Six Lane I-65

[Indyroads]

Kentucky is nearing completion of its plans to 6 lane the entire stretch of I-65 throughout the state. Traffic along I-65 both north and south is congested most of the time and continuing to grow throughout the state. I believe that Indot also needs to push forward and widen I-65 statewide to a minimum of 6 lanes to improve traffic flow and eliminate rolling roadblocks.

[nwi_navigator_1181]

There was a .pdf linked somewhere in this forum which stated that widening I-65 from Gary to Louisville was one of INDOT's prioritized long-term plans, along with finishing I-69 from Bloomington to Indianapolis and (I believe) the Illiana Corridor. So, it's in the works, to some degree.

Some areas are already getting the widening treatment now. Work on widening I-65 from U.S. 52 to I-865 is nearly complete (the Lebanon to I-865 portion was finished in 2010). A stretch from Indiana 2 to U.S. 30 is being looked at for widening in anticipation of the Illiana (some construction is already in progress).

I agree that I-65 could use that extra lane for the entire state of Indiana. In one way or another, I think it will happen.

[froggie]

It's a "nice-to-have".  But unless the "rolling roadblocks" involve significant amounts of recurring congestion instead of just "I can only go 55 because of trucks", it isn't outright necessary.  From a planning level persective (without getting into the nitty-gritty details of traffic flow, peak hour, directional distribution, LOS calculations, etc etc), there are some segments of 65 that may warrant 6 lanes...the aforementioned 865 to 52, through Lafayette (generally IN 38 to IN 43, but especially between 26 and 25), and south of Indy to Edinburgh.  But some segments of I-65, especially south of Columbus and north of Lafayette, just don't have the traffic volumes to justify being a high priority.  Aside from Indy south to Franklin and north to Lebanon, a stronger case could be made for widening I-69 up to Anderson or I-70 west to IN 39 and east to IN 9.

[NWI_Irish96]

I drive I-65 between Louisville and Indy at least twice a month and I can tell you that 6-laning is badly needed on the entire stretch.  I've lost count of the number of times I've had to reroute to US 31 because of an accident on I-65 that may have been avoided with the extra lanes.  There are just too many trucks on this road to justify not doing this.  This should be a higher priority than upgrading the rural sections of US 31 between Plymouth and Westfield (which I also travel frequently).

[froggie]

Crashes are caused more by weather and poor driving than a lack of lanes.  Extra lanes on I-65 will not help this.  Again, outside of the greater Indy area, I've cited other Interstate routes that should be a higher priority than a "statewide 6-lane I-65"...

[Brandon]

Froggie, you don't drive it much, do you?  There are plenty of Midwestern freeways that could be six lanes due to the amount of truck traffic.  I-65 between Gary and Indy is one of them.  I-80 west of Joliet is another.

[NWI_Irish96]

Crashes are caused more by weather and poor driving than a lack of lanes.  Extra lanes on I-65 will not help this.  Again, outside of the greater Indy area, I've cited other Interstate routes that should be a higher priority than a "statewide 6-lane I-65"...

Nearly all of the crashes I've encountered have been during dry weather.  Of course poor driving is a factor in almost every crash everywhere, but an extra lane means fewer interactions between cars. 

[Brandon]

Crashes are caused more by weather and poor driving than a lack of lanes.  Extra lanes on I-65 will not help this.  Again, outside of the greater Indy area, I've cited other Interstate routes that should be a higher priority than a "statewide 6-lane I-65"...

Nearly all of the crashes I've encountered have been during dry weather.  Of course poor driving is a factor in almost every crash everywhere, but an extra lane means fewer interactions between cars. 

That, and less impatience when small vehicles are passing trucks.  Indiana restricts trucks and vehicles with trailers to the two right lanes when there are three travel lanes in a direction.

[froggie]

Froggie, you don't drive it much, do you? 

Not a whole lot, since I don't get back home that often...but I regularly drive routes that are much worse for truck traffic...I-78...I-81...I-95.  Also, truck volumes are factored into LOS calculations during a detailed analysis (as is a multitude of other factors).  Lastly, your reference to impatience in your last post results in poor driving when it shouldn't.

but an extra lane means fewer interactions between cars. 

Not necessarily.  Depending on how the drivers are in a given area (and this is now more often than not), it actually leads to MORE interaction between cars as you have cars darting back and forth across multiple lanes in order to keep up their high speed.

Guys, I'm not saying that a 6-lane I-65 across Indiana is a bad thing, and I said that at the beginning.  My point is that there are other deserving roadways in the state with higher traffic and greater needs than some of the I-65 segments (also cited earlier).

[ShawnP]

It is needed as a six lane for I-65 as the traffic is horrid on I-65 every time I travel up to Anderson. Go every month as the mother in law lives in Anderson and it is a goal to keep the wife happy.

[nwi_navigator_1181]

The arguments on both sides make sense. However, with I-65 being a vital link from Louisville to Chicago, and the intermediate cites in between the major cities (Columbus, Seymour, Edinburgh, Lafayette, etc.), having it go at least 6-lanes the entire way would be inevitable. They should work around those immediate areas first, then finish it in future years.

The "spokes" of I-465 could use the same love; I do agree there. However, mile for mile, I-65 needs it the most. I-69 would be next on the list.

[Henry]

Maybe while they're trying to figure out how to connect I-69 to Bloomington, they could do a major widening of I-65 in the interim. I wouldn't be surprised if this was done in phases, such as this:

Gary to Lafayette
Lafayette to Indianapolis
Indianapolis to Louisville

[NWI_Irish96]

It's a "nice-to-have".  But unless the "rolling roadblocks" involve significant amounts of recurring congestion instead of just "I can only go 55 because of trucks", it isn't outright necessary.  From a planning level persective (without getting into the nitty-gritty details of traffic flow, peak hour, directional distribution, LOS calculations, etc etc), there are some segments of 65 that may warrant 6 lanes...the aforementioned 865 to 52, through Lafayette (generally IN 38 to IN 43, but especially between 26 and 25), and south of Indy to Edinburgh.  But some segments of I-65, especially south of Columbus and north of Lafayette, just don't have the traffic volumes to justify being a high priority.  Aside from Indy south to Franklin and north to Lebanon, a stronger case could be made for widening I-69 up to Anderson or I-70 west to IN 39 and east to IN 9.

I-69 up to Southeastern Pkwy (which is only 5 miles) might be higher priority than I-65, but not all the way up to Anderson. 

I-70 is probably in a similar boat with I-65 due to the truck traffic, and it's been a while since I've been on I-70 outside of the Indy area, but I'd think that having Chicago at the end of I-65 produces higher traffic counts than I-70.  Yes, they should definitely start at Lebanon and Greenwood and work "out" from there, but the entire road needs it. 

[tdindy88]

The same plans that INDOT had which called for widening I-65 to six lanes across the state also called for I-70 across the state to be widened too. But I will also agree about I-69, perferably up to Anderson but most definently up to Exit 210. I-69 from Indy south to Bloomington better at least be designed so that it can be widened to six lanes pretty easily when it's built.

[mukade]

AADT for busiest four lane sections:

• I-65 - US 30-SR 2 (60,297, 42,247)
• I-65 - SR 43 to SR 25 (45,162)
• I-65 - SR 26 to SR 38 (40,740)
• I-65 - I-865 to I-465 (41,013, 45,550)
• I-65 - Greenwood-US 31 in Taylorsville (60,517, 56,902, 53,013, 44,822)
• I-69 - SR 37 to SR 67 (63,093, 57,849, 51,476, 48,261, 41,324)
• I-69 - US 24 to I-469 (40,629)
• I-69 - Union Chapel Rd. to north of SR 1 (unknown)
• I-70 - SR 39 - SR 267 (44,077)
• I-70 - Mt. Comfort Rd to SR 9 (48,227)
• I-70 - US 27 - SR 227 (39,896)
• I-74 - I-465 to Post Road (39,993)
• I-465 - northwest corner (60,000+)

I think I-65 from US 30 to US 231 essentially has six lanes if they add an asphalt shoulder on the right.

[Rick Powell]

Froggie, you don't drive it much, do you?  There are plenty of Midwestern freeways that could be six lanes due to the amount of truck traffic.  I-65 between Gary and Indy is one of them.  I-80 west of Joliet is another.

IDOT District 3 did a feasibility study of 6-laning I-80 all the way west to I-39 while I was there.  Every new overpass, interchange and mainline bridge since about 2002 has been built to accommodate it.  Most apparent from MP 115 to MP 122, but also included in recent interchange rebuilds at Seneca, Marseilles and Utica.

[Brandon]

Froggie, you don't drive it much, do you?  There are plenty of Midwestern freeways that could be six lanes due to the amount of truck traffic.  I-65 between Gary and Indy is one of them.  I-80 west of Joliet is another.

IDOT District 3 did a feasibility study of 6-laning I-80 all the way west to I-39 while I was there.  Every new overpass, interchange and mainline bridge since about 2002 has been built to accommodate it.  Most apparent from MP 115 to MP 122, but also included in recent interchange rebuilds at Seneca, Marseilles and Utica.

And District 3 has done a very nice job with I-80 out there.  It puts District 1's section of I-80 to shame.

[Indyroads]

It's a "nice-to-have".  But unless the "rolling roadblocks" involve significant amounts of recurring congestion instead of just "I can only go 55 because of trucks", it isn't outright necessary.  From a planning level persective (without getting into the nitty-gritty details of traffic flow, peak hour, directional distribution, LOS calculations, etc etc), there are some segments of 65 that may warrant 6 lanes...the aforementioned 865 to 52, through Lafayette (generally IN 38 to IN 43, but especially between 26 and 25), and south of Indy to Edinburgh.  But some segments of I-65, especially south of Columbus and north of Lafayette, just don't have the traffic volumes to justify being a high priority.  Aside from Indy south to Franklin and north to Lebanon, a stronger case could be made for widening I-69 up to Anderson or I-70 west to IN 39 and east to IN 9.

I-69 up to Southeastern Pkwy (which is only 5 miles) might be higher priority than I-65, but not all the way up to Anderson. 

I-70 is probably in a similar boat with I-65 due to the truck traffic, and it's been a while since I've been on I-70 outside of the Indy area, but I'd think that having Chicago at the end of I-65 produces higher traffic counts than I-70.  Yes, they should definitely start at Lebanon and Greenwood and work "out" from there, but the entire road needs it. 

I-70 is another corridor needs 6-laning but since it was identified as a "Corridor of the Future" and there was planning for separated truck lanes, then the 2 lanes would be sufficient in that case. However truck only lanes are looking like less and less of a likelihood so adding a third lane is also of importance here as well..

With regard to froggies comment. The congestion on the freeway is not at critical mass yet right now LOS levels are probably at C and D levels at peak periods. but D isn't an acceptable level of service. The third lane is also needed to address future traffic growth along the corridor which will continue to rise. Additional widening in Lafayette area should focus on a 4 lane section in that area at eventual build-out, as well as 4 laning I-65 from the Borman south to the US 231 (Crown Point) interchange. Also I-65 will need to be 4 laned from I-465 south to the greenwood interchange south of Indy. 4-laning may also be necessary in the "falls' region depending on future growth of the kentukiana region.

[ET21]

Froggie, you don't drive it much, do you?  There are plenty of Midwestern freeways that could be six lanes due to the amount of truck traffic.  I-65 between Gary and Indy is one of them.  I-80 west of Joliet is another.

IDOT District 3 did a feasibility study of 6-laning I-80 all the way west to I-39 while I was there.  Every new overpass, interchange and mainline bridge since about 2002 has been built to accommodate it.  Most apparent from MP 115 to MP 122, but also included in recent interchange rebuilds at Seneca, Marseilles and Utica.

And District 3 has done a very nice job with I-80 out there.  It puts District 1's section of I-80 to shame.

Well considering the latest report that the I-80 bridge in Joliet is in dire need of repair, will we possibly see planning stages to expand I-80 to 3 lanes from Indy to Quad Cities?

Granted, 3 lanes to I-39 is really needed, but I would not be surprised for 3 lanes through the entire state

[NWI_Irish96]

Froggie, you don't drive it much, do you?  There are plenty of Midwestern freeways that could be six lanes due to the amount of truck traffic.  I-65 between Gary and Indy is one of them.  I-80 west of Joliet is another.

IDOT District 3 did a feasibility study of 6-laning I-80 all the way west to I-39 while I was there.  Every new overpass, interchange and mainline bridge since about 2002 has been built to accommodate it.  Most apparent from MP 115 to MP 122, but also included in recent interchange rebuilds at Seneca, Marseilles and Utica.

And District 3 has done a very nice job with I-80 out there.  It puts District 1's section of I-80 to shame.

Well considering the latest report that the I-80 bridge in Joliet is in dire need of repair, will we possibly see planning stages to expand I-80 to 3 lanes from Indy to Quad Cities?

Granted, 3 lanes to I-39 is really needed, but I would not be surprised for 3 lanes through the entire state

I-80 doesn't go to Indy.

[TEG24601]

I just drove I-65 from near Wolcott to Chicago and that stretch of road, south of US 30 is in dire need of another lane, or trucks shouldn't have a lower speed limit.  It was horrible going both directions.

[Indyroads]

I just drove I-65 from near Wolcott to Chicago and that stretch of road, south of US 30 is in dire need of another lane, or trucks shouldn't have a lower speed limit.  It was horrible going both directions.

Exactly

Plus it will also make the highway much safer due to the reduced number of irritated drivers. Y'lll settle down them nerves now.

[ET21]

Froggie, you don't drive it much, do you?  There are plenty of Midwestern freeways that could be six lanes due to the amount of truck traffic.  I-65 between Gary and Indy is one of them.  I-80 west of Joliet is another.

IDOT District 3 did a feasibility study of 6-laning I-80 all the way west to I-39 while I was there.  Every new overpass, interchange and mainline bridge since about 2002 has been built to accommodate it.  Most apparent from MP 115 to MP 122, but also included in recent interchange rebuilds at Seneca, Marseilles and Utica.

And District 3 has done a very nice job with I-80 out there.  It puts District 1's section of I-80 to shame.

Well considering the latest report that the I-80 bridge in Joliet is in dire need of repair, will we possibly see planning stages to expand I-80 to 3 lanes from Indy to Quad Cities?

Granted, 3 lanes to I-39 is really needed, but I would not be surprised for 3 lanes through the entire state

I-80 doesn't go to Indy.

I should have mentioned that my "Indy" refers to the IL/IN border. Better to say IN-Quad Cities after looking over it again

[froggie]

The congestion on the freeway is not at critical mass yet right now LOS levels are probably at C and D levels at peak periods. but D isn't an acceptable level of service.

Per FHWA, D is considered acceptable.  Your local policy may vary...

[Rick Powell]

Well considering the latest report that the I-80 bridge in Joliet is in dire need of repair, will we possibly see planning stages to expand I-80 to 3 lanes from Indy to Quad Cities?

Granted, 3 lanes to I-39 is really needed, but I would not be surprised for 3 lanes through the entire state

IDOT District 1 is in the middle of a planning study that will add a lane to I-80 in each direction from US 30 in New Lenox to Ridge Road in Minooka.  They are already starting to program some bridge replacements in anticipation of the project.  The District 3 section from MP 122 (Minooka exit) to MP 115 (1 mile west of the new Brisbin Road exit) will be an easy conversion; all that is needed is an outside shoulder and re-striping the pavement, but they are waiting for the eastern section in District 1 to be completed first to avoid creating a bottleneck situation.

http://i-80will.com/