I-69 Ohio River Bridge

[hbelkins]

Kentucky has used GARVEE bonds, but I'm not sure how those work.

They also used something called "toll credits" but I'm also not sure how those worked, since we haven't had any toll roads for nearly two decades (other than the new Louisville spans.)

[edwaleni]

Kentucky has used GARVEE bonds, but I'm not sure how those work.

They also used something called "toll credits" but I'm also not sure how those worked, since we haven't had any toll roads for nearly two decades (other than the new Louisville spans.)

Grant Anticipation Revenue Vehicles (GARVEEs)

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ipd/finance/tools_programs/federal_debt_financing/garvees/

Essentially allows you to finance against Title 23 highway grant funds. If the legislation has passed, then you can borrow against that expected federal income.

As for toll credits....

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ipd/pdfs/finance/fhwa_oipd_tollcredit_infographic_102219.pdf

Toll credits reward states that spend their toll
revenue on projects that would otherwise require
federal-aid support. States and metropolitan
planning organizations are eligible to earn credits
based on the amount of toll revenue used by
the toll authority for building, improving, or
maintaining highways, bridges, or tunnels that
serve interstate commerce.

[hbelkins]

^^^^

That would explain why Kentucky's toll credits have expired. They haven't collected any tolls (other than the new bridges) in nearly 20 years.

[Avalanchez71]

Sounds like Kentucky is trying to put themselves on the map with all of these fancy new bridges.  With the state income tax it is going to be hard to compete against Tennessee.

[sprjus4]

Sounds like Kentucky is trying to put themselves on the map with all of these fancy new bridges.  With the state income tax it is going to be hard to compete against Tennessee.

Their new bridges aren't trying to "put themselves on the map" . They're needed infrastructure improvements.

[sparker]

Sounds like Kentucky is trying to put themselves on the map with all of these fancy new bridges.  With the state income tax it is going to be hard to compete against Tennessee.

Their new bridges aren't trying to "put themselves on the map" . They're needed infrastructure improvements.

Besides, every major bridge project either done, in the works, or proposed involves the Ohio River, which effectively means a joint project with the adjoining state, regardless of whose agency takes the lead planning and construction role.  Except for necessary maintenance, there don't seem to be similar projects in the hopper within TN (although a 3rd Mississippi River Bridge north of Memphis would be nice and, considering recent events there, something of a relief).  But any reference to state income tax differentials is something of a "red herring" and completely irrelevant to any situation regarding planned infrastructure improvements; the idea of KY and TN being in some sort of undefined "competition" is disingenuous -- unless the competition is to lure as many anti-tax folks to the state as possible -- which in a state lacking an income tax would seem to be a wash at best unless there's a compensatory sales tax, in which case the newcomers better start spending their money in substantial chunks to compensate for the services they're going to utilize once residing in the state in question.   I.e., no free lunch!

[hbelkins]

Sounds like Kentucky is trying to put themselves on the map with all of these fancy new bridges.  With the state income tax it is going to be hard to compete against Tennessee.

Their new bridges aren't trying to "put themselves on the map" . They're needed infrastructure improvements.

Besides, every major bridge project either done, in the works, or proposed involves the Ohio River, which effectively means a joint project with the adjoining state, regardless of whose agency takes the lead planning and construction role.  Except for necessary maintenance, there don't seem to be similar projects in the hopper within TN (although a 3rd Mississippi River Bridge north of Memphis would be nice and, considering recent events there, something of a relief).  But any reference to state income tax differentials is something of a "red herring" and completely irrelevant to any situation regarding planned infrastructure improvements; the idea of KY and TN being in some sort of undefined "competition" is disingenuous -- unless the competition is to lure as many anti-tax folks to the state as possible -- which in a state lacking an income tax would seem to be a wash at best unless there's a compensatory sales tax, in which case the newcomers better start spending their money in substantial chunks to compensate for the services they're going to utilize once residing in the state in question.   I.e., no free lunch!

I'm not really sure what the tax debate has to do with road construction, as neither Kentucky's income tax nor its sales tax go to road construction.

There are lots of people in Kentucky who would like to adopt Tennessee's taxing setup of no income tax and exorbitant sales taxes. I'm not one of them. My Facebook friends probably saw my rant about paying 9.5 percent sales tax for a purchase in Tennessee a couple of weeks ago. I would much rather pay an income tax on earned income -- specifically, a flat income tax rate (of, say, 15 percent) that exempts a certain amount of income (say, $50,000 for an individual, $100K for a couple, and $5K for each dependent) with no deductions, than a sales tax. I don't know know why so many people in Kentucky lust after Tennessee's taxation policies. I sure don't. I hate sales taxes. They are a hidden cost for goods and services imposed by the government. To my surprise, Tennessee even taxes food. At least Kentucky has the good sense to exempt food from its sales tax.

[sparker]

Sounds like Kentucky is trying to put themselves on the map with all of these fancy new bridges.  With the state income tax it is going to be hard to compete against Tennessee.

Their new bridges aren't trying to "put themselves on the map" . They're needed infrastructure improvements.

Besides, every major bridge project either done, in the works, or proposed involves the Ohio River, which effectively means a joint project with the adjoining state, regardless of whose agency takes the lead planning and construction role.  Except for necessary maintenance, there don't seem to be similar projects in the hopper within TN (although a 3rd Mississippi River Bridge north of Memphis would be nice and, considering recent events there, something of a relief).  But any reference to state income tax differentials is something of a "red herring" and completely irrelevant to any situation regarding planned infrastructure improvements; the idea of KY and TN being in some sort of undefined "competition" is disingenuous -- unless the competition is to lure as many anti-tax folks to the state as possible -- which in a state lacking an income tax would seem to be a wash at best unless there's a compensatory sales tax, in which case the newcomers better start spending their money in substantial chunks to compensate for the services they're going to utilize once residing in the state in question.   I.e., no free lunch!

I'm not really sure what the tax debate has to do with road construction, as neither Kentucky's income tax nor its sales tax go to road construction.

There are lots of people in Kentucky who would like to adopt Tennessee's taxing setup of no income tax and exorbitant sales taxes. I'm not one of them. My Facebook friends probably saw my rant about paying 9.5 percent sales tax for a purchase in Tennessee a couple of weeks ago. I would much rather pay an income tax on earned income -- specifically, a flat income tax rate (of, say, 15 percent) that exempts a certain amount of income (say, $50,000 for an individual, $100K for a couple, and $5K for each dependent) with no deductions, than a sales tax. I don't know know why so many people in Kentucky lust after Tennessee's taxation policies. I sure don't. I hate sales taxes. They are a hidden cost for goods and services imposed by the government. To my surprise, Tennessee even taxes food. At least Kentucky has the good sense to exempt food from its sales tax.

Wow -- 9.5% is close to the highest tax rate out here in CA (which piles local taxes, on top of those imposed by the state, to the total -- and the local is often decided by local referendum at the city and/or county level).  Right now San Jose, which has an extra tax that bought us (for better or worse) the BART commute-train extension into town, is at 9.25%; some towns in Alameda County to the north are 1-1.5% higher for various reasons.  But CA income tax, relatively "progressive", has a low-end "shelf" that only applies taxes above a certain income level.  This is in comparison with Oregon, where I lived for a while, where there are no sales taxes but exceptionally high property taxes as compensation, along with a state income tax that gets a piece of you for the first dollar you make (and why folks from far-north CA and southern WA trek to OR to buy their big-ticket appliances, clothing, and other goods -- the "free rider" phenomenon!).   But I guess with more than a few TN folks (including some posters from that state) the concept of taxing one's income is particularly onerous, whereas the level and type of personal/family expenditure is considered to be discretionary (beyond subsistence one can choose how much to spend) and therefore more tolerable to those folks than having a chunk taken out of their paycheck by the state in which they're residing.  I suppose it comes down to a personal preference as to how one's cash flow is handled (input vs. output), with one's particular politics playing a variable role.  My own take is that each state's method of acquiring operating income is different, but both residents and visitors eventually pay in one form or another. 

And we don't tax food out here in CA either -- thankful for small favors!   

[abqtraveler]

Sounds like Kentucky is trying to put themselves on the map with all of these fancy new bridges.  With the state income tax it is going to be hard to compete against Tennessee.

Their new bridges aren't trying to "put themselves on the map" . They're needed infrastructure improvements.

Besides, every major bridge project either done, in the works, or proposed involves the Ohio River, which effectively means a joint project with the adjoining state, regardless of whose agency takes the lead planning and construction role.  Except for necessary maintenance, there don't seem to be similar projects in the hopper within TN (although a 3rd Mississippi River Bridge north of Memphis would be nice and, considering recent events there, something of a relief).  But any reference to state income tax differentials is something of a "red herring" and completely irrelevant to any situation regarding planned infrastructure improvements; the idea of KY and TN being in some sort of undefined "competition" is disingenuous -- unless the competition is to lure as many anti-tax folks to the state as possible -- which in a state lacking an income tax would seem to be a wash at best unless there's a compensatory sales tax, in which case the newcomers better start spending their money in substantial chunks to compensate for the services they're going to utilize once residing in the state in question.   I.e., no free lunch!

I'm not really sure what the tax debate has to do with road construction, as neither Kentucky's income tax nor its sales tax go to road construction.

There are lots of people in Kentucky who would like to adopt Tennessee's taxing setup of no income tax and exorbitant sales taxes. I'm not one of them. My Facebook friends probably saw my rant about paying 9.5 percent sales tax for a purchase in Tennessee a couple of weeks ago. I would much rather pay an income tax on earned income -- specifically, a flat income tax rate (of, say, 15 percent) that exempts a certain amount of income (say, $50,000 for an individual, $100K for a couple, and $5K for each dependent) with no deductions, than a sales tax. I don't know know why so many people in Kentucky lust after Tennessee's taxation policies. I sure don't. I hate sales taxes. They are a hidden cost for goods and services imposed by the government. To my surprise, Tennessee even taxes food. At least Kentucky has the good sense to exempt food from its sales tax.

It goes to show you that states without income taxes are going to make up for it somewhere else. Point in fact, Texas and New Hampshire both lack personal income taxes, but both of those states have sky-high property tax rates. They're going to get their (really...your) money from you one way or another.

[Avalanchez71]

Sounds like Kentucky is trying to put themselves on the map with all of these fancy new bridges.  With the state income tax it is going to be hard to compete against Tennessee.

Their new bridges aren’t trying to “put themselves on the map”. They’re needed infrastructure improvements.

Besides, every major bridge project either done, in the works, or proposed involves the Ohio River, which effectively means a joint project with the adjoining state, regardless of whose agency takes the lead planning and construction role.  Except for necessary maintenance, there don't seem to be similar projects in the hopper within TN (although a 3rd Mississippi River Bridge north of Memphis would be nice and, considering recent events there, something of a relief).  But any reference to state income tax differentials is something of a "red herring" and completely irrelevant to any situation regarding planned infrastructure improvements; the idea of KY and TN being in some sort of undefined "competition" is disingenuous -- unless the competition is to lure as many anti-tax folks to the state as possible -- which in a state lacking an income tax would seem to be a wash at best unless there's a compensatory sales tax, in which case the newcomers better start spending their money in substantial chunks to compensate for the services they're going to utilize once residing in the state in question.   I.e., no free lunch!

I'm not really sure what the tax debate has to do with road construction, as neither Kentucky's income tax nor its sales tax go to road construction.

There are lots of people in Kentucky who would like to adopt Tennessee's taxing setup of no income tax and exorbitant sales taxes. I'm not one of them. My Facebook friends probably saw my rant about paying 9.5 percent sales tax for a purchase in Tennessee a couple of weeks ago. I would much rather pay an income tax on earned income -- specifically, a flat income tax rate (of, say, 15 percent) that exempts a certain amount of income (say, $50,000 for an individual, $100K for a couple, and $5K for each dependent) with no deductions, than a sales tax. I don't know know why so many people in Kentucky lust after Tennessee's taxation policies. I sure don't. I hate sales taxes. They are a hidden cost for goods and services imposed by the government. To my surprise, Tennessee even taxes food. At least Kentucky has the good sense to exempt food from its sales tax.

Wow -- 9.5% is close to the highest tax rate out here in CA (which piles local taxes, on top of those imposed by the state, to the total -- and the local is often decided by local referendum at the city and/or county level).  Right now San Jose, which has an extra tax that bought us (for better or worse) the BART commute-train extension into town, is at 9.25%; some towns in Alameda County to the north are 1-1.5% higher for various reasons.  But CA income tax, relatively "progressive", has a low-end "shelf" that only applies taxes above a certain income level.  This is in comparison with Oregon, where I lived for a while, where there are no sales taxes but exceptionally high property taxes as compensation, along with a state income tax that gets a piece of you for the first dollar you make (and why folks from far-north CA and southern WA trek to OR to buy their big-ticket appliances, clothing, and other goods -- the "free rider" phenomenon!).   But I guess with more than a few TN folks (including some posters from that state) the concept of taxing one's income is particularly onerous, whereas the level and type of personal/family expenditure is considered to be discretionary (beyond subsistence one can choose how much to spend) and therefore more tolerable to those folks than having a chunk taken out of their paycheck by the state in which they're residing.  I suppose it comes down to a personal preference as to how one's cash flow is handled (input vs. output), with one's particular politics playing a variable role.  My own take is that each state's method of acquiring operating income is different, but both residents and visitors eventually pay in one form or another. 

And we don't tax food out here in CA either -- thankful for small favors!   

The tax maxes out at 9.75%.  The county I am in was 9.25% but they used the whole "it's for the kids" slogan and the tax increase passed.  They did lower the sales tax on food when they increased the gas tax two years ago.  The registration fees and property taxes are low in Tennessee.  This keeps the sales tax higher.  The politicians will tell you that we get money from tourists this way.

[hbelkins]

Speaking of taxes, I've heard allegations -- but have never seen any proof -- that Kentucky has raided its Road Fund (generated by gas taxes) for revenue for the General Fund (generated by income tax, sales tax, state property tax, etc.).

[WKDAVE]

Speaking of taxes, I've heard allegations -- but have never seen any proof -- that Kentucky has raided its Road Fund (generated by gas taxes) for revenue for the General Fund (generated by income tax, sales tax, state property tax, etc.).

They started to require Road Fund to pay for State Police (or at least a portion) which is a "raid."

Also the Gas Tax that is set aside for Underground Storage Tank clean up has been "Swept" into General Fund.

[Avalanchez71]

Speaking of taxes, I've heard allegations -- but have never seen any proof -- that Kentucky has raided its Road Fund (generated by gas taxes) for revenue for the General Fund (generated by income tax, sales tax, state property tax, etc.).

They started to require Road Fund to pay for State Police (or at least a portion) which is a "raid."

Also the Gas Tax that is set aside for Underground Storage Tank clean up has been "Swept" into General Fund.

Good ole Kentucky and their creative stroke of a pen budgeting.

[thefro]

https://www.courierpress.com/story/news/2021/06/11/holcomb-announced-475-million-road-projects-69-among-upcoming-work/7639850002/

Indiana's governor announced construction will begin in Indiana on the 1.5 mile approach to the future I-69 Ohio River bridge in 2024.

Indiana Governor Eric Holcomb Friday announced $475 million in road projects including $200 million to finish up the last mile and a half of Interstate 69 from Evansville to the Kentucky border during the Evansville Regional Economic Partnership's Lunch with the Governor.

"Kentucky will not be waiting on us one day," he said. "We are ahead of schedule and under budget."

Construction of Indiana's approach to the I-69 Ohio River Crossing near Evansville, starting in 2024.

[The Ghostbuster]

When the Interstate 69 Ohio Bridge is complete, what should the "orphaned" portion of Interstate 69 become? Interstate 169, or a non-interstate extension of the Veterans Memorial Parkway? Also, on the Kentucky side, since future 69 will depart the existing US 41 alignment just north of the KY 351 interchange, the Audubon Parkway can still become Interstate 369 (assuming the proposal to add the parkway to the Interstate System is not dead).

[hbelkins]

When the Interstate 69 Ohio Bridge is complete, what should the "orphaned" portion of Interstate 69 become? Interstate 169, or a non-interstate extension of the Veterans Memorial Parkway? Also, on the Kentucky side, since future 69 will depart the existing US 41 alignment just north of the KY 351 interchange, the Audubon Parkway can still become Interstate 369 (assuming the proposal to add the parkway to the Interstate System is not dead).

Given Indiana's penchant for turning over state routes to local governments, I'd expect it to become an extension of the Veterans Memorial Parkway.

Kentucky removed the "Future I-69 Spur" signs from the Audubon Parkway years ago, so I don't know what the plans currently are. All of these changes from parkways to interstates have been spurred by members of the federal delegation, so I guess it depends on how much interest Rand Paul or Brett Guthrie have in getting the I designation.

[sparker]

When the Interstate 69 Ohio Bridge is complete, what should the "orphaned" portion of Interstate 69 become? Interstate 169, or a non-interstate extension of the Veterans Memorial Parkway? Also, on the Kentucky side, since future 69 will depart the existing US 41 alignment just north of the KY 351 interchange, the Audubon Parkway can still become Interstate 369 (assuming the proposal to add the parkway to the Interstate System is not dead).

Given Indiana's penchant for turning over state routes to local governments, I'd expect it to become an extension of the Veterans Memorial Parkway.

Kentucky removed the "Future I-69 Spur" signs from the Audubon Parkway years ago, so I don't know what the plans currently are. All of these changes from parkways to interstates have been spurred by members of the federal delegation, so I guess it depends on how much interest Rand Paul or Brett Guthrie have in getting the I designation.

It wouldn't only be the Audubon Parkway but also a portion of the US 60 Owensboro bypass that would have to be included in any action, congressional or otherwise, to fully complete an Interstate between I-69 near Henderson and I-65 at Bowling Green; it's probable that the "backward" trumpets connecting the bypass to the parkways would need revision as well.  They may as well just extend the I-165 designation west to accomplish this -- unless they get some sort of notion to make the whole shooting match a 2di -- particularly, as has been speculated in another thread, if the Cumberland Parkway is included in that mix.  With political self-aggrandizement as an incentive, anything in that realm is possible!

[silverback1065]

When the Interstate 69 Ohio Bridge is complete, what should the "orphaned" portion of Interstate 69 become? Interstate 169, or a non-interstate extension of the Veterans Memorial Parkway? Also, on the Kentucky side, since future 69 will depart the existing US 41 alignment just north of the KY 351 interchange, the Audubon Parkway can still become Interstate 369 (assuming the proposal to add the parkway to the Interstate System is not dead).

it won't be signed as anything. if anything it will have an unsigned name.

[abqtraveler]

When the Interstate 69 Ohio Bridge is complete, what should the "orphaned" portion of Interstate 69 become? Interstate 169, or a non-interstate extension of the Veterans Memorial Parkway? Also, on the Kentucky side, since future 69 will depart the existing US 41 alignment just north of the KY 351 interchange, the Audubon Parkway can still become Interstate 369 (assuming the proposal to add the parkway to the Interstate System is not dead).

it won't be signed as anything. if anything it will have an unsigned name.

More than likely it would just become an extension of Veterans Memorial Parkway.

[Avalanchez71]

Indiana will likely remove it from the state highway system and it will be unsigned.  The city may have some TO I-69/US 41 signs on it

[NWI_Irish96]

When the Interstate 69 Ohio Bridge is complete, what should the "orphaned" portion of Interstate 69 become? Interstate 169, or a non-interstate extension of the Veterans Memorial Parkway? Also, on the Kentucky side, since future 69 will depart the existing US 41 alignment just north of the KY 351 interchange, the Audubon Parkway can still become Interstate 369 (assuming the proposal to add the parkway to the Interstate System is not dead).

it won't be signed as anything. if anything it will have an unsigned name.

More than likely it would just become an extension of Veterans Memorial Parkway.

Right now, it's an INDOT maintained highway. Unless INDOT convinces the city of Evansville to take the road over, it will remain an INDOT road and would need to get signed as something. If INDOT doesn't want to go for an I-369 designation, then it will likely become something like an extension of IN 662.

[wanderer2575]

When the Interstate 69 Ohio Bridge is complete, what should the "orphaned" portion of Interstate 69 become? Interstate 169, or a non-interstate extension of the Veterans Memorial Parkway? Also, on the Kentucky side, since future 69 will depart the existing US 41 alignment just north of the KY 351 interchange, the Audubon Parkway can still become Interstate 369 (assuming the proposal to add the parkway to the Interstate System is not dead).

it won't be signed as anything. if anything it will have an unsigned name.

More than likely it would just become an extension of Veterans Memorial Parkway.

Right now, it's an INDOT maintained highway. Unless INDOT convinces the city of Evansville to take the road over, it will remain an INDOT road and would need to get signed as something. If INDOT doesn't want to go for an I-369 designation, then it will likely become something like an extension of IN 662.

Why would it need to be signed as something?  Is that INDOT policy?

As another state's example, MDOT (Michigan) has jurisdiction of several roads that don't have route numbers, aren't signed with any, and aren't shown as state trunklines on the general MDOT highway map (although they are shown as Unnumbered Trunklines on the MDOT truck operators' map).

[silverback1065]

When the Interstate 69 Ohio Bridge is complete, what should the "orphaned" portion of Interstate 69 become? Interstate 169, or a non-interstate extension of the Veterans Memorial Parkway? Also, on the Kentucky side, since future 69 will depart the existing US 41 alignment just north of the KY 351 interchange, the Audubon Parkway can still become Interstate 369 (assuming the proposal to add the parkway to the Interstate System is not dead).

it won't be signed as anything. if anything it will have an unsigned name.

More than likely it would just become an extension of Veterans Memorial Parkway.

Right now, it's an INDOT maintained highway. Unless INDOT convinces the city of Evansville to take the road over, it will remain an INDOT road and would need to get signed as something. If INDOT doesn't want to go for an I-369 designation, then it will likely become something like an extension of IN 662.

Why would it need to be signed as something?  Is that INDOT policy?

As another state's example, MDOT (Michigan) has jurisdiction of several roads that don't have route numbers, aren't signed with any, and aren't shown as state trunklines on the general MDOT highway map (although they are shown as Unnumbered Trunklines on the MDOT truck operators' map).

Indot tends to sign all their roads. It's just what they do. I'm not aware of a single secret state highway in Indiana with the exception of SR 431 in Indianapolis.

Pixel 5

[NWI_Irish96]

When the Interstate 69 Ohio Bridge is complete, what should the "orphaned" portion of Interstate 69 become? Interstate 169, or a non-interstate extension of the Veterans Memorial Parkway? Also, on the Kentucky side, since future 69 will depart the existing US 41 alignment just north of the KY 351 interchange, the Audubon Parkway can still become Interstate 369 (assuming the proposal to add the parkway to the Interstate System is not dead).

it won't be signed as anything. if anything it will have an unsigned name.

More than likely it would just become an extension of Veterans Memorial Parkway.

Right now, it's an INDOT maintained highway. Unless INDOT convinces the city of Evansville to take the road over, it will remain an INDOT road and would need to get signed as something. If INDOT doesn't want to go for an I-369 designation, then it will likely become something like an extension of IN 662.

Why would it need to be signed as something?  Is that INDOT policy?

As another state's example, MDOT (Michigan) has jurisdiction of several roads that don't have route numbers, aren't signed with any, and aren't shown as state trunklines on the general MDOT highway map (although they are shown as Unnumbered Trunklines on the MDOT truck operators' map).

Indot tends to sign all their roads. It's just what they do. I'm not aware of a single secret state highway in Indiana with the exception of SR 431 in Indianapolis.

Pixel 5

What I have had explained to me by a couple different people who work for INDOT is that they want to make it easy for drivers to know who is responsible for a road. If it has an interstate/US highway/state highway shield, you contact INDOT, if it doesn't, you contact the city or county. That's why they broke up routes like 25 and 26 in Lafayette and 22 in Kokomo, they didn't want to leave signs up and get contacted for roads they weren't responsible for. 431 is an exception because it's such a small segment of road it isn't worth the effort to sign. Another exception is business routes, those routes are signed by localities but not maintained by INDOT unless they are concurrent with an INDOT highway.

I don't think the city of Evansville will want the road, so INDOT will sign it as something.

[ITB]

In the Courier & Press newspaper article reporting the new road projects in southwest Indiana, there was this:

There's not a firm construction start date on the bridge, which is estimated to cost about $1.5 billion. The project team's most recent estimate was between 2027 and 2031, although officials in both states hope to speed things up.

If the estimated start date doesn't change, it will be at least 2030 before the bridge completes, considering a build time of 36 or 42 months, which is not unreasonable. The only way this project will be sped up is more money from Washington, namely a very large sum. It's possible that will happen when the infrastructure bill is passed and signed into law. The bill is full of big numbers, an enormous amount of money, and a lot of road and bridge projects that are ready to go but on the back burner, will likely be kick started. Good chance the ORX bridge project will be one of them.