AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: I-67: TN, KY, IN  (Read 40138 times)

wdcrft63

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 331
  • Location: Durham, NC
  • Last Login: August 16, 2017, 06:14:00 PM
Re: I-67: TN, KY, IN
« Reply #100 on: April 18, 2015, 11:28:55 PM »

I see the idea of upgrading the Natcher Parkway to interstate standards is still active:
http://www.wave3.com/story/28698204/daviess-co-leaders-want-natcher-parkway-upgraded-to-interstate-standards
Logged

codyg1985

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1994
  • Age: 31
  • Location: Huntsville, AL
  • Last Login: Today at 07:31:35 AM
Re: I-67: TN, KY, IN
« Reply #101 on: May 07, 2015, 07:08:18 AM »

I see the idea of upgrading the Natcher Parkway to interstate standards is still active:
http://www.wave3.com/story/28698204/daviess-co-leaders-want-natcher-parkway-upgraded-to-interstate-standards


I could see this being a I-x65 (I-165 would be a good one).
Logged
Cody Goodman
Huntsville, AL, United States

Life in Paradise

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 79
  • Location: Indiana
  • Last Login: Today at 08:12:57 AM
Re: I-67: TN, KY, IN
« Reply #102 on: November 05, 2016, 11:40:35 AM »

Why Petersburg?  The Jasper, IN area has a lot of industry, and actually has been in need of a four lane road to I-64 or I-69 for years, and a true bypass would have been good as well.  Petersburg already has I-69 and almost no industry for its 2500 residents.
Logged

silverback1065

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2247
  • Age: 27
  • Location: Indianapolis
  • Last Login: August 17, 2017, 09:37:32 PM
Re: I-67: TN, KY, IN
« Reply #103 on: November 05, 2016, 11:12:54 PM »

Why Petersburg?  The Jasper, IN area has a lot of industry, and actually has been in need of a four lane road to I-64 or I-69 for years, and a true bypass would have been good as well.  Petersburg already has I-69 and almost no industry for its 2500 residents.

eventually, us 231 will be a 4 lane divided highway in most of the state. 
Logged

Interstate 69 Fan

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 163
  • I-14 got signed. Now let's get it on Google Maps.

  • Age: 2013
  • Location: Indianapolis, Indiana
  • Last Login: August 03, 2017, 07:49:24 PM
Re: I-67: TN, KY, IN
« Reply #104 on: November 07, 2016, 08:28:55 AM »

I see the idea of upgrading the Natcher Parkway to interstate standards is still active:
http://www.wave3.com/story/28698204/daviess-co-leaders-want-natcher-parkway-upgraded-to-interstate-standards


I could see this being a I-x65 (I-165 would be a good one).
They have assigned the "Future Interstate 565" designation to the route.
Logged
Up to date on I-69, I-14, I-42, I-87, and I-11 construction. I also want I-97 extended south! :)

froggie

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 8366
  • Location: Greensboro, VT
  • Last Login: Today at 07:24:48 AM
    • Froggie's Place
Re: I-67: TN, KY, IN
« Reply #105 on: November 08, 2016, 08:42:25 AM »

Who are "they", and when were the planning to petition AASHTO and FHWA for such a route number?  Until that happens and is approved, it's not an official Future Interstate.
Logged

Interstate 69 Fan

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 163
  • I-14 got signed. Now let's get it on Google Maps.

  • Age: 2013
  • Location: Indianapolis, Indiana
  • Last Login: August 03, 2017, 07:49:24 PM
Re: I-67: TN, KY, IN
« Reply #106 on: November 08, 2016, 04:19:58 PM »

Who are "they", and when were the planning to petition AASHTO and FHWA for such a route number?  Until that happens and is approved, it's not an official Future Interstate.
KYTC submitted it, and they declined I-565, but Approved Future I-565.
Logged
Up to date on I-69, I-14, I-42, I-87, and I-11 construction. I also want I-97 extended south! :)

mvak36

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 455
  • 2016 WS champs!!!!

  • Last Login: August 16, 2017, 09:41:57 PM
Re: I-67: TN, KY, IN
« Reply #107 on: November 08, 2016, 04:25:32 PM »

Who are "they", and when were the planning to petition AASHTO and FHWA for such a route number?  Until that happens and is approved, it's not an official Future Interstate.
KYTC submitted it, and they declined I-565, but Approved Future I-565.

They didn't submit a request: http://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=14873.msg2183548#msg2183548
Logged
Counties: Counties visited
Travel Mapping: Summary

Interstate 69 Fan

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 163
  • I-14 got signed. Now let's get it on Google Maps.

  • Age: 2013
  • Location: Indianapolis, Indiana
  • Last Login: August 03, 2017, 07:49:24 PM
Re: I-67: TN, KY, IN
« Reply #108 on: November 09, 2016, 10:15:50 AM »

Who are "they", and when were the planning to petition AASHTO and FHWA for such a route number?  Until that happens and is approved, it's not an official Future Interstate.
KYTC submitted it, and they declined I-565, but Approved Future I-565.

They didn't submit a request: http://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=14873.msg2183548#msg2183548
I thought they did. My bad
Logged
Up to date on I-69, I-14, I-42, I-87, and I-11 construction. I also want I-97 extended south! :)

andy3175

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1207
  • Location: San Diego, California, USA
  • Last Login: August 17, 2017, 11:44:29 AM
    • AARoads
Re: I-67: TN, KY, IN
« Reply #109 on: May 06, 2017, 12:32:10 AM »

http://www.greensburgdailynews.com/news/new-law-could-open-way-for-additional-southern-interstate/article_e6516a81-4bbb-520c-8814-f87eb3d24d2b.html

New law could open way for additional southern interstate
Mike Grant CNHI News Indiana May 2, 2017

Quote
A unique bill for new road funding could open the way for construction of a new interstate highway in southern Indiana.

Late last week, Governor Eric Holcomb signed Senate Enrolled Act 128, also known as the Regional Infrastructure bill, into law. The measure was authored by State Rep. Mike Braun and State Senator Mark Messmer, both Republicans from Jasper. The bill will allow counties, or municipalities, to establish a Regional Development Authority to raise funds specifically for infrastructure projects like highways, bridges, rail lines, airports, public transportation and other infrastructure improvements.

"I was really pleased that it went through," said Representative Braun. "We started working on this bill last session, but didn't put it together until this one."

Braun points out that Indiana has been struggling to come up with funding for road projects. Right now it has money to fund the major ones on the books like the completion of I-69 between Indianapolis and Martinsville, and the new bridge over the Ohio between Evansville and Henderson, Kentucky.

"The problem is there was not enough money to get any other major projects past the talking stage," he said. "This is a long-term funding bill that will allow for the establishment of Regional Development Authorities that can pay for some of the road funding."

Under the bill cities and counties could take money from any number of sources, including general funds, rainy day funds and other funds to put together money for a major project. The project would go to the Indiana Department of Transportation where it would be vetted, and if acceptable, the local funding could be used to help cover the state matching funds on a major project.

"Most big projects in Indiana are built with federal highway funds," explained Braun. "The state normally has to cover about 20 percent of the cost. The Regional Development Authority fund would be used to off-set the funding for the state match. This law gives regional areas additional tools to help fund their specific infrastructure projects. By providing new ways for local governments and businesses to have skin in the game, we can encourage them to prioritize projects that have a greater economic or regional impact while also working to improve the quality of roads and bridges in their areas."

Mid-State Corridor

Officials in Dubois and surrounding counties have a specific project they wish to push under the new law. The Mid-State Corridor would connect onto I-69 somewhere in Daviess County and extend south to the Ohio River to Owensboro, Kentucky. Along the way it will create interstate access to Martin, Dubois, and Spencer counties.

"We have talked about this project, especially a bypass connecting the industrial areas in Huntingburg and Jasper, forever," said Braun. "We can now get this going. We have already had a meeting to begin forming the RDA. This law is like a green light to work on the Mid-State Corridor. I think it will come together pretty quickly in Dubois and Spencer counties. There is still some question where it will go once it gets to the north of Dubois County."

The Regional Infrastructure Bill is a piece of unique Indiana legislation. Braun says there is nothing like it elsewhere in the country. The Indiana Legislature normally does not embrace new ideas the first one or two times through.

"I am really pleased that it went through on the first attempt," he said. "We were lucky. Senator Luke Kenley (Chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee) liked it and became a supporter, then INDOT got on board. The Indiana Finance Authority liked it. When we removed the provisions for a referendum and potential property tax increases, the Farm Bureau got on board and then came a cascade of support. I think the state liked the idea of local governments getting involved in infrastructure projects and being willing to put up some of their money to do it."

The Regional Infrastructure law came during the same session at HB 1002 which will raise billions of dollars in new funding for Indiana roads and bridges through a higher gas tax and increases in registration fees for vehicles.

"The Regional Infrastructure law is a great companion to HB 1002," said Braun. "The bill will help fast track some projects that have not gone anywhere even though they have had local support."
Logged
Regards,
Andy

www.aaroads.com

silverback1065

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2247
  • Age: 27
  • Location: Indianapolis
  • Last Login: August 17, 2017, 09:37:32 PM
Re: I-67: TN, KY, IN
« Reply #110 on: May 07, 2017, 08:55:29 PM »

this project is a waste of time and money, literally anything you could think of transportationwise is more important to do in indiana before doing this bullshit.  make 231 a divided highway and be done with it. 
Logged

Captain Jack

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 168
  • Location: Southern Indiana
  • Last Login: August 15, 2017, 09:23:38 AM
Re: I-67: TN, KY, IN
« Reply #111 on: May 08, 2017, 12:47:32 AM »

I agree.

Kokomo, Vincennes, Logansport, Bedford, Warsaw, are all Indiana communities larger than Jasper that are not connected to an interstate highway.

If Ft. Wayne to Chicago, Evansville to Chicago, South Bend to Indianapolis, Ft. Wayne to Lafayette are all adequately served by a limited access US route, then there is absolutely no reason a Jasper to Owensboro route can't be as well.
Logged

Life in Paradise

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 79
  • Location: Indiana
  • Last Login: Today at 08:12:57 AM
Re: I-67: TN, KY, IN
« Reply #112 on: May 08, 2017, 10:34:54 AM »

Agreed.  I've lived in the area for over fifty years, and the US-231 corridor between Jasper and Huntingburg has been discussed for decades.  They've even thrown money at it in the 70s with the super two highway that went between the two cities, dropping in at the tow outskirts.  Back then they should have put in a four lane bypassing Jasper for the industrial traffic down to I-64.  They don't need an interstate, but a four lane would have been a good idea to get the furniture factory traffic down to the main east/west interstate.
Logged

The Ghostbuster

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1643
  • Age: 32
  • Location: Madison, WI
  • Last Login: August 15, 2017, 03:19:16 PM
Re: I-67: TN, KY, IN
« Reply #113 on: May 08, 2017, 05:36:41 PM »

I doubt we will ever see an Interstate 67 in any of these states. Is one really needed?
Logged

cabiness42

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 895
  • Age: 43
  • Location: New Albany, IN
  • Last Login: August 16, 2017, 07:43:57 AM
Re: I-67: TN, KY, IN
« Reply #114 on: May 09, 2017, 08:55:21 AM »

I doubt we will ever see an Interstate 67 in any of these states. Is one really needed?

Needed?  No.  You have a road from Bowling Green to Owensboro that is already at or very near interstate standard.  You also have a road from South Bend to Plymouth that is at interstate standard, and you have I-69 covering much of what is in between.  I don't think the segment from Owensboro to wherever it would tie in with I-69 needs to be interstate standard, and I don't think the rest of US 31 between Westfield and Plymouth that hasn't been converted yet needs to be.  From Indiana's standpoint I think 6-laning the rest of I-65 and I-70 is more important.

Still, if at some point in the future the rest of that upgrading is done, then I-67 makes sense.  Even if only the rest of what is between Westfield and Plymouth gets done, designating US 31 from South Bend to Indy as I-67 makes sense.
Logged

hbelkins

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 10413
  • Celebrating another day that Hillary isn't prez.

  • Age: 55
  • Location: Kentucky
  • Last Login: August 17, 2017, 06:15:56 PM
    • Millennium Highway
Re: I-67: TN, KY, IN
« Reply #115 on: May 09, 2017, 02:43:32 PM »

Except Kentucky already plans to sign the Natcher as an x65 instead of 67.
Logged

abqtraveler

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 134
  • US-85 runs thru Albuquerque, but only on paper

  • Location: Albuquerque, NM
  • Last Login: July 18, 2017, 07:54:32 PM
Re: I-67: TN, KY, IN
« Reply #116 on: May 09, 2017, 11:16:10 PM »

I doubt we will ever see an Interstate 67 in any of these states. Is one really needed?

Needed?  No.  You have a road from Bowling Green to Owensboro that is already at or very near interstate standard.  You also have a road from South Bend to Plymouth that is at interstate standard, and you have I-69 covering much of what is in between.  I don't think the segment from Owensboro to wherever it would tie in with I-69 needs to be interstate standard, and I don't think the rest of US 31 between Westfield and Plymouth that hasn't been converted yet needs to be.  From Indiana's standpoint I think 6-laning the rest of I-65 and I-70 is more important.

Still, if at some point in the future the rest of that upgrading is done, then I-67 makes sense.  Even if only the rest of what is between Westfield and Plymouth gets done, designating US 31 from South Bend to Indy as I-67 makes sense.

In that instance, the I-67 designation could be applied to the US-20/31 bypass around South Bend and continue northward along the US-31 freeway into Michigan.  The interchange with the South Bend Bypass and the new US-31 freeway heading south toward Plymouth would have to be upgraded from the current cloverleaf design to a high-speed directional configuration.
Logged
2-d Interstates traveled:  4, 5, 10, 15, 20, 24, 25, 27, 35, 39, 40, 41, 43, 44, 45, 49, 55, 57, 64, 65, 66, 69, 70, 71, 74, 76(E), 77, 78, 81, 83, 84(E), 85, 87, 89, 90, 91, 93, 94, 95

2-d Interstates Clinched:  12, 22, 30, 59, 80, 84(E), 86(E), 238

silverback1065

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2247
  • Age: 27
  • Location: Indianapolis
  • Last Login: August 17, 2017, 09:37:32 PM
Re: I-67: TN, KY, IN
« Reply #117 on: May 10, 2017, 07:28:30 AM »

I doubt we will ever see an Interstate 67 in any of these states. Is one really needed?

Needed?  No.  You have a road from Bowling Green to Owensboro that is already at or very near interstate standard.  You also have a road from South Bend to Plymouth that is at interstate standard, and you have I-69 covering much of what is in between.  I don't think the segment from Owensboro to wherever it would tie in with I-69 needs to be interstate standard, and I don't think the rest of US 31 between Westfield and Plymouth that hasn't been converted yet needs to be.  From Indiana's standpoint I think 6-laning the rest of I-65 and I-70 is more important.

Still, if at some point in the future the rest of that upgrading is done, then I-67 makes sense.  Even if only the rest of what is between Westfield and Plymouth gets done, designating US 31 from South Bend to Indy as I-67 makes sense.

In that instance, the I-67 designation could be applied to the US-20/31 bypass around South Bend and continue northward along the US-31 freeway into Michigan.  The interchange with the South Bend Bypass and the new US-31 freeway heading south toward Plymouth would have to be upgraded from the current cloverleaf design to a high-speed directional configuration.

i've heard that 31 north of 465 could become 67 in the future, but that's just wikipedia. 
Logged

LM117

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 907
  • Age: 28
  • Location: Danville, VA 👎
  • Last Login: August 17, 2017, 12:22:24 PM
Re: I-67: TN, KY, IN
« Reply #118 on: May 10, 2017, 08:28:19 AM »

I doubt we will ever see an Interstate 67 in any of these states. Is one really needed?

Needed?  No.  You have a road from Bowling Green to Owensboro that is already at or very near interstate standard.  You also have a road from South Bend to Plymouth that is at interstate standard, and you have I-69 covering much of what is in between.  I don't think the segment from Owensboro to wherever it would tie in with I-69 needs to be interstate standard, and I don't think the rest of US 31 between Westfield and Plymouth that hasn't been converted yet needs to be.  From Indiana's standpoint I think 6-laning the rest of I-65 and I-70 is more important.

Still, if at some point in the future the rest of that upgrading is done, then I-67 makes sense.  Even if only the rest of what is between Westfield and Plymouth gets done, designating US 31 from South Bend to Indy as I-67 makes sense.

In that instance, the I-67 designation could be applied to the US-20/31 bypass around South Bend and continue northward along the US-31 freeway into Michigan.  The interchange with the South Bend Bypass and the new US-31 freeway heading south toward Plymouth would have to be upgraded from the current cloverleaf design to a high-speed directional configuration.

i've heard that 31 north of 465 could become 67 in the future, but that's just wikipedia.

An I-67 between Indianapolis and Grand Rapids using US-31 and I-196 (assuming Michigan eventually closes that gap) makes better sense to me than it's current proposed routing in KY and IN.
Logged
"You forget a thousand things everyday. How about you make sure this is one of them?"--Michael De Santa, GTA V

Henry

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3477
  • Age: 47
  • Location: Chicago, IL/Seattle, WA
  • Last Login: August 17, 2017, 10:08:56 AM
    • Henry Watson's Online Freeway
Re: I-67: TN, KY, IN
« Reply #119 on: May 10, 2017, 09:58:04 AM »

There can be too much of a good thing. And FWIW, the proposed route would be on the wrong side of I-65, but the I-69 extension also is.

I wonder what has become of the US 219 plans in western PA? An I-67 there would be a far worse violation of the grid than I-99 in the central part of that state!
Logged
Go Cubs Go! Go Cubs Go! Hey Chicago, what do you say? The Cubs are gonna win today!

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2098
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: Today at 05:10:17 AM
Re: I-67: TN, KY, IN
« Reply #120 on: May 18, 2017, 06:20:11 PM »

I doubt we will ever see an Interstate 67 in any of these states. Is one really needed?

Needed?  No.  You have a road from Bowling Green to Owensboro that is already at or very near interstate standard.  You also have a road from South Bend to Plymouth that is at interstate standard, and you have I-69 covering much of what is in between.  I don't think the segment from Owensboro to wherever it would tie in with I-69 needs to be interstate standard, and I don't think the rest of US 31 between Westfield and Plymouth that hasn't been converted yet needs to be.  From Indiana's standpoint I think 6-laning the rest of I-65 and I-70 is more important.

Still, if at some point in the future the rest of that upgrading is done, then I-67 makes sense.  Even if only the rest of what is between Westfield and Plymouth gets done, designating US 31 from South Bend to Indy as I-67 makes sense.

In that instance, the I-67 designation could be applied to the US-20/31 bypass around South Bend and continue northward along the US-31 freeway into Michigan.  The interchange with the South Bend Bypass and the new US-31 freeway heading south toward Plymouth would have to be upgraded from the current cloverleaf design to a high-speed directional configuration.

i've heard that 31 north of 465 could become 67 in the future, but that's just wikipedia.

An I-67 between Indianapolis and Grand Rapids using US-31 and I-196 (assuming Michigan eventually closes that gap) makes better sense to me than it's current proposed routing in KY and IN.


If anything, US 31 north of Indianapolis and a subsumed I-196 would be the most appropriate place to designate a I-67.  Multiplexing it south over the new segments of I-69 just to serve Owensboro, KY would be more than gratuitous (regardless of the ambitions of its mayor).  The segment of US 231 from Crane south to I-64 doesn't have nearly the traffic volume to warrant Interstate-level upgrades, although in the longer term it's possible that a connector from I-64 to Owensboro south of there along 231 might eventually be an auxiliary Interstate route -- just not I-67!
Logged

silverback1065

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2247
  • Age: 27
  • Location: Indianapolis
  • Last Login: August 17, 2017, 09:37:32 PM
Re: I-67: TN, KY, IN
« Reply #121 on: May 18, 2017, 10:33:49 PM »

owensboro seems to live in the shadow of evansville.
Logged

codyg1985

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1994
  • Age: 31
  • Location: Huntsville, AL
  • Last Login: Today at 07:31:35 AM
Re: I-67: TN, KY, IN
« Reply #122 on: May 19, 2017, 09:00:47 AM »

owensboro seems to live in the shadow of evansville.

Downtown Owensboro is quite impressive, at least when I visited a few weeks ago. I don't remember it having a huge playground and park on the river when I was last there in 2005.
Logged
Cody Goodman
Huntsville, AL, United States

Rothman

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2855
  • Last Login: August 15, 2017, 06:26:07 AM
Re: I-67: TN, KY, IN
« Reply #123 on: May 19, 2017, 10:29:22 AM »

That must be due to recent redevelopment.  I went through Owensboro five or six years ago and it was a rather depressing place.  Seemed to be just yet another dying old industrial city.
Logged
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position(s) of NYSDOT.

I-39

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1028
  • Location: Middle Tennessee
  • Last Login: August 13, 2017, 03:20:54 PM
Re: I-67: TN, KY, IN
« Reply #124 on: May 21, 2017, 11:08:43 AM »

I concur with what was previously said. If I-67 comes about at all, the most logical corridor would be from Indianapolis to Grand Rapids along the US 31/I-196 corridor (or perhaps ending in Benton Harbor, as the US 31 freeway will not tie directly into I-196).

Though there are indeed higher priorities in Indiana, with the recent gas tax hike (with indexing), I could see the remaining segments of US 31 between South Bend and Indianapolis being converted to freeway within the next 10-15 years, so maybe an I-67 designation is not too far off.
Logged

 


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.