Indiana Notes

[PurdueBill]

SR 38 is no longer cosigned with US 421 and sr 39 in Frankfort it now has a gap in it. It ends north of the city and picks up again just south of the city.
Very confusing at first as I was going to use 38 to get to Lafayette from there.

I only anticipate that SR38 will be further truncated as warranted in the future there is no need for several sections of the highway. T Only the eastern section east of I-69 in pendleton and eastward should remain. The central sections through Noblesville, Sheridan, Kirklin and Frankfort are not needed because they are served by other state highways. (On that note SR-47 should be extended along 236th street to US-31.)  the western half of the highway, it should be relinquished to the state as it currently serves only the small town of Mulberry and terminates on a non state highway (Sagamore Parkway; aka. former US-52)

From a Purdue sports discussion board thread regarding the detour(s) around the closed section of I-65, a statement by someone who tried to do 421 to 38...

Still haven't figured out where we lost 38 in Frankfort. I picked it back up in Mulberry.

This is why continuing route numbers across a city matters, INDOT!!  God forbid anyone try to use a route number to, you know, navigate...especially in an unusual situation like getting around an emergency closure.

INDOT not being able to post route numbers over city/county roads really irks me.  Do like they do in places like Massachusetts and allow the route number to continue.  Drivers don't care about maintenance of the road when it comes to signage of route numbers.  They are trying to navigate with the route numbers.  Why not at least some TO trailblazers along the old route?  Oi.

I totally agree, but I don't think designing 38 has anything to do with not signing city streets, nothing in that area has been decommissioned, and they really can't since it's a us route principally and those are harder for indot to fuck up. Having 38 signed is a good idea because some people actually are trying to use it to get to Lafayette.

Indeed, stopping and starting 38 in Frankfort is different from 25 and 26 in Lafayette for example, but the end result for navigation is the same...if you're unfamiliar with the area and trying to navigate by number because you know 38 goes to Lafayette, you're stuck when 38 randomly disappears.  It's impossible now to tell people to stay on 25 or 26 from one side of Lafayette to the other.  No driver cares if there is a state shield and the town maintains the road.

As far as the bridge, it's damn lucky that there wasn't some Schoharie Creek bridge type failure out of nowhere with heavy traffic.  It's not as tall a bridge and not exactly the same design, but if the whole thing decided to fall into the creek, the result could be the same for people.  At least it just settled.

[NWI_Irish96]

Indeed, stopping and starting 38 in Frankfort is different from 25 and 26 in Lafayette for example, but the end result for navigation is the same...if you're unfamiliar with the area and trying to navigate by number because you know 38 goes to Lafayette, you're stuck when 38 randomly disappears.  It's impossible now to tell people to stay on 25 or 26 from one side of Lafayette to the other.  No driver cares if there is a state shield and the town maintains the road.

As far as the bridge, it's damn lucky that there wasn't some Schoharie Creek bridge type failure out of nowhere with heavy traffic.  It's not as tall a bridge and not exactly the same design, but if the whole thing decided to fall into the creek, the result could be the same for people.  At least it just settled.

In lieu of co-signing 38 with 39, maybe INDOT could add Lafayette to a few of what I call "arrow signs" in advance of intersections.  Put one where EB 38 ends at 39 directing Lafayette traffic to turn right, and then a couple in Frankfort at the 421/28 and 75 intersections directing Lafayette traffic to continue straight. 

[silverback1065]

Indeed, stopping and starting 38 in Frankfort is different from 25 and 26 in Lafayette for example, but the end result for navigation is the same...if you're unfamiliar with the area and trying to navigate by number because you know 38 goes to Lafayette, you're stuck when 38 randomly disappears.  It's impossible now to tell people to stay on 25 or 26 from one side of Lafayette to the other.  No driver cares if there is a state shield and the town maintains the road.

As far as the bridge, it's damn lucky that there wasn't some Schoharie Creek bridge type failure out of nowhere with heavy traffic.  It's not as tall a bridge and not exactly the same design, but if the whole thing decided to fall into the creek, the result could be the same for people.  At least it just settled.

In lieu of co-signing 38 with 39, maybe INDOT could add Lafayette to a few of what I call "arrow signs" in advance of intersections.  Put one where EB 38 ends at 39 directing Lafayette traffic to turn right, and then a couple in Frankfort at the 421/28 and 75 intersections directing Lafayette traffic to continue straight.

good idea they could also post signs saying "indiana 38 west/east follow indiana 39 north/south"

[tdindy88]

So, the 2016 Indiana Roadway Map is out (yes in August.) Below I have a few observations to share with anyone interested.

-The map is the same format as the previous last two with the state map in the front and tourist related stuff in the back. Only the Indianapolis inset on the front with the state map.

-Interstate 69 in Southern Indiana is more or less the same as last time with Section 4 being shown as under construction, even though it will be open by 2016. But now Section 5 from Bloomington to Martinsville is also shown as under construction. The "Corridor I-69" symbology remains for SR 37 from Martinsville north to I-465. I imagine with the state releasing these maps in August before the coming year there's going to be a one-year delay on various projects that usually open at the end of the year.

-Ohio River Bridges project basically shown as the same, although the construction corridor for the East End Bridge is now shown with a "Corridor SR 265" symbol whereas last year it had a "Corridor I-265" CORRIDOR.

-US 31 is shown as  freeway from Plymouth up to South Bend, along the Kokomo bypass and in parts of Hamilton County (116th Street up to SR 32) with the highway under construction for the other two segments in that area. No mention for the Veterans Parkway (I think that's the name now) along 31 north of Plymouth. New this year however are exit numbers around Kokomo and Plymouth to South Bend....so progress?

-SR 931 designated along old US 31 in St. Joseph County, I've never seen a sign for this but okay.

-SR 22 gone within Kokomo and I'm not sure about any other decommissions, the Lafayette area was shown last year with its new (stupid as we are finding out) rerouting.

-Several new towns are now showing their town boundaries instead of a dot or dot-inside-a-rectangle symbol. Among the communities to have "graduated" are Tipton, Avon, Danville, New Whiteland, Ellettsville and Batesville. Communities like Carmel, Zionsville, Brownsburg, Whitestown and Lebanon don't have their boundaries adjusted to what they are now, annexation and all that.

-Bridge is still present outside of New Harmony, that thing is still closed right?

-The Indianapolis inset does have the new exit configuration at 465 and 65 on the south side as well as US 31 and 465 on the north side. For some reason it still shows the location of Fort Benjamin Harrison.

-No new exit for Worthsville Road in Johnson County (Exit 97,) supposed to be open by the end of the year.

-And for some reason there are city limits for part of Niles, Michigan shown on the far northern edge of the map bordering Indiana. Why we care that much for Michigan when we haven't updated the city limits for Louisville or Owensboro forever I'm not sure.

-Finally, I-65 is shown as COMPLETE around the Lafayette area. 

I think that's it but there may be more in there but for now that's what I've seen.

[silverback1065]

So, the 2016 Indiana Roadway Map is out (yes in August.) Below I have a few observations to share with anyone interested.

-The map is the same format as the previous last two with the state map in the front and tourist related stuff in the back. Only the Indianapolis inset on the front with the state map.

-Interstate 69 in Southern Indiana is more or less the same as last time with Section 4 being shown as under construction, even though it will be open by 2016. But now Section 5 from Bloomington to Martinsville is also shown as under construction. The "Corridor I-69" symbology remains for SR 37 from Martinsville north to I-465. I imagine with the state releasing these maps in August before the coming year there's going to be a one-year delay on various projects that usually open at the end of the year.

-Ohio River Bridges project basically shown as the same, although the construction corridor for the East End Bridge is now shown with a "Corridor SR 265" symbol whereas last year it had a "Corridor I-265" CORRIDOR.

-US 31 is shown as  freeway from Plymouth up to South Bend, along the Kokomo bypass and in parts of Hamilton County (116th Street up to SR 32) with the highway under construction for the other two segments in that area. No mention for the Veterans Parkway (I think that's the name now) along 31 north of Plymouth. New this year however are exit numbers around Kokomo and Plymouth to South Bend....so progress?

-SR 931 designated along old US 31 in St. Joseph County, I've never seen a sign for this but okay.

-SR 22 gone within Kokomo and I'm not sure about any other decommissions, the Lafayette area was shown last year with its new (stupid as we are finding out) rerouting.

-Several new towns are now showing their town boundaries instead of a dot or dot-inside-a-rectangle symbol. Among the communities to have "graduated" are Tipton, Avon, Danville, New Whiteland, Ellettsville and Batesville. Communities like Carmel, Zionsville, Brownsburg, Whitestown and Lebanon don't have their boundaries adjusted to what they are now, annexation and all that.

-Bridge is still present outside of New Harmony, that thing is still closed right?

-The Indianapolis inset does have the new exit configuration at 465 and 65 on the south side as well as US 31 and 465 on the north side. For some reason it still shows the location of Fort Benjamin Harrison.

-No new exit for Worthsville Road in Johnson County (Exit 97,) supposed to be open by the end of the year.

-And for some reason there are city limits for part of Niles, Michigan shown on the far northern edge of the map bordering Indiana. Why we care that much for Michigan when we haven't updated the city limits for Louisville or Owensboro forever I'm not sure.

-Finally, I-65 is shown as COMPLETE around the Lafayette area. 

I think that's it but there may be more in there but for now that's what I've seen.

What the heck is veterans parkway?

[tdindy88]

The 7A Road exit off of US 31 north of Plymouth. As explained here, https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=5642.250

[silverback1065]

That's weird that the old 31 is 931 up on the north part of the state, I thought they got a deal to give it to the county? Also is kokomo ever going to take over their 931?

[renegade]

I guess it could be worse, we have better roads than Michigan.

Yeah, not by much ... I-94 between Lake Station and Michigan City could use some work.

[nwi_navigator_1181]

I guess it could be worse, we have better roads than Michigan.

Yeah, not by much ... I-94 between Lake Station and Michigan City could use some work.

The good news is that INDOT has major resurfacing planned for that exact stretch in 2017. Hopefully they have more winter-resistant material this time.

[NWI_Irish96]

That's weird that the old 31 is 931 up on the north part of the state, I thought they got a deal to give it to the county? Also is kokomo ever going to take over their 931?

Marshall County took over their portion of Old 31, but St. Joseph's portion is still maintained by INDOT.

[silverback1065]

That's weird that the old 31 is 931 up on the north part of the state, I thought they got a deal to give it to the county? Also is kokomo ever going to take over their 931?

Marshall County took over their portion of Old 31, but St. Joseph's portion is still maintained by INDOT.

Someone on here said that St Joseph will take over sometime later this year.

[Revive 755]

Does INDOT usually post a stop sign at the top of a loop ramp - as they have done with the loop from NB I-69 to WB I-64, where the only change during construction is closure of the passing lane (the normal weaving area of the cloverleaf is still available) - or is this just a one-off bad design by INDOT?

[silverback1065]

Does INDOT usually post a stop sign at the top of a loop ramp - as they have done with the loop from NB I-69 to WB I-64, where the only change during construction is closure of the passing lane (the normal weaving area of the cloverleaf is still available) - or is this just a one-off bad design by INDOT?

There shouldn't be a sign there at all, unless it's some new policy. Did it look permanent?

[Revive 755]

^ No, it was definitely a temporary sign.  Just seems most other jurisdictions would use a yield sign instead since there was a lane present to accelerate into.

[bmeiser]

http://www.in.gov/indot/files/PI_I69Interchange.pdf

INDOT, in coordination with the City of Fishers and Hamilton County as partners, intends to construct a new I-69 interchange at the 106th Street overpass located within the City of Fishers in Hamilton County, Indiana. The interchange configuration will be a two-lane, oval-shaped roundabout centered over the I-69 centerline. The existing 106th Street structure over I-69 will be totally removed as part of this project and replaced with two one-way structures (south structure and north structure). The north bridge will provide a variable six foot to eight foot wide sidewalk along the north side of 106th Street for the entire project length, with crosswalks across 106th Street at Crosspoint Boulevard and USA Parkway. Construction along I-69 will include new bridge piers in the median and new bridge abutments to the outside of mainline I-69. No roadway work is proposed for existing mainline I-69, and all roadway work along I-69 will be limited to construction of the ramps for the new interchange.

Interesting interchange design... I wonder why they chose this design out of the 4 listed in the pdf.  I think this interchange has been needed for a long time but I'm thinking they should spend money on the I-69 / I-465 interchange first.  I'm going to try to go to the public meeting.  If they don't mention that interchange, I'll have to ask somebody if there are any plans for that interchange and if the plans for this interchange affect that one.

[silverback1065]

http://www.in.gov/indot/files/PI_I69Interchange.pdf

INDOT, in coordination with the City of Fishers and Hamilton County as partners, intends to construct a new I-69 interchange at the 106th Street overpass located within the City of Fishers in Hamilton County, Indiana. The interchange configuration will be a two-lane, oval-shaped roundabout centered over the I-69 centerline. The existing 106th Street structure over I-69 will be totally removed as part of this project and replaced with two one-way structures (south structure and north structure). The north bridge will provide a variable six foot to eight foot wide sidewalk along the north side of 106th Street for the entire project length, with crosswalks across 106th Street at Crosspoint Boulevard and USA Parkway. Construction along I-69 will include new bridge piers in the median and new bridge abutments to the outside of mainline I-69. No roadway work is proposed for existing mainline I-69, and all roadway work along I-69 will be limited to construction of the ramps for the new interchange.

Interesting interchange design... I wonder why they chose this design out of the 4 listed in the pdf.  I think this interchange has been needed for a long time but I'm thinking they should spend money on the I-69 / I-465 interchange first.  I'm going to try to go to the public meeting.  If they don't mention that interchange, I'll have to ask somebody if there are any plans for that interchange and if the plans for this interchange affect that one.

I think this exit should be at 126th not 106th.  I wonder how this will make traffic better or worse, will weaving be an issue at all?  Meh, it's probably an invalid concern. interesting idea though, the original idea I thought was a teardrop interchange.

[silverback1065]

Maybe this design was chosen due to the higher speeds you can drive in this type of roundabout configuration? 

[ysuindy]

http://www.in.gov/indot/files/PI_I69Interchange.pdf

INDOT, in coordination with the City of Fishers and Hamilton County as partners, intends to construct a new I-69 interchange at the 106th Street overpass located within the City of Fishers in Hamilton County, Indiana. The interchange configuration will be a two-lane, oval-shaped roundabout centered over the I-69 centerline. The existing 106th Street structure over I-69 will be totally removed as part of this project and replaced with two one-way structures (south structure and north structure). The north bridge will provide a variable six foot to eight foot wide sidewalk along the north side of 106th Street for the entire project length, with crosswalks across 106th Street at Crosspoint Boulevard and USA Parkway. Construction along I-69 will include new bridge piers in the median and new bridge abutments to the outside of mainline I-69. No roadway work is proposed for existing mainline I-69, and all roadway work along I-69 will be limited to construction of the ramps for the new interchange.

Interesting interchange design... I wonder why they chose this design out of the 4 listed in the pdf.  I think this interchange has been needed for a long time but I'm thinking they should spend money on the I-69 / I-465 interchange first.  I'm going to try to go to the public meeting.  If they don't mention that interchange, I'll have to ask somebody if there are any plans for that interchange and if the plans for this interchange affect that one.

I think this exit should be at 126th not 106th.  I wonder how this will make traffic better or worse, will weaving be an issue at all?  Meh, it's probably an invalid concern. interesting idea though, the original idea I thought was a teardrop interchange.

The interchange at 106th has been planned for awhile.  As noted in the pdf, it is mostly about reducing congestion on 116th and 96th - the lines to enter southbound 69 in the morning, particularly from the East are very long.  Lots of housing developments along 106th.  The new interchange will also serve the office buildings on each side of 69.

I've always thought an exit at 126th made sense, but I don't see it happening.  A then Fishers councilman told me several years ago that the then Town did not want an exit at 126th.  That was before Billericay Park was built in the most obvious spot for southbound exit and entrance ramps.  The angle at which 126th crosses 69 is very hard to work with.

As for the roundabout interchange, the handful of times I've been on Keystone during rush hour, those exits seem to work well.  Although mine is definitely a small sample size.

[silverback1065]

http://www.in.gov/indot/files/PI_I69Interchange.pdf

INDOT, in coordination with the City of Fishers and Hamilton County as partners, intends to construct a new I-69 interchange at the 106th Street overpass located within the City of Fishers in Hamilton County, Indiana. The interchange configuration will be a two-lane, oval-shaped roundabout centered over the I-69 centerline. The existing 106th Street structure over I-69 will be totally removed as part of this project and replaced with two one-way structures (south structure and north structure). The north bridge will provide a variable six foot to eight foot wide sidewalk along the north side of 106th Street for the entire project length, with crosswalks across 106th Street at Crosspoint Boulevard and USA Parkway. Construction along I-69 will include new bridge piers in the median and new bridge abutments to the outside of mainline I-69. No roadway work is proposed for existing mainline I-69, and all roadway work along I-69 will be limited to construction of the ramps for the new interchange.

Interesting interchange design... I wonder why they chose this design out of the 4 listed in the pdf.  I think this interchange has been needed for a long time but I'm thinking they should spend money on the I-69 / I-465 interchange first.  I'm going to try to go to the public meeting.  If they don't mention that interchange, I'll have to ask somebody if there are any plans for that interchange and if the plans for this interchange affect that one.

I think this exit should be at 126th not 106th.  I wonder how this will make traffic better or worse, will weaving be an issue at all?  Meh, it's probably an invalid concern. interesting idea though, the original idea I thought was a teardrop interchange.

The interchange at 106th has been planned for awhile.  As noted in the pdf, it is mostly about reducing congestion on 116th and 96th - the lines to enter southbound 69 in the morning, particularly from the East are very long.  Lots of housing developments along 106th.  The new interchange will also serve the office buildings on each side of 69.

I've always thought an exit at 126th made sense, but I don't see it happening.  A then Fishers councilman told me several years ago that the then Town did not want an exit at 126th.  That was before Billericay Park was built in the most obvious spot for southbound exit and entrance ramps.  The angle at which 126th crosses 69 is very hard to work with.

As for the roundabout interchange, the handful of times I've been on Keystone during rush hour, those exits seem to work well.  Although mine is definitely a small sample size.

Keystone parkway was supposed to have the same exit type that's being used on 106 th but that was scrapped due to cost. Traffic moves OK on it after you pass 116th St. There are too many lanes between 96th and 106th, its horribly signed (mayors fault) so people end up merging at the last minute. Merge distances on and off are way to short. But again it's just OK. 31 will be way better. And I've said this before but I've always thought 126th should have crossed the white river to allow for better traffic on 96th 116th and 146th, there are too few crossings in the area.
But honestly I don't think you can fix the traffic issues fishers and noblesville have, 69 can't be 10,000 lanes.
Who's paying for this? I thought indot didn't want to build it because they claimed it wasn't necessary.

[mukade]

Southern Indiana's first true roundabouts are opening this weekend with the unveiling of the Ind. 265/Ind. 62/Port Road interchange as part of the east-end crossing project...

East-end interchange opening with 3 roundabouts in Jeffersonville (Indiana Economic Digest/News and Tribune)

[NWI_Irish96]

Southern Indiana's first true roundabouts are opening this weekend with the unveiling of the Ind. 265/Ind. 62/Port Road interchange as part of the east-end crossing project...

East-end interchange opening with 3 roundabouts in Jeffersonville (Indiana Economic Digest/News and Tribune)

So I drove this last night.  There is one problem I see with how this is designed.  Previously, traffic on eastbound 265 that didn't exit at 62/10th St was able to just continue straight on to Port Rd. 

Of course once the bridge is finished the new thru movement on eastbound 265 will be on to the new segment of 265 and eventually the new bridge.  The way the interchange is set up now is that eastbound 265 traffic has to take the exit ramp and then proceed through the roundabout in order to get to Port Rd.  This is causing a lot of backups on eastbound 265 because getting through the roundabout slows traffic down quite a bit, especially when a lot of it is truck traffic heading to the industrial park.

In hindsight, a direct ramp from eastbound 265 to Port Rd. should have been built.

[silverback1065]

So, the 2016 Indiana Roadway Map is out (yes in August.) Below I have a few observations to share with anyone interested.

-The map is the same format as the previous last two with the state map in the front and tourist related stuff in the back. Only the Indianapolis inset on the front with the state map.

-Interstate 69 in Southern Indiana is more or less the same as last time with Section 4 being shown as under construction, even though it will be open by 2016. But now Section 5 from Bloomington to Martinsville is also shown as under construction. The "Corridor I-69" symbology remains for SR 37 from Martinsville north to I-465. I imagine with the state releasing these maps in August before the coming year there's going to be a one-year delay on various projects that usually open at the end of the year.

-Ohio River Bridges project basically shown as the same, although the construction corridor for the East End Bridge is now shown with a "Corridor SR 265" symbol whereas last year it had a "Corridor I-265" CORRIDOR.

-US 31 is shown as  freeway from Plymouth up to South Bend, along the Kokomo bypass and in parts of Hamilton County (116th Street up to SR 32) with the highway under construction for the other two segments in that area. No mention for the Veterans Parkway (I think that's the name now) along 31 north of Plymouth. New this year however are exit numbers around Kokomo and Plymouth to South Bend....so progress?

-SR 931 designated along old US 31 in St. Joseph County, I've never seen a sign for this but okay.

-SR 22 gone within Kokomo and I'm not sure about any other decommissions, the Lafayette area was shown last year with its new (stupid as we are finding out) rerouting.

-Several new towns are now showing their town boundaries instead of a dot or dot-inside-a-rectangle symbol. Among the communities to have "graduated" are Tipton, Avon, Danville, New Whiteland, Ellettsville and Batesville. Communities like Carmel, Zionsville, Brownsburg, Whitestown and Lebanon don't have their boundaries adjusted to what they are now, annexation and all that.

-Bridge is still present outside of New Harmony, that thing is still closed right?

-The Indianapolis inset does have the new exit configuration at 465 and 65 on the south side as well as US 31 and 465 on the north side. For some reason it still shows the location of Fort Benjamin Harrison.

-No new exit for Worthsville Road in Johnson County (Exit 97,) supposed to be open by the end of the year.

-And for some reason there are city limits for part of Niles, Michigan shown on the far northern edge of the map bordering Indiana. Why we care that much for Michigan when we haven't updated the city limits for Louisville or Owensboro forever I'm not sure.

-Finally, I-65 is shown as COMPLETE around the Lafayette area. 

I think that's it but there may be more in there but for now that's what I've seen.

is this map out to get physically, or is it just digital right now?

[US 41]

What's up with US 52 in Lafayette? I drove through there Friday night and it's routed on some crappy road on the south side of Lafayette. When did that happen? Didn't it run on the northeast side of Lafayette on the inner bypass? Why is INDOT allowed to f*ck up the US Highways now? If they want to mess their own road network up then whatever, but US highways, really? You would think they would be protected since they are a federal highway, but I guess I am wrong. It also appears like SR 26 has a might have a gap in it. Someone in INDOT needs fired. The fact that these towns are allowing this to happen is even more amazing to me. I would never let INDOT abandon a highway in my town if I was in charge. Kokomo is the only smart town in Indiana apparently since they refused to take over Old 31 / SR 931. Kokomo deserves a  .

[silverback1065]

What's up with US 52 in Lafayette? I drove through there Friday night and it's routed on some crappy road on the south side of Lafayette. When did that happen? Didn't it run on the northeast side of Lafayette on the inner bypass? Why is INDOT allowed to f*ck up the US Highways now? If they want to mess their own road network up then whatever, but US highways, really? You would think they would be protected since they are a federal highway, but I guess I am wrong. It also appears like SR 26 has a might have a gap in it. Someone in INDOT needs fired. The fact that these towns are allowing this to happen is even more amazing to me. I would never let INDOT abandon a highway in my town if I was in charge. Kokomo is the only smart town in Indiana apparently since they refused to take over Old 31 / SR 931. Kokomo deserves a  .

this fuck up happened 9/13/13, when the new bypass opened up, US 52 follows the old route of 25 on teal road, then is cosigned on the new bypass with us 231, the mileage on the bypass is us 52's.  all the other decommissionings happened that day too.  Originally US 52 was never going to be moved and in fact, SR 26 was supposed to be cosigned with 52 until it crossed south street, this was even on the plans up until the last minute.  this new routing I agree is stupid, I'm actually surprised the cities went along with it, seeing as there's a bridge over the Wabash that needs to be repaired relatively soon.  And the only rule I know of is you cannot have a discontinuity in a us route, (unsigned portions aren't technically a discontinuity).  This new route (teal road segment) doesn't really seem truck friendly either. No one refers to it as being us 52 also (the bypass), only as 231.  Also INDOT does this a lot (weird reroutings), look at the salem bypass.

[NWI_Irish96]

What's up with US 52 in Lafayette? I drove through there Friday night and it's routed on some crappy road on the south side of Lafayette. When did that happen? Didn't it run on the northeast side of Lafayette on the inner bypass? Why is INDOT allowed to f*ck up the US Highways now? If they want to mess their own road network up then whatever, but US highways, really? You would think they would be protected since they are a federal highway, but I guess I am wrong. It also appears like SR 26 has a might have a gap in it. Someone in INDOT needs fired. The fact that these towns are allowing this to happen is even more amazing to me. I would never let INDOT abandon a highway in my town if I was in charge. Kokomo is the only smart town in Indiana apparently since they refused to take over Old 31 / SR 931. Kokomo deserves a  .

this fuck up happened 9/13/13, when the new bypass opened up, US 52 follows the old route of 25 on teal road, then is cosigned on the new bypass with us 231, the mileage on the bypass is us 52's.  all the other decommissionings happened that day too.  Originally US 52 was never going to be moved and in fact, SR 26 was supposed to be cosigned with 52 until it crossed south street, this was even on the plans up until the last minute.  this new routing I agree is stupid, I'm actually surprised the cities went along with it, seeing as there's a bridge over the Wabash that needs to be repaired relatively soon.  And the only rule I know of is you cannot have a discontinuity in a us route, (unsigned portions aren't technically a discontinuity).  This new route (teal road segment) doesn't really seem truck friendly either. No one refers to it as being us 52 also (the bypass), only as 231.  Also INDOT does this a lot (weird reroutings), look at the salem bypass.

I don't know Lafayette really well, so I don't know the answer, but I do know the question:

If you are traveling back and forth between US 52 south of Lafayette and the junction of the new 231 bypass and Sagamore Pkway, what is the quickest route?  The answer to that is what should probably be the routing of US 52.