I-69 Extension in Indiana

[mukade]

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..."

I believe Walsh Construction is the apparent winner for a $100M section around Washington, though I have seen no public announcement yet. This was from the January 12 letting. Also, another section had a letting date of January 26. The final letting for this phase of I-69 is set for February 9. If I am not mistaken, that will mean the entire 68 miles from Evansville to Crane will be under construction or under contract. That would leave Crane to Bloomington which may be problematic.

http://www.in.gov/indot/div/lettings/18MonthsConstLettingDetailsMM_Ext.pdf

[Henry]

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.

So they got it all wrong, then. Even without the interstate, the area ruined itself anyway. I'll take a gamble and say that everyone in Washington, DC said the same thing about I-95 coming through the city, and those areas are now ruined, with I-95 running around the east side of the Capital Beltway.

As for I-69 itself, I'd see it run around the east side of I-465, if they can't revive the old proposal through the city. But then, they'll have to widen it considerably, as was the case when I-95 was rerouted around DC.

[froggie]

I'll take a gamble and say that everyone in Washington, DC said the same thing about I-95 coming through the city, and those areas are now ruined

Gambled and lost.  Those areas along what would be I-95 are not ruined.  Not the greatest, to be fair, but definitely not ruined.  If anything, the most ruined section of DC is an area where an Interstate *WAS* built:  I-295.

[Henry]

I'll take a gamble and say that everyone in Washington, DC said the same thing about I-95 coming through the city, and those areas are now ruined

Gambled and lost.  Those areas along what would be I-95 are not ruined.  Not the greatest, to be fair, but definitely not ruined.  If anything, the most ruined section of DC is an area where an Interstate *WAS* built:  I-295.

Goes to show what I know about urban planning, especially the part about building highways, which is next to zero.

[Grzrd]

Also, another section had a letting date of January 26. The final letting for this phase of I-69 is set for February 9. If I am not mistaken, that will mean the entire 68 miles from Evansville to Crane will be under construction or under contract. That would leave Crane to Bloomington which may be problematic.

There is a new problem for the entire Evansville to Bloomington stretch; Indianapolis Business Journal reports that environmental and citizens groups have filed suit in U.S. District Court to stop the "new terrain" work.  They essentially claim that the Army Corps of Engineers did not adequately consider alternative routes before issuing the permit(s) for the "new terrain" work:

http://www.ibj.com/groups-file-suit-to-stop-i69-work-downstate/PARAMS/article/25215

The article indicates long odds for the lawsuit's ultimate success, but it might upset INDOT's current timetable.

EDIT

This editorial clarifies that the lawsuit alleges that the Corps violated the Clean Water Act and is asking the court to halt construction until the Corps complies with the Act:

http://www.courierpress.com/news/2011/feb/13/interstate-69-the-issue-foes-move-to-block-our/

The editorial also sets forth INDOT's environmental mitigation efforts on this project, including the purchase of approximately 68,600 acres along two rivers.

[ShawnP]

Whine, whine and more whine for those blankety blanks. It's been fought in court by these guys and they still refuse to accept their loss.

[Grzrd]

I believe Walsh Construction is the apparent winner for a $100M section around Washington, though I have seen no public announcement yet. This was from the January 12 letting.

This award is being reported today:

http://www.greenfieldreporter.com/view/story/6b7e016d7cb549e8ace3c4d1ddf1c889/IN--I-69_Contract/

[mukade]

I believe Walsh Construction is the apparent winner for a $100M section around Washington, though I have seen no public announcement yet. This was from the January 12 letting.

This award is being reported today:

http://www.greenfieldreporter.com/view/story/6b7e016d7cb549e8ace3c4d1ddf1c889/IN--I-69_Contract/

According to the INDOT web site, the low bid for the next contract seems to be from Crider and Crider, but that isn't even at the official "pending award" stage yet. That section is around Petersburg. I think there is one more contract after that one to complete the freeway construction projects all the way from SR 68 to US 231.

[mukade]

Additional Contract Approved for Construction on I-69 in Gibson County

http://www.in.gov/portal/news_events/68028.htm

[Grzrd]

Additional Contract Approved for Construction on I-69 in Gibson County
http://www.in.gov/portal/news_events/68028.htm

According to the INDOT web site, the low bid for the next contract seems to be from Crider and Crider, but that isn't even at the official "pending award" stage yet. That section is around Petersburg.

It looks like the Crider & Crider Petersburg/ Pike County contract has been approved:

http://www.insideindianabusiness.com/newsitem.asp?ID=46675

[Grzrd]

Bloomington/Monroe County and INDOT once again appear to be poised for a huge dispute over I-69:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-ap-in-bloomington-i-69,0,2706569.story

A Bloomington-area group has set up a possible showdown with the Indiana Department of Transportation after approving a local highway plan that does not include a section of the contentious $3 billion Interstate 69 extension from Indianapolis to Evansville.
The policy committee of the Bloomington/Monroe County Metropolitan Planning Organization approved a new highway plan Friday that left out a proposed section of the extension in Monroe County ...
The committee's move surprised Sam Sarvis, INDOT's deputy commissioner for major program management. He said the agency "would take a serious look at all discretionary funding" within Monroe County.
In 2009, the last time these two sides butted heads over conflicting highway plans, INDOT officials said as much as $32.4 million could be withheld from transportation projects in Monroe County. Local officials eventually assured INDOT they weren't trying to block I-69's construction, and the policy committee voted last year to include the I-69 project in its highway plan.
Lawyers representing I-69 opponents sent policy committee members a 23-page letter arguing against including the extension in the local plan. Among other things, it said no source of guaranteed funding had been identified as required by federal law, suggesting the policy committee could leave itself legally vulnerable.
Bloomington Mayor Mark Kruzan voted to exclude the extension Friday after backing it a year ago. He cited the issues raised in the letter and a question over whether INDOT would withhold local funding.

EDIT

Here's a link to a video of a TV news report:

http://www.wishtv.com/dpp/news/local/south_central/monroe-county-says-no-to-i-69-project

[Revive 755]

^ INDOT should show that county they aren't bluffing, and withhold local funding, plus stop all other work within the county, and maybe sacrifice most of the county's state highways for the mileage cap.

[NE2]

^ INDOT should be a dick.

[froggie]

To be fair, Bloomington and Monroe County have a point on the funding aspect.  Federal law requires the MPO approve a long range transportation plan including a given project in order to allow Federal highway funding to be used on said given project.  And Federal law also requires the plan to be fiscally constrained.

The state could get around the former by using state money to fund the project and not use any Federal funds on it, but the latter requirement would still require MPO approval.  If the state has funding to build elements of the project, those elements could be included on the MPO plan, but if the full project does not have full funding, the MPO is legally required to leave it off the plan, or at least relegate it to an "unconstrained" portion of the plan.

For INDOT to withhold local funding would be counterproductive.  What they need to do is identify funding sources to fully fund I-69 through the region within the plan horizon.

[Anthony_JK]

Of course, all of that still probably would not appease opponents of I-69 in Bloomington, because they still believe that the US 41/I-70 corridor should have been the selected corridor in the first place.

Problem is, since sections of the "new terrain" I-69 extension are already under construction or completed, I would assume that federal funding for the Bloomington segments would be ultimately secured, since Indiana probably wouldn't take too kindly to a stub freeway only going from Evansville to Crane.


Anthony

[froggie]

Doesn't matter.  Per Federal law, that funding has to be either secured or identified from existing sources (or projections of said sources, i.e. projected future Federal NHS or STP funds) before the MPO could include the project on the long-range plan.

[agentsteel53]

projections of said sources

that's the kind of accounting that has gotten us fucked as a nation.

[froggie]

Not really.  It's incessant borrowing that's screwed us.  What this has done is made the lack of a longer-term transportation reauthorization that much more problematic for transportation planning.

[Duke87]

Why on Earth does Bloomington not want the interstate? You would think they'd appreciate that it'd be a boon for them.

[RoadWarrior56]

Since I hail from Indiana, I know the area well.  Bloomington is home of Indiana University and full of well-to-do liberal NIMBY's who really don't like highways and automobiles and believe in just about every other mode of alternate transportation.  Remember Bloomington and Indiana University are home of the Little 500 bicycle race.

Plus I suspect that there is the fear among many that I-69 would bring "undesirable" growth and sprawl to the area.  That thought is poison to those types.  Sorry, I don't claim to be unbiased.  I went to Purdue, that makes me even more biased about Bloomington and Indiana University.  I grew up in Evansville and remember the lousy two-lane roads to Bloomington, that makes me even biased. My solution - build I-69 through the area and don't provide Bloomington an interchange.

Many of the people that champion the I-70/US 41 route for I-69 are most likely just trying to get it out of their backyard and delay the project long enough so that nothing gets built.  If the US 41/I-70 route had been the preferred alternative, a different crop of well-to-do NIMBY's would had no doubt tried to fight that route by suggesting different alternatives to delay the whole process.

The first design project I worked on out of college was improvements to a  nearby state highway to Bloomington.  This was many years ago.  There were a handfull of rich doctors that lived in the area that tried to block the new roadway, being quietly helped by Fish and Wildlife employees who lived in the Bloomington area. 

BTW, the one positive thing about I-69 ending immediately south and west of Bloomington would be the extra traffic dumped onto the existing lousy two-lane roads in the area.

[agentsteel53]

It's incessant borrowing that's screwed us. 

same thing.  we're assuming that, from somewhere, we will get the funds to pay it back...

[tdindy88]

BTW, the one positive thing about I-69 ending immediately south and west of Bloomington would be the extra traffic dumped onto the existing lousy two-lane roads in the area.

I assume you are referring to SR 45. Since I don't hear Greene County complaining too much about the highway, I was wondering if they might still build Section 4 east of Crane to the proposed exit there at the Monroe-Greene County Line dumping all the traffic onto SR 45 for some 10 miles or so up to SR 37, and what kind of impact that would have on those who live along 45. As for Bloomington sprawling, that's already happening, with the shopping centers along SR 37 on the westside, plus with the exits there in place (with an additional bridge or two needed) there should be little highway construction anywhere in Bloomington.

[RoadWarrior56]

Yes SR 45 is the route I was referring to that comes into Bloomington from the west.  Just let the I-69 traffic choke SR 45.  Traditionallythe most popular route to Bloomington from Evansville was SR 57 to US 231 to SR 54 and SR 45.  Once and awhile, I would take US 50 from Washington to Bedford and then north on SR 37, but most people came in on SR 45.

The roadway I worked on years ago was SR 446 east of town.  Our project was to design several miles of a new two-lane road on new alignment.  The old alignment was narrow, curvy and dangerous.  The project did eventually get constructed, sometime after I moved from Indiana back in the 80's.  I just remember that there were a few people in the area who were against the project and they were the most affluent in the corridor.  Throughout my career that has almost always been the case.  Opposition and NIMBYism is often more likely the more affluent the household is, and the Bloomington area has a high concentration, hence the unsurprising opposition to I-69. 

[ShawnP]

I'm with Road Warrior build it with no exits or exits that charge people to go into Bloomington but not out. In other words hit em in the pocket book.

[mukade]

I just noticed this article from a few days ago entitled "Lawsuit another potential roadblock for I-69 construction":

http://www.indianaeconomicdigest.net/main.asp?SectionID=31&subsectionID=235&articleID=60774

"Earlier this year, the Bloomington Metropolitan Planning Organization tried to block the highway's construction near the city. However, the state's transportation department might have maneuvered around that obstacle... The MPOs, though, must also win state transportation officials' approval before any changes to their plans are finalized. The state is refusing to give that approval."

On the other hand, the primary opponent group is planning to file suit to stop I-69 construction.