Update on I-69 Extension in Indiana

[ITB]

Given that the carriageway is wide enough to accommodate 3 lanes during construction, I'm curious if INDOT or the construction contractor considered using a "zipper barrier" to allow crews to switch the direction of the middle lane (second SB lane), making it available to motorists during peak travel periods for a given direction of travel (I would think NB in the morning and SB in the afternoon/evening).

I thought about that, too. But it doesn't make all that much sense as I-69 traffic counts are relatively low for most of the day and any northbound delays are likely to be minimal. Besides, renting that specialized machine as well as several hundred yards of interlocking barrier isn't going to be cheap.

Here's a couple more screen shots of work underway on westbound I-465.


Looking east from the Mann Road overpass on the southwest side of Indianapolis.


The view looking east from just east of the I-465 bridges over Bluff Road on the south side of Indianapolis.

[ITB]

On Saturday, July 15, 2023, around 8 pm, a vehicle got stuck in a drainage excavation just west of the Mann Road overpass in the closed westbound I-465 work zone. A tow truck had to be called to get it out.


While the tow truck operator works to get the vehicle extricated, it appears a conversation is ongoing about what happened.


Police eventually arrive on the scene to help sort everything out.


After about an hour, the incident is resolved, and work resumes. It would have been nice to get a screen shot of the tow truck leaving the scene, but INDOT traffic camera only update about once every two minutes, so the money shot was, unfortunately, not to be.

To speculate, it looks like the vehicle entered at the closed Mann Road exit ramp, went down it going the wrong way, then did a U-turn and began heading west in the westbound I-465 work zone. It's possible the driver of the vehicle was a team member who simply made a mistake. On the other hand, that may not be the case, as police were called to the scene. If, however, there had been a major infraction or an impaired driver was involved, more police would have been on the scene. So it's possible the police were just brought in to write up an official incident report for insurance purposes.

[mgk920]

The control center has the full real time video, so that base is covered at an 'official' level.

Mike

[ITB]

Took a few pictures yesterday at the State Road 144 interchange in Johnson County. Photos were taken Wednesday, July 19, 2023, unless otherwise indicated.


Looking south from the SR 144 overpass. As expected, demo work is nearly complete on the old SR 37 northbound bridge over Bluff Creek. Pile driving for the new bridge should get underway soon.


Different perspective; looking northwest. Still need to bust up the old abutments.


Another view looking south. The northbound lane merge begins well south of the bridge over Bluff Creek and seems to working well. The SR 144 interchange will remain fully open and functional all through the bridge replacement project and nearby roadwork.


Looking north from the SR 144 overpass toward the recently completed southbound roadway.


Another perspective looking north. In preparation to rebuild the roadbed, the asphalt of the old lanes has been milled off. This small segment is only about a quarter mile, so they'll likely make quick work of it. The replacement bridge over Bluff Creek, however, will take more time to complete.


Long range view looking north. The Smith Valley Road overpass is in the background.


Closer look.


New signage just east of the SR 144 overpass; looking east. The recently built eastern frontage road between CR 144 and Stones Crossing Road is now signed Bluff Creek Pkwy. Google maps does not reflect this, as the road remains labeled as W Stones Crossing Rd.


And, finally, another look looking south.

Aside from the four bridges at the new I-465 interchange, there's ONLY two other bridges that remain to be completed — the northbound bridge over Bluff Creek and the southbound bridge over Banta Road in Marion County. Of the roughly 150–200 new bridges that have been built between Evansville and Indianapolis, it's now down to two, six if you count the I-465 interchange bridges. That says a lot about how far this enormous project has come.

And the roadwork is nearing completion, too. There's only the small northbound segment near the SR 144 interchange and a more substantial northbound segment between the future Smith Valley Road interchange and Fairview Road. That latter segment will complete by the end of October. In Marion County, there's still some road work remaining, primarily north of Southport Road, but, by and large, this project, aside from the interchange at I-465 and the added lane work on I-465, is rapidly moving toward completion.

[roadman65]

NATFTA or not, I’m glad Evansville to Indy will have an interstate connecting the two cities.

Once Kentucky and Indiana build the bridge across the Ohio, will have a freeway south into Tennessee as well. However, don’t count on Memphis to Indy having one route connecting the two anytime soon being TN is moving at a snails pace just to get the Union City bypass done.  The rest maybe done by our grandchildren’s retirements.

[Life in Paradise]

NATFTA or not, I'm glad Evansville to Indy will have an interstate connecting the two cities.

Once Kentucky and Indiana build the bridge across the Ohio, will have a freeway south into Tennessee as well. However, don't count on Memphis to Indy having one route connecting the two anytime soon being TN is moving at a snails pace just to get the Union City bypass done.  The rest maybe done by our grandchildren's retirements.

Once the Indianapolis area of I-69 gets completed (and then doubly so after the Ohio River Crossing is cone) you will notice more through traffic taking that route, and perhaps some truck traffic as well to avoid all of the congestion on I-65 and perhaps some tolls in Louisville.  That will make a fully four lane expressway from Indianapolis to Nashville with the exception of the Henderson, KY food and potty break area until the bridge is completed. Of course I know the Evansville/Henderson bridge will be tolled, but beating the congestion of I-65 will be a big factor.

[silverback1065]

NATFTA or not, I'm glad Evansville to Indy will have an interstate connecting the two cities.

Once Kentucky and Indiana build the bridge across the Ohio, will have a freeway south into Tennessee as well. However, don't count on Memphis to Indy having one route connecting the two anytime soon being TN is moving at a snails pace just to get the Union City bypass done.  The rest maybe done by our grandchildren's retirements.

Once the Indianapolis area of I-69 gets completed (and then doubly so after the Ohio River Crossing is cone) you will notice more through traffic taking that route, and perhaps some truck traffic as well to avoid all of the congestion on I-65 and perhaps some tolls in Louisville.  That will make a fully four lane expressway from Indianapolis to Nashville with the exception of the Henderson, KY food and potty break area until the bridge is completed. Of course I know the Evansville/Henderson bridge will be tolled, but beating the congestion of I-65 will be a big factor.

the ohio river bridge on 69 will be tolled

[sprjus4]

^

NATFTA or not, I'm glad Evansville to Indy will have an interstate connecting the two cities.

Once Kentucky and Indiana build the bridge across the Ohio, will have a freeway south into Tennessee as well. However, don't count on Memphis to Indy having one route connecting the two anytime soon being TN is moving at a snails pace just to get the Union City bypass done.  The rest maybe done by our grandchildren's retirements.

Once the Indianapolis area of I-69 gets completed (and then doubly so after the Ohio River Crossing is cone) you will notice more through traffic taking that route, and perhaps some truck traffic as well to avoid all of the congestion on I-65 and perhaps some tolls in Louisville.  That will make a fully four lane expressway from Indianapolis to Nashville with the exception of the Henderson, KY food and potty break area until the bridge is completed. Of course I know the Evansville/Henderson bridge will be tolled, but beating the congestion of I-65 will be a big factor.

the ohio river bridge on 69 will be tolled

[ITB]

Probably old news already, but anyway, last night, the westbound lanes of I-465 between I-65 and I-70 on the southwest side of Indianapolis were reopened to traffic. This was two days earlier than originally planned.

Here's a few screen grabs from INDOT traffic cameras:


INDOT Traffic Camera
Looking west from about a mile east of the I-465/Harding Street–SR 37 interchange. In the background is the new eastbound bridge over Bluff Road.


INDOT Traffic Camera
And here's a view from last week looking east from near Harding Street interchange. It appears the deck pour for the bridge over Bluff Road was very recently completed.


INDOT Traffic Camera
Cleaning the westbound lanes of I-465 just prior to the reopening; looking east from near the Mann Road overpass.


INDOT Traffic Camera
Looking north from near the former Banta Road/SR 37 intersection in Marion County. Note how the earthwork is shifting away from SR 37 to form the new alignment that will take I-69 northwest up to the interchange at I-465.


INDOT Traffic Camera
Team members cover a recent concrete pour near the Smith Valley Road overpass as a rain shower passes through. According to the I-69 Finish Line newsletter, the overpass and southbound ramps are planned to be opened in early August.


INDOT Traffic Camera
From earlier this month, here's a zoomed in view of the construction looking east from near the Mann Road overpass. On the right is bridge construction over (1) Harmon Ditch, and further back (2), the White River. It appears at Harmon, the piles have been driven, while at White River, shafts are being drilled for a deep foundation.


INDOT Traffic Camera
During the closure of I-465 westbound lanes, the bridge over Kentucky Avenue received an overlay. This is one of the few I-465 bridges that needed minimal work, and as can be seen, it's already wide enough to carry four lanes.


INDOT Traffic Camera
Here, INDOT zoomed in on recreational vehicle broken down on the eastbound lanes of I-465 just west of Harding Street. In the background is the future I-69 northbound ramp to I-465E, as well as new pavement for the realigned eastbound lanes of I-465.


INDOT Traffic Camera
Clear and bright view of the Smith Valley Road overpass and future interchange.


INDOT Traffic Camera
And here it is at night.


INDOT Traffic Camera
A couple weeks old, here's a view looking north toward the County Line Road interchange in Johnson/Marion counties. When northbound road work completes near the State Road 144 and Smith Valley Road interchanges in Johnson County, the roadways will join this section of completed mainline, and I-69 will be complete up to Southport Road. This will likely happen by the end of October. Construction, however, on the bridge over Bluff Creek near the SR 144 overpass may still be ongoing.

[wanderer2575]

INDOT Traffic Camera
A couple weeks old, here's a view looking north toward the County Line Road interchange in Johnson/Marion counties. When northbound road work completes near the State Road 144 and Smith Valley Road interchanges in Johnson County, the roadways will join this section of completed mainline, and I-69 will be complete up to Southport Road. This will likely happen by the end of October. Construction, however, on the bridge over Bluff Creek near the SR 144 overpass may still be ongoing.

I'm kind of surprised to see Midwest W-beam guardrail (I think that's what it's called), instead of a concrete Jersey barrier, in the median.  I didn't think current design standards still allowed it.

[PurdueBill]

INDOT Traffic Camera
A couple weeks old, here's a view looking north toward the County Line Road interchange in Johnson/Marion counties. When northbound road work completes near the State Road 144 and Smith Valley Road interchanges in Johnson County, the roadways will join this section of completed mainline, and I-69 will be complete up to Southport Road. This will likely happen by the end of October. Construction, however, on the bridge over Bluff Creek near the SR 144 overpass may still be ongoing.

I'm kind of surprised to see Midwest W-beam guardrail (I think that's what it's called), instead of a concrete Jersey barrier, in the median.  I didn't think current design standards still allowed it.

INDOT seems to have liked to use that longer than others.  The redone I-65 from I-865 to just outside Lebanon was done that way (narrow median with metal guardrail), while the section in Lebanon (newest) is a concrete wall.  Similarly, I-65 around Lafayette when widened has the narrow median/metal guardrail combo but the newest redone section, around SR 43, has the concrete wall (new this year), joined up to the metal where the previous project meets the current one.

[silverback1065]

INDOT Traffic Camera
A couple weeks old, here's a view looking north toward the County Line Road interchange in Johnson/Marion counties. When northbound road work completes near the State Road 144 and Smith Valley Road interchanges in Johnson County, the roadways will join this section of completed mainline, and I-69 will be complete up to Southport Road. This will likely happen by the end of October. Construction, however, on the bridge over Bluff Creek near the SR 144 overpass may still be ongoing.

I'm kind of surprised to see Midwest W-beam guardrail (I think that's what it's called), instead of a concrete Jersey barrier, in the median.  I didn't think current design standards still allowed it.

This method is a lot cheaper than jersey barrier. the drawback is that ditch in the middle doesn't have a lot of capacity.

[ITB]

"Smart concrete" sensors are being tested in the I-69/I-465 interchange. These are sensors that are embedded in concrete during the paving process. Developed by WaveLogix, a West Lafayette-based company, the sensors help to pin down when the concrete has "matured" and is strong enough to handle traffic, thereby reducing the possibility of early concrete failure. Data from the sensors, in conjunction with AI, can also help determine if excess cement is being used in concrete.

Read more about the "smart concrete" sensors here and here. The first link is to an IBJ article. Please be aware that non-subscribers to the IBJ are given a very limited number of free articles, so access to the full article may not be available to everyone.

[ITB]

From what I understand, the type of barrier used in an interstate median is determined by median width and whether the interstate section is categorized as either rural or urban.

While I don't have AASHOTO's "Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets" (aka the "Green Book) at hand, and I can't seem to find any design standards on the internet, here's how the standards might be organized. Please bear in mind, I have little expertise in this area.

50 or 60 foot median, or wider         No barrier needed
30 to 50 foot median                       Flexible barrier (cable barrier, single guide rail)
20 to 30 foot median                       Semi-rigid barrier (single guide rail, box or double guide rail)
Less than 20 or 15 feet (rural)          Rigid barrier (concrete barrier wall; Jersey wall)
Less than 10 foot (urban or rural)     Rigid barrier (concrete barrier wall)

This is a very rough outline of possible standards and is probably not accurate. Without knowing the exact standards, it's impossible to say with any specificity when a concrete barrier wall, for instance, must be used, instead of a double guide rail. Obviously, any median that's quite narrow (less than 10 or 15 feet) is going to require a concrete barrier, whether urban or rural. From the picture posted above, it appears the median is about 20 feet in width and is located in an area that can be categorized as rural, rather than urban. As depicted, a double guide rail has been installed. If that stretch of road had been categorized as urban or if the median had been narrower, more likely a concrete barrier would have been constructed.

If anyone has the exact standards available, please chime in.

Edit: Changed guardrail to guide rail, as the latter term is more standard in the industry.

[Bobby5280]

Much the I-44 turnpike South of Lawton down to US-70 has a one lane wide concrete median adorned with a simple cable barrier. It's kind of a trip to drive on that going upwards of 80mph. It's not as fun at night since the cable barrier does very little to block glare of headlights in the opposing lanes. Thankfully traffic counts aren't all that high on that stretch of Interstate.

[CtrlAltDel]

From what I understand, the type of barrier used in an interstate median is determined by median width and whether the interstate section is categorized as either rural or urban.

As it turns out, the 2001 Green Book (the most recent one I could find online for free) offers only more qualitative details about median barriers, but the 2011 Yellow Book (again, the most recent one I could find online for free) offers this, which considers both median width and AADT:



It goes on to say, however:

For locations with median widths equal to or greater than 15.2 m [50 ft], a barrier is not normally considered except in special circumstances, such as a location with a significant history of cross-median crashes.

Each transportation agency has the flexibility to develop its particular median barrier guidelines. For example, in 1997, a study by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) suggested that the medians of facilities with traffic volumes in excess of 60,000 vpd would warrant a barrier study, even at widths as wide as 22.9 m [75 ft]. California uses a crash study warrant to identify sections of freeways that may need the installation of a median barrier. This warrant requires a minimum of 0.311 cross-median crashes per kilometer [0.50 cross-median crashes per mile] of any severity per year, or 0.075 fatal crashes per kilometer [0.12 fatal crashes per mile] per year. The rate calculation requires a minimum of three crashes occurring within a five-year period.

In some cases, it may be determined that a median barrier is only necessary at locations where there are concentrations of cross-median crashes. For example, the Florida Department of Transportation found that 62 percent of all cross-median crashes occurred within 0.8 km [1/2 mile] and 82 percent occurred within 1.6 km [1 mile] of interchange ramp termini.

[ITB]

^^^^
Nice find. So AADT is another factor that comes into play. That helps explain the stretch of I-44 south of Lawton referenced above.

It seems the standards for median barriers are more fluid than not. Still there seems to be a framework of recommended standards, and any deviation, I imagine, would require a sign-off by the FHWA. Some states, too, might have their own standards, which, in some cases, may exceed normal design guidelines.

[CtrlAltDel]

Looking at the thread again, it seems I confused the presence or absence of a median barrier with the type of median barriers used. Anyway, the Yellow Book discusses the following types of barriers and I've attempted to summarize the advantages of each:

6.4.1.1 Weak-Post W-Beam Median Barrier
The weak-post system is sensitive to height variations and should not be used as a median barrier where terrain irregularities exist. Because the W-beam does not interlock with a vehicle's sheet metal, the likelihood of going over or under the rail is increased if the bumper height at impact is in a range that is higher or lower than normal. It should not be used where frost heave or erosion is likely to alter the beam mounting height relative to the shoulder beyond 51 mm [2 in.].

6.4.1.2 Low-Tension Cable Barrier
Cable barriers typically deflect more than other types of barriers during impacts. The crash test of this system using the NCHRP 350 pickup truck (the strength test) resulted in 3.4 m [11.2 ft] of deflection, and most agencies position these barriers to accommodate approximately 3.7 m [12 ft] of movement. Shortening the post spacing can reduce deflection distances. When a single run of low-tension cable barrier is used in the median, deflection distance generally is provided on both sides of the barrier. This results in minimum median widths of 7.3 m [24 ft] to provide enough deflection distance to reduce most encroachments into the opposing travel lanes. Cable systems should be installed and maintained as close to the design height as feasible in order to function properly. Although the cable barrier is relatively inexpensive to install and performs well when hit, it must be repaired after each hit to maintain its effectiveness. Consequently, its use in areas where it is likely to be hit frequently, such as on the outside of sharp curves, is not recommended.

6.4.1.3 High-Tension Cable Barrier
These systems are installed with a significantly greater tension in the cables than the generic low-tension system discussed in the previous section, and there are several differences in their performance. The deflection of these systems is reduced to 2 m [6.6 ft] to 2.8 m [9.2 ft] depending on the system, the post spacing, and the length of the barrier tested. As discussed for the low-tension cable barrier, deflection distances may be increased as the length of the barrier is increased. One state, Oregon, has used a high-tension cable barrier on a highway that has only a 2.4-m [8-ft] wide median, thus providing 1.2 m [4 ft] of deflection distance. Even though it is possible that some crashes may deflect into the opposing travel lanes, it was decided that the barrier would reduce the number of head-on collisions and provide a cost-effective solution in this corridor.

6.4.1.4 Box-Beam Median Barrier
Its design deflection distance is approximately 1.7 m [5.5 ft]. As with the weak-post W-beam, this system is most suitable for use in traversable medians having no significant terrain irregularities.

6.4.1.5 Blocked-Out W-Beam (Strong Post)
These barriers may be installed with either wood or steel posts. The strong-post W-beam system has been used extensively to reduce crossover crashes in relatively narrow medians. Because these systems are semi-rigid (meaning that their design deflection distances are in the 0.6- to 1.2-m [2- to 4-ft] range), they typically have been used in medians approximately 3 m [10 ft] or more in width. There are both proprietary and generic strong-post W-beam systems available that are mounted at 787 mm [31 in.] in an attempt to better contain large vehicles. These systems have other advantages as well, most notably the ability to use steeper flare rates and increased usability in conjunction with a curb. Strong-post W-beam median barriers generally impart higher forces on impacting vehicles and their occupants than do flexible systems, but they do not usually need immediate repair to remain functional except after very severe impacts.

6.4.1.6 Blocked-Out Thrie-Beam (Strong Post)
This system is similar in most respects to the blocked-out W-beam median barrier but is capable of accommodating a larger range of vehicle sizes because of its increased beam depth. Posts may be either wood or steel with blocks of either wood or one of several approved recycled plastics. The use of thrie-beam also eliminates the need for a separate rubrail. Design deflection for this barrier is in the range of 0.3 to 0.9 m [1 to 3 ft], and its typical mounting height is 813 mm [32 in.].

6.4.1.7 Modified Thrie-Beam Median Barrier
Using the spacer blocks developed in conjunction with the modified thrie-beam roadside barrier described in Chapter 5 can significantly enhance performance of the thrie-beam median barrier. This barrier successfully contained and redirected an 8,000-kg [18,000- lb] single-unit truck impacting at a nominal speed of 80 km/h [50 mph] and an impact angle of 15 degrees. The roadside version of this barrier also contained and redirected an 18,000-kg [40,000-lb] intercity bus under the same conditions.

6.4.1.8 Concrete Barrier
The concrete barrier is the most common rigid median barrier in use today. Its popularity is based on its relatively low life-cycle cost, generally effective performance, and its maintenance-free characteristics. Concrete barrier designs vary in shape, construction type, and reinforcement. Research has shown that variations in the profile of the concrete barrier can have a significant effect on barrier performance. The New Jersey shape and F-shape barriers are commonly referred to as "safety shapes."  The safety-shape concrete barriers were designed to minimize damage to vehicles as a result of low-angle impacts and to reduce the occupant impact forces as compared to a vertical wall. The critical variable for these barriers is the height above the road surface of the break between the upper and lower slope. If this break is higher than 330 mm [13 in.], the chances of a vehicle overturning are increased, particularly for compact and subcompact automobiles. Several important factors are related to safety-shape concrete median barriers. For high-angle, high-speed impacts, passenger size vehicles may become partially airborne and in some cases may reach the top of the barrier. Fixed objects (e.g., luminaire supports) on top of the wall may cause snagging or separate from the barrier and fly into opposing traffic lanes. Another factor to consider is that, even for shallow-angle impacts, the roll angle toward the barrier imparted to high-center-of gravity vehicles may be enough to permit contact by the top portion of the cargo box with fixed objects on top of or immediately behind the wall. Bridge piers are one of the common obstacles typically shielded by a concrete safety shape. Single-slope concrete barriers have been developed and tested (3). Slopes of 9.1 degrees and 10.8 degrees have been used successfully on these barriers. The primary advantage of this barrier shape is that the pavement adjacent to it can be overlaid several times without affecting the performance of the barrier. Vertical concrete barrier walls can be an effective alternative to the wider safety-shape barriers and can preserve available median shoulder width at narrow locations, such as in front of bridge piers. A study of rollovers that resulted from crashes with concrete barriers concluded that the vertical wall offers the greatest reduction in rollover potential.

6.4.1.9 Quickchange Moveable Barrier System
This proprietary portable barrier system is composed of a chain of modified F-shape concrete barrier segments 940 mm [37 in.] in length that can be readily shifted laterally. The top of each segment is T-shaped to allow pick up by a special vehicle and lateral movement from 1.2 to 5.5 m [4 to 18 ft]. Two other systems, known as the Steel Reactive Tension System (SRTS) and the Concrete Reactive Tension System (CRTS) are similar to the narrow and standard Quickchange Moveable Barriers, respectively, except that an improved connection is used between modules. This connection contains spring-loaded hinges that keep the individual segments in tension and reduce the dynamic deflection of the system to 0.7 m [2.3 ft].

[silverback1065]

if anyone is interested, you can easily find Indiana Standards for roads on INDOT's website here:

https://www.in.gov/dot/div/contracts/design/IDM.htm

they even have their own version of the MUTCD which I cannot find any difference between the standard MUTCD.

https://www.in.gov/dot/div/contracts/design/mutcd/2011rev3MUTCD.htm

[I-55]

if anyone is interested, you can easily find Indiana Standards for roads on INDOT's website here:

https://www.in.gov/dot/div/contracts/design/IDM.htm

they even have their own version of the MUTCD which I cannot find any difference between the standard MUTCD.

https://www.in.gov/dot/div/contracts/design/mutcd/2011rev3MUTCD.htm

A lot of what I've learned in my internship this year ahs been navigating the INDOT bible. That and CAD. Fun resources

[ITB]

Here's a few recent screen grabs from INDOT traffic cameras:


INDOT Traffic Camera
On the south side of Indianapolis, earthwork for the I-69 mainline has now crossed over S. Belmont Ave; looking north from near the former State Road 37/Banta Road intersection.


INDOT Traffic Camera
Closer look. This point is roughly one mile from the future I-69/I-465 interchange. In the background is the Harding Street power station. Note that when zooming in, whether it's with a handheld camera or a mounted traffic camera, background elements are dramatically pulled in closer.


INDOT Traffic Camera
The Southport Road overpass and interchange; looking south from north of the former SR 37/Banta Road intersection. Banta Road is in the foreground right where the white car is. Construction has not yet commenced on the future southbound bridge over Banta, and it's looking increasingly likely that won't happen until 2024.


INDOT Traffic Camera
Looking west from near the I-465/US 31-East Street interchange in Indianapolis. In the background, pile driving is underway for the new westbound bridge over S. Meridian Street. To get your bearings, S. Meridian Street is about a mile east of the I-465/State Road 37-Harding Street interchange.


INDOT Traffic Camera
Zoomed in look.


INDOT Traffic Camera
The view looking north from the State Road 144 overpass in Johnson County. In this area, new material is being trucked in, spread, and compacted, to form a new roadbed for the northbound lanes.


INDOT Traffic Camera
After the roadbed material is placed and compacted it's treated with lime. Special trucks disperse the lime, in this case, hydrated lime (dry). Another vehicle then grinds the lime into the sub-base. Heat activates the lime, and the roadbed rapidly begins to harden. Note the somewhat lighter color of the roadbed after the lime treatment. Next step here will be the placing of a layer of base material.


INDOT Traffic Camera
Here's the lime treatment process underway near the former State Road 37/Banta Road intersection; looking south.


INDOT Traffic Camera
Afternoon zoomed in view looking east toward the new Mann Road overpass from near the I-465/State Road 67-Kentucky Avenue interchange.

[X99]

INDOT Traffic Camera
Afternoon zoomed in view looking east toward the new Mann Road overpass from near the I-465/State Road 67-Kentucky Avenue interchange.

Looked around the area on google maps for context and I can clarify that's the Mooresville Road overpass. Mann Road is further up past the bend, and not visible from this camera.

[ITB]

Looked around the area on google maps for context and I can clarify that's the Mooresville Road overpass. Mann Road is further up past the bend, and not visible from this camera.

Thanks for pointing this out. Yes, indeed, it is the Mooresville Road bypass.

[ITB]

About 9 am noon today, there was an major incident involving an overturned truck just north of the State Road 144 overpass and interchange. Looks like it happened near the changeover, where northbound traffic is redirected back to the northbound roadway.


Looking south toward the State Road 144 interchange. Seems the excavator is being utilized to fix the concrete barrier.


Backup, with little movement, as the right northbound lane is closed due to the incident; looking north from near the SR 144 overpass.


Just 20 minutes after the screen grabs above, traffic has returned to normal.

Update: The incident was much more significant than I initially believed. According to reports, it happened earlier, around 9 am, and involved an overturned truck. This led to the northbound roadway being closed for nearly three hours. Some reports state all lanes were blocked. It's very likely both the southbound and northbound lanes were completely closed for a period. The southbound lanes were probably reopened before traffic was able to resume on the northbound roadway. The first two images above depict the end of incident, just prior to the northbound lanes being reopened.

Yikes! What a traffic dilemma this incident presented. I imagine all northbound I-69 traffic was diverted to SR 144/CR 144, and thence, for most, west to SR 67. If the southbound lanes were closed for an extended period, traffic was probably redirected off SR 37 at either Fairland Road or Smith Valley Road. From Fairland, vehicles would be able to travel south on Bluffdale Drive and Old SR 37 to eventually intersect with SR 144 just west of the I-69/SR 144 interchange, and from there, return to I-69.

[ITB]

Couple of aerial drone photos grabbed from the I-69 Finish Line Newsletter.


I-69 Finish Line
Looking north from near the former State Road 37/Banta Road intersection in Marion County. This was taken about a month ago. Since then earthwork has significantly advanced and now crosses S. Belmont Road. The future interchange with I-465 is partially visible in the upper left hand corner.


I-69 Finish Line
Looking west from near the I-465/SR 37-Harding Street interchange. Girders for the I-69N to I-465W flyover sit ready for placement. The process of erecting them is planned to begin this week. On the left is the future ramp from I-465E to I-69S. In the background is the work zone for the eastbound bridge over the White River.

I-69 Finish Line
The Smith Valley Road overpass and interchange is expected to be partially opened by mid-August. Here's a short video that explains how traffic will be managed.