News:

The AARoads Wiki is live! Come check it out!

Main Menu

Interstate 55/ Crump Boulevard Interchange

Started by Grzrd, May 26, 2017, 02:44:34 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

mrsman

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on May 28, 2024, 11:06:37 PMPS, Shouldn't this thread be in the Southeast section given that is where Tennessee posts are at?

I believe it should.  About a year ago, the forum went through a realignment process and essentially made sure that most states would exist entirely within one section.  So many of the Midwestern states were split between Great Lakes and Ohio Valley and there were many other states like PA and NY that were also split between two (or even three) sections.

It seems like this thread was a legacy of that.  I believe the Memphis area used to be in Mid-South area.  It seems like now only MS and LA are the only states that are split between sections.  As there doesn't seem to be much clamoring about it, it is likely to remain as such.


bwana39

Yes, Tennessee used to be divided into what amounted to Metro Memphis and the rest of the state. Memphis seemed to fit better with Arkansas. Likewise northern Mississippi.

As to Louisiana, the division although called " Western" and just "Louisiana".
Western Louisiana seems to be everything West of the Atchafalaya River.

Let's build what we need as economically as possible.

Henry

Yeah, I remember seeing western TN being discussed in the Mid-South section, but now that the whole state is in Southeast, it's time to start moving this discussion there (as well as any others that do not include AR or MS).
Go Cubs Go! Go Cubs Go! Hey Chicago, what do you say? The Cubs are gonna win today!

bwana39

While the plan is to somehow (eventually) replace the Memphis & Arkansas bridge in approximate same location, it seems strange they are doing long term repairs to the bridge deck It would seem that they are not really seeing the new bridge actually happening, just planning for the what if?
Let's build what we need as economically as possible.

vdeane

Quote from: bwana39 on June 02, 2024, 09:43:34 PMWhile the plan is to somehow (eventually) replace the Memphis & Arkansas bridge in approximate same location, it seems strange they are doing long term repairs to the bridge deck It would seem that they are not really seeing the new bridge actually happening, just planning for the what if?
Maybe they'll do what New York did with the Tappan Zee, and re-use the deck on bridge projects elsewhere?
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position of NYSDOT or its affiliates.

sprjus4

Quote from: bwana39 on June 02, 2024, 09:43:34 PMWhile the plan is to somehow (eventually) replace the Memphis & Arkansas bridge in approximate same location, it seems strange they are doing long term repairs to the bridge deck It would seem that they are not really seeing the new bridge actually happening, just planning for the what if?
They are in the beginning stages of a long range study... I'm willing to bet any bridge replacement is at least 15 years out, unless there was some major source of funding immediately identified. Unfortunately, that's just infrastructure costs and how mega-projects in this country work.

bwana39

Quote from: sprjus4 on June 03, 2024, 05:57:24 AM
Quote from: bwana39 on June 02, 2024, 09:43:34 PMWhile the plan is to somehow (eventually) replace the Memphis & Arkansas bridge in approximate same location, it seems strange they are doing long term repairs to the bridge deck It would seem that they are not really seeing the new bridge actually happening, just planning for the what if?
They are in the beginning stages of a long range study... I'm willing to bet any bridge replacement is at least 15 years out, unless there was some major source of funding immediately identified. Unfortunately, that's just infrastructure costs and how mega-projects in this country work.

Right now, they are doing deck replacement on the M&A in stages. Apparently, they are figuring on decades of use before any replacement is actually offered.
Let's build what we need as economically as possible.

formulanone

Photos from earlier last month on southbound I-55 at/near "the cloverleaf" at Crump...

Rare left-land loop sign:

I-55 South at EH Crump Left Ramp 25mph Sign by formulanone, on Flickr

It looks like three lanes per direction, headed south on I-55:

I-55 South Near Crump Boulevard - Construction Zone Contraflow by formulanone, on Flickr 

CtrlAltDel

Google Maps is now showing the new mainline for I-55 at the interchange:

I-290   I-294   I-55   (I-74)   (I-72)   I-40   I-30   US-59   US-190   TX-30   TX-6

davewiecking

Quote from: CtrlAltDel on October 15, 2024, 11:58:32 AMGoogle Maps is now showing the new mainline for I-55 at the interchange:
And the August street view shows 1 lane each way on the new bridge.

The Ghostbuster

Navigating the under-reconstruction roadway via Google Maps Street View is a little tricky. The Street View tends to divert to previous Google Car run-throughs taken before the reconstruction began. Hopefully, once the reconstruction project is complete, and another Google Car runs along the reconstructed roadway, the problem will be fixed.

Plutonic Panda

Controversial opinion incoming... man, if there was ever a case to be made for urban renewal and tearing down neighborhoods for a freeway, this would be case in point. It seems like they could've really done a better job for the freeway and reconnecting the community by just starting this area from scratch.

formulanone

Quote from: davewiecking on October 15, 2024, 09:39:44 PM
Quote from: CtrlAltDel on October 15, 2024, 11:58:32 AMGoogle Maps is now showing the new mainline for I-55 at the interchange:
And the August street view shows 1 lane each way on the new bridge.

It was still one way per direction as of two weeks ago. Sure beats coming to a near-stop even in the best of traffic.

MikieTimT

It's better already than it was before the start of the construction then, since it was just 1 lane each direction to stay on I-55 to begin with, except without a parclo for northbound traffic.

CtrlAltDel

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on October 16, 2024, 01:48:28 AMControversial opinion incoming... man, if there was ever a case to be made for urban renewal and tearing down neighborhoods for a freeway, this would be case in point. It seems like they could've really done a better job for the freeway and reconnecting the community by just starting this area from scratch.

What.
I-290   I-294   I-55   (I-74)   (I-72)   I-40   I-30   US-59   US-190   TX-30   TX-6

The Ghostbuster

This isn't the 1950s or 1960s anymore. You can't use urban renewal to build new roads anymore (for the most part). In any event, this Interstate 55 reconstruction project is a major improvement over what existed before.

edwaleni

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on October 16, 2024, 01:48:28 AMControversial opinion incoming... man, if there was ever a case to be made for urban renewal and tearing down neighborhoods for a freeway, this would be case in point. It seems like they could've really done a better job for the freeway and reconnecting the community by just starting this area from scratch.

I would say this is just one part of many "renewals" that have taken place here.

If you look at the historical city maps and photos of central Memphis, you will find that between Crump on the south and Patterson on the north was a massive railyard complex with freight houses and stockyards. All gone now and now taken over by small business, housing and parks.

Probably the one neighborhood that stands out is the French Fort area. Metal Museum to the west, total industrial to the east and south. It's almost an island that was protected by I-55 from the industrial areas.

The only thing left from the railyards era is the sugar depot at Patterson and Tennessee and the connection from the M-A Bridge to Crump.

Bobby5280

In the case of the I-55/Crump Blvd interchange they probably could have created a better interchange design, even if it meant demolishing some existing properties. Most of what is built adjacent to the interchange are industrial buildings. There is one residential neighborhood on the SW side.

Generally speaking, it's not such a good idea to use freeways as a tool to wipe out big chunks of lower income neighborhoods. The practice actually ends up hurting more than just the people who get displaced. It doesn't matter how "rich" any city may be, none of them can function without low wage workers. None. We take service industry businesses and the people who work in them for granted. If the low wage workers can't live within a reasonable distance to their jobs the businesses who depend on those kinds of workers will face severe manpower shortages or even be forced to close.

edwaleni

Quote from: Bobby5280 on October 17, 2024, 10:44:26 PMIn the case of the I-55/Crump Blvd interchange they probably could have created a better interchange design, even if it meant demolishing some existing properties. Most of what is built adjacent to the interchange are industrial buildings. There is one residential neighborhood on the SW side.

Generally speaking, it's not such a good idea to use freeways as a tool to wipe out big chunks of lower income neighborhoods. The practice actually ends up hurting more than just the people who get displaced. It doesn't matter how "rich" any city may be, none of them can function without low wage workers. None. We take service industry businesses and the people who work in them for granted. If the low wage workers can't live within a reasonable distance to their jobs the businesses who depend on those kinds of workers will face severe manpower shortages or even be forced to close.

The only functional industrial land they could have taken is currently occupied by a very large employer, The Hershey Chocolate Company. As it stands they took about 10 feet along their property line to get a retaining/sound wall/storm sewer installed and gave them about 7 feet back for their parking lot.

DJStephens

Quote from: CtrlAltDel on October 17, 2024, 01:11:43 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on October 16, 2024, 01:48:28 AMControversial opinion incoming... man, if there was ever a case to be made for urban renewal and tearing down neighborhoods for a freeway, this would be case in point. It seems like they could've really done a better job for the freeway and reconnecting the community by just starting this area from scratch.

What.
That was a reference to the fact that "the long range" plan should have been taken.  Meaning a brand new 55 bridge S of the antiquated 1949 one.  And removal of 55 out of this residential area.  Demolition and complete removal of the "Crump" mess. Basically triple multiplex's proposal.  Which has been one of the best diagrams/proposals for a "removal" seen on this site.

froggie

^ Whatever you were trying to do with your last post, DJ, it didn't work.

CtrlAltDel

Quote from: DJStephens on October 19, 2024, 10:30:49 AM
Quote from: CtrlAltDel on October 17, 2024, 01:11:43 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on October 16, 2024, 01:48:28 AMControversial opinion incoming... man, if there was ever a case to be made for urban renewal and tearing down neighborhoods for a freeway, this would be case in point. It seems like they could've really done a better job for the freeway and reconnecting the community by just starting this area from scratch.

What.

That was a reference to the fact that "the long range" plan should have been taken.  Meaning a brand new 55 bridge S of the antiquated 1949 one.  And removal of 55 out of this residential area.  Demolition and complete removal of the "Crump" mess. Basically triple multiplex's proposal.  Which has been one of the best diagrams/proposals for a "removal" seen on this site.


Is this what you're referring to? I don't think the Panda had this in mind, since it doesn't entail "urban renewal and tearing down neighborhoods for a freeway." That said, I do think something like this would be a good idea.

Quote from: triplemultiplex on June 27, 2023, 11:51:12 AM
I-290   I-294   I-55   (I-74)   (I-72)   I-40   I-30   US-59   US-190   TX-30   TX-6

74/171FAN

^But that proposal means that US 78 (and also US 61, US 64, US 70, and US 79) would have to be rerouted?  :clap:  :spin:
I am now a PennDOT employee.  My opinions/views do not necessarily reflect the opinions/views of PennDOT.

Travel Mapping: https://travelmapping.net/user/?units=miles&u=markkos1992
Mob-Rule:  https://mob-rule.com/user/markkos1992

Plutonic Panda

Look either way it could've been done. I completely agree with DJ Stephens and he was on point with what I was trying to say just to get rid of the S curve. Now, even if that could've been done with removing the neighborhoods, yes I would've supported it.

But ideally, it could've gotten done another way.



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.