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

Update on I-69 Extension in Indiana

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

Previous topic - Next topic

vdeane

I doubt they will.  If I were INDOT, I'd make the number such that they would incorporate that section without changes.  Why resign multiple times?

Plus that would be more confusing than just doing it right the first time.  In the IT world it's called "legacy deadwood", and we're stuck with it.
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position of NYSDOT or its affiliates.


NE2

Utah did a useless renumbering several years ago, changing numbers by 1 or 2 to match the as-built mileage. Alabama did something similar to I-565.
pre-1945 Florida route log

I accept and respect your identity as long as it's not dumb shit like "identifying as a vaccinated attack helicopter".

tdindy88

Very recently, a similar thing happened to the Natcher Parkway in Kentucky, over two extra miles of new highway.

PurdueBill

Why bother renumbering it?  If the mileage and exit numbers for 69 are done as for 74 on the 465 overlap, hidden under 465's mileage and exit numbers, even resetting at zero at the southern 65 interchange, it isn't going to be a big deal.  The exact routing is unknown for sure right now but the exits on existing 69 had to be numbered to avoid duplication with new 69.  Numbering with too much slack instead of too little was sensible so there wouldn't wind up being duplication if the final segments built were longer than expected.  200 made sense to make the math instant so people can just drive instead of spending one millisecond on addition.

If the exact final routing of 69 all the way were known now, then so would the mileage and then the exact mileage could have been added on to existing 69.  But with so many unknowns, they had to leave some slack.  Renumbering new exit numbers to account for a couple miles difference is silly when that will introduce new new exit numbers that may duplicate old new exit numbers.  Tennessee rerouted I-40 and wound up with mile 1, mile 1A, mile 1B to fudge and not have to renumber everything....Indiana isn't doing anything worse.  How much traffic is following all of I-69?  It's probably not enough to worry that much about renumbering miles and exits again and again, especially with the 465 overlap.

theline

Did INDOT ever consider building the Bloomington to Indy portion of the road on new alignment? I can't find historical info on route alternatives on the project web site.

It would be interesting to see a cost comparison. At first blush, you'd think that new alignment would cost a lot more, but there are some mitigating factors:

  • Along the SR-37 route, ROW would have to be purchased most of the way for frontage roads, exits, etc. I'd think that ROW, including existing homes and businesses, would be much more expensive per acre than along a new alignment.
  • Fewer exits would be required along new alignment, and less critical ones could have construction deferred. Local motorists rely on SR-37 and will still need access if it's converted, leading to many more exits than on a new road.
  • New alignment would permit a toll option, if funding can't be found. It was pointed out up-thread that users would mightily object if free SR-37 were converted to a toll road. A new alignment allows 37 to remain free.
  • Upgrading the existing road would be highly disruptive to existing traffic, and nearby residents and businesses. Not so for the new alignment. (Not a direct cost to the government, but still a cost factor.)

Does anyone know about whether a new alignment was considered?

hbelkins

Checked out the I-69 construction at various points today between Evansville and Crane. Workers were out in full-force, but they are still going to have to hustle to get the road open to US 231 by Thanksgiving.

Looks like the control city for northbound I-69 is going to be "I-69 north," best I could tell from what little lettering was revealed on the signs that are up but covered over.


Government would be tolerable if not for politicians and bureaucrats.

tdindy88

Eventually the control city should be Indianapolis, though Bloomington may be used in the short term.

theline

Obviously Crane wasn't considered a prominent enough berg to qualify as a control city.

mukade

Quote from: theline on November 05, 2012, 09:29:39 PM
Did INDOT ever consider building the Bloomington to Indy portion of the road on new alignment? I can't find historical info on route alternatives on the project web site.

It would be interesting to see a cost comparison. At first blush, you'd think that new alignment would cost a lot more, but there are some mitigating factors:

  • Along the SR-37 route, ROW would have to be purchased most of the way for frontage roads, exits, etc. I'd think that ROW, including existing homes and businesses, would be much more expensive per acre than along a new alignment.
  • Fewer exits would be required along new alignment, and less critical ones could have construction deferred. Local motorists rely on SR-37 and will still need access if it's converted, leading to many more exits than on a new road.
  • New alignment would permit a toll option, if funding can't be found. It was pointed out up-thread that users would mightily object if free SR-37 were converted to a toll road. A new alignment allows 37 to remain free.
  • Upgrading the existing road would be highly disruptive to existing traffic, and nearby residents and businesses. Not so for the new alignment. (Not a direct cost to the government, but still a cost factor.)

Does anyone know about whether a new alignment was considered?

Of course, but in some areas like Bloomington it makes no sense at all.

Quote
INDOT has suggested that the current northbound lanes of SR37 could become an access road for businesses along the east side of I-69. Businesses such as Oliver Winery, Worm's Way, and Thompson Furniture would use those roads to connect with an interchange of I-69.

The current southbound lane of SR37 would then be upgraded to interstate specifications and used at the new northbound lanes, and a new set of southbound lanes would be built to the west.

INDOT Taking Input On I-69 Details (from April)

Grzrd

Quote from: Grzrd on March 01, 2012, 10:23:47 AM
Indiana Public Media reports (with plan diagrams) that INDOT is proposing two I-69/ SR 37 interchange options

This November 1 Indiana Public Media article reports that the trumpet option has been chosen and that a contractor has been selected to build it:

Quote
Bloomington based Crider & Crider Inc. will build the interchange that will connect Interstate 69 to S.R. 37 just south of Bloomington.
After looking at several options, the Indiana Department of Transportation decided on a "˜trumpet' style of interchange for the road.
According to a release from INDOT, the trumpet will allow traffic to move through the interchange at a higher speed than some of the other designs that were previously on the table.
The interchange saw a bit of controversy last year when some members of the Bloomington, Monroe County Metropolitan Planning Organization accused INDOT and federal highway officials of wanting to put a stoplight there, instead of interstate style on/off ramps. INDOT says the stoplight plan has been off the table for some time.
The intersection will cost around $29 million to build, which according to INDOT, is about 10-percent less than an engineer's original estimate. The stretch of I-69 from NSA Crane to Bloomington is expected to be open by 2014. INDOT says the next section of the road, which will connect Bloomington to Martinsville, could begin construction by 2013.

hbelkins

Quote from: tdindy88 on November 05, 2012, 10:18:13 PM
Eventually the control city should be Indianapolis, though Bloomington may be used in the short term.

It is demountable copy, so the change should be OK. However, they could have used Indianapolis anyway, because there are a couple of options from Crane to Indy that are do-able.


Government would be tolerable if not for politicians and bureaucrats.

SW Indiana

Drove over 69 via CR 200 N in Daviess County yesterday and noticed the center line is striped and guard-railing is in place.
Also, the majority of the paving is complete at the US 50 interchange. There are still a few small areas that still need concrete, but I'd say that will be complete this week. Today, they were asphalting the median of US 50. From what I could tell, the ramps are done except for the shoulders. 

theline

Quote from: mukade on November 05, 2012, 10:52:37 PM
Quote from: theline on November 05, 2012, 09:29:39 PM
Did INDOT ever consider building the Bloomington to Indy portion of the road on new alignment? I can't find historical info on route alternatives on the project web site.

It would be interesting to see a cost comparison. At first blush, you'd think that new alignment would cost a lot more, but there are some mitigating factors:

  • Along the SR-37 route, ROW would have to be purchased most of the way for frontage roads, exits, etc. I'd think that ROW, including existing homes and businesses, would be much more expensive per acre than along a new alignment.
  • Fewer exits would be required along new alignment, and less critical ones could have construction deferred. Local motorists rely on SR-37 and will still need access if it's converted, leading to many more exits than on a new road.
  • New alignment would permit a toll option, if funding can't be found. It was pointed out up-thread that users would mightily object if free SR-37 were converted to a toll road. A new alignment allows 37 to remain free.
  • Upgrading the existing road would be highly disruptive to existing traffic, and nearby residents and businesses. Not so for the new alignment. (Not a direct cost to the government, but still a cost factor.)

Does anyone know about whether a new alignment was considered?

Of course, but in some areas like Bloomington it makes no sense at all.


Agreed. The only sensible route through Bloomington is along the existing SR-37. I was arguing that new terrain north of Bloomington should be considered.

I didn't see any alternatives using new terrain for areas north of Bloomington, except the last few miles south of 465. Was it ever considered?

mukade

Several routes were considered at the outset (back in the early 2000s), the current route was selected by INDOT, and was then approved by the Feds. Making a major change at this late stage, would be problematic and would probably be a last resort option. Of course the CARR people still want the route changed to follow US 41 and I-70. For them, hope springs eternal.

silverback1065

Quote from: mukade on November 06, 2012, 06:25:56 PM
Several routes were considered at the outset (back in the early 2000s), the current route was selected by INDOT, and was then approved by the Feds. Making a major change at this late stage, would be problematic and would probably be a last resort option. Of course the CARR people still want the route changed to follow US 41 and I-70. For them, hope springs eternal.

The US 41/ I-70 route never made any sense, its current routing is the most logical.  Also I believe that the previous idea was a roundabout interchange at SR 37.  I personally think that was a terrible idea, the trumpet is much better for high speed travel. 

Henry

Quote from: tdindy88 on November 04, 2012, 01:54:40 AM
It's not that INDOT is lazy, it's that they assume regular people are. The whole point of the 200 thing was to make it easier on people who couldn't do the math from 184. But I've dicussed this before, all I will hope for is that they change the numbers again once the entire interstate is finished plus the Ohio River Bridges.
I'm sure they will.
Go Cubs Go! Go Cubs Go! Hey Chicago, what do you say? The Cubs are gonna win today!

vtk

Or they could make the exit numbers on the new part of I-69 be off by the same amount, so they start at ~15 in Evansville...
Wait, it's all Ohio? Always has been.

theline

Quote from: silverback1065 on November 06, 2012, 10:01:40 PM
Quote from: mukade on November 06, 2012, 06:25:56 PM
Several routes were considered at the outset (back in the early 2000s), the current route was selected by INDOT, and was then approved by the Feds. Making a major change at this late stage, would be problematic and would probably be a last resort option. Of course the CARR people still want the route changed to follow US 41 and I-70. For them, hope springs eternal.

The US 41/ I-70 route never made any sense, its current routing is the most logical.  Also I believe that the previous idea was a roundabout interchange at SR 37.  I personally think that was a terrible idea, the trumpet is much better for high speed travel.

"[T]he CARR people"? Who are they? I missed something.

A roundabout at SR-37? I'd like some of whatever they were smoking when they thought that up. I'd have to move to Colorado though.  :spin:
Thank goodness they reconsidered.

Grzrd

Quote from: Grzrd on March 01, 2012, 10:23:47 AM
Indiana Public Media reports (with plan diagrams) that INDOT is proposing two I-69/ SR 37 interchange options
Quote from: theline on November 07, 2012, 04:09:38 PM
A roundabout at SR-37? I'd like some of whatever they were smoking when they thought that up.

FWIW here is the roundabout design that had been under consideration:

theline

Quote from: Grzrd on November 07, 2012, 04:58:04 PM
Quote from: Grzrd on March 01, 2012, 10:23:47 AM
Indiana Public Media reports (with plan diagrams) that INDOT is proposing two I-69/ SR 37 interchange options


The captions on the pictures are reversed, right? It's the roundabouts that cost less, but require traffic to slow to 20 MPH. The trumpet allows traffic to continue close to freeway speed, but is more expensive. That's the only way it makes sense.

mukade

Quote from: theline on November 07, 2012, 04:09:38 PM
"[T]he CARR people"? Who are they? I missed something.

CARR = Citizens for Appropriate Rural Roads

They are the very outspoken I-69 people led by Tom Tokarski. Almost any article about I-69 in Indiana quotes this group.

ShawnP


theline

Thanks for the explanation mukade, and also for the alternate name Shawn.

I must confess that I skip over the drivel from the folks stuck in the horse-and-buggy days. I'm content that they'll eventually run out of gas and progress will happen anyway.

ShawnP

As I said before it will only be a matter of time before these CARR people are driving on I-69. I sooooooo want a picture of that.

NE2

Quote from: theline on November 08, 2012, 02:17:17 PM
I must confess that I skip over the drivel from the folks stuck in the horse-and-buggy days. I'm content that they'll eventually run out of gas and progress will happen anyway.
Actually horse-and-buggy owners will be well off when gas runs out. :spin:
pre-1945 Florida route log

I accept and respect your identity as long as it's not dumb shit like "identifying as a vaccinated attack helicopter".



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.