits and entrances onto/ off of I-55 near the Crump Interchange.

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

[Lyon Wonder]

Think the old I-55 bridge across the river will be replaced in its entirety in the next 10 years with a completely new 6 lane bridge or, if the old bridge is found to still be structurally sound, twinned with a new bridge immediately south of it as a parallel span for 3 lanes of eastbound/southbound and the old bridge rehabbed for 3 lanes of westbound/northbound traffic?

[Tom958]

They have made some tweaks to the exits and entrances onto/ off of I-55 near the Crump Interchange.

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

Nice. That westbound-to-southbound loop ramp ought to have been closed decades ago, especially after they put two lanes on the I-55 loop ramp in 2011-12. Hopefully they never reopen it.

[bwana39]

Think the old I-55 bridge across the river will be replaced in its entirety in the next 10 years with a completely new 6 lane bridge or, if the old bridge is found to still be structurally sound, twinned with a new bridge immediately south of it as a parallel span for 3 lanes of eastbound/southbound and the old bridge rehabbed for 3 lanes of westbound/northbound traffic?

I agree the "I-55 bridge" should be replaced.  Replaced at a different location farther south. The Memphis and Arkansas Bridge should remain to service the local streets.

[sparker]

Think the old I-55 bridge across the river will be replaced in its entirety in the next 10 years with a completely new 6 lane bridge or, if the old bridge is found to still be structurally sound, twinned with a new bridge immediately south of it as a parallel span for 3 lanes of eastbound/southbound and the old bridge rehabbed for 3 lanes of westbound/northbound traffic?

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

[bwana39]

Think the old I-55 bridge across the river will be replaced in its entirety in the next 10 years with a completely new 6 lane bridge or, if the old bridge is found to still be structurally sound, twinned with a new bridge immediately south of it as a parallel span for 3 lanes of eastbound/southbound and the old bridge rehabbed for 3 lanes of westbound/northbound traffic?

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

There is less possibility to actually put six lanes either in a same location replacement or a twinned span. The neighborhoods around the Riverside / Crump intersection south of Crump are seemingly sacrosanct.  The French Fort area itself is not open for any incursion (and the boundaries of this area are not as fixed as it would appear) .  Simply anything south of the current I-55 (Crump) and west of Riverside (I-55 going south) is not even a possibility to be considered.  It would be seemingly less difficult to finish I-40 / Sam Cooper Blvd on through than to touch this area. (By-the-way, much of it is mid-twentieth century dwellings, not  antiquities.)

[Avalanchez71]

I say mark I-55 from the I-40/I-55 split in the West Memphis area as I-55 Business Loop.  That way you take away the deficiency.  I-55 would now run along I-40 to I-69 back to where it is now.

[sparker]

I say mark I-55 from the I-40/I-55 split in the West Memphis area as I-55 Business Loop.  That way you take away the deficiency.  I-55 would now run along I-40 to I-69 back to where it is now.

Considering business-loop freeways to be something of an oxymoron, IMO I-240 and I-55 should be swapped, with I-55 continuing north in Memphis to I-40 then turning left to share the DeSoto bridge.  I-240 then would be signed over the former I-55, serving as a "mileage shortcut" as well as the direct route to the FedEx hub from the west.  At least it directs I-55 through traffic away from the decidedly substandard configuration.  If both the Crump interchange and the substandard bridge are successfully addressed, the matter could be revisited or even reversed down the line. 

[US 89]

I say mark I-55 from the I-40/I-55 split in the West Memphis area as I-55 Business Loop.  That way you take away the deficiency.  I-55 would now run along I-40 to I-69 back to where it is now.

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

Yes, I know a few freeway-grade business routes that were old interstate alignments do exist. That doesn't make them any less dumb. If we're moving I-55 to I-40 and I-240/unsigned I-69, I'd rather post the old route as a 3di. Something like I-255. (EDIT: or just reroute 240 that way per sparker's suggestion above.)

[bwana39]

I say mark I-55 from the I-40/I-55 split in the West Memphis area as I-55 Business Loop.  That way you take away the deficiency.  I-55 would now run along I-40 to I-69 back to where it is now.

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

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

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

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


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

[MikeTheActuary]

Folks...despite what Google Maps may claim, I-69 does not currently exist in Memphis, according to TDOT.  (I asked a few years ago, when I was sucked into a Wikipedia edit war over the extension of the I-269 designation.)

While they may have approvals to extend the designation up to the TN300/US51 interchange, TDOT has no plans to do so until SIU9 is completed (assuming it is ever completed).

[sprjus4]

Folks...despite what Google Maps may claim, I-69 does not currently exist in Memphis, according to TDOT.

Not to mention, I-69 is not even signposted in Tennessee. It's still I-240 and I-40.

[The Ghostbuster]

Tennessee probably thought it would be overkill to sign Interstate 69 along Interstates 55, 240 and 40 before any of the Memphis-to-Dyersburg segments were built. Mississippi probably signed 69 along 55 so that 69 would not terminate at 269, as it would have after 2018.

[Avalanchez71]

As far as I am concerned I see no use for I-69 in Tennessee anyway.  US 51 already covers the West Tennessee and does a fine job.

[rte66man]

As far as I am concerned I see no use for I-69 in Tennessee anyway.  US 51 already covers the West Tennessee and does a fine job.

I'll remember that next time I'm stuck in traffic in Covington, Brighton, Atoka, etc.

[US 89]

As far as I am concerned I see no use for I-69 in Tennessee anyway any new building or expansion project ever

FTFY

[Lyon Wonder]

As far as I am concerned I see no use for I-69 in Tennessee anyway.  US 51 already covers the West Tennessee and does a fine job.

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

[Avalanchez71]

As far as I am concerned I see no use for I-69 in Tennessee anyway.  US 51 already covers the West Tennessee and does a fine job.

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

I say that it should terminate that the state line KY/TN.

[sprjus4]

As far as I am concerned I see no use for I-69 in Tennessee anyway.  US 51 already covers the West Tennessee and does a fine job.

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

I say that it should terminate that the state line KY/TN.

I say that it should be at the Mexico border 

[zzcarp]

As far as I am concerned I see no use for I-69 in Tennessee anyway.  US 51 already covers the West Tennessee and does a fine job.

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

I say that it should terminate that the state line KY/TN.

I say that it should be at the Mexico border 

I second Mexico. All those in favor say "aye".

[froggie]

Nay.

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

But this is really for another thread.


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

[edwaleni]

If the Crump Park/Metal Museum/French Fort area are untouchable, then i would look at the options TDOT are looking at for a proposed south bypass of Memphis and redirect I-55 on it.

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

Have the former I-55 from McLemore to I-240 be a stub. There is too much industrial between McLemore and I-240 with the need for heavy truck access, so ripping out the whole thing is a non-starter.