I-69 Extension in Indiana

[Grzrd]

This question just came up on another thread.  Should I-69 be extended to I-70/65 intersection in downtown Indianapolis?

http://www.ibj.com/newstalk/2010/05/28/should-interstate-69-be-extended-to-downtown-indianapolis/PARAMS/post/20236

But in Indianapolis, a ghost of the original plan remains: The extension of Interstate 69 all the way downtown from I-465 on the northeast side.
Is it time to reconsider the project? A better road would alleviate lots of congestion and cut the time needed to drive from Fishers to downtown by about half.
Even though it was never completed, much of the groundwork is laid. Four-lane Binford Boulevard angles toward downtown from I-465 but stops at Fall Creek Parkway. Now, look at Google Maps carefully and you'll notice a tiny spur extending toward Fall Creek from the north interchange of I-70 and I-65 downtown.
Could the northern interchange and Binford be linked at a reasonable price? ...

(May 28, 2010 Indianapolis Business Journal).

[Revive 755]

^ Depends on the definition of reasonable.  The bike trail along the existing railroad line running north from the northern I-65/I-70 interchange would really complicate any EIS with 4f concerns.  A few streetview images also indicate possible environmental justice issues that could kill any major project today. 

Best improvement that could likely be done would be a new high capacity surface arterial from the northern I-65/70 interchange that would somehow connect to Binford Boulevard.

[tdindy88]

First of all, from the North Split to Binford is dead, this was the only stretch of highway in Indianapolis that was fought and won by community activists. If it's hard to get the project started in rural Indiana it will be impossible to get it going through the city, 465 will be used as the route for 69 through the city. However, I have wondered, if I-69 were extended north toward I-70 from Martinsville, instead of following SR 37 north to 465, like I've heard some people talk about, then 69 could multiplex with I-70 through the city and thus through downtown, bringing in the third interstate. Then, on the eastside it could follow I-465 north to the current end of I-69.

[Grzrd]

First of all, from the North Split to Binford is dead, this was the only stretch of highway in Indianapolis that was fought and won by community activists.

Years ago, community activists in Shreveport stopped the I-20 to I-220 "gap" for I-49 (the Inner-City Connector).  As the years have passed, the community has had a change of heart and is now cooperating with Shreveport's greater government in trying to get the Inner-City Connector built.

I have no knowledge of communities in Indy.  How has passage of time treated the community around the North Split to Binford corridor?  IOW, is there any chance the community would have a change of heart?

[mgk920]

First of all, from the North Split to Binford is dead, this was the only stretch of highway in Indianapolis that was fought and won by community activists. If it's hard to get the project started in rural Indiana it will be impossible to get it going through the city, 465 will be used as the route for 69 through the city. However, I have wondered, if I-69 were extended north toward I-70 from Martinsville, instead of following SR 37 north to 465, like I've heard some people talk about, then 69 could multiplex with I-70 through the city and thus through downtown, bringing in the third interstate. Then, on the eastside it could follow I-465 north to the current end of I-69.

How many generations have passed since then and how has the overall situation in that area changed (better or worse)?  These days, 'context-sensitive design' is S.O.P. in new and substantially rebuilt urban freeways - a 'do it right' thing to help everything fit in - something not practiced two and three generations ago.  The first instance of 'context-sensitive design' that I recall seeing was when I-35E and I-94 were rebuilt through downtown Saint Paul, MN and I-35 was extended through downtown Duluth, MN, both in the late 1980s (over a generation ago).  I do agree, times change and I sense that the majority of the people living in those areas now have no memory of those 1960s and 1970s 'freeway wars' - they weren't born yet and most of those who did the fighting are now no longer with us.

Also, the significance of that example regarding I-49 in Shreveport, LA cannot be overstated, IMHO.

Mike

[mobilene]

Extending I-69 south to Downtown can be as "context sensitive" as can be, but it would still involve leveling houses and dividing neighborhoods.  Even though I live in Indy I'm not terribly familiar with the neighborhoods in question.  But if there's any community there, I can't see how building a highway through it would do anything but destroy it. 

I-65 made a ghetto out of blocks and blocks of neighborhoods on the near Northwestside.  These were solid middle-class homes before.  Now -- well, it's not someplace I would dream of driving into.

jim

[Grzrd]

Extending I-69 south to Downtown can be as "context sensitive" as can be, but it would still involve leveling houses and dividing neighborhoods ... But if there's any community there, I can't see how building a highway through it would do anything but destroy it.

I have also very closely followed that corridor on Indianapolis' northeast side on the air photos and Streetview and it does look like it should not be all that hard to complete that part of I-69 - most of the ROW is clear and yes, that boulevard looks to be easily upgradable and the rest not hard to acquire and clear.

mgk920 quote from "20 years later" thread on GHT.

When I originally "pasted" the blog from the Indy Business Journal, I omitted the following:

A route from the northern interchange to Binford could easily pass through a series of brownfields and neighborhoods that probably never will attract urban pioneers like the Old Northside did.  The drawbacks would be significant. An interstate might torpedo plans for mass transit. Cars and trucks would howl past Martindale Brightwood and Fall Creek Place. Sprawl might get another shot in the arm.  What are your thoughts?

The comment about the area not even being attractive to urban pioneers made me suspect that time has not been kind to the area, and that the area's current generation of leaders could conceivably reach the same conclusion as have the community leaders in Shreveport.

OTOH, the comments about Martindale Brightwood and Fall Creek Place suggest a negative impact on areas in better shape.

A major distinction between Indy and Shreveport is that the ROW has basically already been acquired.

[3467]

In Illinois the area of the proposed Crosstown Expressway (IL 50 Cicero Ave) Went downhill and the Tollway Corridors boomed so much that Chicago has looked into making a new truckway/busway along RR ROW in the old corridor. Its the only way in could be funded these days / Perhaps the I69 corrdor could be rivived in a similar fashion

[Grzrd]

Section 2 and Section 3 projects recently awarded, with combined total worth of approximately $100 million:

Two more bids have been awarded on the Interstate 69 project, ensuring that construction will be under way on the first three sections of I-69 by the end of the year.
Fred Weber, Inc., of Maryland Heights, Mo., was the low bidder at $83.9 million for the final two segments of Section 3 in Daviess and Greene counties. Force Construction Company, Inc., of Columbus, Ind., was awarded a $14.9 million contract to construct bridges over the East Fork of the White River in Pike County, the initial project for Section 2.
Section 2 extends from Indiana 64 in Oakland City to north of Indiana 50 in Washington. Indiana Department of Transportation officials said contracts for road construction in Section 2 will be awarded beginning next month through January." (Sept. 29, 2010 Evansville Courier & Press).

(http://www.courierpress.com/news/2010/sep/29/more-bids-are-awarded-construction-interstate-69/)

[tvketchum]

First of all, from the North Split to Binford is dead, this was the only stretch of highway in Indianapolis that was fought and won by community activists.

The community won the fight saying the road would ruin the area. Now, thirty plus years later, the area is ruined, full of abandoned houses, and the ones that are left are crack houses, brothels, and opium dens, as well as gambling holes. The area would have been far better off had I 69 come in as was originally planned.

[Grzrd]

From what I can gather, it looks like INDOT played hardball with Bloomington MPO by stating that they would use local funds (at expense of other local projects) to build Bloomington section of I-69 if MPO voted "no" on I-69 (my understanding is that federal funds only become available if a MPO signs off on an interstate segment).  Mayor Kruzan, a long-time opponent of I-69 and a crucial swing vote, voted "yes": http://www.idsnews.com/news/story.aspx?id=78534

Bloomington Mayor Mark Kruzan, who has been opposed to Interstate 69 construction since before he was elected in 2003, made what he called a "reluctant"  vote in favor of an amendment that would allow federal funding to be used to construct a section of I-69 that would run through Bloomington.
On Nov. 5, a battle about proposed I-69 construction through Bloomington and Monroe County ended at the City Council Chambers of Bloomington City Hall.
At a Bloomington/Monroe County Metropolitan Planning Organization meeting, a representative from the Indiana Department of Transportation stated if the Transportation Improvement Program Amendment was not passed, INDOT would use local transportation funds – which would have been used for local projects – to build Section 4 of I-69.
With a 9-4 vote in favor of the TIP Amendment, the Bloomington/Monroe County
MPO will allow INDOT to use federal funding to construct Section 4 of I-69.
Kruzan was one of those nine votes.
"MPO funds will either be used to build I-69 or for local transportation projects,"  Kruzan said, attempting to explain his vote to the crowd at the MPO meeting.
Kruzan was unavailable for further comment ...

Here is a link to INDOT's web page on Section 4: http://www.i69indyevn.org/section4.html

[ShawnP]

I would still toll I-69 thru Bloomington.

[The Premier]

I would still toll I-69 thru Bloomington.

Good luck with that, because IIRC you can't toll an Interstate Highway.

[ShawnP]

If you can't toll you can remove exits from them. After Bloomington doesn't want it then bam no exits.

[hbelkins]

Good luck with that, because IIRC you can't toll an Interstate Highway.

They're planning to toll the missing segment of I-265 between Indiana and Kentucky.

[froggie]

Good luck with that, because IIRC you can't toll an Interstate Highway.

Not entirely true.  There's still one pilot slot available for a state to set tolls on an existing Interstate (the slot PA was rejected for with I-80).  And toll roads which were not built with Federal highway money can be added to the Interstate system as non-chargeable Interstates...I-88 IL, I-355 IL, and I-476 PA all being examples.

[TheStranger]

Good luck with that, because IIRC you can't toll an Interstate Highway.

They're planning to toll the missing segment of I-265 between Indiana and Kentucky.

Isn't that more simply the case of building a toll bridge to begin with?  i.e. while something like I-80 on the Bay Bridge was grandfathered into the system, the Verezzano Narrows Bridge was built as I-278 IIRC.

[J N Winkler]

And toll roads which were not built with Federal highway money can be added to the Interstate system as non-chargeable Interstates...I-88 IL, I-355 IL, and I-476 PA all being examples.

Don't toll roads built before or during the early days of Interstate construction count as chargeable Interstates, at least for purposes of IM funding?  I am thinking of roads like the former DFW Turnpike (now part of I-30) and Richmond-Petersburg Turnpike (now part of I-95), both of which--as far as I know--are eligible for IM money.

[Anthony_JK]

And toll roads which were not built with Federal highway money can be added to the Interstate system as non-chargeable Interstates...I-88 IL, I-355 IL, and I-476 PA all being examples.

Don't toll roads built before or during the early days of Interstate construction count as chargeable Interstates, at least for purposes of IM funding?  I am thinking of roads like the former DFW Turnpike (now part of I-30) and Richmond-Petersburg Turnpike (now part of I-95), both of which--as far as I know--are eligible for IM money.

Both of those roads were former toll roads converted to free, I assume...it's the "free" part that allows them to receive IM funding.  AFAIK, no toll road can receive IM funding as of now.


Anthony

[J N Winkler]

Both of those roads were former toll roads converted to free, I assume...it's the "free" part that allows them to receive IM funding.  AFAIK, no toll road can receive IM funding as of now.

Right--in both cases initial construction was funded with bonds, which were to be liquidated by tolls, but later the tolls were removed and both roads became part of the untolled Interstate system.  (I believe the Richmond-Petersburg Turnpike was completely paid off, but I don't know if this was also true for the DFW Turnpike.)

My understanding is that newly built toll roads cannot become eligible for IM money, even if the tolls are removed, because FHWA stopped accepting new-built Interstates as chargeable mileage in 2003.

[Brandon]

I would still toll I-69 thru Bloomington.

Good luck with that, because IIRC you can't toll an Interstate Highway.

No, you can't toll federally funded interstate highway.  You can place an interstate number on a toll funded freeway - see I-88, I-355 for examples.

[3467]

Sen Moynihan put in a refund for for the exsiting toll roads into ISTEA but it was never appropriated. Illinois and New York would have done very well. This would have only been for the original portions not I-88

I didnt think there was a restriction on new Interstates like 69.

[truejd]

Anybody have any updates on I-69 construction status for sections 1-4 in Indiana?  I've checked www.i69indyevn.org and they haven't updated the project status portion of their website in a while.

Thanks!

[Grzrd]

Anybody have any updates on I-69 construction status for sections 1-4 in Indiana?

Jan. 25 INDOT press release indicates they still intend to complete Evansville to Crane by end of 2012 and Evansville to Bloomington by end of 2014:

http://www.in.gov/portal/news_events/66184.htm

Contract for Construction on I-69 Approved
Construction in Gibson County continues
WASHINGTON, Ind. -The Indiana Department of Transportation (INDOT) announces today another contract award for road construction as a part of the Interstate 69 (I-69) Corridor in southwest Indiana.  Blankenberger Brothers, Inc. of Cynthiana, Ind., submitted the lowest bid for the $22.2 million contract. This contract includes construction of the new interstate roadway from the Pigeon Creek Bridges to State Road 168 in Gibson County ...
In October 2009 Governor Daniels announced the accelerated schedules for the design and construction of the I-69 corridor.  Samuel Sarvis, Deputy Commissioner of Major Programs stated "Although this is an aggressive schedule, we are confident we will meet that time frame."  The completion of I-69 from Evansville to Crane is slated for the end of 2012 and from Evansville to Bloomington by the end of 2014 ...

EDIT

Evansville Courier Press indicates that four bids still need to be awarded for construction from Evansville to Crane, describes the Crane to Bloomington section as "far from finalized", and projects that all "new terrain" construction from Evansville to Indianapolis should be completed by end of 2014:

http://www.courierpress.com/news/2011/jan/25/cynthiana-ind-company-gets-nod-22-million-section/

[truejd]

Thanks for the info!  Good stuff.