I-469/US 24 Ramp Construction

[NWI_Irish96]

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. 

[sparker]

^^^^^^^^^^^
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.

[silverback1065]

^^^^^^^^^^^
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

[NWI_Irish96]

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.

[captkirk_4]

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.

[tdindy88]

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.

[captkirk_4]

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.

[NWI_Irish96]

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. 

[NWI_Irish96]

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.

[froggie]

^ 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.

[Stephane Dumas]

^ 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.

[sparker]

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.

[westerninterloper]

^ 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.

[silverback1065]

^ 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. 

[froggie]

^^ 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.

[Finrod]

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.

[silverback1065]

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.

[thefarmerchris]

https://wpta21.com/2019/12/13/new-ramp-expected-to-boost-safety-at-busy-interchange/

Ramp from 469N to 24E is now open!!

[tdindy88]

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.

[thefarmerchris]

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......

[westerninterloper]

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.

[Hot Rod Hootenanny]

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....


(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)

[tdindy88]

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.

[westerninterloper]

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?

[Buck87]

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.

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?

Woodburn!