News:

Thank you for your patience during the Forum downtime while we upgraded the software. Welcome back and see this thread for some new features and other changes to the forum.

Main Menu

I-69 Ohio River Bridge

Started by truejd, August 05, 2010, 10:32:59 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

vdeane

Quote from: Brandon on July 18, 2014, 09:52:29 AM
Quote from: vdeane on July 17, 2014, 10:08:36 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on July 17, 2014, 09:08:02 AM
Why would they decommission the us 41 bridge?  Why not just build a new one?
It needs to be replaced anyways, and US 41 will likely have no need for more than two lanes after I-69 is built.  Why not save some money?

Wanna bet?  US-41 connects the downtowns of two cities on either side of the Ohio River at this point.  It should maintain 4 lanes (2 per direction).
Why wouldn't they just get on I-69 for the short hop?  I guarantee you there will be at least one Henderson interchange on that side of the city and an interchange near where the current US 41/I-69 interchange is.
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position of NYSDOT or its affiliates.


Brandon

Quote from: vdeane on July 18, 2014, 09:16:44 PM
Quote from: Brandon on July 18, 2014, 09:52:29 AM
Quote from: vdeane on July 17, 2014, 10:08:36 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on July 17, 2014, 09:08:02 AM
Why would they decommission the us 41 bridge?  Why not just build a new one?
It needs to be replaced anyways, and US 41 will likely have no need for more than two lanes after I-69 is built.  Why not save some money?

Wanna bet?  US-41 connects the downtowns of two cities on either side of the Ohio River at this point.  It should maintain 4 lanes (2 per direction).
Why wouldn't they just get on I-69 for the short hop?  I guarantee you there will be at least one Henderson interchange on that side of the city and an interchange near where the current US 41/I-69 interchange is.

Considering that the road on both sides of the bridge into each town is 4 lanes, it's wisest to just maintain the  4 lanes.  Why should all traffic be forced to use the I-69 Bridge?
"If you think this has a happy ending, you haven't been paying attention." - Ramsay Bolton

"Symbolic of his struggle against reality." - Reg

vdeane

I would think it would be more convenient.  Don't interstates have higher speed limits?
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position of NYSDOT or its affiliates.

silverback1065


Pete from Boston

It's a non-starter because you'd lose a lot of goodwill in Henderson over it.  There's a lot of personal and municipal income dependent on that 41 strip and the traffic flowing past.  Sometimes politics is more important than engineering in getting things done.

silverback1065

I wouldn't say more important, I'd say more popular

Anthony_JK

Quote from: Avalanchez71 on July 18, 2014, 08:48:20 AM
When I need to get to Chicagoland and points north in WI I use US 41.  The highway is just fine as is.  Yes the bridge does need work.  I don't want it to collapse and dump into the Ohio.  I think it is a nice break to stop in Henderson, not that Henderson is something special, but just nice to say hey it is time to stop.

That's the reason we have those things called "exits" and "business routes".

Through traffic that is bypassing Henderson should not have to endure stoppage and traffic lights just so you can have a "great place to rest". Either upgrade US 41 to proper Interstate standards with a new/better bridge, or build the bypass. I-69 is mostly about international freight/national travel between Mexico/South Texas and the Midwest, anyway.

silverback1065

The whole "international freight" thing I always thought was bs.

Pete from Boston


Quote from: Anthony_JK on July 20, 2014, 03:25:02 AM
Quote from: Avalanchez71 on July 18, 2014, 08:48:20 AM
When I need to get to Chicagoland and points north in WI I use US 41.  The highway is just fine as is.  Yes the bridge does need work.  I don't want it to collapse and dump into the Ohio.  I think it is a nice break to stop in Henderson, not that Henderson is something special, but just nice to say hey it is time to stop.

That's the reason we have those things called "exits" and "business routes".

Through traffic that is bypassing Henderson should not have to endure stoppage and traffic lights just so you can have a "great place to rest". Either upgrade US 41 to proper Interstate standards with a new/better bridge, or build the bypass. I-69 is mostly about international freight/national travel between Mexico/South Texas and the Midwest, anyway.

Henderson' strip will also do just fine as the best cluster of just-off-exit services for many miles (getting off for those things at the Lloyd requires a lot of extraneous driving). 

vdeane

Quote from: silverback1065 on July 20, 2014, 08:27:49 AM
The whole "international freight" thing I always thought was bs.
Agreed.  We already have a perfectly good interstate system international freight can use.  Aside from south Texas, the most-used part of I-69 for international traffic will probably be the Michigan one, to bypass Detroit.  The interior parts of I-69 will likely never be more than anything beyond regional connectors.
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position of NYSDOT or its affiliates.

Avalanchez71

My thoughts as well with regard to the Reconquistador Connector.

mgk920

Quote from: Grzrd on July 16, 2014, 09:44:51 PMHere is a snip of the map of BridgeLink's suggested alternative from the article:



This is what my scribblings from a while back also show for a routing for such a crossing - IMHO it just makes the most sense, carrying the through traffic, allowing convenient I-route access to the locals while maintaining the local utility of the current US 41 routing at the lowest cost.

:nod:

Mike

qguy

Does anyone have a link to the actual proposal by Bridgelink?

RoadMaster09

New here - but having just travelled there on a vacation, I would say the best idea:

* Replace the older US 41 bridge and rehabilitate the existing US 41 bridge

* Upgrade existing US 41 in Henderson to a freeway (speed limit: 55 mph), elevating at ramps, using service roads to maintain local access

* Interchanges at Waterworks Road for island area access, KY-414/Stratman Road (partial - to/from north only) and Watson Lane, and a reconstruction of the US 60 interchange to eliminate some loop ramps and improve service road access

Lowest cost routing that allows for I-69 to be continuous relatively quickly.

US 41

Quote from: RoadMaster09 on August 03, 2014, 09:30:16 PM
New here - but having just travelled there on a vacation, I would say the best idea:

* Replace the older US 41 bridge and rehabilitate the existing US 41 bridge

* Upgrade existing US 41 in Henderson to a freeway (speed limit: 55 mph), elevating at ramps, using service roads to maintain local access

* Interchanges at Waterworks Road for island area access, KY-414/Stratman Road (partial - to/from north only) and Watson Lane, and a reconstruction of the US 60 interchange to eliminate some loop ramps and improve service road access

Lowest cost routing that allows for I-69 to be continuous relatively quickly.

I agree with everything except for the US 60 part. Why would you want to ruin a perfectly good interchange?
Visited States and Provinces:
USA (48)= All of Lower 48
Canada (5)= NB, NS, ON, PEI, QC
Mexico (9)= BCN, BCS, CHIH, COAH, DGO, NL, SON, SIN, TAM

silverback1065

I think keeping them separate is better having a bypass for through traffic would be great especially in the event that an accident closes a bridge.

RoadMaster09

Quote from: silverback1065 on August 04, 2014, 07:41:21 AM
I think keeping them separate is better having a bypass for through traffic would be great especially in the event that an accident closes a bridge.

Couldn't they just move traffic to one lane on the other bridge though (except during replacement or reconstruction)? After all, those bridges will need major work anyway.

Grzrd

Quote from: Pete from Boston on July 17, 2014, 10:23:24 AM
Quote from: US 41 on July 17, 2014, 09:11:10 AM
Quote from: silverback1065 on July 17, 2014, 09:08:02 AM
Why would they decommission the us 41 bridge?  Why not just build a new one?
They could build a new 41 bridge and replace the really old one. Then route 69 onto US 41 over the River.
The ROW is too difficult in Henderson.  Old news.

In this August 19 video interview of KYTC's Keith Todd, Todd mentions that KYTC's senior engineers are exploring the possibility of taking out the double turn lanes on Henderson's strip in order to add an extra travel lane.  They are anticipating substantial extra traffic in five to ten years and believe that adding the extra traffic lane would greatly improve the traffic flow.  The traffic flow dipped to approximately 37,000 vehicles per day several years ago, but has slowly crept back up to 41,000 vehicles per day.




Quote from: jnewkirk77 on June 12, 2014, 12:26:25 AM
A bridge like "The Stan" would be sufficient to carry traffic across the Ohio there for at least the foreseeable future, IMHO.  Keep in mind, most local traffic would probably still use the Twin Bridges.  I could be wrong, but if it they can find a way to get it for less, I think they ought to do it.

Above said, I don't think Todd was suggesting that a new travel lane would remove the need for an I-69 bridge; it would basically serve as a short-term solution until the new bridge could be built.  Regarding a new I-69 bridge, Todd suggested that a bridge like "The Stan" would be sufficient for the anticipated traffic flow.

Grzrd

Quote from: Grzrd on June 12, 2013, 10:03:55 AM
Quote from: Grzrd on April 26, 2013, 12:28:52 AM
In the recently completed I-69 Innovative Financing Study Final Findings and the Executive Summary, the Final Findings set forth a standalone traffic and toll analysis for the I-69 Ohio River Bridge
On pages 47-49/122 of the Final Findings (pages 42-44 of the document), an analysis is performed under three scenarios to determine what percentage of the bridge's project cost could be covered by innovative financing.  The three scenarios and the percentage covered by innovative financing:
1. Base Case: This case assumes the SIU's financing is solely supported by toll revenues. 71%.
2. Case 1: Under this case, the security for the bonds and the TIFIA loan are enhanced by a contractual obligation of the State DOT to pay operations, maintenance and rehabilitation, and replacement expenses to the extent toll revenues are not sufficient. This back‐up obligation or "credit enhancement"  allows the bonds and TIFIA loan to be secured by a pledge of gross toll revenues. 90%.
3. Case 2: This case improves on Case 1 by adding a full secondary lien security or legal pledge to the debt from a high credit worthy nontoll revenue source(s) such as a state transportation trust fund or a state's full faith and credit. This significantly improves the SIU's credit rating to an assumed "˜AA‐' that results in additional project debt proceeds. 100%.

This article (behind paywall) reports that Kentucky's assistant state highway engineer with primary responsibility for the I-69 project believes that the use of tolls to finance the bridge should be given "careful consideration":

Quote
Further studies are being done or are on the drawing board, said Rusty Fowler, the district engineer with the Indiana Department of Transportation who has responsibility for the southwest part of the state. "That's the first thing we've got to find out – how are we going to fund this thing.
"If we don't follow the rules it jeopardizes federal funding,"
he said in response to a question on why design hasn't already begun. "We want to make sure we get the steps in the right order."
Building the new bridge with toll revenue has been a popular idea, and one supported by BridgeLink. "We're pushing for a tolled new interstate to help this move forward,"  said Christy Gillenwater, BridgeLink's moderator of the panel.
But Paul Looney, Kentucky's assistant state highway engineer with primary responsibility for the I-69 project, said that idea needs careful consideration.
"Tolling could be a primary financing mechanism,"  said Looney, who conceded he is "relatively new to the I-69 project.
"But one of the things (the planning study indicated) was that the toll revenue may be inadequate if the existing bridges are left in place, given the diversion of traffic that may occur."

Henderson and Evansville are "two cities-one community to a large degree,"  in that many people cross the river on a regular basis to work, play and shop. "The local connection in having it be toll-free is obviously ... a critical element for the day-to-day connectivity of the area."
But leaving the Twin Bridges toll-free while charging tolls on a new I-69 bridge could pose a "challenge,"  he said, in that the toll revenues may not be sufficient to pay off the bonds.

hbelkins

Ban trucks on the old bridges and restripe them to one lane. That'll force much of the through traffic onto the I-69 bridge.


Government would be tolerable if not for politicians and bureaucrats.

codyg1985

Quote from: hbelkins on September 24, 2014, 10:52:25 PM
Ban trucks on the old bridges and restripe them to one lane. That'll force much of the through traffic onto the I-69 bridge.

Or if the older bridge is demolished or converted to a pedestrian/bike facility.
Cody Goodman
Huntsville, AL, United States

Pete from Boston

Just throw a few traffic lights up on 41 near Ellis Park for no particular reason.  Everywhere else makes it inconvenient to shunpike; they just need to learn the tricks.

silverback1065

Quote from: Pete from Boston on September 25, 2014, 07:40:22 AM
Just throw a few traffic lights up on 41 near Ellis Park for no particular reason.  Everywhere else makes it inconvenient to shunpike; they just need to learn the tricks.
Hahahaha so pull a kokomo?

hbelkins

Quote from: Pete from Boston on September 25, 2014, 07:40:22 AM
Just throw a few traffic lights up on 41 near Ellis Park for no particular reason.  Everywhere else makes it inconvenient to shunpike; they just need to learn the tricks.

The way traffic can jam up on the Henderson stretch now, I can understand the desire to pay a toll to bypass that congestion, especially if a completed I-69 leads to an increase in through traffic.


Government would be tolerable if not for politicians and bureaucrats.

RoadWarrior56

I would not be surprised if the older of the two US 41 spans would be closed to vehicular traffic after the I-69 bridge opens.  Since that span is already over 80 years old, I am not sure how many more years of useful life it will have left without prohibitive maintenance costs.

That could be the eventual compromise........build the new bridge as toll, and keep a single two-lane US 41 bridge open as a free facility.  The congestion on the free bridge will attract traffic to the new span.  Also, keep the tolls reasonable, especially for frequent travelers. 



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.