I-69 in TN

[Grzrd]

This article ... reporting on comments made by Eighth District U.S. Rep. Stephen Fincher

Congressman Fincher posted a blog in the Dyersburg State Gazette today; interestingly, he looks to Wisconsin as providing a case example of why Tennessee should complete its section of I-69:

At a time when our economy is sluggish, unemployment is high, budgets are tight and economic opportunities are limited, Tennessee should say YES to prioritizing its limited funds in smart projects that produce maximum economic gains. I-69 is such a project .... Just look at Wisconsin, between 1990 and 2001, 88 percent of the state's new and expanded manufacturing facilities decided to relocate within five miles of the "Corridors 2020" highway. This new highway links the state's key economic centers, illustrating the importance of an easily accessible goods movement infrastructure in business location decisions. Simply put, communities not connected to the interstate system are not considered by businesses as candidates for major industrial or business facilities.
Bottom line, I-69 is a smart project and should be made a priority. It creates opportunities for folks today and generations to come.

I guess he is telling the folks in Dyersburg to keep hanging in there.

[froggie]

Wisconsin also chose to pump a good chunk of state money into their Corridors 2020 program.  Even Mississippi did as well, both with their 1987 Highway Program (the main reason they finished their portion of US 78 eons before Alabama) and the Vision 21 follow-up.  Is Tennessee willing to do the same?

[mgk920]

Also, nearly all of Wisconsin's 'Corridors 2020' roads are not interstates, simply important rural two-lane roads that were upgraded to various levels of four lanes since the mid-1980s.  It is at the top of my list of reasons why Wisconsin was able to withstand the recessions of the past couple of decades better than other states, despite all of the state's other warts.



Mike

[HandsomeRob]

Google Maps now shows I-69 running along US-51 between Dyersburg and Troy, as well as sections of the new Union City bypass. Is any of this real, or is Google just doing some wishful thinking?

[codyg1985]

Google Maps now shows I-69 running along US-51 between Dyersburg and Troy, as well as sections of the new Union City bypass. Is any of this real, or is Google just doing some wishful thinking?

This is yet another example of Google being quite overzealous with showing future routes on their maps. See this thread for many more examples.

[hbelkins]

Google Maps now shows I-69 running along US-51 between Dyersburg and Troy, as well as sections of the new Union City bypass. Is any of this real, or is Google just doing some wishful thinking?

This is yet another example of Google being quite overzealous with showing future routes on their maps. See this thread for many more examples.

Speaking of, I sat next to my counterpart from the two westernmost Kentucky highway districts today, who had reported to Google the erroneous marking of I-69 on the Pennyrile Parkway and I-66 on the WK Parkway. He said he got a response from Google that said, in effect, we don't know what you're referring to.

When Google won't even respond in a positive manner to a transportation official reporting an error on their maps, it makes you wonder how important accuracy is to them.

[Grzrd]

I recently received an email update from TDOT reflecting Commissioner Schroer's comments re SIU 7:

The focus is to finish what has been started on SIU7.   It is not our intentions to build a road to nowhere so we are going to focus on finishing SIU 7.  This will give us a connection from the Kentucky State line to I-155 at Dyersburg.  We estimate that it could take about 10 years to accomplish this.

Google Maps now shows I-69 running along US-51 between Dyersburg and Troy, as well as sections of the new Union City bypass. Is any of this real, or is Google just doing some wishful thinking?

I decided to ask TDOT if they had any plans to sign the US 51 freeway between I-155 and Troy as I-69 and suggested that it would be similar to I-69 signage in Mississippi, Kentucky and Texas (and that they could possibly receive some exceptions from current interstate standards).  To make a long story short, TDOT is going to content itself with "Future I-69 Corridor" signage until more work is completed:

... we have received approval from the Federal Highway Administration to sign the existing corridors as future I-69.  We will review the need to sign a section as more work is completed and connectivity with other sections and facilities warrant signing.    Google made the decision to show I-69 on their maps without input from TDOT.

Are "Future I-69 Corridor" signs currently posted along the US 51 corridor?

[hbelkins]

Are "Future I-69 Corridor" signs currently posted along the US 51 corridor?

Yes, and they have been since at least the summer of 2006.

[Grzrd]

^ Thanks for the photo.

A Union City Messenger reporter spoke with Schroer after the February 22 meeting and Schroer provided a little more detail about the respective timelines associated with the ten year program to complete I-69 to Troy:

"We're in the process of starting construction on the second of three phases (of I-69 around Union City). We should do that within the next year to 18 months...

TDOT released its FY 2014-2016 Three Year Plan today and it includes 2.9 miles of FY 2014 construction on I-69 in Obion County from south of US 51 to south of TN 5:



edit

This article provides some local details regarding the location of the project:

... a critical 2.9-mile section of I-69 southwest of Union City has been included in Schroer's three-year transportation plan .... In his transportation plan, the 2.9-mile segment from just south of West Main Street to Highway 51 South near the Hampton Inn will be completed [have construction begin?] in the 2014 fiscal year.

[Grzrd]

The Memphis MPO recently approved its Priority List from its November 15 Agenda

(quote from Tennessee thread, with the post containing an image of the Priority List) ....
the above November 15, 2012 Memphis MPO ranking does not include any I-69 projects

TDOT released its FY 2014-2016 Three Year Plan today and it includes 2.9 miles of FY 2014 construction on I-69 in Obion County from south of US 51 to south of TN 5

The Memphis MPO has posted its 4-25-2013 TPB Meeting Minutes and the Minutes indicate that the MPO wants to investigate whether TDOT intends to apply for a 2013 TIGER grant for a rural section of I-69 (pp. 2-3, 5/5 of pdf):

3) Memphis MPO Coordinator's Report ....
e. 2013 TIGER Funding Notice
 Criteria and selection process is very similar to previous TIGER funding.
 Obligation deadline of June 2014 is a shorter timeline than before.
Mayor Mark Luttrell asked about the funding match for TIGER grants. Ms. Pragati Srivastava commented that more local or private match is generally better, and that a 50% match was common ....
Other Business ....
d. Mr. Rick McClanahan asked if TDOT had any proposed projects associated with the latest round of TIGER grant funding, including the possibility of Austin Peay Highway, I-40/I-240 interchange, or I-69 in the rural areas. Mr. Carlos McCloud indicated that TDOT is currently developing a long range transportation plan and he would check if any of the projects were included.

Although I doubt TDOT will use a 2013 TIGER application for an Obion County section of I-69, the question indicates that I-69 may still be on the long-range radar of the Memphis MPO, and possibly be included on MPO Priority Lists in the relatively near future if some progress can be made on I-69 north of Memphis.

edit

Here is a link to USDOT's TIGER Grant page.

second edit

Since I made the above post, the Memphis MPO has updated its website. Above, I updated the link to the April 25 Minutes.

[Grzrd]

This article seems to bring some clarity to Schroer's remarks by reporting on comments made by Eighth District U.S. Rep. Stephen Fincher indicating that construction on the Union City and Memphis sections of I-69 will proceed, but the section between Troy and Memphis is being halted:

Fincher stated, over the next three or four years, the lower part of the I-69 project will be completed around Union City, which will cost approximately $100 million. It will cost another $100 million to complete the I-69 project from Memphis to the Mississippi border.
"The problem is between Troy and Memphis,"  Fincher said. "All of that area, from what a commissioner told me, will be halted (due to insufficient funding).And to me, that's a problem."

it's more the northern part of 8 that isn't really justified based on traffic now (and being stuck with a half-finished SIU 7 that they need to finish to justify the hardly-used stuff that's already built, which they started because it was all that had gotten environmental clearance when they had the money).  SIU 9 has fairly immediate need, and suburban growth is finally getting up towards Covington (hence the TN 14 widening parallel to US 51 to the east), justifying SIU 8 up to the Hatchie River or so - once you get north of there, the towns are effectively bypassed except Dyersburg proper.  And TDOT is probably going to be done with I-269 (except the stub to I-69 at Millington, which is pointless to build except as part of the I-69 contract) before MDOT meets up.

SIU 7 and SIU 9 are logical extensions of existing freeways to provide regional connectivity, as is the southern part of SIU 8.

(lordsutch quotes from Interstate 22 thread)

In reading the recent discussion about I-69 on the Interstate 22 thread, I started thinking about SIU 8 and whether Commissioner Schroer's announcement that work between Troy and Memphis will be halted due to a lack of funding may make the FHWA hesitant to issue a Record of Decision ("ROD") for SIU 8 (I think a necessary part of a FEIS and/or ROD is a proposed timetable for completion of the project based on realistic financial projections).  That would not necessarily be a bad thing, except for lordsutch's observation that the southern part of SIU 8 currently makes some sense, and I believe it would be nice to have a ROD when the time comes.

Related to lordsutch's observation, I am concerned about the southernmost section of SIU 8, from the I-269 interchange to the Tipton County line, and whether lack of progress on that section could also stall progress on SIU 9. The Memphis MPO's 2011-14 TIP included a provison for preliminary engineering work for I-269 from US 51 to the I-69/I-269 interchange, and then for I-69 to the Tipton County line (page 34/184 of pdf):



At the time of the 2011-14 TIP, it was anticipated that a ROD would be issued for SIU 8 by the end of 2011, and that preliminary engineering work could begin after the issuance of the ROD.  However, since a ROD still has not been issued, I am guessing that the work was never performed (just my guess). The project is not among the proposed list of projects for the 2014-17 TIP. If the FHWA declines to issue a ROD for SIU 8, then working on SIU 9 may become less attractive to Memphis officials.

Also, as inclusion in the Memphis MPO TIP indicates, work on the I-69 section from the I-269 interchange to the Tipton County line appears to be in the "Memphis pot of money" and possibly not subject to Commissioner Schroer's pronouncement.  It will be interesting to see whether or not FHWA issues a ROD for SIU 8 in the near future.

[Grzrd]

In reading the recent discussion about I-69 on the Interstate 22 thread, I started thinking about SIU 8 and whether Commissioner Schroer's announcement that work between Troy and Memphis will be halted due to a lack of funding may make the FHWA hesitant to issue a Record of Decision ("ROD") for SIU 8

Slow progress is being made on the SIU 8 Final Environmental Impact Statement ("FEIS").  A recent email from TDOT indicates that the consultant has submitted a copy to TDOT for their review and that it may be available for public comment in early 2014:

The FEIS is not ready for distribution.   The environmental consultant working on the document has submitted a copy to TDOT to review for approval.  TDOT's review will take about 30 days.  If there are any corrections then it will be returned to the consultant to correct and return to TDOT within 25-30 days.   If there are no corrections then a copy will be forward to FHWA for review.  The FEIS could be ready for the public to review by the first quarter of 2014.

I assume that the FHWA FEIS review would raise any red flags that would prevent the issuance of a ROD.   

[Grzrd]

TDOT released its FY 2014-2016 Three Year Plan today and it includes 2.9 miles of FY 2014 construction on I-69 in Obion County from south of US 51 to south of TN 5

Slow progress is being made on the SIU 8 Final Environmental Impact Statement ("FEIS").  A recent email from TDOT indicates that the consultant has submitted a copy to TDOT for their review and that it may be available for public comment in early 2014

I emailed TDOT and asked for updates on the anticipated letting date for the Obion County project and on the SIU 8 Final Environmental Impact Statement process.  The response:

At this time TDOT and FHWA are in the process of reviewing the final Environmental Impact Statement.  I know that both agencies have submitted comments on the document to the consultant to provide additional information. The current anticipated letting date for the SIU  7 project is summer of 2014.

Rollin' down the glacier........ 

[Grzrd]

This article indicates that Phase 1 construction of Section 4 of SIU 7 near Union City is "nearing completion", but there is no money to proceed with Phase 2 construction:

However, until federal funding is allocated for the project, the interstate will remain covered with what Harrison called "incidental asphalt."  The final layer of gravel and asphalt paving will have to wait until funding is approved and contracts are signed for the work.

This article

"We are committed to getting this section done," said Schroer, who estimates it will take four years to complete the second and third segments of the highway through Union City and a little longer to complete the paving.

I recently noticed that Google Maps has April 2012 imagery that shows significant progress on bridges and ramps.  Here is a view from the Brevard Road overpass.

[Grzrd]

What I am curious about is how the TN section of I-69 will tie into the Purchase Pkwy with the complication of having the existing interchange with US 45E.

KYTC has posted the 2014 Recommended Highway Plan. The Project Listing page includes "reconstruct and improve" I-69 from the KY/TN state line to milepost 1.66, with preliminary work scheduled to begin 2014 (page 43/139 of pdf)

(bottom quote from I-69 in KY thread)

After seeing the state line work included in Kentucky's Recommended Plan, I emailed TDOT and asked for an update of the situation on their side of the state line.

My question:

I recently noticed that KYTC has included an I-69 TN/KY state line project in its 2014 Recommended Highway Plan (page 43):
http://transportation.ky.gov/Program-Management/Highway%20Plan/2014RecommendedProjectListing.pdf
With the above project in mind, I assume that TDOT has committed to remaining on the US 51 corridor in that area and upgrading the current interchange in that area.  Is that a safe assumption? If so, has TDOT finalized plans on how to upgrade the US 45E interchange to meet current interstate standards?
My understanding is that Commissioner Schroer has committed to completing I-69 SIU 7 in approximately ten years.

The response:

I want to thank you for contacting our office about the I-69 project in Obion County.  You ask about the corridor for the section of I-68 [sic] from Union City to the Kentucky line.  This section will follow existing US 51 to the Kentucky Purchase Parkway.  Kentucky is currently work [sic] TDOT on the completion of the environmental reevaluation at the Kentucky line.   The Final Environmental Impact Statement did not identify the connector to the Purchase Parkway so the document has to be reevaluated to include the connector to the Purchase Parkway. 
TDOT has not started developing plans on the upgrade to US 45 E  or US 51.
You are correct that Commissioner Schroer has committed to completing I-69 SIU 7 in approximately ten years.

At least they are doing some preliminary environmental work on the connection.

[lordsutch]

That interchange is a little nastier than most of the others, between the combined high school & middle school sitting right by it and the TN 214 interchange immediately to the west. Probably the best you can do at a reasonable price is build a better, 2-lane southbound ramp and a two-lane flyover northbound and divert TN 214 onto a new connector road over to US 45E, removing the existing partial interchange for TN 214.

You probably also need to close or move exit 0 on the Purchase; probably the best solution is a split diamond with frontage roads between KY 166 and US 51, which would also help access to the Walmart on KY 166.

[Grzrd]

I emailed TDOT and asked for an update of the situation on their side of the state line.
The response:

I want to thank you for contacting our office about the I-69 project in Obion County ... You are correct that Commissioner Schroer has committed to completing I-69 SIU 7 in approximately ten years.

This TV video report has some footage of the work in Obion County and confirms the current ten-year timetable;

People in Union City, Tennessee are hoping that I-69 provides an economic shot in the arm. The superhighway connecting the Canadian border to the Mexican border that will run right through Northwest Tennessee ....
The Tennessee Department of Transportation estimates it could be ten years before the highway is completed because the road isn't being built all at once.
"We try to do it in phases. It's a little more affordable when we do it in phases," TDOT spokesperson Nichole Lawrence said. TDOT also said that the state has spent about 68-million on the Obion County part of I-69 so far.

TDOT released its FY 2014-2016 Three Year Plan today and it includes 2.9 miles of FY 2014 construction on I-69 in Obion County from south of US 51 to south of TN 5

The video also reports that the south of US 51 to south of TN 5 project will be let in May, 2014.

If you've ever been to Union City, the first question that would come to your mind is, "What on earth is there to see from an observation tower?"

(above quote from Memphis and Saint Louis after a bad New Madrid earthquake thread)

Apparently, the observation tower at Discovery Park of America provides a great view of the I-69 roadwork. 

[Grzrd]

SIU 7 and SIU 9 are logical extensions of existing freeways to provide regional connectivity, as is the southern part of SIU 8.

(lordsutch quote from Interstate 22 thread)
In reading the recent discussion about I-69 on the Interstate 22 thread, I started thinking about SIU 8 and whether Commissioner Schroer's announcement that work between Troy and Memphis will be halted due to a lack of funding may make the FHWA hesitant to issue a Record of Decision ("ROD") for SIU 8 (I think a necessary part of a FEIS and/or ROD is a proposed timetable for completion of the project based on realistic financial projections).  That would not necessarily be a bad thing, except for lordsutch's observation that the southern part of SIU 8 currently makes some sense, and I believe it would be nice to have a ROD when the time comes.
Related to lordsutch's observation, I am concerned about the southernmost section of SIU 8, from the I-269 interchange to the Tipton County line, and whether lack of progress on that section could also stall progress on SIU 9 ....
as inclusion in the Memphis MPO TIP indicates, work on the I-69 section from the I-269 interchange to the Tipton County line appears to be in the "Memphis pot of money" and possibly not subject to Commissioner Schroer's pronouncement.

I am a little skeptical about the accuracy of the reporting, but this article reports that TDOT is submitting alternative budgets to the state legislature because of the possibility of a loss of federal funding; the budget assuming the presence of federal money reportedly includes I-69 projects in northern Shelby County:

The Tennessee Department of Transportation's budget could be short $900 million due to a funding shortage on the federal level ....
As congress scrambles to come up with the money TDOT is presenting two budgets to the state.
One project includes construction like 240 and Airways, the I-69 projects in northern Shelby County, and another budget that basically puts the breaks on road construction because of funding.

I emailed TDOT and asked for updates on ... the SIU 8 Final Environmental Impact Statement process.  The response:

At this time TDOT and FHWA are in the process of reviewing the final Environmental Impact Statement.  I know that both agencies have submitted comments on the document to the consultant to provide additional information.

With the reported northern Shelby County I-69 budget in mind, it would be nice if the SIU 8 FEIS will be made available for public comment in the near future.

[Chris]

I recently noticed that Google Maps has April 2012 imagery that shows significant progress on bridges and ramps.  Here is a view from the Brevard Road overpass.

Google Earth has November 2013 imagery of Union City. It basically shows the new alignment in the same condition (no asphalt yet). It also shows this new freeway alignment won't improve travel much until it is extended on either side. (in fact, the northern end is in a field).

[Grzrd]

I emailed TDOT and asked for updates on ... the SIU 8 Final Environmental Impact Statement process.  The response:

At this time TDOT and FHWA are in the process of reviewing the final Environmental Impact Statement.  I know that both agencies have submitted comments on the document to the consultant to provide additional information.

Here is an email update from TDOT regarding the SIU 8 FEIS:

The document will be ready for public viewing in the winter of 2014-15.  It will be published in the Federal Register and the public may comment.  The public will have at least 30 days to comment.  The Record of Decision can't be signed until the Notice of Availability for the FEIS has been published and 30 days has passed.  Comments on the FEIS are addressed in the Record of Decision. 
The current budget does not include any money for I 69 SIU 8 and 9.  We are still waiting on a funding source.   The budget does include money to finish a portion of I-69 in Obion County where the right-of-way has been purchased.

I suppose they are waiting for a funding source to appear in order to plausibly represent a funding stream for SIU 8 that would justify the issuance a Record of Decision.

recent Comments to the Draft Highway Primary Freight Network Plan

(above quote from I-69 in TX thread)

In its Comments Letter, the Memphis MPO writes the following:







Accompanying the Comments Letter is a Comments Map:



I find it interesting that they included the future, currently unfunded, new terrain I-69 SIU 9 as comprising part of I-269's freight connectivity.  On the other hand, none of SIU 8 (including the little "thumb" within the Memphis MPO boundary) appears on the map as being part of I-269's freight connectivity.

[andy3175]

Has there been any discussion or concurrence on whether I-240 will be retained as a designation along the north-south segment of I-69? I have wondered if an I-69/240 shared alignment makes sense or not. It might be worthwhile to call that segment of freeway I-69 alone, and leave I-240 on the southeastern quadrant of  the Memphis inner belt route (between I-55/69 and I-40 east). Obviously such a decision would become more important once Tennessee decides to sign its portion of I-69 that has been formally accepted/approved.

Regards,
Andy

[codyg1985]

It would seem they could go ahead and designate I-69 over I-240 to its junction with I-40.

[Grzrd]

Has there been any discussion or concurrence on whether I-240 will be retained as a designation along the north-south segment of I-69? I have wondered if an I-69/240 shared alignment makes sense or not. It might be worthwhile to call that segment of freeway I-69 alone, and leave I-240 on the southeastern quadrant of  the Memphis inner belt route (between I-55/69 and I-40 east). Obviously such a decision would become more important once Tennessee decides to sign its portion of I-69 that has been formally accepted/approved.

It would seem they could go ahead and designate I-69 over I-240 to its junction with I-40.

I recently had a Q & A with the Memphis MPO:

Q: In the PFN Comment, a request is also made to include I-69/I-240 in the PFN.  Since I-69 is expressly referenced in the Comment, does the Memphis MPO have any plans to request that TDOT install I-69 signage along I-69/I-55, I-69/I-240, and I-69/I-40?  Related to this question, wouldn't it make sense to drop I-240 from the I-69/I-240 designation?

A: In regards to your question regarding signage, it does not seem appropriate to us to replace all signage until I-69 provides a completed connection to other regions. Ultimately, this decision lies with TDOT as they are the project manager for those roads. Also, regardless of the status of I-69/I-269, the north/south portion of I-40/I-240 that runs through downtown Memphis will still serve as part of that highway and thus would not benefit the wayfinding of drivers by dropping I-240 from the signage.

[mwb1848]

Has there been any discussion or concurrence on whether I-240 will be retained as a designation along the north-south segment of I-69? I have wondered if an I-69/240 shared alignment makes sense or not. It might be worthwhile to call that segment of freeway I-69 alone, and leave I-240 on the southeastern quadrant of  the Memphis inner belt route (between I-55/69 and I-40 east). Obviously such a decision would become more important once Tennessee decides to sign its portion of I-69 that has been formally accepted/approved.

It would seem they could go ahead and designate I-69 over I-240 to its junction with I-40.

I recently had a Q & A with the Memphis MPO:

Q: In the PFN Comment, a request is also made to include I-69/I-240 in the PFN.  Since I-69 is expressly referenced in the Comment, does the Memphis MPO have any plans to request that TDOT install I-69 signage along I-69/I-55, I-69/I-240, and I-69/I-40?  Related to this question, wouldn't it make sense to drop I-240 from the I-69/I-240 designation?

A: In regards to your question regarding signage, it does not seem appropriate to us to replace all signage until I-69 provides a completed connection to other regions. Ultimately, this decision lies with TDOT as they are the project manager for those roads. Also, regardless of the status of I-69/I-269, the north/south portion of I-40/I-240 that runs through downtown Memphis will still serve as part of that highway and thus would not benefit the wayfinding of drivers by dropping I-240 from the signage.

Nothing about the numbering or signing of Interstates in the Memphis area seems designed to "benefit the wayfinding of drivers".

These are the people that have signs on NB I-55 at I-240 telling Little Rock traffic to go one way and St Louis traffic to go another only to be re-joined on the other side of the Mississippi River.

https://www.google.com/maps/@35.072348,-90.025701,3a,90y,1.89h,98.18t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sYgo2LYRSQubHfjLOrUiTeA!2e0

An I-240/I-69 joint designation through Downtown would be incredibly redundant.

[NE2]

These are the people that have signs on NB I-55 at I-240 telling Little Rock traffic to go one way and St Louis traffic to go another only to be re-joined on the other side of the Mississippi River.

https://www.google.com/maps/@35.072348,-90.025701,3a,90y,1.89h,98.18t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sYgo2LYRSQubHfjLOrUiTeA!2e0

I can think of several benefits to this (distributing long-distance traffic more equally, avoiding weaving in Arkansas) but chances are they just used the control cities for I-40 and I-55 without thinking.