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

truejd

Does anyone know what the exit number will be for the I-69, I-465 interchange?


silverback1065

Quote from: ITB on September 03, 2019, 02:22:57 PM
Quote from: ITB on September 03, 2019, 01:44:38 PM
Quote from: Interstate 69 Fan on September 03, 2019, 01:21:50 PM
Anyone know where the sign plans are?

Sign specs and drawings for a particular project can be accessed under INDOT's documents webpage. You'll need to know the project's 5-digit contract number to search.

https://erms.indot.in.gov/viewdocs/

You might have to open and view several Plan/Drawing sets before you find what you're looking for. Someone with experience in looking up sign specs could probably be of more assistance.

If you're looking for sign plans for the "Martinsville" segment of Section 6,  I think I found what your looking for. A search of documents for Contract #33493 brings up 28 Plan/Drawing Sets. Among these is Part 1 of 2 1800337 Contract Services. That's the drawings for traffic management, and includes all the signs that will be placed along the route in Martinsville. You'll have to select and download to view those drawings. There are 3 pages for Contract #33493 drawings. Part 1 of 2 1800337 is found on the second page. The page numbers are at the bottom of the results, and are simply enumerated 1, 2 or 3. Click on the number 2.

Here's a short INDOT guide on how to view drawings/contracts:

https://www.in.gov/dot/div/contracts/letting/archive/2019/aug07/view_a_contract.pdf

Edit: added INDOT "view contracts" guide info

DES mean "designation number" it's a number given to every indot project.  very similar to a contract number. 

tdindy88

Quote from: truejd on September 03, 2019, 03:18:20 PM
Does anyone know what the exit number will be for the I-69, I-465 interchange?

Well, just using a measuring tool from the intersection of SR 37 and SR 44, which will be Exit 140, the I-69/465 interchange will likely be Exit 163 or very close to that number.

abqtraveler

Quote from: tdindy88 on September 03, 2019, 08:03:55 PM
Quote from: truejd on September 03, 2019, 03:18:20 PM
Does anyone know what the exit number will be for the I-69, I-465 interchange?

Well, just using a measuring tool from the intersection of SR 37 and SR 44, which will be Exit 140, the I-69/465 interchange will likely be Exit 163 or very close to that number.

That sounds about right. Published documents on I-69 SIU 3 state that the extension from I-465 to I-64 is 142 miles. Add to that the 21 miles of former I-164, and you have 163 miles.
2-d Interstates traveled:  4, 5, 8, 10, 15, 20, 24, 25, 27, 29, 35, 39, 40, 41, 43, 45, 49, 55, 57, 64, 65, 66, 69, 70, 71, 72, 74, 75, 76(E), 77, 78, 81, 83, 84(W), 85, 87(N), 89, 90, 91, 93, 94, 95

2-d Interstates Clinched:  12, 22, 30, 37, 44, 59, 80, 84(E), 86(E), 238, H1, H2, H3, H201

tdindy88

Which is what makes Exit 200 on the northeast side not make sense. It will not be 37 miles around the 465 beltway to connect the two I-69 interchanges. Yeah, making it 200 is easier on those who remember it as 0 and so on. INDOT as usual thinks people will care less about the technicality. It does make it harder if you want to see how long I-69 will be across the state. With most interstates that use mileage-based exits you can look at the last exit and make a guess as to how long. With I-69, it will not be close to 357 miles in length.

sprjus4

Quote from: tdindy88 on September 03, 2019, 09:31:27 PM
Which is what makes Exit 200 on the northeast side not make sense. It will not be 37 miles around the 465 beltway to connect the two I-69 interchanges. Yeah, making it 200 is easier on those who remember it as 0 and so on. INDOT as usual thinks people will care less about the technicality. It does make it harder if you want to see how long I-69 will be across the state. With most interstates that use mileage-based exits you can look at the last exit and make a guess as to how long. With I-69, it will not be close to 357 miles in length.
The only solution would be route I-69 on the west side of I-465, which would be 33 miles, which isn't exactly 37 miles, but closer. Granted, other than getting the mileage closer to correct, this route makes just about no sense to actually implement. Nobody would follow it anyways, they'd still take I-465 around the east side. More direct, quicker, etc.

Henry

Well, I-465 is 53 miles long, so I-69's route as proposed would only be 20 miles, and provided the Exit 163 guess holds up, the exits on the original I-69 would have to be renumbered by subtracting 17 from their current numbers. After all this, the total length (including the former I-164) should come out to 340 miles.
Go Cubs Go! Go Cubs Go! Hey Chicago, what do you say? The Cubs are gonna win today!

thefarmerchris

Quote from: sprjus4 on September 03, 2019, 11:51:27 PM
Quote from: tdindy88 on September 03, 2019, 09:31:27 PM
Which is what makes Exit 200 on the northeast side not make sense. It will not be 37 miles around the 465 beltway to connect the two I-69 interchanges. Yeah, making it 200 is easier on those who remember it as 0 and so on. INDOT as usual thinks people will care less about the technicality. It does make it harder if you want to see how long I-69 will be across the state. With most interstates that use mileage-based exits you can look at the last exit and make a guess as to how long. With I-69, it will not be close to 357 miles in length.
The only solution would be route I-69 on the west side of I-465, which would be 33 miles, which isn't exactly 37 miles, but closer. Granted, other than getting the mileage closer to correct, this route makes just about no sense to actually implement. Nobody would follow it anyways, they'd still take I-465 around the east side. More direct, quicker, etc.

Remember too about the Ohio River bridge. How many miles will be cut off of the total amount when that realignment comes into the fold?

MikeSantNY78

Quote from: tdindy88 on September 03, 2019, 09:31:27 PM
Which is what makes Exit 200 on the northeast side not make sense. It will not be 37 miles around the 465 beltway to connect the two I-69 interchanges. Yeah, making it 200 is easier on those who remember it as 0 and so on. INDOT as usual thinks people will care less about the technicality. It does make it harder if you want to see how long I-69 will be across the state. With most interstates that use mileage-based exits you can look at the last exit and make a guess as to how long. With I-69, it will not be close to 357 miles in length.

If you're traveling along I-465 between the two legs of I-69, you're using the 465's mileposts, and the distance calculation doesn't completely matter.  SO: Kentucky line to the southern leg of the 465 + the concurrency therewith + mileage along the original 69 to the Michigan line = total accumulated state mileage.  Forcing people to actually Do Some Math. 

Life in Paradise



Remember too about the Ohio River bridge. How many miles will be cut off of the total amount when that realignment comes into the fold?
[/quote]
It should be close to a wash.  It will occur close to the 2 mile marker, but then there is over a mile to the river to cross.

mgk920

Quote from: tdindy88 on September 03, 2019, 09:31:27 PM
Which is what makes Exit 200 on the northeast side not make sense. It will not be 37 miles around the 465 beltway to connect the two I-69 interchanges. Yeah, making it 200 is easier on those who remember it as 0 and so on. INDOT as usual thinks people will care less about the technicality. It does make it harder if you want to see how long I-69 will be across the state. With most interstates that use mileage-based exits you can look at the last exit and make a guess as to how long. With I-69, it will not be close to 357 miles in length.

INDOT did that to lessen possible confusion when all of the MPs and interchange numbers were changed on the existing I-69 northeast of I-465 - just add 200 to each of them.

Mike

csw

Yeah, I think just adding 200 was way easier than renumbering it exactly...I don't think most people will notice or care that it doesn't add up exactly. I guess we'll have to see how many people are driving it end to end and then decide whether or not it was a good idea.

tdindy88

Quote from: Life in Paradise on September 05, 2019, 02:24:27 PM
Remember too about the Ohio River bridge. How many miles will be cut off of the total amount when that realignment comes into the fold?
It should be close to a wash.  It will occur close to the 2 mile marker, but then there is over a mile to the river to cross.
[/quote]

Doing a quick measurement based on the latest alternative map for I-69 over the Ohio River. It should be right on it, and that's just if you include the distance to the state line which comes before the river. Worse comes to worse you can tell Kentucky to piss off and count the mileage from the bridge, though it would have to probably be the northern end of the bridge. But it looks as if the mileage will be just about perfect.

ITB


A few pictures of the construction currently underway in Martinsville, Indiana. Photos were taken August 18, 2019, unless otherwise noted.

Section 6, Martinsville, Indiana

The construction zone near the intersection of SR 37 and Grand Valley Blvd. in Martinsville, Indiana; looking east. Grand Valley Blvd. will be extended over SR 37 (future I-69) via an overpass to connect with South Street in Martinsville proper.


Stacks of MSE panels at the construction zone near Martinsville High School in Martinsville, Indiana.


The bridge that will carry Grand Valley Blvd./South Street over Sartor Ditch, and the Martinsville High School connecting multi-use access path (left); looking south


Another perspective of the construction zone; looking south.


Closer look at the construction zone; looking east. SR 37 is the road pictured. Work to now underway to construct the median bent for the Grand Valley Blvd. overpass (background; yellow excavator).

Ryctor2018

A small bit of news: https://www.hoosiertimes.com/reporter_times/free_access/grand-valley-ind-intersection-expected-to-permanently-close-saturday/article_5c79cb06-877d-502f-965e-c1347078546d.html

"The Indiana Department of Transportation is expected to close the intersection of Ind. 37 and Grand Valley Boulevard early Saturday morning."
2DI's traveled: 5, 8, 10, 12, 15, 20, 24, 30, 35, 39, 40, 41, 43, 44, 45, 49, 55, 57, 59, 64, 65, 66, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 85, 87, 88, 90, 93, 94, 95, 96

X99

Quote from: Ryctor2018 on September 12, 2019, 01:51:40 PM
A small bit of news: https://www.hoosiertimes.com/reporter_times/free_access/grand-valley-ind-intersection-expected-to-permanently-close-saturday/article_5c79cb06-877d-502f-965e-c1347078546d.html

"The Indiana Department of Transportation is expected to close the intersection of Ind. 37 and Grand Valley Boulevard early Saturday morning."
So Artesian Avenue is done and open to traffic? (In other words, can I take the construction tag off of it on OpenStreetMap?)
why are there only like 5 people on this forum from south dakota

SSR_317

Quote from: mgk920 on September 05, 2019, 05:26:42 PM
Quote from: tdindy88 on September 03, 2019, 09:31:27 PM
Which is what makes Exit 200 on the northeast side not make sense. It will not be 37 miles around the 465 beltway to connect the two I-69 interchanges. Yeah, making it 200 is easier on those who remember it as 0 and so on. INDOT as usual thinks people will care less about the technicality. It does make it harder if you want to see how long I-69 will be across the state. With most interstates that use mileage-based exits you can look at the last exit and make a guess as to how long. With I-69, it will not be close to 357 miles in length.

INDOT did that to lessen possible confusion when all of the MPs and interchange numbers were changed on the existing I-69 northeast of I-465 - just add 200 to each of them.

Mike
Exactly, Mike.

BTW, this is why I objected to the entire "southern extension" project being called I-69 in the first place. The Indy to Evansville to Memphis portion SHOULD HAVE been designated as I-63, with sections further south and west being assigned appropriate  numbers that fit into the original grid. And yes, the W-E Lansing to Port Huron/Sarnia stretch should not be I-69 either (I-98 would've fit). But that's all water under the (Blue Water) bridge at this point.

silverback1065

I agree, never thought of that idea but I like it

X99

Quote from: SSR_317 on September 13, 2019, 02:20:17 PM
Quote from: mgk920 on September 05, 2019, 05:26:42 PM
Quote from: tdindy88 on September 03, 2019, 09:31:27 PM
Which is what makes Exit 200 on the northeast side not make sense. It will not be 37 miles around the 465 beltway to connect the two I-69 interchanges. Yeah, making it 200 is easier on those who remember it as 0 and so on. INDOT as usual thinks people will care less about the technicality. It does make it harder if you want to see how long I-69 will be across the state. With most interstates that use mileage-based exits you can look at the last exit and make a guess as to how long. With I-69, it will not be close to 357 miles in length.

INDOT did that to lessen possible confusion when all of the MPs and interchange numbers were changed on the existing I-69 northeast of I-465 - just add 200 to each of them.

Mike
Exactly, Mike.

BTW, this is why I objected to the entire "southern extension" project being called I-69 in the first place. The Indy to Evansville to Memphis portion SHOULD HAVE been designated as I-63, with sections further south and west being assigned appropriate  numbers that fit into the original grid. And yes, the W-E Lansing to Port Huron/Sarnia stretch should not be I-69 either (I-98 would've fit). But that's all water under the (Blue Water) bridge at this point.
They wanted a single number running border to border. That's why it's all I-69.
why are there only like 5 people on this forum from south dakota

X99

3 questions:
Is Artesian Avenue open to traffic?
Is the east side of Grand Valley Boulevard open to Cramertown Loop?
Is the west side of Grand Valley Boulevard between the future bridge site and SR 37 closed, and if so, is it permanent? (Like "remove from maps" permanent?)
why are there only like 5 people on this forum from south dakota

ITB

#3220
Quote from: X99 on September 16, 2019, 05:40:38 PM
3 questions:
Is Artesian Avenue open to traffic?
Is the east side of Grand Valley Boulevard open to Cramertown Loop?
Is the west side of Grand Valley Boulevard between the future bridge site and SR 37 closed, and if so, is it permanent? (Like "remove from maps" permanent?)

Artesian Avenue was opened to traffic on August 30th.

Source: INDOT Section 6 Construction Update (Aug 27) https://content.govdelivery.com/accounts/INDOT/bulletins/25afe6e

Grand Valley Boulevard most likely is open to Cramertown Loop. I say most likely because I haven't seen an official INDOT notice stating that it is open. That doesn't mean there wasn't one. In early August, INDOT announced a 30-day closure of Cramertown Loop to rebuild a section and to complete the tie-in to Grand Valley Boulevard. Since 42 days have passed since the announced closure date, the tie-in is almost certainly completed.

Source: INDOT Section 6 Traffic Alert (Aug 6) https://content.govdelivery.com/accounts/INDOT/bulletins/256a657

I'm a little confused by the third question, but maybe the following will provide an answer. As you know, Grand Valley Boulevard is to be extended over SR 37 via an overpass to link into South Street in Martinsville proper. Prior to the recent closure of the SR 37/Grand Valley Boulevard intersection, Grand Valley Blvd. ran only east from that intersection. There is no road signed Grand Valley Blvd. west of SR 37. The road you might be thinking of is South Street. South Street, however, never intersected with SR 37, as it dead ends just prior to Sartor Creek. Currently, construction on a bridge over Sartor Creek is underway that will carry South Street/Grand Valley Blvd. INDOT in its bulletin of Sept 5 calls the bridge over Sartor Creek the "new South Street bridge." Construction of the Grand Valley Blvd. overpass over SR 37 has also commenced. The following link has a map that may be useful.

Link: INDOT Section 6 Construction Update (Sept 5) https://content.govdelivery.com/accounts/INDOT/bulletins/25d4c15

If your reference to the "west" side of Grand Valley Blvd. means the small section of roadway between the current SR 37/Grand Valley Blvd. intersection and the point where the new overpass will tie-in to Grand Valley – that small slice of roadway will be eliminated.

Update: On a rereading of the INDOT Section 6 bulletin of August 27, 2019, I believe it provides the information you seek:

"This closure will allow crews to complete the tie-in of the newly-aligned section of Cramertown Loop to the existing roadway. Once the tie-in is finished, work on Artesian Avenue, Cramertown Loop and the Grand Valley Boulevard extension will be complete and all will be open to traffic. "





sturmde

You objected to there being a route number that would be the same for a Mexico-to-Canada through route?  Please don't tell me you actually wrote a letter of complaint to AASHTO.

Quote from: SSR_317 on September 13, 2019, 02:20:17 PM
Quote from: mgk920 on September 05, 2019, 05:26:42 PM
Quote from: tdindy88 on September 03, 2019, 09:31:27 PM
Which is what makes Exit 200 on the northeast side not make sense. It will not be 37 miles around the 465 beltway to connect the two I-69 interchanges. Yeah, making it 200 is easier on those who remember it as 0 and so on. INDOT as usual thinks people will care less about the technicality. It does make it harder if you want to see how long I-69 will be across the state. With most interstates that use mileage-based exits you can look at the last exit and make a guess as to how long. With I-69, it will not be close to 357 miles in length.

INDOT did that to lessen possible confusion when all of the MPs and interchange numbers were changed on the existing I-69 northeast of I-465 - just add 200 to each of them.

Mike
Exactly, Mike.

BTW, this is why I objected to the entire "southern extension" project being called I-69 in the first place. The Indy to Evansville to Memphis portion SHOULD HAVE been designated as I-63, with sections further south and west being assigned appropriate  numbers that fit into the original grid. And yes, the W-E Lansing to Port Huron/Sarnia stretch should not be I-69 either (I-98 would've fit). But that's all water under the (Blue Water) bridge at this point.

X99

Quote from: ITB on September 18, 2019, 03:08:21 AM
Quote from: X99 on September 16, 2019, 05:40:38 PM
3 questions:
Is Artesian Avenue open to traffic?
Is the east side of Grand Valley Boulevard open to Cramertown Loop?
Is the west side of Grand Valley Boulevard between the future bridge site and SR 37 closed, and if so, is it permanent? (Like "remove from maps" permanent?)

Artesian Avenue was opened to traffic on August 30th.

Source: INDOT Section 6 Construction Update (Aug 27) https://content.govdelivery.com/accounts/INDOT/bulletins/25afe6e

Grand Valley Boulevard most likely is open to Cramertown Loop. I say most likely because I haven't seen an official INDOT notice stating that it is open. That doesn't mean there wasn't one. In early August, INDOT announced a 30-day closure of Cramertown Loop to rebuild a section and to complete the tie-in to Grand Valley Boulevard. Since 42 days have passed since the announced closure date, the tie-in is almost certainly completed.

Source: INDOT Section 6 Traffic Alert (Aug 6) https://content.govdelivery.com/accounts/INDOT/bulletins/256a657

I'm a little confused by the third question, but maybe the following will provide an answer. As you know, Grand Valley Boulevard is to be extended over SR 37 via an overpass to link into South Street in Martinsville proper. Prior to the recent closure of the SR 37/Grand Valley Boulevard intersection, Grand Valley Blvd. ran only east from that intersection. There is no road signed Grand Valley Blvd. west of SR 37. The road you might be thinking of is South Street. South Street, however, never intersected with SR 37, as it dead ends just prior to Sartor Creek. Currently, construction on a bridge over Sartor Creek is underway that will carry South Street/Grand Valley Blvd. INDOT in its bulletin of Sept 5 calls the bridge over Sartor Creek the "new South Street bridge." Construction of the Grand Valley Blvd. overpass over SR 37 has also commenced. The following link has a map that may be useful.

Link: INDOT Section 6 Construction Update (Sept 5) https://content.govdelivery.com/accounts/INDOT/bulletins/25d4c15

If your reference to the "west" side of Grand Valley Blvd. means the small section of roadway between the current SR 37/Grand Valley Blvd. intersection and the point where the new overpass will tie-in to Grand Valley – that small slice of roadway will be eliminated.

Update: On a rereading of the INDOT Section 6 bulletin of August 27, 2019, I believe it provides the information you seek:

"This closure will allow crews to complete the tie-in of the newly-aligned section of Cramertown Loop to the existing roadway. Once the tie-in is finished, work on Artesian Avenue, Cramertown Loop and the Grand Valley Boulevard extension will be complete and all will be open to traffic. "
okay good, because I already updated OpenStreetMap to match that. I left the old Grand Valley Blvd/IN 37 intersection there, but hidden, just in case.
why are there only like 5 people on this forum from south dakota

X99

Is the 465/69 South interchange under construction? It's marked as such on OSM, and I don't think it should be yet.
why are there only like 5 people on this forum from south dakota

tdindy88

Nope. It won't be under construction for another couple of years at least.



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.