News:

Thanks to everyone for the feedback on what errors you encountered from the forum database changes made in Fall 2023. Let us know if you discover anymore.

Main Menu

Update on I-69 Extension in Indiana

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

Previous topic - Next topic

wanderer2575

Quote from: Moose on August 12, 2024, 11:38:46 PMhttps://fb.watch/tWzEOwPVG0/

Quick drive through of the new section

What I see is that there are no guide signs for the I-465 interchange except the lone APL at the wbd/ebd split, and the lane markings don't match that APL.  Maybe that's only temporary, but what the f#$%?!


Interstate 69 Fan

Took a drive of the corridor between I-465 and Martinsville. All future signs on I-69 are gone. Little to no lane restrictions once you get past Wicker Lane (just north of the County Line Road interchange), but they weren't doing any work between there and Southport Road, where you could clearly see where SB traffic ran prior to the interchange opening recently.

And yes, little to no reference northbound of I-465 interchange, even the Epler Avenue one. All that there was NB was prior to Southport, a sign saying "JUNCTION 465/74 2 MILES" sign - nothing on Epler. A lot of people - myself included - are used to taking 5 or so minutes at least to go from Southport to I-465, nowadays that takes you probably a minute and a half, so that comes up on you QUICK. And absolutely no signage telling you what lane you were in, I actually took the wrong exit, getting on I-465 eastbound instead of westbound.

LOTS of cops too. They were EVERYWHERE on the corridor, especially south of County Line Road.

Side note - when going over any flyover at the interchange, you really get a stance at just how wide I-465 will be when this is all done. It's really impressive, and photos cannot do it justice - you have to see it in person.
Apparently I’m a fan of I-69.  Who knew.

silverback1065

Quote from: Interstate 69 Fan on August 13, 2024, 11:36:42 AMTook a drive of the corridor between I-465 and Martinsville. All future signs on I-69 are gone. Little to no lane restrictions once you get past Wicker Lane (just north of the County Line Road interchange), but they weren't doing any work between there and Southport Road, where you could clearly see where SB traffic ran prior to the interchange opening recently.

And yes, little to no reference northbound of I-465 interchange, even the Epler Avenue one. All that there was NB was prior to Southport, a sign saying "JUNCTION 465/74 2 MILES" sign - nothing on Epler. A lot of people - myself included - are used to taking 5 or so minutes at least to go from Southport to I-465, nowadays that takes you probably a minute and a half, so that comes up on you QUICK. And absolutely no signage telling you what lane you were in, I actually took the wrong exit, getting on I-465 eastbound instead of westbound.

LOTS of cops too. They were EVERYWHERE on the corridor, especially south of County Line Road.

Side note - when going over any flyover at the interchange, you really get a stance at just how wide I-465 will be when this is all done. It's really impressive, and photos cannot do it justice - you have to see it in person.

maybe the signs will be added when they finish the harding street removal.  :hmmm:

ITB

#5378
North of the Southport Road interchange there is this overhead spanning sign, which is currently covered:


November 10, 2023

Although not complete, the sign indicates the I-465 interchange at the top, as it does on the similar spanning sign just south of the Epler Avenue overpass. Also, there's another spanning sign to be installed over the northbound lanes north of the Southport Road interchange. Currently, it's lying on the ground near the temporarily closed northbound lanes.

Peoria? Why am I not charmed by that? Wouldn't it be preferable to have it as "Peoria, Illinois"? And, perhaps, below that, separated by a line, "Iowa". Or better yet, below "Peoria" there could mention of Chicago, as is "To Chicago", adjacent to an I-65 shield. Another option could be "To (I-65 shield) North", with "Chicago" below.

silverback1065

Quote from: ITB on August 13, 2024, 05:49:11 PMNorth of the Southport Road interchange there is this overhead spanning sign, which is currently covered:


November 10, 2023

Although not complete, the sign indicates the I-465 interchange at the top, as it does on the similar spanning sign just south of the Epler Avenue overpass. Also, there's another spanning sign to be installed over the northbound lanes north of the Southport Road interchange. Currently, it's lying on the ground near the temporarily closed northbound lanes.

Peoria? Why am I not charmed by that? Wouldn't it be preferable to have it as "Peoria, Illinois"? And, perhaps, below that, separated by a line, "Iowa". Or better yet, below "Peoria" there could mention of Chicago, as is "To Chicago", adjacent to an I-65 shield. Another option could be "To (I-65 shield) North", with "Chicago" below.


on the west side it did used to say Peoria, ILL but was taken off when they redid the west side, maybe the state isn't proper sign protocol and was removed?  :hmmm: not sure I would add chicago, that sign is big enough as it is!  :-D

wanderer2575

Quote from: ITB on August 13, 2024, 05:49:11 PMPeoria? Why am I not charmed by that? Wouldn't it be preferable to have it as "Peoria, Illinois"? And, perhaps, below that, separated by a line, "Iowa". Or better yet, below "Peoria" there could mention of Chicago, as is "To Chicago", adjacent to an I-65 shield. Another option could be "To (I-65 shield) North", with "Chicago" below.

Why is "Cincinnati" okay, as opposed to "Cincinnati, Ohio"?  And IMO, the sign is already busy enough that it doesn't need a sixth shield and a fourth control city.  Can't get every large city destination on one sign.

tdindy88

This is why I'm honestly okay with a lack of control cities along I-465, there's usually too many choices that one can put up on these signs due to all the interstates radiating out of Indianapolis. For westbound I-465 you could include Chicago, but you can also include St. Louis and now there are three control cities. Eastbound I-465 can also add Dayton on there and now there's six cities on one large sign. I'm okay with just sticking with I-74's control cities. They're finally treating I-74 as a mainline interstate and not just another number hitching a ride on the Great Indianapolis Multiplex.

My only thing with the control cities along I-69 approaching I-465 is the sudden disappearance of Indianapolis itself. It's mentioned at the Southport Road interchange but disappears completely. I guess they assume that you know that you've already entered the city and no longer need to know that. As for getting to Downtown Indianapolis, well hopefully you know your way there as well.

ITB

Quote from: wanderer2575 on August 13, 2024, 06:22:09 PM
Quote from: ITB on August 13, 2024, 05:49:11 PMPeoria? Why am I not charmed by that? Wouldn't it be preferable to have it as "Peoria, Illinois"? And, perhaps, below that, separated by a line, "Iowa". Or better yet, below "Peoria" there could mention of Chicago, as is "To Chicago", adjacent to an I-65 shield. Another option could be "To (I-65 shield) North", with "Chicago" below.

Why is "Cincinnati" okay, as opposed to "Cincinnati, Ohio"?  And IMO, the sign is already busy enough that it doesn't need a sixth shield and a fourth control city.  Can't get every large city destination on one sign.

Because Cincinnati is a major city that is known by many throughout the country. Peoria, on the other hand, not so much. Even Fort Wayne is substantially larger than Peoria, with more than double the population. Good chance a lot of people from the south and southeast are unfamiliar with Peoria. Without perusing a map, they might think it's located in Indiana or Iowa, rather than Illinois.

Maybe the sign could read as "Peoria," and underneath, separated by a line, "Illinois," and underneath that, "Iowa." If the word "to" is deemed pertinent, by all means add it to read as "To Illinois," followed underneath by "Iowa."

nwi_navigator_1181

#5383
Quote from: tdindy88 on August 13, 2024, 07:12:26 PMThis is why I'm honestly okay with a lack of control cities along I-465, there's usually too many choices that one can put up on these signs due to all the interstates radiating out of Indianapolis. For westbound I-465 you could include Chicago, but you can also include St. Louis and now there are three control cities. Eastbound I-465 can also add Dayton on there and now there's six cities on one large sign. I'm okay with just sticking with I-74's control cities. They're finally treating I-74 as a mainline interstate and not just another number hitching a ride on the Great Indianapolis Multiplex.

My only thing with the control cities along I-69 approaching I-465 is the sudden disappearance of Indianapolis itself. It's mentioned at the Southport Road interchange but disappears completely. I guess they assume that you know that you've already entered the city and no longer need to know that. As for getting to Downtown Indianapolis, well hopefully you know your way there as well.

Speaking on the latter point, I think Indianapolis goes away on I-69 mainly because of the fact that, when you get to 465/74 proper, you now have TWO options to get to Downtown. If I'm not mistaken, barring emergencies, they have a VMS on northbound I-69 that provides travel times to Downtown via those two options (I-465 N to I-70 E and I-465 E to I-65 north). Plus, those two junctions sit in very close proximity of the I-69 interchange, so Indianapolis will reemerge as a control city in short time.

On the former point, when I think about it, I think it is best that any control cities along I-465 should be limited to the mainline interstates that occupy it (Peoria, Cincinnati, and now Fort Wayne and Evansville). Unlike Columbus or Atlanta, too many interstates approach I-465 at odd approaches and are too uniquely spaced apart to assign radial control cities to I-465 on a consistent basis - never mind I-865 and the confusion that can be made there (you COULD assign I-865/465 east Fort Wayne and Dayton while I-465 north and west can be assigned Fort Wayne* and Chicago for those coming from I-70 west). Otherwise, it gets really muddled with I-69/74 running concurrent at points, the aforementioned I-865, and the sheer amount of interstates that spoke out from the city.

*Fort Wayne will likely be assigned to that section of I-465 once I-69 is properly signed along that section.
"Slower Traffic Keep Right" means just that.
You use turn signals. Every Time. Every Transition.

vdeane

Quote from: wanderer2575 on August 13, 2024, 01:03:35 AM
Quote from: Moose on August 12, 2024, 11:38:46 PMhttps://fb.watch/tWzEOwPVG0/

Quick drive through of the new section

What I see is that there are no guide signs for the I-465 interchange except the lone APL at the wbd/ebd split, and the lane markings don't match that APL.  Maybe that's only temporary, but what the f#$%?!
I see another sign on the northbound lanes (where NB is utilizing part of the SB lanes due to the construction) that's covered up, and the lanes reflect the permanent configuration, not the temporary one where there's only one lane on the ramps.

Also, I really hope that's sped up.
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position of NYSDOT or its affiliates.

sprjus4

Quote from: vdeane on August 13, 2024, 09:05:48 PMAlso, I really hope that's sped up.
Yes, that's what the description of the video says.

wanderer2575

Quote from: vdeane on August 13, 2024, 09:05:48 PMI see another sign on the northbound lanes (where NB is utilizing part of the SB lanes due to the construction) that's covered up, and the lanes reflect the permanent configuration, not the temporary one where there's only one lane on the ramps.

Yes, I see that.  Covered = Not There.  And I know the one APL reflects what will eventually be the permanent lane configuration, but that's of no help to motorists driving it now.  That last APL also should be covered, with temporary signs in advance and at the split indicating left lane for I-465 west, right lane for I-465 east and I-69.  Shields on the pavement are next to useless as they are visible for only a split second.

cjw2001


KelleyCook

I emailed INDOT about the status of SR 37. David Pluckebaum replied and it turns out the SR 37 is not being decommissioned; it is just being de-signed.

It will remain as an unsigned route on I-69 from Martinsville to Fishers while the segment from Bloomington to Martinsville should be de-signed in the near future.

seicer

It doesn't count against Indiana's mileage cap?

tdindy88

It shouldn't. There's really no change to the mileage since the SR 37 corridor turns into I-69 and remains and INDOT-maintained highway. They don't lose or gain anything essentially. It is interesting to hear that SR 37 isn't technically going away. I guess there will remain two separate segments to SR 37.

davewiecking

Quote from: cjw2001 on August 14, 2024, 01:36:11 PMNew INDOT camera is now live at the Epler interchange with I 69.

https://511in.org/camera/3676/@-86.19618,39.68832,16?show=incidents,normalCameras,trafficSpeeds,electronicSigns,stationsAlert,weatherWarningsAreaEvents,plowCameras,flooding#camera/3676/2865044682

Good view towards the I-465 interchange. I had it up for 15 seconds when a car on the I-69 ramp to EB quickly pulled to the right shoulder (past the cones), waited for traffic to clear, then accelerated through 3 lines of cones to get to WB. Possibly a misaligned APL sign contributed to this?

Henry

When can we expect to see the updated signs on I-65 and I-70 where they'll now meet I-69 on the loop?
Go Cubs Go! Go Cubs Go! Hey Chicago, what do you say? The Cubs are gonna win today!

jakeroot

Quote from: davewiecking on August 14, 2024, 09:05:35 PM
Quote from: cjw2001 on August 14, 2024, 01:36:11 PMNew INDOT camera is now live at the Epler interchange with I 69.

https://511in.org/camera/3676/@-86.19618,39.68832,16?show=incidents,normalCameras,trafficSpeeds,electronicSigns,stationsAlert,weatherWarningsAreaEvents,plowCameras,flooding#camera/3676/2865044682

Good view towards the I-465 interchange. I had it up for 15 seconds when a car on the I-69 ramp to EB quickly pulled to the right shoulder (past the cones), waited for traffic to clear, then accelerated through 3 lines of cones to get to WB. Possibly a misaligned APL sign contributed to this?

Can't really say what exactly might have contributed to that. But APLs don't need to be aligned to the roadway. The arrows correspond with the lanes on the road, drivers simply need to be aware of how many lanes there are, and use the arrow to determine if their lane goes where they need to go.

Aligning the APL with the lanes make it more obvious which lanes are for which, but technically you don't need them to be aligned. Good example would be the R3-8 (lane assignment) signs, which are kind of arrow-per-lane but off to the side.

Interstate 69 Fan

Quote from: Henry on August 14, 2024, 11:10:38 PMWhen can we expect to see the updated signs on I-65 and I-70 where they'll now meet I-69 on the loop?
I imagine we'll see them uncovered shortly, if not already.
Apparently I’m a fan of I-69.  Who knew.

silverback1065

37 is in essence decommissioned. saying it's designed is essentially the same thing, they designed it from SR 9 to 469 up to FT Wayne, I take it as the same thing being done here. I very highly doubt they will keep this on their books as the name of the route when interstates take precedent over all other highway numbers when they overlap.

IndyAgent

Quote from: seicer on August 14, 2024, 07:36:23 PMIt doesn't count against Indiana's mileage cap?

What do you mean by mileage cap? I am not familiar with that term.

Life in Paradise

Quote from: tdindy88 on August 14, 2024, 07:44:37 PMIt shouldn't. There's really no change to the mileage since the SR 37 corridor turns into I-69 and remains and INDOT-maintained highway. They don't lose or gain anything essentially. It is interesting to hear that SR 37 isn't technically going away. I guess there will remain two separate segments to SR 37.
This makes me wonder if there are other "non signed" state highways that Indiana felt that weren't needed to be signed between their segments. because they were quite local roads, and no one would be thought to have a need to follow the road number to get to the other segment. 

I-55

Quote from: IndyAgent on August 15, 2024, 11:58:45 AM
Quote from: seicer on August 14, 2024, 07:36:23 PMIt doesn't count against Indiana's mileage cap?

What do you mean by mileage cap? I am not familiar with that term.

There's a certain number of miles (12,000) of state roads that INDOT is allowed to maintain. Decommissioning would imply that the mileage is being "refunded" whereas de-signing would theoretically keep it on the books. INDOT likes to relinquish state highway mileage to local agencies (see SR 28 in Tipton or any of the old alignments of state and US highways in Indianapolis, Fort Wayne, or Lafayette) to reduce their responsibility and add flexibility to build new miles (but mostly to reduce operational costs).
Transportation Engineer
Let's Go Purdue Basketball Whoosh

CtrlAltDel

Quote from: jakeroot on August 15, 2024, 01:05:14 AMCan't really say what exactly might have contributed to that. But APLs don't need to be aligned to the roadway.

Well, the MUTCD does state the following:
Quote from: MUTCD, Part 2, Chapter E, Section 40, Paragraph 6Overhead Arrow-per-Lane guide signs used on freeways and expressways shall be designed in accordance with the following criteria: [...] The shaft of each arrow shall be located over the approximate center of the lane to which it applies.
I-290   I-294   I-55   (I-74)   (I-72)   I-40   I-30   US-59   US-190   TX-30   TX-6



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.