Update on I-69 Extension in Indiana

[thefro]

Here's some comments from Perry Township NIMBYs from Monday night

Residents who live near State Road 37 already hear traffic on the highway and are concerned how bad the traffic noise would become if the road were turned into an interstate. White River Township residents Jeff and Kelly Parsons said they already have considered moving away from the area.

"We just moved into a house about two years ago, and we live in between Fairview (Road) and Smith Valley (Road),"  Jeff Parsons said. "We can hear the 37 traffic now. Our biggest concern is will we stay or will we go?"

If the state installs noise barriers along the interstate, Kelly Parsons thinks the traffic will still be loud when she walks upstairs, she said.

"We don't want to hear the noise,"  Kelly Parsons said.

State, city and school officials spoke out against I-69, including state Sen. Brent Waltz, who said he has opposed the interstate for more than 12 years, when he first joined the state Senate.

"I have been a die-hard opponent of State Road 37 being used for I-69 from the beginning. I still am,"  Waltz said. "It is going to turn State Road 37 into basically a parking lot during rush hour."

Even when the new route is announced in a few years, the state won't be able to cover the cost of construction, Waltz said.

"The good news I can tell you is that the state of Indiana does not have any money to pay for it,"  Waltz said. "There's no discussion at this point on how to fund Section 6. So it will be several years even if something is approved before the taxpayers would be able to pay for it."

Perry Township Schools Superintendent Tom Little asked state officials to consider the safety of children when deciding on the ultimate route.

"We have 100 bus routes every day that cross 37. I have over 400 children that drive to school every day that cross 37,"  Little said. "If that was your child at 6:45 in the morning, driving across 37, would you like them taking that route?"

[mgk920]

^^
Ahh, didn't the 'Parsons' know about that road being there when they moved in two years ago?  I have zero sympathy for them.

Mike

[SW Indiana]

These comments annoy me more than they should....

If the noise bothers the Parsons' that bad, then why did they move there in the first place? 

And in regards to the buses crossing SR 37, it'll be SAFER if INDOT uses 37 for 69, because of the little things called overpasses and the elimination of at grade crossings. How are they currently navigating 37?

Perhaps I'm missing something within their comments, IDK...

[silverback1065]

literally every one of those comments they had could be easily refuted.  And the senator who claims 69 will make the road a "parking lot", I think the 10 traffic lights are doing a wonderful job at doing that all ready.  There's a big difference from being against something for legitimate reasons, and just being an asshole NIMBY.  Don't come out against it with some weak arguments that are baseless and easily refuted by facts.   

[silverback1065]

I thought there was an option for an interchange that would serve both SR 252 and SR 44. That could still be considered, but given that SR 44 already has a random endpoint on the west side of Franklin, why not another unorthodox terminus for the other end? Looking at the Martinsville area, what happened with Ohio Street, I thought that was going to be another Martinsville exit. I look to Lebanon, a similar-sized town with an interstate wrapping around it in a manner unlike that of Martinsville and see that they have four exits there. One at Ohio Street to compliment the ones at SR 39 and SR 252 (and/or SR 44) would seem like a good solution for me, but I'm sure this stuff can still be hammered out, I'm sure INDOT's meeting in Martinsville will get some people talking about that.

I thought the same thing on Ohio Street and the previously-proposed single SR 44/SR 252 exit. I thought that was a great plan, and its too bad that got dropped. If Ohio Street does not get an interchange, then they're going to need an improved road connecting to SR 39. Is there a ramp from SB SR 39 to NB SR 37 (future) I-69 or SB SR 37 to NB SR 39? If not, the only services for I-69 in Martinsville would be at SR 252. That would seem to be a recipe for congestion there.

I'd be mad too, I really think the only logical solution is to follow 37 all the way, the 70 tie ins make no sense to me.  How is there no interchange at SR 44?  unless I'm looking at the map wrong, they'd be pulling a SR 61 in Vincennes or SR 160 in Salem.

While alternative C is fine, I would like alternative D also if a bypass from I-65 in Lebanon to I-69 were also built. That could effectively offload traffic bound for Nashville and points south from I-65 south of Indy.

What bypass connecting 69 and 65? I've never even heard of this, are you referring to something following SR 28 or 32?

[thefro]

literally every one of those comments they had could be easily refuted.  And the senator who claims 69 will make the road a "parking lot", I think the 10 traffic lights are doing a wonderful job at doing that all ready.  There's a big difference from being against something for legitimate reasons, and just being an asshole NIMBY.  Don't come out against it with some weak arguments that are baseless and easily refuted by facts.   

Yeah, the funny part is if they said "okay you win, we won't build Section 6 at all!" the problems would be worse in Perry Township.

There's going to be an uptick of traffic once Section 4 & 5 open and there's already a good amount of traffic on that route.  Greenwood is growing over to the SR 37 area and that's a future exurb/sprawl growth area south of that on the whole east side of SR 37.  At this point you've got to upgrade the road to Interstate standards, especially since this is the part of the route that already has Interstate-level traffic.

[EngineerTM]

literally every one of those comments they had could be easily refuted.  And the senator who claims 69 will make the road a "parking lot", I think the 10 traffic lights are doing a wonderful job at doing that all ready.  There's a big difference from being against something for legitimate reasons, and just being an asshole NIMBY.  Don't come out against it with some weak arguments that are baseless and easily refuted by facts.

I agree with your observation regarding the comments.  These same objections were also being made by the NIMBYs in Bloomington when I-69 Sections 4 and 5 were being studied and detailed.  These I-69 NIMBYs really need to develop a new playbook; they are obtusely predictable.

You are also correct about how awful traffic on that stretch of SR 37 is during the morning and afternoon rushes.  I've driven through there many times following my travels to Indianapolis, and I swear I could walk faster than traffic at times.  It is common to sit through a number of traffic light cycles before being able to get through some of those intersections.

[Henry]

It looks like a no-win situation for the south suburbs, because either I-69 will cut through Perry Township or Mooresville. I'd rather have it go through Perry Township because it is a more direct route to the existing I-69, and also because it makes absolutely no sense linking up to I-70 further west. Unless you continued as sort of an outer loop, that wouldn't be such a huge issue, but IN 37 is still the most direct route for the new Interstate to take.

[SW Indiana]

INDOT has reportedly sent out a news release, stating section 4 will open December 9th.

http://www.courierpress.com/news/local/mayors-next-section-of-i-69-to-open-next-week-25edb1ed-c189-708c-e053-0100007f01a3-360060761.html

[thefro]

Martinsville city officials say that Ohio Street interchange can still happen in I-69 Section 6

http://www.heraldtimesonline.com/ohio-st-interchange-with-i--can-happen-in-martinsville/article_ffd0e44e-4ed5-5cc1-aed9-2d1c3bef8d0f.html

MARTINSVILLE – The exclusion of an Ohio Street interchange from maps for Interstate 69 displayed Monday at an Indiana Department of Transportation gathering doesn't mean there won't be such an interchange, city officials said Tuesday.

The routes follow Ind. 37 through Martinsville. The Martinsville Common Council endorsed that, while asking that there be an interchange at Ohio Street and a vehicular overpass with pedestrian accommodation from Grand Valley Boulevard.

Martinsville Common Council President Eric Bowlen said the city wants the interstate to provide access to downtown Martinsville, two major employers and schools that an Ohio Street interchange would facilitate.

The problem, said Bowlen and Ross Holloway, the city engineer, is the federal requirement that interchanges be a mile apart. The Ohio Street interchange would be just a little less than a mile from the Rogers Road/Ind. 37 Bypass interchange that the state plans to build. Additionally, each interchange that is built costs approximately $20 million to build and funding for Section 6 of the interstate hasn't been secured yet.

Holloway said what was shown on the maps displayed Monday wasn't a surprise to city officials.

"We got a heads up a few weeks ago," Holloway said.

The process, however, to determine where the interchanges will be is far from finished, Holloway and Bowlen said.

"The city still has ample opportunity to make its case," Holloway said. "But it's not easy selling to INDOT."

In Section 5, the plans originally called for an interchange at the Morgan Monroe State Forest instead of a Liberty Church Road exit. County officials and others persuaded the state to put the exit at Liberty Church Road.

"This will have a big impact to the city," Bowlen said. "This is important to us."

Holloway, Bowlen and Martinsville mayor-election Shannon Kohl, who is a member of the city council, have had ongoing talks with state officials. City officials have stressed the economic impact the interstate will have on Martinsville, city officials said.

The interchanges could be tweaked with the Rogers Road/Bypass exchange being moved further south, closer to the Liberty Church Road exit that is three miles away from the Bypass. That could increase the distance between the Bypass and Ohio exits to more than a mile. And there are other ways that could be used to meet the federal requirements and allow an Ohio interchange to be built, Bowlen said.

Although the maps don't list an interchange at Grand Valley Boulevard as a possible option, Holloway said an overpass for vehicles and pedestrians at the crossing between the shopping area and the vicinity of Martinsville High School is likely.

[sd72667]

I'd recommend to the Parsons and other folks living near the new I-69 to buy tall grass plants, IE Giant Silvergrass, to use as a natural noise buffer. Also adding more insulation to the outside walls and possibly replacing old windows with newer "noise reduction windows". The irony is these people use more mental energy complaining about progress than just taking 15 minutes to "google" search many simple, low cost solutions that can also reduce their home energy costs. I live 1500-2000 ft from US 41 and railroad tracks in Evansville IN. During the summer, the tree foliage and plant growth create a great noise barrier. We barely notice any sounds from the road and tracks. In the winter, the traffic and train sounds are obviously increased, but still bearable.

Here's some comments from Perry Township NIMBYs from Monday night

Residents who live near State Road 37 already hear traffic on the highway and are concerned how bad the traffic noise would become if the road were turned into an interstate. White River Township residents Jeff and Kelly Parsons said they already have considered moving away from the area.

"We just moved into a house about two years ago, and we live in between Fairview (Road) and Smith Valley (Road),"  Jeff Parsons said. "We can hear the 37 traffic now. Our biggest concern is will we stay or will we go?"

If the state installs noise barriers along the interstate, Kelly Parsons thinks the traffic will still be loud when she walks upstairs, she said.

"We don't want to hear the noise,"  Kelly Parsons said.

State, city and school officials spoke out against I-69, including state Sen. Brent Waltz, who said he has opposed the interstate for more than 12 years, when he first joined the state Senate.

"I have been a die-hard opponent of State Road 37 being used for I-69 from the beginning. I still am,"  Waltz said. "It is going to turn State Road 37 into basically a parking lot during rush hour."

Even when the new route is announced in a few years, the state won't be able to cover the cost of construction, Waltz said.

"The good news I can tell you is that the state of Indiana does not have any money to pay for it,"  Waltz said. "There's no discussion at this point on how to fund Section 6. So it will be several years even if something is approved before the taxpayers would be able to pay for it."

Perry Township Schools Superintendent Tom Little asked state officials to consider the safety of children when deciding on the ultimate route.

"We have 100 bus routes every day that cross 37. I have over 400 children that drive to school every day that cross 37,"  Little said. "If that was your child at 6:45 in the morning, driving across 37, would you like them taking that route?"

[sd72667]

I drive to and from Indianapolis almost everyday for UPS. I use US 41/I-70 or I-69/IN 45, IN 37 route. The issue of ending and "merging" the IN 37/I-69 route into I-465 will be it's going to add much more congestion in the 3, 4 and 5 mile marker area on I-465. By building I-69 and using the IN 37 route, why not continue I-69 north on pass I-465, creating an I-169>I-70 spur north along Bluff Rd/S West St and tying into the S West St/I-70 interchange? By staying east of the White River, there's no bridge construction. Also add interchanges at Southport Rd and I-465 (Indy South) to reduce congestion. This would allow motorists who work downtown, who travel from Greenwood/Franklin/Bloomington area, to use I-169 spur, thus reducing traffic going into downtown area on I-65N. I'm sure these ideas have already been tossed around over the years.

[silverback1065]

I drive to and from Indianapolis almost everyday for UPS. I use US 41/I-70 or I-69/IN 45, IN 37 route. The issue of ending and "merging" the IN 37/I-69 route into I-465 will be it's going to add much more congestion in the 3, 4 and 5 mile marker area on I-465. By building I-69 and using the IN 37 route, why not continue I-69 north on pass I-465, creating an I-169>I-70 spur north along Bluff Rd/S West St and tying into the S West St/I-70 interchange? By staying east of the White River, there's no bridge construction. Also add interchanges at Southport Rd and I-465 (Indy South) to reduce congestion. This would allow motorists who work downtown, who travel from Greenwood/Franklin/Bloomington area, to use I-169 spur, thus reducing traffic going into downtown area on I-65N. I'm sure these ideas have already been tossed around over the years.

I like that idea, I've had a similar idea of continuing it up harding st to I-70

[thefro]

Dang... over 1000 people showed up at the Mooresville I-69 meeting (which they had to move to the gym).

http://fox59.com/2015/12/02/mooresville-residents-protest-options-for-final-stretch-of-i-69/

MOORESVILLE, Ind. (December 2, 2015) - More than 1,000 people showed up to Mooresville High School Wednesday to voice concerns about the final new stretch of I-69.

It was the largest I-69 public hearing INDOT has ever had. Hundreds packed the gymnasium, leaving standing room only.

"Mooresville just pays for the mess as Hendricks and Marion County profit from it. I don't call fast food and gas stations economic growth,"  said Dr. Angela Blackwell, a Veterinarian in Mooresville whose animal hospital sits along a possible new stretch of I-69.

"I have strong concerns with preliminary routes B, D, K3, and K4 due to the potential negative impact on the Mooresville Schools,"  said Dr. David Marcotte, the Superintendent of Mooresville Schools.

"Well the D route would just about go through my house,"  said Donovan Robinson.

Robinson has owned his historic Mooresville home, built in the 1850s, since the early 1980s. One proposed route of the final portion of the new I-69 would run right through Robinson's yard, tanking he says, his property value.

"We have all kinds of hiking and so forth going on in the area and it would just be like having a China wall right down between Mooresville and the rest of Morgan County,"  he said.

One INDOT option for the new highway is its original plan, which is to stick to the corridor along State Road 37.

Something seemingly everyone in Mooresville seems to agree on...

"In my perfect world they would go on up 37,"  said Robinson. "I think the original plan probably makes sense,"  said Ed Conder, another Mooresville resident. "I support I-69 staying on State Road 37,"  said Blackwell.

[noelbotevera]

Isn't there some grading, some freeway stubs and ROW in Indianapolis designed for I-69? Why not brush off those old plans from the 60s and string I-69 through Indianapolis rather than string it on I-465.

[tdindy88]

The grading and stubs were for I-69 from the North Split with I-65 and I-70 and points north. There was never really any stub or ROW done for any parts to the south, that would have to be all new to work. If I-69 were to run through the city, I would think that it may follow I-70 itself, should the connection be made with I-70 via the Mooreseville route. My father was at the first meeting on the southside earlier this week and there was a lot of opposition there for the Mooreseville option, it would seem that this was only magnified at the most recent meeting. And I can see why. While those along SR 37 have/or could have been getting prepared for the inevitable (even if that just included turning SR 37 into a freeway) those in Mooresville have been blind-sighted by having an interstate suddenly be rerouted in their backyards just so that an existing four-lane highway would not be upgraded. I'm curious about how Martinsville goes but I think these meetings are already giving us a good idea for what most of us here already know about the practicality of staying on the original route.

[silverback1065]

Isn't there some grading, some freeway stubs and ROW in Indianapolis designed for I-69? Why not brush off those old plans from the 60s and string I-69 through Indianapolis rather than string it on I-465.

69 was never supposed to go south of the north split originally.  I've always wanted to see plans of the NE Expressway though.  Quick side note, was I-74 ever at all planned to go through the city?

[Henry]

Isn't there some grading, some freeway stubs and ROW in Indianapolis designed for I-69? Why not brush off those old plans from the 60s and string I-69 through Indianapolis rather than string it on I-465.

69 was never supposed to go south of the north split originally.  I've always wanted to see plans of the NE Expressway though.  Quick side note, was I-74 ever at all planned to go through the city?

Despite the stub ends that exist inside I-465, I don't see any plans that had I-74 going through the city instead of around the loop. If it weren't for that relentless opposition back in the 70s, then the Binford Expressway would've already been completed today and made for a better alignment for the ongoing I-69 southern extension.

[silverback1065]

Isn't there some grading, some freeway stubs and ROW in Indianapolis designed for I-69? Why not brush off those old plans from the 60s and string I-69 through Indianapolis rather than string it on I-465.

69 was never supposed to go south of the north split originally.  I've always wanted to see plans of the NE Expressway though.  Quick side note, was I-74 ever at all planned to go through the city?

Despite the stub ends that exist inside I-465, I don't see any plans that had I-74 going through the city instead of around the loop. If it weren't for that relentless opposition back in the 70s, then the Binford Expressway would've already been completed today and made for a better alignment for the ongoing I-69 southern extension.

One can dream (NE not getting cancelled), but that makes sense about 74, it doesn't need to go through town.

[RoadWarrior56]

If my INDOT history is correct (I worked there early in my career), related to the posting before last, the NE expressway in Indianapolis might have been canceled, but it ultimately benefited the I-69 Extension anyway.  The unused mileage from I-165 (what the NE expressway was designated as in the 70's) was transferred to I-164, which allowed its southern extension from its original planned terminus at the Lloyd Expressway south and west to US 41.  Of course this is now part of I-69.

[sd72667]

I drive to and from Indianapolis almost everyday for UPS. I use US 41/I-70 or I-69/IN 45, IN 37 route. The issue of ending and "merging" the IN 37/I-69 route into I-465 will be it's going to add much more congestion in the 3, 4 and 5 mile marker area on I-465. By building I-69 and using the IN 37 route, why not continue I-69 north on pass I-465, creating an I-169>I-70 spur north along Bluff Rd/S West St and tying into the S West St/I-70 interchange? By staying east of the White River, there's no bridge construction. Also add interchanges at Southport Rd and I-465 (Indy South) to reduce congestion. This would allow motorists who work downtown, who travel from Greenwood/Franklin/Bloomington area, to use I-169 spur, thus reducing traffic going into downtown area on I-65N. I'm sure these ideas have already been tossed around over the years.

I like that idea, I've had a similar idea of continuing it up harding st to I-70

That would work as well.

[2trailertrucker]

When the state redesigned the split a few years ago (Hyperfix)
they took those stubs out IIRC. I am sure someone on here can give more detail.

[silverback1065]

Is this why I-70 is still signed as Exit 112A? was 69 supposed to be Exit 112B?

[noelbotevera]

Is this why I-70 is still signed as Exit 112A? was 69 supposed to be Exit 112B?

Yup. It would have been I-69 as exit 112B. Strange that they never renumbered it to exit 112.

[silverback1065]

Wow strange relic

Nexus 6P