Update on I-69 Extension in Indiana

[silverback1065]

I'm not sure what Madison Avenue has to do with I-69, it's not like they'll be signing it on that road. Speaking of that area, the Google Streetview image is already outdated now that there's an arch in the area.

The arch wasn't the point of the link, it was the sign, and as I said, it is still there.

[tdindy88]

Don't worry, I understand, I was just remarking more about GSV than anything else, I'm glad to see that the sign is still there and hope that INDOT never finds it. And given that the city recently did away with two old BGSs at that split I'm even more happy to see that SR 37 sign still there. I still see white on blue milemarkers for the former US 31/SR 37 multiplex on downtown streets.

[Brandon]

It seems interesting having I-69's northern mileposts being increased by 200 for the extension.  InDOT is choosing to go the route of states that switched from sequential to distanced-based numbering by posting old exit number signage:

[roadman65]

No more exit 0 at I-465 then.  It will be interesting now that its Exit 200.  Also the SE part of the loop will be another case of three interstates on one pavement like in Wisconsin for I-90/I-94/ I-39.

[Pete from Boston]

It seems interesting having I-69's northern mileposts being increased by 200 for the extension.  InDOT is choosing to go the route of states that switched from sequential to distanced-based numbering by posting old exit number signage:

Isn't that premature, given the fact that a final route hasn't even been decided?  Before this, I"d have expected at least an extension of the I-69 number into Evansville (with an I-169 renaming of I-164 west of US 41). 

[thefro]

It seems interesting having I-69's northern mileposts being increased by 200 for the extension.  InDOT is choosing to go the route of states that switched from sequential to distanced-based numbering by posting old exit number signage:

Isn't that premature, given the fact that a final route hasn't even been decided?  Before this, I"d have expected at least an extension of the I-69 number into Evansville (with an I-169 renaming of I-164 west of US 41).

Not really, since otherwise there'd be two I-69 Exit 22's in Indiana, one on the new segment and one on the existing road.  And they'd probably run into some similar situations when Section 4 & 5 open.  INDOT decided adding 200 would be "close enough" and easier for everyone involved rather than waiting on getting an exact mileage for the whole route.

[silverback1065]

It seems interesting having I-69's northern mileposts being increased by 200 for the extension.  InDOT is choosing to go the route of states that switched from sequential to distanced-based numbering by posting old exit number signage:

Isn't that premature, given the fact that a final route hasn't even been decided?  Before this, I"d have expected at least an extension of the I-69 number into Evansville (with an I-169 renaming of I-164 west of US 41).

Not really, since otherwise there'd be two I-69 Exit 22's in Indiana, one on the new segment and one on the existing road.  And they'd probably run into some similar situations when Section 4 & 5 open.  INDOT decided adding 200 would be "close enough" and easier for everyone involved rather than waiting on getting an exact mileage for the whole route.

That's the reason, I think they gave for doing it, I think they make up for the lost mileage where 69 is cosigned with 465.  What will 169's routing be in Evansville? It looks like it will just have one exit, at US 41.

[ShawnP]

Is Mike road next?

It seems interesting having I-69's northern mileposts being increased by 200 for the extension.  InDOT is choosing to go the route of states that switched from sequential to distanced-based numbering by posting old exit number signage:

[thefro]

http://www.in.gov/ifa/files/SOQ_Teams_I69_Section_5_Project.pdf
http://infrapppworld.com/2013/07/five-teams-submit-soqs-for-i-69-section-p3-in-indiana.html

Connect Indiana Development Partners:
■Macquarie Capital Group Limited
■Lane Infrastructure, Inc.
■Lane Industries Incorporated

I-69 Development Partners:
■OHL Concesiones S.A. (OHLC)
■Star America Fund GP LLC (acting in its capacity as general partner of Star America Infrastructure Fund, LP and Star America Infrastructure Fund Affiliates, LP)
■UIF GP, LLC

Isolux Infrastructure Netherlands B.V.:
■Public Sector Pension Investment Board (PSP Investments — a Canadian Crown Corporation)
■Grupo Isolux Corsan S.A.

Plenary Roads Indiana:
■Plenary Group

WM I-69 Partners:
■Walsh Investors, L.L.C.
■Meridiam Infrastructure

We have 5 bidders for the Section 5 Private/Public Partnership.  Not sure if they're going to cut it down further in a week (when they're said they're going to release a "shortlist") or not.

A pretty interesting mix of groups there.  I find it kinda interesting that the groups have already partnered with local construction companies as part of the bids.

I would also expect that INDOT might be holding the ROD as well to release it at the same time as the official release of the Section 5 shortlist (July 30th), but we'll see.

[silverback1065]

I'm not sure if this has been discussed, but does anyone actually think that interstate 69 in its entirety is completely necessary?  I see the importance of the route in Indiana, but south of that, especially in Tennessee and Mississippi, is it really that important?  Aren't the current interstates in the area enough?  I always thought that the whole "it will connect Mexico and Canada" reason wasn't really a huge deal seeing that several other interstates already do that.  Anyway, I'm interested in everyone's opinions. 

[vtk]

The route is split into "sections of independent utility".  This means each of those sections is ostensibly worth building*, even if no other sections are built at all.  Accepting that notion, a continuous highway from Mexico to Canada is not the sole justification for any individual part of the route, but effectively it's the happy by-product of all those SIUs connecting end-to-end.

*Of course, anyone can argue that any individual SIU (or most of them) is not necessary.  But the DOTs have to make an argumet that they are, or the feds won't let it through environmental review.

[vdeane]

I think I read that the whole CANAMEX idea was just Indiana trying to get the federal government to pay them to build the interstate from Evansville to Indianapolis.

[theline]

^^ That is pretty much true. The whole process is laid out in the Matt Dellinger's fine book, Interstate 69: The Unfinished History of the Last Great American Highway. Advocates for the Evansville-to-Indy road were hitting a stone wall for decades, until they got advice that they should think bigger. Expanding the idea to other states allowed them to enlist allies that could help convince the government to act.

Of course, nobody had a gun held to his head to support the road. If the folks in the other states didn't think there was merit in the idea of the road, they wouldn't have supported it. Whether there is enough support in some states to ever get it completed is dubious. In much of Mississippi, Arkansas, and Louisiana, there just may not be the need that would drive the project forward.

[thefro]

http://www.infrainsightblog.com/2013/07/articles/ppps/indiana-finance-authority-shortlists-4-proposers-for-its-i69-section-5-project/

4 proposers shortlisted for I-69 Section 5 public-private partnership.  Things seem to be on schedule thus far.  Next item should be the ROD from FHWA which should be imminent.

On July 31, 2013, the Indiana Finance Authority ("IFA" ), in coordination with the Indiana Department of Transportation ("INDOT" ), shortlisted four teams for its I-69 Section 5 Project (the "Project" ) located between Evansville, Indiana and Indianapolis, Indiana.  The Project marks the second foray of Indiana into the emerging availability payment structure of public-private partnerships in the United States, having led with the East End Crossing project (part of the Louisville-Southern Indiana Ohio River Bridges Project), successfully financed the end of March, 2013.  The Project also marks the second effort of the joint IFA and Indiana Department of Transportation Team in using innovating project delivery approaches to meet growing transportation infrastructure demands in Indiana.

The Project is one of six sections that are anticipated to complete the interstate connection from Evansville, Indiana to Indianapolis, Indiana, including improvements to Highway 37 outside of  Bloomington, the home of Indiana University. The broader I-69 project is part of the national I-69 corridor connecting Mexico with Canada. Four of the six sections have either been completed or construction is underway.  Section 5 is approximately 26 miles long, varying from 4 to 6 lanes wide in each direction, located in Morgan, Johnson, and Marion Counties, involving construction of four new interchanges and four new overpasses with varying degrees of improvements to the existing interchanges and overpasses.

The shortlisted teams, in alphabetical order, are:
Connect Indiana Development Partners (joint venture of Macquarie Capital Group Limited, Lane Infrastructure, Inc. and Lane Industries Incorporated), partnering with The Lane Construction Corporation and Ames Construction, Inc. as the joint venture design-builder, Parsons Brinckerhoff, Inc. as the project designer and with others.
Isolux Infrastructure Netherlands B.V. (through its members, Public Sector Pension Investment Board and Grupo Isolux Corsán S.A.), partnering with Corsán as the builder, AZTEC Engineering Group, Inc. and TYPSA (Tecnica y Projectos S.A.) working together as the project designer and with others
Plenary Roads Indiana (through the Plenary Group), partnering with Granite Construction Company and Fred Weber, Inc. as the joint-venture builder, AECOM as the project designer and with others.
WM I-69 Partners (joint venture of Walsh Investors, L.L.C. and Meridiam Infrastructure), partnering with Walsh Construction Company II, LLC as the builder, Parsons Transportation Group as the project designer and with others.

As was the case with the East End Crossing procurement, several new players to the US P3 transportation scene responded to the I-69 Section 5 RFQ, including Isolux and Plenary.

IFA plans to issue a final RFP in October of this year with award and execution of the comprehensive P3 agreement in the first half of 2014.

[thefro]

The FEIS & ROD have been released for Section 5

FHWA has approved the N. Walnut Street interchange remaining a partial interchange, so that will not need to be reconstructed.  Also they were able to acquire ROW along the edge of the Mountain Bike Park.  Most of the rest of the changes from the DEIS involve local access roads that probably won't be of interest to most here.

Total cost they quote is $394 million.  Obviously not a lot of details on exact construction sequence as that's going to be determined as part of the P3 contract.

http://www.i69indyevn.org/wp-content/uploads/Sec5_FEIS/S5_Appendix-TT.pdf

Also they may be deferring adding the extra lane on each side (making it a 6-lane freeway) for the urban Bloomington I-69 segment as their studies say it will not be needed until 2025.  Their studies assume the Ohio River I-69 bridge is not built by 2020, but is built by 2035

[thefro]

I missed that they have shaved $100-$130 million off the cost from the DEIS, which is kind of a big deal.

[mukade]

The final piece of the puzzle has been put in place, improving interstate access to the Parkview Regional Medical Center in north Fort Wayne...

All Clear: Union Chapel Road Interchange Now Fully Operational (Indiana's News Center)

[andy]

I was out riding a couple of weeks ago and snapped some pictures of Segment 4 construction.

I'm still learning Flickr, so forgive me in advance for any mistakes.

This is just a random view of dirt in Monroe County.



This is the IN45 intersection.  They built the overpass first and are just now getting around to digging the dirt and rock out from under;


This shovel is just above and right of the previous photo.


If I got this right, I'll take and post some more pictures over the next few months.

[seicer]

Is there a way we can get a map of where this is located at - i.e. the IN 45 interchange, specifically?

[andy]

Is there a way we can get a map of where this is located at - i.e. the IN 45 interchange, specifically?

Again, I'm still trying to figure out the details on this stuff.
I think this link will get you to the Flickr page and you can get the GPS tags directly from the photos there.  I don't have anything organized, but everything there is from my I-69 ride, so you don't have to pick through any other stuff.  As a minimum, I hope to go back and note what direction I'm looking for each photo, but that's more than I can do during lunch break.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/102735237@N03/

[NWI_Irish96]

Here is a website with a map of where construction is ongoing:  http://www.i69indyevn.org/i-69-corridor-interactive-map/

I drove this section of IN 45 this past Saturday. 

[andy]

Is there a way we can get a map of where this is located at - i.e. the IN 45 interchange, specifically?

If I did this right, here is the Google Map link to the IN45 I69 intersection.
http://goo.gl/Lr9NMz

This link is from the construction run-around as the overpass was being built.  For some reason I am getting some 2012 photography and then it jumps back to 2009 for a stretch.

edit:
by the way, bing photography shows the trees removed.
http://binged.it/18qoabz

[mukade]

There's a difference of opinion when it comes to stormwater quality at the construction sites for Interstate 69 through Monroe County. On one side is the Indiana Department of Transportation, which noted violations following June storms at construction sites, but believes other factors caused subsequent sedimentation reports...

Monroe County: 'INDOT could do better' on I-69 (Indiana Economic Digest)

[andy]

With construction on their door step, Bloomington is not done messing around with I-69.

http://www.ibj.com/monroe-county-looks-to-limit-i-69-truck-stops/PARAMS/article/43782

Officials in southern Indiana's Monroe County are looking at tougher rules for any truck stops that might be built with the opening of the Interstate 69 extension.

I think this is largely symbolic and pointless.  I think the only potential place for such a truck stop would be the southern split of IN37 and I69 due to the lack of any other un-developed exchanges with meaningful highway intersections.

I suspect a more likely place for major truck stop would be the I69, US231 and IN45 exchange about 30 miles west well outside Monroe County.

[silverback1065]

With construction on their door step, Bloomington is not done messing around with I-69.

http://www.ibj.com/monroe-county-looks-to-limit-i-69-truck-stops/PARAMS/article/43782

Officials in southern Indiana's Monroe County are looking at tougher rules for any truck stops that might be built with the opening of the Interstate 69 extension.

I think this is largely symbolic and pointless.  I think the only potential place for such a truck stop would be the southern split of IN37 and I69 due to the lack of any other un-developed exchanges with meaningful highway intersections.

I suspect a more likely place for major truck stop would be the I69, US231 and IN45 exchange about 30 miles west well outside Monroe County.

the state should take out all interchanges within 10 miles of Bloomington.