I-69 Ohio River Bridge

[codyg1985]

Looks like there may be some movement by Indiana and Kentucky on restarting efforts to build the I-69 bridge over the Ohio River.  Discussion is ongoing with Governor Pence of Indiana and Governor Bevin of Kentucky to secure funding to re-start environmental studies that will eventually determine where the bridge and its approaches will be built.  Construction is still a long way off though.

http://www.tristatehomepage.com/news/local-news/winnecke-asks-for-impact-study-on-new-i-69-bridge

We can see a time not too far off when I-69 will be complete in both Indiana and Kentucky, except for the bridge. Obvious gaps have a way of attracting attention!

What's changed now is that with I-69 connected to SR-37 (and Indianapolis/I-69N) in Indiana and the Parkways being signed as I-69 in Kentucky, has introduced a forcing function to get the Ohio River Bridge done.  That forcing function of course being all of the traffic that is (or soon will be) generated by the completed sections of the route that will have no other option but to use the outdated US-41 bridges over the river. 

I don't imagine traffic will increase on I-69 south of Evansville for quite some time, at least until it is complete to Memphis. However, maybe traffic would increase if motorists utilize I-69 to US 51 to I-155 to I-55 to reach Memphis, since most of US 51 between Fulton and Dyersburg is already interstate standard.

Either way, I think the political pressure will increase to close the gap since I-69 bumps up against it from both directions, and you can then say that I-69 is complete from Kentucky to Canada.

[abqtraveler]

Looks like there may be some movement by Indiana and Kentucky on restarting efforts to build the I-69 bridge over the Ohio River.  Discussion is ongoing with Governor Pence of Indiana and Governor Bevin of Kentucky to secure funding to re-start environmental studies that will eventually determine where the bridge and its approaches will be built.  Construction is still a long way off though.

http://www.tristatehomepage.com/news/local-news/winnecke-asks-for-impact-study-on-new-i-69-bridge

We can see a time not too far off when I-69 will be complete in both Indiana and Kentucky, except for the bridge. Obvious gaps have a way of attracting attention!

What's changed now is that with I-69 connected to SR-37 (and Indianapolis/I-69N) in Indiana and the Parkways being signed as I-69 in Kentucky, has introduced a forcing function to get the Ohio River Bridge done.  That forcing function of course being all of the traffic that is (or soon will be) generated by the completed sections of the route that will have no other option but to use the outdated US-41 bridges over the river. 

I don't imagine traffic will increase on I-69 south of Evansville for quite some time, at least until it is complete to Memphis. However, maybe traffic would increase if motorists utilize I-69 to US 51 to I-155 to I-55 to reach Memphis, since most of US 51 between Fulton and Dyersburg is already interstate standard.

Either way, I think the political pressure will increase to close the gap since I-69 bumps up against it from both directions, and you can then say that I-69 is complete from Kentucky to Canada.

With increased traffic on the US-41 bridges, the deterioration of those bridges will accelerate, which will add to the sense of urgency to get the I-69 bridge funded and built.  It's either that, or pay almost the same amount to overhaul or replace the US-41 bridges.

[seicer]

One bridge is 80 or so years old and although it is in good condition now, it will need either rehabilitation or replacement by the time construction nears for Interstate 69. The other is 50 or so years old and is also in good condition, but it will need rehabilitation in 10 to 20 years. Isn't the goal of an Interstate 69 bypass to keep the newer US 41 bridge in service for local traffic - and the goal of an inner-city Interstate 69 route to replace both crossings?

[Pete from Boston]

and the goal of an inner-city Interstate 69 route to replace both crossings?

?

This is not even in the broad 2002 map of possibilities, nor does it seem like it fills a need the present plan does not.  Evansville and especially Henderson are not that big. Where are you getting this from?

[silverback1065]

US 41 bridges need to be replaced eventually, also, since the new bridge is likely to be tolled, they must exist to provide a free alternative.  I hope 41 doesn't get downgraded around the bridge to being 2 lanes wide.

[abqtraveler]

US 41 bridges need to be replaced eventually, also, since the new bridge is likely to be tolled, they must exist to provide a free alternative.  I hope 41 doesn't get downgraded around the bridge to being 2 lanes wide.

Maybe the solution would be building an 8-lane bridge that not only carries I-69 but replaces the US-41 bridges.  Kill two birds with one stone?

[seicer]

and the goal of an inner-city Interstate 69 route to replace both crossings?

?

This is not even in the broad 2002 map of possibilities, nor does it seem like it fills a need the present plan does not.  Evansville and especially Henderson are not that big. Where are you getting this from?

On a map of the alignments, there was one or two that used the existing US 41 by elevating the interstate over the existing facility and another that plows through a residential neighborhood to the west/north.

[abqtraveler]

and the goal of an inner-city Interstate 69 route to replace both crossings?

?

This is not even in the broad 2002 map of possibilities, nor does it seem like it fills a need the present plan does not.  Evansville and especially Henderson are not that big. Where are you getting this from?

On a map of the alignments, there was one or two that used the existing US 41 by elevating the interstate over the existing facility and another that plows through a residential neighborhood to the west/north.

I suspect the good folks in E-Ville and Henderson wouldn't be particularly happy with those options.

[codyg1985]

US 41 bridges need to be replaced eventually, also, since the new bridge is likely to be tolled, they must exist to provide a free alternative.  I hope 41 doesn't get downgraded around the bridge to being 2 lanes wide.

Maybe the solution would be building an 8-lane bridge that not only carries I-69 but replaces the US-41 bridges.  Kill two birds with one stone?

I think initially the plan was for the new I-69 bridge to be six lanes, but in order to make the bridge more palatable the design was reduced to four lanes.

[silverback1065]

US 41 bridges need to be replaced eventually, also, since the new bridge is likely to be tolled, they must exist to provide a free alternative.  I hope 41 doesn't get downgraded around the bridge to being 2 lanes wide.

Maybe the solution would be building an 8-lane bridge that not only carries I-69 but replaces the US-41 bridges.  Kill two birds with one stone?

I think initially the plan was for the new I-69 bridge to be six lanes, but in order to make the bridge more palatable the design was reduced to four lanes.

That and money savings.

[Pete from Boston]

and the goal of an inner-city Interstate 69 route to replace both crossings?

?

This is not even in the broad 2002 map of possibilities, nor does it seem like it fills a need the present plan does not.  Evansville and especially Henderson are not that big. Where are you getting this from?

On a map of the alignments, there was one or two that used the existing US 41 by elevating the interstate over the existing facility and another that plows through a residential neighborhood to the west/north.

I think it's helpful here to come back to this map:



I'm not sure what the residential neighborhood is you're talking about, and there is certainly no inner city at that point.  Alignment 1 swings up through the empty peninsula, west of the residential area south of the Lloyd where Burdette Park is, and from there it's all rural Posey County.  There are houses, sure, but not many, and a lot of space between them in most cases.  If it were being done now they'd probably co-opt some part of the University Parkway ROW anyway (I don't think any of it existed when this map was made).  The construction of that road is some evidence that it would not really need to plow through much of anything.  The same is more or less true for 1A.

As for how the route would be handled in replacing 41 over the twin bridges, I've never seen any details about elevating it or anything else, but that option does not even seem to appear on this map.

[Grzrd]

and the goal of an inner-city Interstate 69 route to replace both crossings?

?
This is not even in the broad 2002 map of possibilities, nor does it seem like it fills a need the present plan does not.  Evansville and especially Henderson are not that big. Where are you getting this from?

On a map of the alignments, there was one or two that used the existing US 41 by elevating the interstate over the existing facility and another that plows through a residential neighborhood to the west/north.

This post briefly discusses the western, single crossing, alternatives from the January, 2014 Feasibility Study:

a January, 2014 I-69 SIU 4 in Henderson County Feasibility Study that KYTC prepared .... BridgeLink's favored alternative is known as Alternative 1a .

An interesting aspect of the January, 2014 Feasibility Study is that all of the alternatives except for Alternative 1a would involve closing the Twin Bridges and building a new bridge (p. 18/82 of pdf; p. ES11 of document):

In this Feasibility Study, seven alternatives and some variations were examined at the concept level. All but one of these alternatives (1a) would close the existing US 41 twin bridges over the Ohio River northeast of Henderson and construct a new bridge.

The goals of the Feasibility Study were identified as follows (p. 21/82 of pdf; p. 2 of document):

The following goals were identified for the project Feasibility Study:
* Shorten the project from its original concept so that as much of the existing Breathitt Parkway and US 41 are used for the future I-69 as possible.
* Provide for a single river crossing for US 41 and I-69.
* Provide access from I-69 to the businesses along US 41.

After looking at the comments from the September 8 Evansville meeting and seeing BridgeLink's favored alternative, it seems like the notion of closing the Twin Bridges and having a single crossing I-69 bridge is a non-starter for most people.

Here is a map showing the single crossing alternatives and BridgeLink's preferred multiple crossings alternative (p. 66/82 of pdf; p. 47 of document):

[Pete from Boston]

That's helpful context.  If this was the source of the western alignment question, then yes, it certainly does plow through residential Henderson.  I suspect my answer is based on a different stage of alternatives than the post I was responding to.

[US 41]

The alternatives going right through Henderson are probably the "if Indiana and Kentucky can't afford a bridge" options. If they go that route I am willing to bet that the US 41 bridges are used for I-69 until the US 41 bridges actually "need" replaced another 25 years down the road. In that case they will build the new bridge for I-69/US 41 just west of the current US 41 bridges.

Hate to say I told you so, but even Indiana and Kentucky know that building a new interstate bridge won't be cheap. Upgrading 41 through Henderson and between the river and former I-164 will probably be the option they end up chosing. They've been inching closer and closer to that alternative.

[silverback1065]

Henderson would be pissed to have 69 go over 41 through town.

[Pete from Boston]

Henderson would be pissed to have 69 go over 41 through town.

It would also be very expensive.

[US 41]

Unless they rip right through Henderson they basically have to route it east and build new bridges. There is no way that all the tree huggers would allow I-69 to go through the Audubon State Park. Even I am against running it through there and I am not a tree hugger. The only way I'd support 69 going through the state park is if was placed north of SR 414.

I really do believe that the running it right through Henderson alternatives are the using the existing US 41 bridges for I-69 alternative.

It looks like they are considering putting a tight diamond along the Henderson strip or whatever you want to call it, probably at Watson Lane. I wonder if there is enough room for a frontage road on both sides.

[US 41]

I drew on Scribble Maps how I'd design I-69 if it ran right through Henderson. Basically I put up a bunch of walls, an interchange at KY 414, frontage roads along 41, and I had 41 go over Watson Lane. If you view my map on scribble maps you will basically have to zoom in to either 1 or 2 out to see what I have done.

http://www.scribblemaps.com/create/#id=qpznBbxMqv

Key
Red= Barrier wall
Blue= new bridge
Green= new road (interchange ramps, frontage roads, etc)

[EngineerTM]

US 41 bridges need to be replaced eventually, also, since the new bridge is likely to be tolled, they must exist to provide a free alternative.  I hope 41 doesn't get downgraded around the bridge to being 2 lanes wide.

I have colleagues who are closer to the decision-makers in this process than I am.  What they have told me so far is that Kentucky would like to "retire" the older of the two bridges and convert it to non-vehicular use.  Then, the other bridge would be converted to carry one lane of traffic in each direction with the objective of directing all commercial and freight traffic to the new I-69 bridge(s).  If Kentucky went that route, the discussions also included posting restrictions on the type of traffic allowed.  The discussions have also included how much Kentucky should spend on the next round of maintenance scheduled for the twin bridges.  If there is real movement towards getting the new bridge (or bridges) built sooner as opposed to later, then Kentucky could scale back on the $$ spent for the upcoming maintenance.

Of course this could change.  However, if the new I-69 bridge(s) are tolled, it would make sense to "encourage" commercial and freight traffic to use the new route.

[hbelkins]

It's not been that many years ago that Kentucky did a crapload of work on the bridges. I remember driving across when they had a setup that involved only having one lane open on one bridge. Surely they can't need extensive, expensive work so soon afterwards.

[jnewkirk77]

It's not been that many years ago that Kentucky did a crapload of work on the bridges. I remember driving across when they had a setup that involved only having one lane open on one bridge. Surely they can't need extensive, expensive work so soon afterwards.

They're to the point now where some sort of maintenance work is being done every few months. Indeed, within the past few months, I noticed new weight limit signs on the NB bridge that I think lowered the limits by a little bit.

The work I think you're referring to is the most recent repaint job -- which didn't hold up: http://www.courierpress.com/news/local/twin-bridges-rusting-just-five-to-six-years-after-painting-ep-443138365-326176461.html

[codyg1985]

If one of the US 41 bridges were converted to non-vehicle traffic use, it would still cost quite a bit of money to keep it maintained. I am not sure how much less it would cost, though.

[Pete from Boston]

If one of the US 41 bridges were converted to non-vehicle traffic use, it would still cost quite a bit of money to keep it maintained. I am not sure how much less it would cost, though.

I don't either, but the only comparably large bridge I know that's maintained for pedestrian use is the Poughkeepsie Bridge in New York. 

There's a burgeoning interest in Evansville in multi-use paths (and physical activity in general–it was infamously named the country's obesest metro area a few years back) but this is not only not near existing trails, it would probably cost a lot per user. 

It would be a spectacular ride, though.  The Ohio River is breathtakingly wide.  It would be a tourist draw if done right.

Is there a precedent for pedestrian/bike toll bridges?

[codyg1985]

I believe you have to pay a small toll to walk across the Rainbow Bridge in Niagara Falls between Ontario and New York.

[tidecat]

I should note that just upstream in Louisville, the operator of Waterfront Park is publicly asking for state assistance. Apparently one of the pledges for lighting the Big 4 bridge fell through.