I noticed a couple of weeks ago that clearing has started at the I-469 /US 24 east ramp.
It looks like they will be tying the ramp straight to US 24 on the other side of the current loop ramp.
Has anyone seen the plans or timetable for this?
https://www.in.gov/indot/3773.htm
Quote from: 2trailertrucker on July 21, 2019, 03:30:50 PM
I noticed a couple of weeks ago that clearing has started at the I-469 /US 24 east ramp.
It looks like they will be tying the ramp straight to US 24 on the other side of the current loop ramp.
Has anyone seen the plans or timetable for this?
This will hopefully be amazing when done. No more backups onto 469 North at nearly all times of day.
Any idea on if INDOT will be smart and re-sign 24 to go along the south side of 469....and maybe onto Lafayette Center Road towards Roanoke?
Never going to happen. They recently rerouted it on 69 north and around the Northside of ft Wayne. The reason why that interchange looks so weird (the new one planned) is because the NW corner had a historic property they couldn't mess with. But recently it got torn down by the property owner.
It would be so much better though about rerouting US 24 down Lafayette Center Road now that its four lane. Any GPS from say Huntington toward Toledo is already going to route you that way, why not just make is US 24 and make the current US 24 from Roanoke to I-69 a spur state highway, some SR x24. But I do understand, since when has Indiana been about doing the rational thing too.
Quote from: tdindy88 on July 25, 2019, 08:20:04 PM
It would be so much better though about rerouting US 24 down Lafayette Center Road now that its four lane. Any GPS from say Huntington toward Toledo is already going to route you that way, why not just make is US 24 and make the current US 24 from Roanoke to I-69 a spur state highway, some SR x24. But I do understand, since when has Indiana been about doing the rational thing too.
Making sense isn't indots strong suit. They love to ruin routings
Quote from: tdindy88 on July 25, 2019, 08:20:04 PM
It would be so much better though about rerouting US 24 down Lafayette Center Road now that its four lane. Any GPS from say Huntington toward Toledo is already going to route you that way, why not just make is US 24 and make the current US 24 from Roanoke to I-69 a spur state highway, some SR x24. But I do understand, since when has Indiana been about doing the rational thing too.
Only way InDOT might, would be if they could spin off the orphaned bit of US 24 to either the County or City Highway Dept...InDOT isn't going to add ~4 miles of a 4 lane, local jurisdiction Arterial unless they can write off 4 or more miles back to local jurisdictions
Quote from: ilpt4u on July 25, 2019, 09:09:50 PM
Quote from: tdindy88 on July 25, 2019, 08:20:04 PM
It would be so much better though about rerouting US 24 down Lafayette Center Road now that its four lane. Any GPS from say Huntington toward Toledo is already going to route you that way, why not just make is US 24 and make the current US 24 from Roanoke to I-69 a spur state highway, some SR x24. But I do understand, since when has Indiana been about doing the rational thing too.
Only way InDOT might, would be if they could spin off the orphaned bit of US 24 to either the County or City Highway Dept...InDOT isn't going to add ~4 miles of a 4 lane, local jurisdiction Arterial unless they can write off 4 or more miles back to local jurisdictions
Plus they can have another one of their routes randomly end at a non state road. (114)
Quote from: silverback1065 on July 25, 2019, 09:14:46 PM
Quote from: ilpt4u on July 25, 2019, 09:09:50 PM
Quote from: tdindy88 on July 25, 2019, 08:20:04 PM
It would be so much better though about rerouting US 24 down Lafayette Center Road now that its four lane. Any GPS from say Huntington toward Toledo is already going to route you that way, why not just make is US 24 and make the current US 24 from Roanoke to I-69 a spur state highway, some SR x24. But I do understand, since when has Indiana been about doing the rational thing too.
Only way InDOT might, would be if they could spin off the orphaned bit of US 24 to either the County or City Highway Dept...InDOT isn't going to add ~4 miles of a 4 lane, local jurisdiction Arterial unless they can write off 4 or more miles back to local jurisdictions
Plus they can have another one of their routes randomly end at a non state road. (114)
I didn't even notice IN 114 there...thats an interesting possibility...Its about 3.5 miles along US 24 between Lafayette Center Rd and IN 114...InDOT might go for that swap, within (roughly) half a mile. Extend IN 114 East to I-469 along current US 24. Orphan the segment between and turn it over to Local Control
Problem Solved! Tho getting Fictional...
Quote from: silverback1065 on July 25, 2019, 02:36:40 PM
Never going to happen. They recently rerouted it on 69 north and around the Northside of ft Wayne. The reason why that interchange looks so weird (the new one planned) is because the NW corner had a historic property they couldn't mess with. But recently it got torn down by the property owner.
Will the demolition change the plans for the interchange? The snake-like 24W to 69S ramp is something I havent seen before. I travel this route back to my family in Indiana, and the new ramps will be a big improvement.
I asked the designer and he said it could in the future when indot decides to make it a full limited access facility. Which I believe is what they want. This won't happen with this construction though.
Quote from: silverback1065 on July 25, 2019, 02:36:40 PM
Never going to happen. They recently rerouted it on 69 north and around the Northside of ft Wayne. The reason why that interchange looks so weird (the new one planned) is because the NW corner had a historic property they couldn't mess with. But recently it got torn down by the property owner.
I really wish this 'the DOT can't impact the historic property but everyone else can' would get fixed someday. Particularly when it comes to impacting the view from the historic property, and when there are already other subdivisions or large power lines in the same view.[/rant].
Quote from: Revive 755 on July 27, 2019, 10:24:59 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on July 25, 2019, 02:36:40 PM
Never going to happen. They recently rerouted it on 69 north and around the Northside of ft Wayne. The reason why that interchange looks so weird (the new one planned) is because the NW corner had a historic property they couldn't mess with. But recently it got torn down by the property owner.
I really wish this 'the DOT can't impact the historic property but everyone else can' would get fixed someday. Particularly when it comes to impacting the view from the historic property, and when there are already other subdivisions or large power lines in the same view.[/rant].
I don't think the mentality is that anyone but the DOT can impact the historic property; I think it's just that the DOT can't impact land that they don't own, which happens to be for historical reasons in this case. Also, if it came down to impacting the view, wouldn't that have forced the Interstate to be routed elsewhere in the first place?
I mean they can it's called immenant domain. But it doesn't work in historic property scenarios. The view argument sounds like a nepa document, which in my experience is just a giant waste of time and money.
Quote from: silverback1065 on July 28, 2019, 03:27:14 PM
I mean they can it's called immenant domain. But it doesn't work in historic property scenarios. The view argument sounds like a nepa document, which in my experience is just a giant waste of time and money.
Not to pick nits, and no offense intended, but it's "Eminent Domain".
Quote from: SSR_317 on August 04, 2019, 02:58:16 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on July 28, 2019, 03:27:14 PM
I mean they can it's called immenant domain. But it doesn't work in historic property scenarios. The view argument sounds like a nepa document, which in my experience is just a giant waste of time and money.
Not to pick nits, and no offense intended, but it's "Eminent Domain".
:-D it was hastily typed. Didn't realize it was spelled that way! no offense taken
Question: since US 24 between Logansport and Toledo is part of a longstanding federal high priority corridor (#4, with one iteration of the "Heartland" label attached!) -- and ostensibly a sizeable chunk of federal funds were requested and used by both INDOT and ODOT to deploy the various expressway/freeway mileage along that corridor -- has there been no movement at all to connect the Wabash River section that extends around Huntington to somewhere along I-69 (whether following the Lafayette Center alignment directly to the southern I-469 interchange or another location along that route) to functionally complete a high-speed/high-capacity corridor? Curiously, it almost seems like INDOT has elected to downplay the presence of US 24 as a viable cross-state/intraregional artery even after sinking funds into its construction, including the western extension along IN 25 toward Lafayette.
^ Were you not aware that Lafayette Center Rd was recently widened to 4 lanes (albeit undivided) with a bridge over the Norfolk Southern tracks?
Quote from: froggie on August 06, 2019, 08:21:48 PM
^ Were you not aware that Lafayette Center Rd was recently widened to 4 lanes (albeit undivided) with a bridge over the Norfolk Southern tracks?
No, I was not aware of that; thanks for the info (will see if it shows up on GSV when I have the time). Nevertheless, although Lafayette Center is a locally-known
de facto (albeit a little "underpowered" even as 4-lane local arterial) connector, is that connection reasonably well publicized via signage from I-69 and/or I-469? It sounds like the facility is still under local control and that the upgrade was likely to at least in part address the increased traffic level from those aware of the "shortcut". If INDOT was serious about the corridor's effectiveness it would have extended US 24 directly to I-69 as an expressway and/or freeway rather than simply hand off the issue to a local jurisdictions (if this were present-day CA, the state would have contributed a big chunk anyway). Now I
do recognize that under IN laws there's a SH mileage cap; something (possibly the present US 24 alignment NE from Huntington) could be relinquished to clear mileage for a new direct connector. But maybe all involved will get lucky and the Lafayette Center connection won't create traffic issues at either end or pose safety issues as an undivided corridor carrying intraregional traffic. At least nobody will get T-boned by a NS train! :-/
INDOT isn't at the 12,000 mile mileage cap. They've never gotten to there as far as I've known, they got space for another three or four miles of road.
I wonder why 24 doesn't use Lafayette Center Road. I've always wondered why they won't just throw 24 onto that route. Also the Hoosier heartland highway isn't an interstate because it doesn't really need to be one. Only improvements I'd make is make 24 the continuous movement at the 35/24 split east of logansport and do something about that weird split diamond.
Quote from: silverback1065 on August 06, 2019, 09:56:19 PM
I wonder why 24 doesn't use Lafayette Center Road. I've always wondered why they won't just throw 24 onto that route. Also the Hoosier heartland highway isn't an interstate because it doesn't really need to be one. Only improvements I'd make is make 24 the continuous movement at the 35/24 split east of logansport and do something about that weird split diamond.
I can't even remember the last time INDOT actually assumed control of a county/local road. It just seems to be something they don't do. CR 17 in Elkhart is another road that really needs to be a state highway but INDOT hasn't done anything with it either. As noted above, there is no mileage cap issue, it's just not done.
That stoplight where 24 goes onto 469 east of Fort Wayne is really slow, I had to wait for two cycles behind a line of semis to get onto 469. The New Lafayette Center Road by comparison is no problem even though it's not a real expressway. My biggest frustration with the 24 expressway is the stoplights in Wabash are ALWAYS RED. Huntington too, although being a much bigger city that is more expected although interchanges in those bypasses would really speed things up. Is 24 ever going to be four laned all the way to Kentland and the IL state line? Or is Lafayette the destination of the corridor? I've tried both 24 from Gilman IL across Indiana to Toledo and 74 East up through Lafayette on the two lanes then across via the Hoosier Heartland Expressway and both routes are very slow in the non expressway parts. Getting through Lafayette is a nightmare, the 231 up to the north side of town over to the Heartland is riddled with so many stoplights, 25 through the city is an absolute nightmare, Veterans Parkway across the south side of town to 65 seems to be the best, but still flawed route through Lafayette connecting 74 to the Heartland. The alternate route of 24 from Logansport to Illinois is also slow, Watseka definitely needs a bypass same with Monticello, and the two lane section from Monticello to Logansport is too winding and lacking good visibility to safely pass slowpokes.
Quote from: captkirk_4 on August 25, 2019, 12:08:05 PM
Is 24 ever going to be four laned all the way to Kentland and the IL state line? Or is Lafayette the destination of the corridor?
I would lean towards Lafayette being the corridor destination. I don't think any of the towns west of Logansport are big enough population wise or industry wise to warrant a four lane corridor (corrections are welcomed).
Now if Illinois and Indiana ever wanted to try and develop another high quality alternative to using I-80 through Chicagloand . . .
^^^^^^^^^
Lafayette has been the western end of HPC #4 since its 1991 inception; IN 25 was always intended to be the basic alignment of its western end. Some speculators have suggested a (fictional) extension to somewhere along I-74 to the southwest in order to complete a full westward connection; AFAIK that's not been seriously proposed by IDOT or even local (Lafayette and/or other western Indiana locales) interests. Of course, the existing terminus location tends to limit much of the corridor's utility (unless you're a Purdue student originally from Ft. Wayne or even Toledo!).
Quote from: Revive 755 on August 25, 2019, 12:22:41 PM
Quote from: captkirk_4 on August 25, 2019, 12:08:05 PM
Is 24 ever going to be four laned all the way to Kentland and the IL state line? Or is Lafayette the destination of the corridor?
I would lean towards Lafayette being the corridor destination. I don't think any of the towns west of Logansport are big enough population wise or industry wise to warrant a four lane corridor (corrections are welcomed).
Now if Illinois and Indiana ever wanted to try and develop another high quality alternative to using I-80 through Chicagloand . . .
You might be able to justify making 24 4 lanes between Logansport and Monticello, but definitely not anywhere beyond that.
^^^^^^^^^^^
As a "relief route" for I-80(90) through and past Chicagoland, a much more useful concept like the now-stalled Illiana proposal makes more sense; its backers projected a connection out to the ITR between Michigan City and South Bend (and a N-S extension somewhere around IL 47 could complete the concept rather well). US 24 is too far afield to serve as an effective relief route to I-80; the Heartland concept, even veering down to Lafayette, is more suited as a generally diagonal connector from Central IL to Toledo (where it could disperse N to MI and E to Cleveland and beyond). Of course that would involve, as mentioned in a previous post, a connection between Lafayette and I-74 SW of that city. Some prognosticators would characterize that as an eastern extension of I-72 -- but raising the corridor to that level would involve upgrading about 70% of its existing length plus the cost of the Lafayette-I-74 connector -- something not in the near-term cards. If some of the "glitches" endemic to the current corridor configuration (the Logansport indirect connection plus the Huntington-Fort Wayne issues are foremost here) can be resolved, the mostly expressway-format Heartland corridor would function very well as an intraregional connector; a corridor with more ambitious goals might occur down the line, but surely not in the short haul.
Quote from: sparker on August 26, 2019, 04:03:30 PM
^^^^^^^^^^^
As a "relief route" for I-80(90) through and past Chicagoland, a much more useful concept like the now-stalled Illiana proposal makes more sense; its backers projected a connection out to the ITR between Michigan City and South Bend (and a N-S extension somewhere around IL 47 could complete the concept rather well). US 24 is too far afield to serve as an effective relief route to I-80; the Heartland concept, even veering down to Lafayette, is more suited as a generally diagonal connector from Central IL to Toledo (where it could disperse N to MI and E to Cleveland and beyond). Of course that would involve, as mentioned in a previous post, a connection between Lafayette and I-74 SW of that city. Some prognosticators would characterize that as an eastern extension of I-72 -- but raising the corridor to that level would involve upgrading about 70% of its existing length plus the cost of the Lafayette-I-74 connector -- something not in the near-term cards. If some of the "glitches" endemic to the current corridor configuration (the Logansport indirect connection plus the Huntington-Fort Wayne issues are foremost here) can be resolved, the mostly expressway-format Heartland corridor would function very well as an intraregional connector; a corridor with more ambitious goals might occur down the line, but surely not in the short haul.
There are more alignment issues than that. US 24 should use Lafayette Center Rd in Roanoke, US 24 needs to be the continuous movement at the 24/35 split on the east side of logansport and at the 24/9 split in Huntington
If a freeway were built running from the I-65/IN 38 interchange to the I-76/US 41 interchange, how much time does that really save compared to just taking US 231 down to I-74, especially considering the cost of construction and the number of people who would use it?
As for 24, the 24/9 is fixable because it's currently at grade, but 24/35 is never going to change.
Quote from: silverback1065 on August 26, 2019, 04:32:31 PM
There are more alignment issues than that. US 24 should use Lafayette Center Rd in Roanoke, US 24 needs to be the continuous movement at the 24/35 split on the east side of logansport and at the 24/9 split in Huntington
The 24/35 split is illogical but due to low volumes on the highway doesn't currently cause many issues, when headed eastbound there's usually so little traffic coming at me I can just take it non-stop at 45mph. The most frustrating thing for me is those 3 traffic lights in Wabash that are ALWAYS RED.
I would think that the US 24/35 split east of Logansport could be solved with a flyover ramp from eastbound 24/35 onto eastbound 24. Of course the question would be whether or not it would be justifiable with the low traffic. And maybe a small ramp leading directly from westbound 24 to westbound 24/35. Doing some kind of interchange at the 24/9 intersection in Huntington looks to be more problematic with various things in the way.
As for 231 from Lafayette to I-74, isn't INDOT planning on widening that eventually. I'd have to think that would be one of their next major highways to want to expand since it seems whether busy trafficwise, at least when I drive along that highway.
Quote from: cabiness42 on August 27, 2019, 07:53:21 AM
If a freeway were built running from the I-65/IN 38 interchange to the I-76/US 41 interchange, how much time does that really save compared to just taking US 231 down to I-74, especially considering the cost of construction and the number of people who would use it?
The big problem is getting from the circle roundabout at the end of the Hoosier Heartland Highway by the 65 interchange to 231. First of all there is absolutely no signed routes through Lafayette, secondly all those you can find on a map have multiple stoplights and a 14 mile trip takes 40 minutes. There's really no road network around the town in the cornfields where you can make good time. No way of getting off around Americus and taking some route to just north of Romney. Then there is no diagonal routing from Lafayette to the Danville area so you loose more time. 231 is also very busy so it's nearly impossible to pass a slowpoke.
Quote from: captkirk_4 on August 27, 2019, 08:55:02 AM
Quote from: silverback1065 on August 26, 2019, 04:32:31 PM
There are more alignment issues than that. US 24 should use Lafayette Center Rd in Roanoke, US 24 needs to be the continuous movement at the 24/35 split on the east side of logansport and at the 24/9 split in Huntington
The 24/35 split is illogical but due to low volumes on the highway doesn't currently cause many issues, when headed eastbound there's usually so little traffic coming at me I can just take it non-stop at 45mph. The most frustrating thing for me is those 3 traffic lights in Wabash that are ALWAYS RED.
The 24/35 split is illogical now because at the time it was built, 24 still went right through Logansport.
Quote from: captkirk_4 on August 27, 2019, 09:05:19 AM
Quote from: cabiness42 on August 27, 2019, 07:53:21 AM
If a freeway were built running from the I-65/IN 38 interchange to the I-76/US 41 interchange, how much time does that really save compared to just taking US 231 down to I-74, especially considering the cost of construction and the number of people who would use it?
The big problem is getting from the circle roundabout at the end of the Hoosier Heartland Highway by the 65 interchange to 231. First of all there is absolutely no signed routes through Lafayette, secondly all those you can find on a map have multiple stoplights and a 14 mile trip takes 40 minutes. There's really no road network around the town in the cornfields where you can make good time. No way of getting off around Americus and taking some route to just north of Romney. Then there is no diagonal routing from Lafayette to the Danville area so you loose more time. 231 is also very busy so it's nearly impossible to pass a slowpoke.
I agree there is a great need for a better way to get between 65 and 231, and I do believe that 4-laning 231 down to 74 is going to happen. I just don't see justification for a new terrain freeway running SW from Lafayette.
^ I think INDOT had a couple of missed opportunities in the Lafayette area. First was a lack of interchanges (or even reserving the right-of-way for future interchanges) along the new(ish) US 231 bypass. The second missed opportunity was an improved Veterans Memorial Parkway, including a more direct connection between Veterans Pkwy and IN 38. This would have provided a more seamless connection between I-65 and US 231.
Quote from: froggie on August 27, 2019, 10:08:48 AM
^ I think INDOT had a couple of missed opportunities in the Lafayette area. First was a lack of interchanges (or even reserving the right-of-way for future interchanges) along the new(ish) US 231 bypass. The second missed opportunity was an improved Veterans Memorial Parkway, including a more direct connection between Veterans Pkwy and IN 38. This would have provided a more seamless connection between I-65 and US 231.
Another missed opportunity in the Lafayette area would had been a beltway as a freeway (I-665? but that's go into fictionnal territory) on the west side playing a role similar to I-469 in Fort Wayne.
Quote from: cabiness42 on August 27, 2019, 09:22:28 AM
Quote from: captkirk_4 on August 27, 2019, 09:05:19 AM
Quote from: cabiness42 on August 27, 2019, 07:53:21 AM
If a freeway were built running from the I-65/IN 38 interchange to the I-76/US 41 interchange, how much time does that really save compared to just taking US 231 down to I-74, especially considering the cost of construction and the number of people who would use it?
The big problem is getting from the circle roundabout at the end of the Hoosier Heartland Highway by the 65 interchange to 231. First of all there is absolutely no signed routes through Lafayette, secondly all those you can find on a map have multiple stoplights and a 14 mile trip takes 40 minutes. There's really no road network around the town in the cornfields where you can make good time. No way of getting off around Americus and taking some route to just north of Romney. Then there is no diagonal routing from Lafayette to the Danville area so you loose more time. 231 is also very busy so it's nearly impossible to pass a slowpoke.
I agree there is a great need for a better way to get between 65 and 231, and I do believe that 4-laning 231 down to 74 is going to happen. I just don't see justification for a new terrain freeway running SW from Lafayette.
For the time being, INDOT will likely make do with improvements to existing connectors from Lafayette down to I-74, including US 231. I agree that some sort of connection, preferably south of town, needs to be made between US 65 and US 231 to effect a Lafayette bypass. But it would take a formal and concerted effort to extend the "Heartland" concept SW to precipitate any plans for a new-terrain connector down to I-74 (most likely either following IN 25 or heading diagonally right toward the I-74/US 41 junction). But the state has pretty much a full plate at present; it'll be a while before any concept of this sort not presently on the agenda receives anything in the way of consideration.
Quote from: Stephane Dumas on August 27, 2019, 04:14:55 PM
Quote from: froggie on August 27, 2019, 10:08:48 AM
^ I think INDOT had a couple of missed opportunities in the Lafayette area. First was a lack of interchanges (or even reserving the right-of-way for future interchanges) along the new(ish) US 231 bypass. The second missed opportunity was an improved Veterans Memorial Parkway, including a more direct connection between Veterans Pkwy and IN 38. This would have provided a more seamless connection between I-65 and US 231.
Another missed opportunity in the Lafayette area would had been a beltway as a freeway (I-665? but that's go into fictionnal territory) on the west side playing a role similar to I-469 in Fort Wayne.
Lafayette doesn't have the high-traffic US routes that Ft Wayne does, nor the commuter traffic. I agree that some sort of connection between SR 25 and I74 is necessary. When I drove that route earlier this month, though, it was easier than I'd imagined just following 25 through Lafayette and down to I-74. There was very little traffic on that route after I passed 231, and getting through Lafayette wasn't too bad.
Quote from: froggie on August 27, 2019, 10:08:48 AM
^ I think INDOT had a couple of missed opportunities in the Lafayette area. First was a lack of interchanges (or even reserving the right-of-way for future interchanges) along the new(ish) US 231 bypass. The second missed opportunity was an improved Veterans Memorial Parkway, including a more direct connection between Veterans Pkwy and IN 38. This would have provided a more seamless connection between I-65 and US 231.
There is a shit ton of R/W on that bypass, particularly the portion north of airport road. They were actually going to bridge over airport road, but ran out of money. It needs to shoot up to 65 from where they turn left at sagamore.
^^ Agree that Lafayette doesn't have the traffic volumes to warrant a full freeway loop. I have a bit of experience with the city...an old ship buddy of mine who I visit is a cop there and a college classmate is doing graduate work at Purdue. But a better and direct connection between 231 and 65 on the south side is IMO warranted. And if INDOT ran out of money for interchanges on the new 231, they should have at least preserved the right-of-way.
I also disagree with Silverback that they need to extend that due north to 65. It may be a "nice-to-have", but traffic on 65 from the north can fairly easily use 43 to get to Purdue, or use Old 25/Schuyler to get to Sagamore.
Quote from: froggie on August 28, 2019, 08:21:31 AM
I also disagree with Silverback that they need to extend that due north to 65. It may be a "nice-to-have", but traffic on 65 from the north can fairly easily use 43 to get to Purdue, or use Old 25/Schuyler to get to Sagamore.
If they can figure out the unmarked path of old 25 through Lafayette. The only reason it's in Wikipedia for Indiana 25 is because I put it there, in the History section.
Oop, my bad, I misread and thought you were talking about getting from I-65 to US 231 south of Lafayette.
my dream is to have a bypass that would go from 65/38 west to 52 (this portion signed as 25/26) then shoot west to 231 (signed as 52/25/26) go up current 231, and go all the way up to 65. that would make a complete loop. INDOT fucked up lafayette's routes.
https://wpta21.com/2019/12/13/new-ramp-expected-to-boost-safety-at-busy-interchange/
Ramp from 469N to 24E is now open!!
I'm curious, doesn't US 24 now come in from the north? I'm guessing most people are still coming in from the south (hence the new ramp) even if they are no longer following 24 east. Which leads to something else. Would it kill INDOT to include Toledo on their signage for US 24 east. They aren't afraid to use control cities along some their other exits along I-469 (SR 1, SR 37, US 27) so why can't we get a mention of Toledo for US 24 east, and maybe another control city mention around the interchanges with I-69 and I-469.
Quote from: tdindy88 on December 15, 2019, 07:29:29 PM
I'm curious, doesn't US 24 now come in from the north? I'm guessing most people are still coming in from the south (hence the new ramp) even if they are no longer following 24 east. Which leads to something else. Would it kill INDOT to include Toledo on their signage for US 24 east. They aren't afraid to use control cities along some their other exits along I-469 (SR 1, SR 37, US 27) so why can't we get a mention of Toledo for US 24 east, and maybe another control city mention around the interchanges with I-69 and I-469.
That'd make too much sense for INDOT to do that......
Quote from: thefarmerchris on December 15, 2019, 08:40:17 PM
Quote from: tdindy88 on December 15, 2019, 07:29:29 PM
I'm curious, doesn't US 24 now come in from the north? I'm guessing most people are still coming in from the south (hence the new ramp) even if they are no longer following 24 east. Which leads to something else. Would it kill INDOT to include Toledo on their signage for US 24 east. They aren't afraid to use control cities along some their other exits along I-469 (SR 1, SR 37, US 27) so why can't we get a mention of Toledo for US 24 east, and maybe another control city mention around the interchanges with I-69 and I-469.
That'd make too much sense for INDOT to do that......
I don't know that US 24 is signed for out-of-state control cities in Ohio either. From Toledo, they are Napoleon and Defiance, and only FtW the last dozen miles or so. Usually, US route control cities are in-state. Chicago shows up a few places on US and state routes in Indiana and Ohio.
Quote from: westerninterloper on December 15, 2019, 10:06:00 PM
Quote from: thefarmerchris on December 15, 2019, 08:40:17 PM
Quote from: tdindy88 on December 15, 2019, 07:29:29 PM
I'm curious, doesn't US 24 now come in from the north? I'm guessing most people are still coming in from the south (hence the new ramp) even if they are no longer following 24 east. Which leads to something else. Would it kill INDOT to include Toledo on their signage for US 24 east. They aren't afraid to use control cities along some their other exits along I-469 (SR 1, SR 37, US 27) so why can't we get a mention of Toledo for US 24 east, and maybe another control city mention around the interchanges with I-69 and I-469.
That'd make too much sense for INDOT to do that......
I don't know that US 24 is signed for out-of-state control cities in Ohio either. From Toledo, they are Napoleon and Defiance, and only FtW the last dozen miles or so. Usually, US route control cities are in-state. Chicago shows up a few places on US and state routes in Indiana and Ohio.
For reason I do not understand....
(https://live.staticflickr.com/1849/29367966337_6153bfd717_z.jpg)
(https://live.staticflickr.com/1845/29367964777_a6b2a100c6_z.jpg)
(in the case of the bottom photo, the sign in the background is what I'm focusing on.)
Both photos are from US 33 near Bellefountaine, Oh. (NW of the Honda plants)
At least in Defiance along US 24 Fort Wayne gets mention heading west. Even better, at the US 6 interchange the control points are Kendallville and Chicago. Which is better than in Northeast Indiana where the ONLY mention of Chicago is along the Toll Road.
If I could do control cities along the Fort Wayne interstates I'd do it like this:
I-469
US 24 east: Toledo
US 30 east: Mansfield (or Van Wart)
US 27/33 south: Richmond (Decatur works too though I suppose)/Columbus, OH
Control cities along I-469 from Exit 0 to 21
I-469 east/north: Toledo
I-469 west/south: Lafayette
I-469 from Exit 21 to 31
I-469 north/west: Chicago
I-469 east/south: Van Wert (maybe Richmond/Columbus instead)
Granted, I could just do Indianapolis and Lansing for directing traffic back to the north and south ends of 469 but since we've established that the beltway is more for regional traffic getting around the city than bypassing it, I thought these regional controls work better.
I-69
US 24 west: Huntington/Lafayette (via SR 25)
US 30 west: Columbia City/Chicago
US 33 north: Elkhart
I know, this will never happen. But it's something fun to do on a cold snowy night.
Quote from: tdindy88 on December 15, 2019, 11:27:44 PM
At least in Defiance along US 24 Fort Wayne gets mention heading west. Even better, at the US 6 interchange the control points are Kendallville and Chicago. Which is better than in Northeast Indiana where the ONLY mention of Chicago is along the Toll Road.
There doesn't seem to be much rhyme or reason for the control cities...I recall that on the Indiana Toll Road, maybe near Michigan City heading east, the control is "Ohio". Chicago gets a mention at US 6 and US 24 (as you mentioned), and I recall that on the Ohio Turnpike near Youngstown, the control city is New York City, both of those are on interstates though. In Indiana, SR63 gets Chicago as its control city on the north side of Terre Haute, even though it is US 41 that eventually goes to Chicago. The US route control cities seem to be, frequently, in-state. Is there any idea whether the US 24 east exit from I-469 will get Toledo as a control city - or will it just stay empty?
Quote from: westerninterloper on December 18, 2019, 09:43:33 AM
and I recall that on the Ohio Turnpike near Youngstown, the control city is New York City
That's actually on I-80 after it leaves the Turnpike. The Turnpike's eastbound control city in that area, as I-76, is Pittsburgh.
QuoteIs there any idea whether the US 24 east exit from I-469 will get Toledo as a control city - or will it just stay empty?
Woodburn! :D
Quote from: Buck87 on December 28, 2019, 07:31:00 PM
Quote from: westerninterloper on December 18, 2019, 09:43:33 AM
and I recall that on the Ohio Turnpike near Youngstown, the control city is New York City
That's actually on I-80 after it leaves the Turnpike. The Turnpike's eastbound control city in that area, as I-76, is Pittsburgh.
QuoteIs there any idea whether the US 24 east exit from I-469 will get Toledo as a control city - or will it just stay empty?
Woodburn! :D
Still on control cities, I noticed that on I-94W just before I-75 in Detroit, the control city is Chicago as well, quite early on its way through Ann Arbor, Jackson, Kalamazoo...
Quote from: westerninterloper on January 14, 2020, 10:14:48 AM
Quote from: Buck87 on December 28, 2019, 07:31:00 PM
Quote from: westerninterloper on December 18, 2019, 09:43:33 AM
and I recall that on the Ohio Turnpike near Youngstown, the control city is New York City
That's actually on I-80 after it leaves the Turnpike. The Turnpike's eastbound control city in that area, as I-76, is Pittsburgh.
QuoteIs there any idea whether the US 24 east exit from I-469 will get Toledo as a control city - or will it just stay empty?
Woodburn! :D
Still on control cities, I noticed that on I-94W just before I-75 in Detroit, the control city is Chicago as well, quite early on its way through Ann Arbor, Jackson, Kalamazoo...
And one more, exiting the Indiana Toll Road to I-94 at Lake Station, IN, the control city for I-80 is "Des Moines".
Back on topic, another poster mentioned that the US24-I469 interchange was "looking like a cloverleaf". Has there been a change in design now that the farm on the NW corner is for sale?
Quote from: westerninterloper on February 12, 2020, 01:21:55 PM
Quote from: westerninterloper on January 14, 2020, 10:14:48 AM
Quote from: Buck87 on December 28, 2019, 07:31:00 PM
Quote from: westerninterloper on December 18, 2019, 09:43:33 AM
and I recall that on the Ohio Turnpike near Youngstown, the control city is New York City
That's actually on I-80 after it leaves the Turnpike. The Turnpike's eastbound control city in that area, as I-76, is Pittsburgh.
QuoteIs there any idea whether the US 24 east exit from I-469 will get Toledo as a control city - or will it just stay empty?
Woodburn! :D
Still on control cities, I noticed that on I-94W just before I-75 in Detroit, the control city is Chicago as well, quite early on its way through Ann Arbor, Jackson, Kalamazoo...
And one more, exiting the Indiana Toll Road to I-94 at Lake Station, IN, the control city for I-80 is "Des Moines".
Back on topic, another poster mentioned that the US24-I469 interchange was "looking like a cloverleaf". Has there been a change in design now that the farm on the NW corner is for sale?
Yes, i think that house got knocked down. Last time I was in the area I saw no house.
Quote from: westerninterloper on February 12, 2020, 01:21:55 PM
Quote from: westerninterloper on January 14, 2020, 10:14:48 AM
Quote from: Buck87 on December 28, 2019, 07:31:00 PM
Quote from: westerninterloper on December 18, 2019, 09:43:33 AM
and I recall that on the Ohio Turnpike near Youngstown, the control city is New York City
That's actually on I-80 after it leaves the Turnpike. The Turnpike's eastbound control city in that area, as I-76, is Pittsburgh.
QuoteIs there any idea whether the US 24 east exit from I-469 will get Toledo as a control city - or will it just stay empty?
Woodburn! :D
Still on control cities, I noticed that on I-94W just before I-75 in Detroit, the control city is Chicago as well, quite early on its way through Ann Arbor, Jackson, Kalamazoo...
And one more, exiting the Indiana Toll Road to I-94 at Lake Station, IN, the control city for I-80 is "Des Moines".
Back on topic, another poster mentioned that the US24-I469 interchange was "looking like a cloverleaf". Has there been a change in design now that the farm on the NW corner is for sale?
I've noticed that generally more distant control cities are used at major interstate interchanges. E.g., the control cities out of St Louis point to Memphis and Chicago (I-55 and I-255), Indianapolis and Kansas City (I-70 and I-270), Louisville (I-64), and Tulsa (I-44). The only local city is Wentzville on WB I-64 and the interstate terminates there. Curiously, the BGS on NB I-270 at I-64 uses KC and Chicago for the I-270 traffic (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.6337441,-90.4501407,3a,75y,6.34h,83.82t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sR0vovigoGUb_sXsFkGePfA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en) even though travelers to KC usually take I-64 to Wentzville before following I-70 to KC from that interchange.
There was a nice long STL Beltway Control City discussion over in Road Related Illustrations... https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=9539.3500
Long story short, I-270 North/Inner on the West Side would probably be better served with a Control of Lambert STL Airport versus anything Long Distance
I-64 West at I-270 should use Minneapolis :cool: I don't see MoDOT getting on that bandwagon anytime soon, tho. But then again, if InDOT can use Des Moines in Northwestern Indiana for I-80 West...
Quote from: ilpt4u on February 12, 2020, 09:52:36 PM
There was a nice long STL Beltway Control City discussion over in Road Related Illustrations... https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=9539.3500
Long story short, I-270 North/Inner on the West Side would probably be better served with a Control of Lambert STL Airport versus anything Long Distance
I-64 West at I-270 should use Minneapolis :cool: I don't see MoDOT getting on that bandwagon anytime soon, tho. But then again, if InDOT can use Des Moines in Northwestern Indiana for I-80 West...
Back when InDOT owned the Toll Road, they wanted people to stay on the Toll Road rather than exiting onto I-80/94 for Chicago area destinations, so using a far away place like Des Moines as the control city was part of that strategy.
Quote from: cabiness42 on February 13, 2020, 07:37:08 AM
Quote from: ilpt4u on February 12, 2020, 09:52:36 PM
There was a nice long STL Beltway Control City discussion over in Road Related Illustrations... https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=9539.3500
Long story short, I-270 North/Inner on the West Side would probably be better served with a Control of Lambert STL Airport versus anything Long Distance
I-64 West at I-270 should use Minneapolis :cool: I don't see MoDOT getting on that bandwagon anytime soon, tho. But then again, if InDOT can use Des Moines in Northwestern Indiana for I-80 West...
Back when InDOT owned the Toll Road, they wanted people to stay on the Toll Road rather than exiting onto I-80/94 for Chicago area destinations, so using a far away place like Des Moines as the control city was part of that strategy.
Really?? they had plans for nice high speed ramp upgrade to exit on to I-80/94
Quote from: silverback1065 on February 12, 2020, 01:28:34 PM
Quote from: westerninterloper on February 12, 2020, 01:21:55 PM
Quote from: westerninterloper on January 14, 2020, 10:14:48 AM
Quote from: Buck87 on December 28, 2019, 07:31:00 PM
Quote from: westerninterloper on December 18, 2019, 09:43:33 AM
and I recall that on the Ohio Turnpike near Youngstown, the control city is New York City
That's actually on I-80 after it leaves the Turnpike. The Turnpike's eastbound control city in that area, as I-76, is Pittsburgh.
QuoteIs there any idea whether the US 24 east exit from I-469 will get Toledo as a control city - or will it just stay empty?
Woodburn! :D
Still on control cities, I noticed that on I-94W just before I-75 in Detroit, the control city is Chicago as well, quite early on its way through Ann Arbor, Jackson, Kalamazoo...
And one more, exiting the Indiana Toll Road to I-94 at Lake Station, IN, the control city for I-80 is "Des Moines".
Back on topic, another poster mentioned that the US24-I469 interchange was "looking like a cloverleaf". Has there been a change in design now that the farm on the NW corner is for sale?
Yes, i think that house got knocked down. Last time I was in the area I saw no house.
The house on the NE side has been knocked down. Not sure about NW side. Wasn't the plan incorporating a flyover tamp for WB24 to SB469 movement? I thought that was the reasoning for knocking down the house on the NE side.
Drove by a couple days ago:
- The loop ramp from NB I-469 to Rose Ave is closed and is being reconstructed with new concrete.
- The loop ramp from Rose Ave to NB I-469 has begun construction and appears to have been for some time. This will complete all movements to/from the northbound direction
- The flyover ramp from 24 has yet to begin construction, or at least I wasn't able to tell.
On a related note there is bridge work on I-469 at the bridges for US-24, IN-37, Wheelock Rd, and Maysville Rd, all of which frequently have cops stationed on site and have lane closures
Quote from: Joe The Dragon on February 13, 2020, 11:47:19 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on February 13, 2020, 07:37:08 AM
Quote from: ilpt4u on February 12, 2020, 09:52:36 PM
There was a nice long STL Beltway Control City discussion over in Road Related Illustrations... https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=9539.3500
Long story short, I-270 North/Inner on the West Side would probably be better served with a Control of Lambert STL Airport versus anything Long Distance
I-64 West at I-270 should use Minneapolis :cool: I don't see MoDOT getting on that bandwagon anytime soon, tho. But then again, if InDOT can use Des Moines in Northwestern Indiana for I-80 West...
Back when InDOT owned the Toll Road, they wanted people to stay on the Toll Road rather than exiting onto I-80/94 for Chicago area destinations, so using a far away place like Des Moines as the control city was part of that strategy.
Really?? they had plans for nice high speed ramp upgrade to exit on to I-80/94
Yeah, they had once some plans for a big upgrade of that location then I mentionned in another thread (http://"https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=7151.msg160299#msg160299"). http://web.archive.org/web/20021220081218/http://nwindianahwys.homestead.com/i80909451newint.html
https://www.in.gov/indot/about-indot/central-office/welcome-to-the-fort-wayne-district/i-469us-24/
Just found out that the final interchange product will be a full cloverleaf instead of a flyover like originally proposed.
Quote from: Great Lakes Roads on February 21, 2022, 01:29:50 PM
https://www.in.gov/indot/about-indot/central-office/welcome-to-the-fort-wayne-district/i-469us-24/
Just found out that the final interchange product will be a full cloverleaf instead of a flyover like originally proposed.
yep, i believe this was done because the historic property in the NW corner burned down or something, allowing them to buy the land :-D
Quote from: Great Lakes Roads on February 21, 2022, 01:29:50 PM
https://www.in.gov/indot/about-indot/central-office/welcome-to-the-fort-wayne-district/i-469us-24/
Just found out that the final interchange product will be a full cloverleaf instead of a flyover like originally proposed.
This is the first new full cloverleaf I've seen in a long time. The trend now seems to be removing full cloverleafs.
Quote from: SkyPesos on February 21, 2022, 01:43:58 PM
Quote from: Great Lakes Roads on February 21, 2022, 01:29:50 PM
https://www.in.gov/indot/about-indot/central-office/welcome-to-the-fort-wayne-district/i-469us-24/
Just found out that the final interchange product will be a full cloverleaf instead of a flyover like originally proposed.
This is the first new full cloverleaf I've seen in a long time. The trend now seems to be removing full cloverleafs.
to your point, they did this very thing at 69/14 on the other side of town. now it's a parclo.
Quote from: silverback1065 on February 21, 2022, 01:51:21 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on February 21, 2022, 01:43:58 PM
Quote from: Great Lakes Roads on February 21, 2022, 01:29:50 PM
https://www.in.gov/indot/about-indot/central-office/welcome-to-the-fort-wayne-district/i-469us-24/
Just found out that the final interchange product will be a full cloverleaf instead of a flyover like originally proposed.
This is the first new full cloverleaf I've seen in a long time. The trend now seems to be removing full cloverleafs.
to your point, they did this very thing at 69/14 on the other side of town. now it's a parclo.
Although in this case, a cloverleaf makes sense because US 24 East is a full freeway with a lot of long distance traffic. You'd rather have that than have traffic have to stop and make left turns etc.
Quote from: silverback1065 on February 21, 2022, 01:41:01 PM
yep, i believe this was done because the historic property in the NW corner burned down or something, allowing them to buy the land :-D
Interesting. Was
this (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.0837931,-84.9933092,3a,15y,326.22h,87.66t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sbsaTHvqiJ5vrH3p7ZeyLYg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1) the building in question?
Quote from: webny99 on February 21, 2022, 03:13:04 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on February 21, 2022, 01:51:21 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on February 21, 2022, 01:43:58 PM
Quote from: Great Lakes Roads on February 21, 2022, 01:29:50 PM
https://www.in.gov/indot/about-indot/central-office/welcome-to-the-fort-wayne-district/i-469us-24/
Just found out that the final interchange product will be a full cloverleaf instead of a flyover like originally proposed.
This is the first new full cloverleaf I've seen in a long time. The trend now seems to be removing full cloverleafs.
to your point, they did this very thing at 69/14 on the other side of town. now it's a parclo.
Although in this case, a cloverleaf makes sense because US 24 East is a full freeway with a lot of long distance traffic. You'd rather have that than have traffic have to stop and make left turns etc.
Quote from: silverback1065 on February 21, 2022, 01:41:01 PM
yep, i believe this was done because the historic property in the NW corner burned down or something, allowing them to buy the land :-D
Interesting. Was this (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.0837931,-84.9933092,3a,15y,326.22h,87.66t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sbsaTHvqiJ5vrH3p7ZeyLYg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1) the building in question?
:hmmm: i think so
just curious if INDOT wants to upgrade the I65/IN25 interchange in Lafayette to free flow as well
Quote from: tosa on March 08, 2022, 01:27:44 PM
just curious if INDOT wants to upgrade the I65/IN25 interchange in Lafayette to free flow as well
Given the presence of immediate side streets and a concrete plant with no other entrance I doubt this will happen any time in the near future.
Quote from: tosa on March 08, 2022, 01:27:44 PM
just curious if INDOT wants to upgrade the I65/IN25 interchange in Lafayette to free flow as well
nope, no plans any time soon at least.
Quote from: SkyPesos on February 21, 2022, 01:43:58 PM
Quote from: Great Lakes Roads on February 21, 2022, 01:29:50 PM
https://www.in.gov/indot/about-indot/central-office/welcome-to-the-fort-wayne-district/i-469us-24/
Just found out that the final interchange product will be a full cloverleaf instead of a flyover like originally proposed.
This is the first new full cloverleaf I've seen in a long time. The trend now seems to be removing full cloverleafs.
Typical of INDOT to not learn the lessons of the past and repeat the same mistakes over and over again just because they THINK it is cheaper to do so.
Quote from: webny99 on February 21, 2022, 03:13:04 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on February 21, 2022, 01:51:21 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on February 21, 2022, 01:43:58 PM
Quote from: Great Lakes Roads on February 21, 2022, 01:29:50 PM
https://www.in.gov/indot/about-indot/central-office/welcome-to-the-fort-wayne-district/i-469us-24/
Just found out that the final interchange product will be a full cloverleaf instead of a flyover like originally proposed.
This is the first new full cloverleaf I've seen in a long time. The trend now seems to be removing full cloverleafs.
to your point, they did this very thing at 69/14 on the other side of town. now it's a parclo.
Although in this case, a cloverleaf makes sense because US 24 East is a full freeway with a lot of long distance traffic. You'd rather have that than have traffic have to stop and make left turns etc.
There's also the issue of how US 24 is routed around Ft Wayne. I'm pretty sure if I give a road geek without knowledge of this area a blank highways map, tell them where US 24 enters and leaves the map and that it bypasses the city on the freeways, a logical guess would be that it uses Lafayette Center Rd to the southern loop of I-469 before continuing as its own.
Nope, that's not what INDOT had in mind. They had I-24 loop around the west and north sides of Ft Wayne via I-69 and I-469. So you have traffic following the US 24 signage, and the people that know the Lafayette Center Rd/I-465 south loop shortcut. Had the latter been signed as US 24 like it really should've been, I'm pretty sure the WB 24 to SB 469/WB 24 ramp would've been a flyover instead.
Quote from: SkyPesos on April 09, 2022, 08:22:57 PM
Quote from: webny99 on February 21, 2022, 03:13:04 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on February 21, 2022, 01:51:21 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on February 21, 2022, 01:43:58 PM
Quote from: Great Lakes Roads on February 21, 2022, 01:29:50 PM
https://www.in.gov/indot/about-indot/central-office/welcome-to-the-fort-wayne-district/i-469us-24/
Just found out that the final interchange product will be a full cloverleaf instead of a flyover like originally proposed.
This is the first new full cloverleaf I've seen in a long time. The trend now seems to be removing full cloverleafs.
to your point, they did this very thing at 69/14 on the other side of town. now it's a parclo.
Although in this case, a cloverleaf makes sense because US 24 East is a full freeway with a lot of long distance traffic. You'd rather have that than have traffic have to stop and make left turns etc.
There's also the issue of how US 24 is routed around Ft Wayne. I'm pretty sure if I give a road geek without knowledge of this area a blank highways map, tell them where US 24 enters and leaves the map and that it bypasses the city on the freeways, a logical guess would be that it uses Lafayette Center Rd to the southern loop of I-469 before continuing as its own.
Nope, that's not what INDOT had in mind. They had I-24 loop around the west and north sides of Ft Wayne via I-69 and I-469. So you have traffic following the US 24 signage, and the people that know the Lafayette Center Rd/I-465 south loop shortcut. Had the latter been signed as US 24 like it really should've been, I'm pretty sure the WB 24 to SB 469/WB 24 ramp would've been a flyover instead.
Very similar situation with US-52 in Lafayette, where given the endpoints you'd think 1) Sagamore Parkway (4 lane divided), 2) Veterans Memorial Parkway (4 lane undivided or 2 lane with shoulders), then 3) Teal Road (narrow city street with West Virginia Terrain). INDOT does not appear privy to swapping maintenance responsibilities when they already operate a continuous route, regardless of the quality of the route or other options presented.
to be fair with 24, that portion from lafayette center to 69 was there as a divided highway for much longer than lafayette center's 4 lane segment. i think the 24 segment has been around since the late 50s. also 24 used to go south on 69 then east on 469. they flipped it a few years ago i think because of the garbage interchange at 469/24 (the same one they are fixing now).
Quote from: silverback1065 on April 09, 2022, 10:14:59 PM
to be fair with 24, that portion from lafayette center to 69 was there as a divided highway for much longer than lafayette center's 4 lane segment. i think the 24 segment has been around since the late 50s. also 24 used to go south on 69 then east on 469. they flipped it a few years ago i think because of the garbage interchange at 469/24 (the same one they are fixing now).
Here's my take:
- US-24 was completed to exit 302 before I-469 was even constructed
- I-469 was originally going to tie into I-69 at 302 until GM announced their plant at 296
- I-469 is built south to north form exit 296
- US-24 is routed on 469 south side when built to exit 21
- US-24 is rerouted to north side years later because it is shorter distance from 302
- US-24 should be routed on 900/Lafayette Center, existing US-24 should be IN-924, IN-114 takes over 24 to exit 302.
Quote from: I-55 on April 12, 2022, 03:09:14 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on April 09, 2022, 10:14:59 PM
to be fair with 24, that portion from lafayette center to 69 was there as a divided highway for much longer than lafayette center's 4 lane segment. i think the 24 segment has been around since the late 50s. also 24 used to go south on 69 then east on 469. they flipped it a few years ago i think because of the garbage interchange at 469/24 (the same one they are fixing now).
Here's my take:
- US-24 was completed to exit 302 before I-469 was even constructed
- I-469 was originally going to tie into I-69 at 302 until GM announced their plant at 296
- I-469 is built south to north form exit 296
- US-24 is routed on 469 south side when built to exit 21
- US-24 is rerouted to north side years later because it is shorter distance from 302
- US-24 should be routed on 900/Lafayette Center, existing US-24 should be IN-924, IN-114 takes over 24 to exit 302.
:hmmm: Really? that makes a lot of sense, I always wondered why 469 ends where it does on the south side. 469 isn't very useful south of 30 for non trucks.
Quote from: silverback1065 on April 12, 2022, 03:21:19 PM
Quote from: I-55 on April 12, 2022, 03:09:14 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on April 09, 2022, 10:14:59 PM
to be fair with 24, that portion from lafayette center to 69 was there as a divided highway for much longer than lafayette center's 4 lane segment. i think the 24 segment has been around since the late 50s. also 24 used to go south on 69 then east on 469. they flipped it a few years ago i think because of the garbage interchange at 469/24 (the same one they are fixing now).
Here's my take:
- US-24 was completed to exit 302 before I-469 was even constructed
- I-469 was originally going to tie into I-69 at 302 until GM announced their plant at 296
- I-469 is built south to north form exit 296
- US-24 is routed on 469 south side when built to exit 21
- US-24 is rerouted to north side years later because it is shorter distance from 302
- US-24 should be routed on 900/Lafayette Center, existing US-24 should be IN-924, IN-114 takes over 24 to exit 302.
:hmmm: Really? that makes a lot of sense, I always wondered why 469 ends where it does on the south side. 469 isn't very useful south of 30 for non trucks.
Getting truck traffic out of downtown was the main reason the road was built in the first place so it doesn't defeat the purpose. I-469 was always meant to serve US-30 and US-24 over I-69.
Quote from: I-55 on April 12, 2022, 03:45:54 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on April 12, 2022, 03:21:19 PM
Quote from: I-55 on April 12, 2022, 03:09:14 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on April 09, 2022, 10:14:59 PM
to be fair with 24, that portion from lafayette center to 69 was there as a divided highway for much longer than lafayette center's 4 lane segment. i think the 24 segment has been around since the late 50s. also 24 used to go south on 69 then east on 469. they flipped it a few years ago i think because of the garbage interchange at 469/24 (the same one they are fixing now).
Here's my take:
- US-24 was completed to exit 302 before I-469 was even constructed
- I-469 was originally going to tie into I-69 at 302 until GM announced their plant at 296
- I-469 is built south to north form exit 296
- US-24 is routed on 469 south side when built to exit 21
- US-24 is rerouted to north side years later because it is shorter distance from 302
- US-24 should be routed on 900/Lafayette Center, existing US-24 should be IN-924, IN-114 takes over 24 to exit 302.
:hmmm: Really? that makes a lot of sense, I always wondered why 469 ends where it does on the south side. 469 isn't very useful south of 30 for non trucks.
Getting truck traffic out of downtown was the main reason the road was built in the first place so it doesn't defeat the purpose. I-469 was always meant to serve US-30 and US-24 over I-69.
Exactly. I remember what Coliseum Boulevard used to be like before I-469 was built. It sometimes took a half hour to an hour to get from Stellhorn Road/Crescent Avenue to the Glenbrook Mall, just because it was that clogged with trucks trying to get from points east and west.
Just heard that this garbage interchange will simply be a cloverleaf. Just another I-69 at US 30 (northwest) crashtrap. Slow-moving semi trucks entering I-469 southbound from US 24 westbound, weaving with trucks trying to exit I-469 SB to US 24 EB. I would like to see this in a VISSIM model.
Fort Wayne has the lamest highway system of any comparable city in the US- Fort Wayne always gets the bread crumbs.
INDOT doesn't even provide Ohio control cities on their lousy signage. No control city in OH is posted at either the US 24 or US 30 interchanges on I-469.
(I'm originally from the Fort Wayne area- live in Florida now)
Quote from: SignGeniusPTOE on April 20, 2022, 09:52:41 PM
Just heard that this garbage interchange will simply be a cloverleaf. Just another I-69 at US 30 (northwest) crashtrap. Slow-moving semi trucks entering I-469 southbound from US 24 westbound, weaving with trucks trying to exit I-469 SB to US 24 EB. I would like to see this in a VISSIM model.
Fort Wayne has the lamest highway system of any comparable city in the US- Fort Wayne always gets the bread crumbs.
INDOT doesn't even provide Ohio control cities on their lousy signage. No control city in OH is posted at either the US 24 or US 30 interchanges on I-469.
(I'm originally from the Fort Wayne area- live in Florida now)
It's lame but it works. Rush hour's not terrible, we have viable ways to travel around town from all directions, and lack of control cities on a 3di is standard for the state.
I don't see the point in making the interchange free flowing if trucks are going to be merging onto the highway at 20MPH. It would make more sense to just use a double left turn with good light timing so trucks can hit the merge point at a decent speed.
Quote from: FixThe74Sign on April 21, 2022, 11:42:07 AM
I don't see the point in making the interchange free flowing if trucks are going to be merging onto the highway at 20MPH. It would make more sense to just use a double left turn with good light timing so trucks can hit the merge point at a decent speed.
It's an entirely free flowing corridor between I-469 and I-475, the latter is a full cloverleaf interchange. I'll take the cloverleaf option for this one though I would've preferred the original flyover design.
It's standard practice to not use outside of state control cities on US Highways, at least it is in Indiana.
Quote from: silverback1065 on April 21, 2022, 01:14:12 PM
It's standard practice to not use outside of state control cities on US Highways, at least it is in Indiana.
Niles, MI, is used as a control city for US 31 as far south as the southern junction with US 20.
Quote from: cabiness42 on April 21, 2022, 01:23:03 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on April 21, 2022, 01:14:12 PM
It's standard practice to not use outside of state control cities on US Highways, at least it is in Indiana.
Niles, MI, is used as a control city for US 31 as far south as the southern junction with US 20.
Fair point. I suspect it's because of the proximity of the city to the boarder.
I'm an Indy resident, so I may not know what I'm talking about here, but it seems like FT Wayne has a good highway system for the size it is. Doesn't seem like they have any traffic jams. Evansville i would put in the category of having a bad highway system and always getting the shaft.
Quote from: silverback1065 on April 21, 2022, 01:31:25 PM
I'm an Indy resident, so I may not know what I'm talking about here, but it seems like FT Wayne has a good highway system for the size it is. Doesn't seem like they have any traffic jams. Evansville i would put in the category of having a bad highway system and always getting the shaft.
Coliseum Boulevard (IN-930, formerly US-24/30) is still chronically congested around the Glenbrook Mall, even after the completed I-469 to reroute east-west truck traffic around Fort Wayne.
Quote from: abqtraveler on April 21, 2022, 02:22:33 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on April 21, 2022, 01:31:25 PM
I'm an Indy resident, so I may not know what I'm talking about here, but it seems like FT Wayne has a good highway system for the size it is. Doesn't seem like they have any traffic jams. Evansville i would put in the category of having a bad highway system and always getting the shaft.
Coliseum Boulevard (IN-930, formerly US-24/30) is still chronically congested around the Glenbrook Mall, even after the completed I-469 to reroute east-west truck traffic around Fort Wayne.
But at least now those who want to bypass Fort Wayne can do so. When I graduated from college in the 80's, I drove US 30 across Indiana to shunpike from Chicago to Pennsylvania. It took me an hour to go through Ft Wayne on Coliseum Blvd as I hit it about 5 pm; I probably would have made better time going through downtown. I've never been to Fort Wayne since but I understood why I-469 was needed.
Quote from: abqtraveler on April 21, 2022, 02:22:33 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on April 21, 2022, 01:31:25 PM
I'm an Indy resident, so I may not know what I'm talking about here, but it seems like FT Wayne has a good highway system for the size it is. Doesn't seem like they have any traffic jams. Evansville i would put in the category of having a bad highway system and always getting the shaft.
Coliseum Boulevard (IN-930, formerly US-24/30) is still chronically congested around the Glenbrook Mall, even after the completed I-469 to reroute east-west truck traffic around Fort Wayne.
That kind of thing happens when the biggest stores are all within a mile of each other. If you know the backroads to even a minor extent it's not difficult to avoid a good chunk of that traffic.
Quote from: I-55 on April 21, 2022, 12:52:47 PM
Quote from: FixThe74Sign on April 21, 2022, 11:42:07 AM
I don't see the point in making the interchange free flowing if trucks are going to be merging onto the highway at 20MPH. It would make more sense to just use a double left turn with good light timing so trucks can hit the merge point at a decent speed.
It's an entirely free flowing corridor between I-469 and I-475, the latter is a full cloverleaf interchange. I'll take the cloverleaf option for this one though I would've preferred the original flyover design.
In a perfect world, there would be a C/D lane configuration for the cloverleaf traffic entering/exiting I-469 (see I-94 @ I-69 in Marshall, MI). But this is manageable for now. About 20 years down the road, I would want a weave/merge lane between US-24 and US-30, and at that point they can implement the C/D lanes for the cloverleaf.
Quote from: silverback1065 on April 21, 2022, 01:14:12 PM
It's standard practice to not use outside of state control cities on US Highways, at least it is in Indiana.
Isn't Chicago used on US 41 from Evansville on North? It certainly is on all the distance/mileage signs as the "bottom" line/where the Primary Control typically goes
Quote from: ilpt4u on April 21, 2022, 09:40:31 PM
Isn't Chicago used on US 41 from Evansville on North? It certainly is on all the distance/mileage signs as the "bottom" line/where the Primary Control typically goes
Chicago shows up on the bottom of some of the signs (https://goo.gl/maps/jTZwvrNgPFqUwTdA6), but there seems to be a few with only two lines using Terre Haute for the second line. (https://goo.gl/maps/dr2tGRFND9pLe5GR8)
It's not a US highway but rather a state highway, but Chicago is used as a control city for IN 63 north from the southern split with 41, and at 36, 74 and 136.
Quote from: silverback1065 on April 21, 2022, 01:14:12 PM
It's standard practice to not use outside of state control cities on US Highways, at least it is in Indiana.
Nowhere in the MUTCD it says to do this. Totally asinine. Fort Wayne is signed on US 30 WB in Ohio.
The weaving area on 469 southbound will be a mess from the day they get this completed.
INDOT= Incompetent
Fort Wayne- one of the largest cities in the US served by only 1 interstate highway, despite it being between Indy, Columbus, Detroit, and Chicago.
Quote from: silverback1065 on April 21, 2022, 01:14:12 PM
It's standard practice to not use outside of state control cities on US Highways, at least it is in Indiana.
INDOT has Toledo signed at the US 24/SR 101 interchange :-D
Quote from: SignGeniusPTOE on April 26, 2022, 02:37:20 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on April 21, 2022, 01:14:12 PM
It's standard practice to not use outside of state control cities on US Highways, at least it is in Indiana.
Nowhere in the MUTCD it says to do this. Totally asinine. Fort Wayne is signed on US 30 WB in Ohio.
The weaving area on 469 southbound will be a mess from the day they get this completed.
INDOT= Incompetent
Fort Wayne- one of the largest cities in the US served by only 1 interstate highway, despite it being between Indy, Columbus, Detroit, and Chicago.
Fort Wayne has I-69 and its child, I-469. I think that is 2
Served by the Fictional I-76/I-80 upgrade of US 30 across Ohio/Indiana/Illinois, between Mansfield, OH and (roughly) Morris, IL, in addition to the actual I-69
Could it happen someday? Sure. Will it? Pretty much any discussion of it has been had on the Fictional board, where it belongs, at least in the present realm of reality
Quote from: ilpt4u on April 26, 2022, 10:50:51 PM
Quote from: SignGeniusPTOE on April 26, 2022, 02:37:20 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on April 21, 2022, 01:14:12 PM
It's standard practice to not use outside of state control cities on US Highways, at least it is in Indiana.
Nowhere in the MUTCD it says to do this. Totally asinine. Fort Wayne is signed on US 30 WB in Ohio.
The weaving area on 469 southbound will be a mess from the day they get this completed.
INDOT= Incompetent
Fort Wayne- one of the largest cities in the US served by only 1 interstate highway, despite it being between Indy, Columbus, Detroit, and Chicago.
Fort Wayne has I-69 and its child, I-469. I think that is 2
Served by the Fictional I-76/I-80 upgrade of US 30 across Ohio/Indiana/Illinois, between Mansfield, OH and (roughly) Morris, IL, in addition to the actual I-69
Could it happen someday? Sure. Will it? Pretty much any discussion of it has been had on the Fictional board, where it belongs, at least in the present realm of reality
I have 3 interstates for Ft Wayne in my fictional map, though I'll leave the details in fictional.
I was only speaking of mainline routes when I stated that Fort Lame is served by only one interstate route. Routes that can take you to/from other cities. 69 is it for Fort Lame.
Quote from: SignGeniusPTOE on May 22, 2022, 05:26:08 PM
I was only speaking of mainline routes when I stated that Fort Lame is served by only one interstate route. Routes that can take you to/from other cities. 69 is it for Fort Lame.
Fort Lame? :-D I've heard Fort Boring, but not Fort Lame :-D :-D
Quote from: silverback1065 on May 23, 2022, 08:11:53 AM
Quote from: SignGeniusPTOE on May 22, 2022, 05:26:08 PM
I was only speaking of mainline routes when I stated that Fort Lame is served by only one interstate route. Routes that can take you to/from other cities. 69 is it for Fort Lame.
Fort Lame? :-D I've heard Fort Boring, but not Fort Lame :-D :-D
I've called the city of my birth Fart Wayne for years now. Another nickname is "the Wimpy City". When I grew up there in the 1960s to early 1970s, it was known as, "The largest city in the USA without [whatever]." They didn't even have a PBS station until well after I left for college. However, it was not that bad a place in which to grow up during that time. And as noted, it's centrally located in the middle of several large metropolises that DID have many of the things it lacked.
Quote from: SSR_317 on June 05, 2022, 07:25:21 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on May 23, 2022, 08:11:53 AM
Quote from: SignGeniusPTOE on May 22, 2022, 05:26:08 PM
I was only speaking of mainline routes when I stated that Fort Lame is served by only one interstate route. Routes that can take you to/from other cities. 69 is it for Fort Lame.
Fort Lame? :-D I've heard Fort Boring, but not Fort Lame :-D :-D
I've called the city of my birth Fart Wayne for years now. Another nickname is "the Wimpy City". When I grew up there in the 1960s to early 1970s, it was known as, "The largest city in the USA without [whatever]." They didn't even have a PBS station until well after I left for college. However, it was not that bad a place in which to grow up during that time. And as noted, it's centrally located in the middle of several large metropolises that DID have many of the things it lacked.
Fort Affordable. If it were just "lame" we wouldn't be growing as fast as we are.
Quote from: I-55 on June 11, 2022, 07:09:33 PM
Quote from: SSR_317 on June 05, 2022, 07:25:21 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on May 23, 2022, 08:11:53 AM
Quote from: SignGeniusPTOE on May 22, 2022, 05:26:08 PM
I was only speaking of mainline routes when I stated that Fort Lame is served by only one interstate route. Routes that can take you to/from other cities. 69 is it for Fort Lame.
Fort Lame? :-D I've heard Fort Boring, but not Fort Lame :-D :-D
I've called the city of my birth Fart Wayne for years now. Another nickname is "the Wimpy City". When I grew up there in the 1960s to early 1970s, it was known as, "The largest city in the USA without [whatever]." They didn't even have a PBS station until well after I left for college. However, it was not that bad a place in which to grow up during that time. And as noted, it's centrally located in the middle of several large metropolises that DID have many of the things it lacked.
Fort Affordable. If it were just "lame" we wouldn't be growing as fast as we are.
i like ft wayne!
Drove past that interchange twice, coming and going, between Chicago and Columbus.
Other than repaving on I-469, saw nothing going on at the interchange.
Was I missing something? :hmmm: