Update on I-69 Extension in Indiana

Started by mukade, June 25, 2011, 08:55:31 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

tdindy88

Quote from: mobilene on July 17, 2012, 01:02:15 PM
Here's the thing I don't get. In Indiana, we tend to call an exit by the road it exits onto.  "Take the 96th St. exit" or "Take the SR 37 exit" or whatever.  When Indiana went from sequential to mile-based exit numbers a bunch of years ago, it was met with a collective ho-hum statewide.  So in a big way, imho, the average Indiana traveler couldn't care less about exit numbers. -Jim

While I agree that this is true, when I frequent the I-69 corridor, I usually do call Exit 5 as Exit 5, since SR 37/116th Street isn't as quick for me to say. Likewise, Exit 10 is usually just Exit 10, that and saying Campus Parkway/Southeastern Parkway is a mouthful, or SR 238 for those who don't keep track of the latest highway decommissionings. Then again, I will get off at the 82nd Street exit or the 96th Street exit.


rickmeck

Good heavens. Are people really that stupid? Post a "former exit number" sign on the new exit number and be done with it. Is there really a compelling argument for the 200 mile idea? It has worked in other states, why not Indiana? Geez.

mukade

I assume the compelling argument is that it simplifies things albeit at the expense of accuracy. Exit 112 become exit 312 so maybe INDOT can change only one digit on every highway sign. Additionally, people reading commercial signs, publications, or web pages that haven't been updated would more likely be able to figure things out. I really can't think of any other reason. That said, I don't like the idea.

I am not sure about the "other states" comment. Other states have gone from sequential exit numbers to mileage-based exit numbers. How many times have Interstates been extended south or west like this thereby requiring numbering changes? I can only think of I-26 in NC. What does make this different than other situations is that there will be a gap in the middle where I-69 mileage will not be used for exit numbers no matter what.

NWI_Irish96

Quote from: mukade on July 17, 2012, 04:27:19 PM
Either way, mileage-based means just that. If I am 184 miles away from the Ohio River, I would prefer to know that. Once you change it to a "close enough for Government work" based system you lose that little convenience.

I agree.  I'm always using mile markers to know how much distance I have to go and from that estimate how much time it will take me.  Everybody heading south down I-69 is going to get to Evansville about 15 minutes later than they were expecting.
Indiana: counties 100%, highways 100%
Illinois: counties 100%, highways 61%
Michigan: counties 100%, highways 56%
Wisconsin: counties 86%, highways 23%

sd72667

Why don't they just take out their 9/16 socket and unbolt 2 nuts and replace the signs? Am I missing something here?

tvketchum

Quote from: cabiness42 on July 18, 2012, 07:41:21 AM
Quote from: mukade on July 17, 2012, 04:27:19 PM
Either way, mileage-based means just that. If I am 184 miles away from the Ohio River, I would prefer to know that. Once you change it to a "close enough for Government work" based system you lose that little convenience.

I agree.  I'm always using mile markers to know how much distance I have to go and from that estimate how much time it will take me.  Everybody heading south down I-69 is going to get to Evansville about 15 minutes later than they were expecting.

Actually, they will get there 15 minutes earlier, because the 16 miles don't exist and won't be traveled.

Alps

Quote from: cabiness42 on July 18, 2012, 07:41:21 AM
Quote from: mukade on July 17, 2012, 04:27:19 PM
Either way, mileage-based means just that. If I am 184 miles away from the Ohio River, I would prefer to know that. Once you change it to a "close enough for Government work" based system you lose that little convenience.

I agree.  I'm always using mile markers to know how much distance I have to go and from that estimate how much time it will take me.  Everybody heading south down I-69 is going to get to Evansville about 15 minutes later than they were expecting.
a) Sooner, not later
b) 99.5% of people aren't going to notice/care if Exit 200 is actually 184 miles from the border. Also, most people from NE of Indy aren't continuing SW of Indy on 69, no matter what CANAMEX proponents would have you believe. Finally, this isn't about the ease of converting exit numbers, since many are button copy anyway, but rather the ease of converting people who have had these exit numbers for decades. It's not like sequential to mile based, where there's no way to do it cleanly.

tvketchum

Quote from: mukade on July 17, 2012, 07:48:39 PM
I agree, they can interpret them - until they are no longer accurate on I-69. Then none of us will be able to unless we remember to subtract 16.

As for the Toll Road, I think that renumbereing happened a few years after the rest of the freeway exits were numbered.

Speaking of mileage-based exit numbers, who remembers these?


Michigan's first numbered exits- late 1960s, with the green tabs not appearing until sign replacement time. I lived just south of exit 190 back then.

mukade

Yeah, exactly. I was disappointed when the green tabs came along.

mukade


PurdueBill

Quote from: cabiness42 on July 18, 2012, 07:41:21 AM
I agree.  I'm always using mile markers to know how much distance I have to go and from that estimate how much time it will take me.  Everybody heading south down I-69 is going to get to Evansville about 15 minutes later than they were expecting.

Wouldn't it be sooner, not later, since the actual distance would be less, not more?

The traffic close to Indy and on the 465 overlap may frequently be bad enough that any time that one "gains" by there being 16 miles less might be lost in slow traffic. 

200 vs. 184 wouldn't be the end of the world.  Heck, remember when what is now I-865 was signed as I-465 miles 900.0 to 905.0?  :P

mukade

Quote from: PurdueBill on July 19, 2012, 05:35:42 PM
200 vs. 184 wouldn't be the end of the world.  Heck, remember when what is now I-865 was signed as I-465 miles 900.0 to 905.0?  :P

Maybe there is doubt on the final route through Indy. Back around 2005, some state representative in Perry Twp. (south side of Indy)  tried to introduce a law barring I-69 from there. I don't remember if that passed or not, but I guess there is a chance they don't know 100% where it will go around Indy. In that case, picking some number over 184 starting at current mile 0 in Indy would make a certain amount of sense.

If I-69 would have to avoid Perry Twp., it could intersect I-465 near SR 67 or even with I-70 west of there near the airport.

tdindy88

So, perhaps another renumbering may be in order once the entire route of I-69 (including the bridge) will be in order to make certain that the numbering is accurate.

NWI_Irish96

Quote from: PurdueBill on July 19, 2012, 05:35:42 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on July 18, 2012, 07:41:21 AM
I agree.  I'm always using mile markers to know how much distance I have to go and from that estimate how much time it will take me.  Everybody heading south down I-69 is going to get to Evansville about 15 minutes later than they were expecting.
Wouldn't it be sooner, not later, since the actual distance would be less, not more?

Yes it would, that's what I get for posting before having my morning caffeine.
Indiana: counties 100%, highways 100%
Illinois: counties 100%, highways 61%
Michigan: counties 100%, highways 56%
Wisconsin: counties 86%, highways 23%

jnewkirk77

The South Gibson Star-Times and Petersburg Press-Dispatch have posted a video tour of part of the new I-69 in SW IN.  I'm told we'll be driving on it before 2012 ends, but they've got a fair bit of work to do to get us there.

http://youtu.be/BwHeW0r5JqE

ShawnP

I see new cast bridge beams constantly on I-64. At least 10-15 a week. They are putting them out quickly at the casting plant. I think they are for I-69.

Beltway

<<< INDOT: I-69 extension should open by year's end (Bloomington Herald Times/associated Press) >>>

Is this the whole 70 miles between Evansville and Crane?
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

Baloney is a reserved word on the Internet
    (Robert Coté, 2002)

tdindy88


Beltway

Quote from: tdindy88 on July 23, 2012, 01:58:57 PM
Yes.

Oh my ... the radical environmentalist/transit groups in Indiana will be having conniption fits !
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

Baloney is a reserved word on the Internet
    (Robert Coté, 2002)

mukade

They are having more fits about the US 231 to SR 37 (i.e. Crane to Bloomington) section that is also under construction. They really thought that would never happen... ever.

Beltway

Quote from: mukade on July 23, 2012, 10:01:14 PM
They are having more fits about the US 231 to SR 37 (i.e. Crane to Bloomington) section that is also under construction. They really thought that would never happen... ever.

When will the section between Bloomington and Indianapolis be under construction?
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

Baloney is a reserved word on the Internet
    (Robert Coté, 2002)

mukade

Probably 2015 for Bloomington to Martinsville and 2018 to 2020 for Martinsville north, but that is a guess.

ShawnP

I can see this timeline as both candidates for Governor are committed to it. 
Quote from: mukade on July 24, 2012, 05:12:00 AM
Probably 2015 for Bloomington to Martinsville and 2018 to 2020 for Martinsville north, but that is a guess.

tdindy88

Assuming a funding source can be found, it's not like we have another toll road to give away. I'm hopeful that stretch will be completed in a short amount of time, but 2015 seems a tad too soon given that they haven't even formalized the location and types of interchanges along that stretch. I can see the Bloomington stretch of SR 37 being done quicker though. Still, 2015 and 2018 to 2020 would be nice timelines.

mukade

I have the same concerns on funding, but 2015 was a date that actually came from INDOT in an article that I believe is listed somewhere in this thread. I have no idea if that statement was thought through well. The next section (section 5) should cost around $250M to $300M which is probably affordable given that much of the funding would be from Federal funds. The final section to Indy will be expensive - especially the I-465 interchange.

Speaking of which the NE side I-69/I-465 rebuild is back on the INDOT web site.

I suppose Indiana could raise gas tax a few pennies or be creative with the gasoline sales tax to increase funding. While tax increases would be a hard sell, a gas tax could be sold as a fee, and the road improvements that came with Major Moves have proved to be popular.



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.