Project Manager of the Southern Gateway project was kind enough to respond to an email about the current status of the project. The pertinent part of his reply is as follows:
Quote
We have contracted with the consultant, Kimley-Horn, to draft an outline for the work to be completed on the EIS. This will be used to draft the scope of work into 4 phases; 1- Purpose & Need and Study Area; 2-Identify Project Alternatives to be evaluated; 3- Conduct Detailed Analysis of Alternatives (DEIS); 4-Determine Preferred Alternative and Mitigatory Measures (FEIS)...
Please make a note that we are in the process of changing the name from the Mississippi 3rd River Bridge to the Southern Gateway, Crossing the River/ Connecting America . The forecast completion time for the project has been adjusted from 2 yrs. to 5 yrs. to reflect the amount of work and coordination that will be required between three states participating in this project, Arkansas-Mississippi-Tennessee. Tennessee will be the lead state.
I think it is interesting that Mississippi is still involved in the project. I apparently had been mistaken in believing that route alternatives had been narrowed down to AR-TN crossings. Five years is a long time ...
EDIT
Since both this project and the "Brinkley AR to Batesville MS Corridor" project [recent discussion in "Mississippi" thread on "Southeast" page] are both EXTREMELY early stage, I wonder how much interaction, if any, there will be between the two teams in terms of a connection in Arkansas that might serve as an "Arkansas arc" of a loop around Memphis?
The project 's website is now up and running. The schedule indicates that they hope to identify a preferred alternative corridor by 2013-2014 and to have a FEIS by 2015. The website also has an Online Public Meeting with a Survey that can be completed at the end: http://www.southerngatewayproject.com/index.asp
A link to the recently started project:
http://www.southerngatewayproject.com/
I think a southern bridge seems most likely. This can eliminate the nasty I-55 TOTSO on the Tennessee side and will connect to the largest cargo airport in the world, plus give additional options for I-40 - I-22 traffic (Little Rock - Birmingham/Atlanta). The southern side of Memphis is also the most developed part, i.e. the most traffic potential. I think an I-69 bridge is too far south to be of any use for the metro area.
What they do, they better not fall into the result St. Louis is getting.
QuoteThis can eliminate the nasty I-55 TOTSO on the Tennessee side
TDOT already has a project (http://www.tdot.state.tn.us/i55/default.htm) in the works (currently in the Final EIS stage) to eliminate this problem. At much less cost than a new river bridge.
Quote from: froggie on February 03, 2011, 06:55:43 AM
QuoteThis can eliminate the nasty I-55 TOTSO on the Tennessee side
TDOT already has a project (http://www.tdot.state.tn.us/i55/default.htm) in the works (currently in the Final EIS stage) to eliminate this problem. At much less cost than a new river bridge.
And with a minimum inpact to neighboring buildings to boot.
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=99.msg77267#msg77267 (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=99.msg77267#msg77267)
DeSoto County MS officials are being encouraged to advocate that the Southern Gateway bridge have a south of Memphis crossing that will tie in with Mississippi's sections of I-69 and I-269. They are also being advised that, although MS section of I-269 currently does not have a rail component, one could be added at a later time (at a minimal cost, no doubt :happy:) that would make the south of Memphis route more attractive. The link:
http://www.desototimes.com/articles/2011/03/05/news/doc4d71843b58e90902663282.txt
edit
Quote
The consultant helping DeSoto County officials plan for development of the I-69/I-269 International Trade Corridor told DeSoto County officials Thursday an alignment of the roadway with a planned third bridge across the Mississippi River is a "logical connection."
Greg Dale, a principal with McBride Dale Clarion of Cincinnati, briefed members of the DeSoto County Planning Commission on the development of a strategic plan for the I-69/I-269 International Trade Corridor.
It was during discussion of the plan the subject of the third bridge came up.
Dale told planning commissioners it's not too early to begin thinking about what the third bridge project could mean for DeSoto County.
"There is an opportunity for public input for a third bridge decision," Dale said. "This will take years and years to unfold," Dale said. "If a particular community wanted to advocate for that, DeSoto County's timing is opportunistic."
The environmental impact study on a third bridge across the Mississippi River is expected to be completed by 2013 or 2014.
Dale said rail traffic is expected to be a component of the third bridge project and no such rail traffic is planned along I-269 at present but could be incorporated at a later date.
[end edit]
Looking from afar, I've thought that north of Memphis link to TN I-269 would eventually be the selected route. Should be an interesting political chess game for the next decade or so ...
Also, Japan's recent horrific earthquake shows that earthquakes can still have devastating effects. Maybe the Southern Gateway really is needed in case the New Madrid fault decides to have a "big one."
DeSoto County Planning Director Jim McDougal has clarified that he would like to see the bridge cross where I-69 crosses US 61 at the Tunica County line. Here is a link to a news report with a video of McDougal setting forth his arguments for that crossing (as well as two neutered I-69 shields):
http://www.wreg.com/news/wreg-third-bridge,0,4563136.story
I believe he is referring to the Bridge A alternative from the initial study for the bridge (Exhibit 5 on page 14/14 of this pdf):
http://www.southerngatewayproject.com/library/MRCexecsum.pdf
How do you sell this route to Arkansas? It would involve substantial new terrain roadway and would be relatively far away from West Memphis. Casinos on the Arkansas side of the River? Potential economic development along an I-x69?
From my reading of the Executive Study, that particular alternative was rejected for current study, but retained for a seperate future corridor for "economic development".
From the alternatives I've seen, I believe that the "1-D" alternative would work best, since it would directly connect with future I-69 at the short TN 300 connector, and would be compatible with any future bridge across President's Island. Plus, it's the shortest and probably least expensive alternative.
The "1-A" alternative, though, would work well as an extension of I-269 or even an extension of I-22.
Anthony
Quote from: Grzrd on December 21, 2010, 11:31:30 AM
The project 's website is now up and running. The schedule indicates that they hope to identify a preferred alternative corridor by 2013-2014 and to have a FEIS by 2015. The website also has an Online Public Meeting with a Survey that can be completed at the end: http://www.southerngatewayproject.com/index.asp
In case anyone needs some holiday reading ... On December 22, the Purpose and Need and Study Area Package for the Southern Gateway Project was posted on the Southern Gateway website. The study is organized around three perceived needs: (1) improve infrastructure to withstand a major earthquake, (2) improve movement of freight on roadways and railroads in Memphis area, and (3) increase capacity and improve operations for vehicular traffic.
In regard to a major earthquake, I found it interesting that it is projected that a re-occurrence of the 1811-12 New Madrid seismic event would cause collapses of the I-155 bridge, the US 60/US 62 bridge in Birds Point, MO and Cairo, IL, and the US 49 bridge in Helena, AR (page 22/112 of pdf).
In terms of movement of freight, of the 1000 miles of interstates carrying the highest volumes of long-haul truck freight, Arkansas (I-40) has 23 percent and Tennessee 8 percent (page 21/112 of pdf).
Here's the link:
http://www.southerngatewayproject.com/library/CP-1%20Package%20with%20Agency%20Lts%20and%20Responses.pdf
Happy Holidays!
EDIT
The seven initial corridors are summarized on pages 37-40/112 of the pdf.
Some sort of traffic study for through truck movements (and through rail freight movements) would need to be done to determine the best location for the new bridge. Here are some of my observations:
- The southern alignment (V1-1) would work well from a freeway connectivity standpoint. This alignment, along with I-69 and I-269, would provide a southern bypass of Memphis and connect with I-22, and could also be used as a bypass for through I-40 traffic. However, it would fail to connect to most Class I railroads that serve Memphis; that alignment would only serve the CN lines coming from Jackson and the old Cotton Belt UP lines. An extension would need to be made along I-69/269 in order to serve BNSF and NS. An extension further north would be necessary to reach CSX. I should mention that none of the alternates serve the NS line going east out of Memphis towards Huntsville and Chattanooga, or the CSX line going northeast out of Memphis towards Nashville.
- V1-2 (the stateline routing) would work best from both a rail and a freeway connectivity standpoint since it would tie into where the future I-22 freeway ends at the TN/MS state line. It would also serve BNSF and tie in really close to their intermodal facility off of Lamar. I really like this routing for rail traffic. Extend it further east to intercept the NS line near the new NS intermodal center in SW Fayette County and extend it north from I-40 to intercept the UP intermodal center and it is even better. My only problem with this routing is that it doesn't provide for a complete bypass of Memphis from a freeway standpoint. It would serve traffic from the south and southeast (read: I-55 and I-22) better than I-40 traffic.
- V1-3 and V1-4 I don't think would be good routings. It would require a lot of displacement and, like V1-1, only serve two class I railroads (CN and UP). Plus, truck traffic would still have to use I-240 and I-55 to get to and from this bridge.
- V1-5 does nothing for bypass traffic through Memphis with either rail or truck traffic. It does provide some redundancy for the I-55 and the Frisco and Harahan bridges
- V1-6 is a good bypass for through I-40 traffic but for the most part it leaves rail traffic having to go back through Memphis to complete the through routing.
- V1-7 is a great freeway connection since it connects I-269 and I-69 with I-555 and I-55. However, it doesn't do as well as a true rail bypass without rail extensions to the bridge since, again, a lot of rail traffic would still have to pass through Memphis proper.
If I were looking at this I would choose the V1-2 routing for a rail bypass and bridge, and the V1-1 routing for a new freeway bridge.
Quote from: codyg1985 on December 29, 2011, 07:29:52 AM
V1-2 (the stateline routing) would work best from both a rail and a freeway connectivity standpoint since it would tie into where the future I-22 freeway ends at the TN/MS state line. It would also serve BNSF and tie in really close to their intermodal facility off of Lamar. I really like this routing for rail traffic. Extend it further east to intercept the NS line near the new NS intermodal center in SW Fayette County and extend it north from I-40 to intercept the UP intermodal center and it is even better.
If TDOT has the same sense that V1-2 is an early front-runner, then I wonder to what extent the ongoing FHWA/HUD study of the Lamar Corridor(incorporating the recent TDOT study at http://www.tdot.state.tn.us/documents/LamarAvenueCorridor_June2011.pdf) would be affected by Lamar having a substantial possibility of a direct tie-in to the Southern Gateway V1-2 corridor? Memphis has a lot of long-range moving pieces right now.
About railroads: remember that they don't usually run through major cities without stopping, but set off and pick up cars at the yard. In general, only unit trains (e.g. coal mine to power plant) are going to bypass the yard.
^ BNSF runs a lot of Wyoming Powder River Coal trains down the Thayer Sub through Memphis onto the BNSF Birmingham Sub and on the NS Memphis Sub (I believe it iw called) to Georgia.
Quote from: Grzrd on July 13, 2012, 11:08:31 AM
Quote from: Grzrd on March 21, 2012, 08:19:17 AM
Memphis Urban Area Metropolitan Planning Organization administrator Pragati Srivastava stated yesterday that the expectation is still to have I-69 completed through metro Memphis by 2020 (http://www.memphisdailynews.com/news/2012/mar/21/mpo-administrator-recaps-plans-to-ccim/):
Quote
"The TIP is literally where the rubber meets the road," Srivastava said, "because in our TIP, all of the projects that we have identified in our long-range plan get the funding associated with those projects in the Transportation Improvement Program ...."
Major projects of the 2011-2014 TIP are ... the preliminary phases of Interstate 69 — which is anticipated to be completed by 2020.
After seeing the scheduled lettings for the remaining sections of Tennessee's I-269 (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=1329.msg159213#msg159213), I emailed Ms. Srivastava and asked what the game plan is for I-69 in metro Memphis through 2020. Given her March comments, I was a little surprised by her response (and caused to wonder how they could include a 2020 completion date in the 2040 LRTP :hmm:):
Quote
Without a commitment on the federal level ... TDOT has made the decision to postpone any further public meetings and design work on the various segments of I-69 until there is a dedicated funding source. When and if the funding issue is resolved, TDOT will be ready to resume work on I-69.
(above quote from I-69 in TN (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3841.msg160973#msg160973) thread)
The uncertainty surrounding I-69's construction in Tennessee may have an impact upon the the corridor selected for the Southern Gateway bridge. In the the Purpose and Need and Study Area Package for the Southern Gateway Project (http://www.southerngatewayproject.com/library/CP-1%20Package%20with%20Agency%20Lts%20and%20Responses.pdf), TDOT had to address a concern by the EPA that I-69 might not be completed (which in EPA's view would have deprived two of the corridors of their independent utility) and had to acknowledge building I-69 was not a certainty, but not building I-69 was still an "unlikely event" (page 69/112 of pdf):
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FZDaaM.png&hash=668c31eba90c6c64d89b3d024d5116cbe9570569)
The Schedule for the Southern Gateway Project (http://www.southerngatewayproject.com/schedule.asp) indicates that the seven corridors should be narrowed down to three corridors by October or November:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2F7CPbj.jpg&hash=aa4f5077fe96e40bdd84ce08c2b1947f22da579f)
It will be interesting to see if Corridors V1-6 and V1-7 make the cut.
Quote from: Grzrd on July 17, 2012, 05:23:23 PM
The Schedule for the Southern Gateway Project (http://www.southerngatewayproject.com/schedule.asp) indicates that the seven corridors should be narrowed down to three corridors by October or November
I recently emailed the Project Manager and asked him if they were on schedule. His response made me appreciate that, in addition to a no build alternative and three alternative corridors, they are also considering a
bridge replacement alternative:
Quote
We started with 7 alternatives. Now we are in the process of reducing it down to no build alternative, bridge replacement, and 3 build alternatives. We will not have that completed by year end.
In the current economic climate, bridge replacement may well be the choice.
Quote from: NYYPhil777 on September 18, 2012, 03:38:28 AM
Odds are I-22 will run into Memphis and its west terminus will be at I-240.
Quote from: codyg1985 on September 18, 2012, 07:12:15 AM
I think for a while I-22 will either end at the MS/TN state line, at I-55, or at I-269. There are plans to upgrade some of the intersections to interchanges along Lamar Avenue, but I don't know if the plan is to fully limit access along the corridor or only upgrade major intersections while allowing direct access to Lamar.
I hope you are right, though.
Quote from: NE2 on September 18, 2012, 03:53:19 AM
I'd take I-22 north on I-269 and west on SR 385 to I-240. And then extend it to Yellowstone.
(above quotes from Interstate 269 (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=1329.msg174324#msg174324) thread)
As a darkhorse apart from the above options, I still like Corridor V1-2:
Quote from: codyg1985 on December 29, 2011, 07:29:52 AM
V1-2 (the stateline routing) would work best from ... a freeway connectivity standpoint since it would tie into where the future I-22 freeway ends at the TN/MS state line.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FXyM3S.jpg&hash=07256dc59e512ee74ce5fe10b43af8350d20b878)
(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))
V1-2 would get I-22 through Tennessee over to Arkansas; not quite as dramatic as taking it to Yellowstone, but it would add two states to the interstate routing. :happy:
Quote from: Grzrd on March 13, 2011, 11:27:11 AM
Also, Japan's recent horrific earthquake shows that earthquakes can still have devastating effects. Maybe the Southern Gateway really is needed in case the New Madrid fault decides to have a "big one."
If the New Madrid Fault goes off, especially towards its southern end, there won't be anybody to evacuate Memphis. And it would certainly destroy all the bridges from Memphis to St Louis.
Quote from: Grzrd on July 17, 2012, 05:23:23 PM
The uncertainty surrounding I-69's construction in Tennessee may have an impact upon the the corridor selected for the Southern Gateway bridge. In the the Purpose and Need and Study Area Package for the Southern Gateway Project (http://www.southerngatewayproject.com/library/CP-1%20Package%20with%20Agency%20Lts%20and%20Responses.pdf), TDOT had to address a concern by the EPA that I-69 might not be completed (which in EPA's view would have deprived two of the corridors of their independent utility) and had to acknowledge building I-69 was not a certainty, but not building I-69 was still an "unlikely event" (page 69/112 of pdf):
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FZDaaM.png&hash=668c31eba90c6c64d89b3d024d5116cbe9570569)
The Schedule for the Southern Gateway Project (http://www.southerngatewayproject.com/schedule.asp) indicates that the seven corridors should be narrowed down to three corridors by October or November:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2F7CPbj.jpg&hash=aa4f5077fe96e40bdd84ce08c2b1947f22da579f)
Since it seemed like the project was falling behind the timeline, I emailed the Deputy Project Manager with the consultant and asked for an update. The response:
Quote
Thanks for your email. The project is currently on hold and there are no pending or projected dates for moving on to the next phase. TDOT is reviewing the Southern Gateway project and other large projects across the State before authorizing the project to move forward.
There will be public notices and public meetings prior to selection of corridors for detailed evaluation.
I wonder if the project is on hold because of either its own independent projected cost or TDOT's placing of I-69 SIU 8 on indefinite hold and wanting a federal commitment for more dedicated funds for I-69 (which could theoretically be part of a larger plan to also assist Tennessee's rural neighbors of Arkansas and Mississippi regarding I-69 funding). Perhaps the TDOT I-69 "hold" has led to a downstream placing on hold of the Southern Gateway bridge. Getting the dedicated funds might allow TDOT to work out an "understanding" with EPA regarding I-69 SIU 8 similar to KYTC's I-69 "understanding" with FHWA and allow the Southern Gateway project to proceed.
Otherwise, since I-269 is now completely under construction in Mississippi, Mississippi and Arkansas might want Tennessee to "default" to Corridor V1-1, which completely bypasses Tennessee.
Plenty of time for some more paint to dry ...............
My sense of things is that this study was mostly an AHTD wishlist item anyway. Tolls might be viable on the V1-1 route because it'd save substantial time for truck traffic; I can't see a new bridge happening without tolls, though.
Quote from: Chris on February 02, 2011, 04:32:32 PM
I think a southern bridge seems most likely. This can eliminate the nasty I-55 TOTSO on the Tennessee side and will connect to the largest cargo airport in the world, plus give additional options for I-40 - I-22 traffic (Little Rock - Birmingham/Atlanta). The southern side of Memphis is also the most developed part, i.e. the most traffic potential. I think an I-69 bridge is too far south to be of any use for the metro area.
The bridge to nowhere.
Not sure why this thread was revived; in any event, since TDOT is going ahead with the I-55/Crump reconstruction my guess is that any "new" bridge will be a replacement for the existing Memphis & Arkansas (V1-5).
It's also possible (maybe even likely) that the lengthy closure of the M&A during the reconstruction will suggest that just one bridge is enough for I-40 and I-55 highway traffic, particularly once I-69 is in place to allow better access to the existing bridges south and north of Memphis in the event of a serious disruption. Probably the more serious concern is the rail bridges, since none of them are likely to survive a decent quake (unlike the Hernando de Soto, which probably will survive anything that would leave the roads around it still passable as well). A rail bypass north or south of Memphis would make sense since most of the intermodal yards are on the periphery of the city, and free up the old Southern line along Poplar out to Collierville for transit use.
Quote from: froggie on November 18, 2015, 11:59:00 AM
Theoretically, a rail component to the Great River Bridge would provide some redundancy for when the New Madrid Fault rears its ugly head and impacts the existing Memphis river crossings...
(above quote from I-69 Mississippi River Bridge (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=6153.msg2106574#msg2106574) thread)
This article (http://www.commercialappeal.com/business/logistics/Memphis-backlog-of-uncompleted-road-projects-nears-1-billion-352338291.html) reports that the Memphis metro area has approximately $1 billion in backlogged projects, that the third Mississippi River bridge (Southern Gateway) is not among them, and that Shelby County officials believe that the federal government should pay for most of the bridge because the nation would suffer a huge economic loss if an earthquake wiped out the existing bridges:
Quote
... Gov. Bill Haslam ....
recently stood on BNSF property with traffic roaring in the background and talked about the state's $6 billion backlog of transportation projects, including at least $934 million that touch Shelby County. Haslam said he wants to work with lawmakers to come up with a plan to fix the issue before he leaves office in 2018. Not included in the backlog are a proposed third Mississippi River bridge and nearly $35 million in newly identified needs, mostly bridge replacements on state routes ....
Dexter Muller, a senior advisor for the Greater Memphis Chamber ....
TDOT's Shelby backlog is dwarfed by an estimated $1.5 billion pricetag of a third Mississippi River bridge.
The third bridge and I-69 are considered as much national as local in significance, and Memphis chamber officials argue they should receive a larger proportion of federal support for that reason.
"That's not a project the state should have to fund," Muller said, noting that the nation would suffer a massive economic loss if Memphis area bridges were knocked out by a calamity like an earthquake.
He's right. In fact, there needs to be two. Arkansas shoud be screaming for two as well because that would create a loop of Memphis that included Arkansas. Quite Franky new bridges in Memphis is more important than an I-69 bridge.
You want to know who will throw up resistance to a new bridge that would connect I-40 to I-69 in Tunica. The Dog Track will throw tons of money around to kill that route. They are the ones screaming the loudest over the proposed closing of the Old Bridge by TDOT. If you build one, will Tenn and Miss fight over which one gets it and delay it decades more.