Post by: msunat97 on March 26, 2022, 10:02:16 AM
Post by: silverback1065 on March 26, 2022, 10:06:22 AM
Post by: NWI_Irish96 on March 26, 2022, 10:33:37 AM
I hadn't heard about the segment from 10 to 2. Where did you see that?
Post by: ilpt4u on March 26, 2022, 10:45:45 AM
I got to the point, going between Chicagoland and Southern Indiana, that I preferred the much more relaxing, even if a bit slower, haul down US 41/IN 63/US 41 down to US 50/150 and over, versus down I-65, around on I-465, and then down then-IN 37/becoming I-69
I get the same feelings on I-57 between Marion and Mt Vernon in Illinois, at least until IDOT finishes the 6 laning project. So many trucks its just not comfortable to drive or even safe
Post by: msunat97 on March 26, 2022, 10:54:47 AM
I haven’t driven I-65 in Northern Indiana in a few years time…but even 20 years ago the truck traffic was insane
I got to the point, going between Chicagoland and Southern Indiana, that I preferred the much more relaxing, even if a bit slower, haul down US 41/IN 63/US 41 down to US 50/150 and over, versus down I-65, around on I-465, and then down then-IN 37/becoming I-69
I get the same feelings on I-57 between Marion and Mt Vernon in Illinois, at least until IDOT finishes the 6 laning project. So many trucks its just not comfortable to drive or even safe
Agree on 41 south from Chicago. I hate driving in Illinois & the traffic on 65 is nuts. I've started started taking Hwy 41 thru Terra Haute & Evansville if I'm headed down towards Nashville. It's much more relaxing and I can set the cruise at 9+ over the speed limit and enjoy the drive. Even I-69 was nice, but the 65 corridor is too congested.
Post by: SkyPesos on March 26, 2022, 10:57:34 AM
Post by: Great Lakes Roads on March 26, 2022, 01:52:41 PM
With all of the INSANE truck traffic on 65 more recently, I now take 31 down to Indy from La Porte since it's a much smoother drive.
Post by: CtrlAltDel on March 26, 2022, 03:51:58 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/27YEAlj.png)
Post by: silverback1065 on March 26, 2022, 03:55:49 PM
Yes, the truck traffic is beyond ridiculous. Hopefully the infrastructure deal will speed up this process.Don't quote me on that one
I hadn't heard about the segment from 10 to 2. Where did you see that?
I remember asking about it to someone familiar with previous widening jobs on 65 and they mentioned that that was a candidate to be widened next since it would connect to what was done last. No idea when it would happen, I just took it as it's probably under design now. 
Post by: NWI_Irish96 on March 26, 2022, 04:03:12 PM
As far as I can tell, the red bits of I-65 between I-80/I-94 and I-865 in the image below have three lanes or more in both directions, while the bits in purple are being expanded. That leaves quite a bit to go, though.
(https://i.imgur.com/27YEAlj.png)
You only have the stop segment down to US 30 but it actually goes to IN 2.
I get why it makes sense to work from each end when filling in that gap, but from a traffic standpoint, I'd rather have them do IN 114 to US 24 next, to give people a spot to get by all the trucks they've been stuck behind.
Post by: Buck87 on March 26, 2022, 04:07:29 PM
(Map)
Thanks for posting that, makes this much easier to understand for someone not too familiar with this section.
Post by: silverback1065 on March 26, 2022, 04:08:36 PM
some people on this thread say the Indy to Louisville section is worse. I think the Indy to Chicago one is but I go that way way more.
Post by: NWI_Irish96 on March 26, 2022, 04:14:40 PM
I drive both a lot and they're really equally bad. The whole thing really needs 6 lanes ASAP.
Post by: CtrlAltDel on March 26, 2022, 04:25:25 PM
You only have the stop segment down to US 30 but it actually goes to IN 2.
Good catch. I have redone the map, and also added nearby exit numbers.
(https://i.imgur.com/iMrT5Rq.png)
Post by: mvak36 on March 26, 2022, 05:34:28 PM
Looks like the only thing planned for the near future is on the Indy-Louisville stretch
Post by: 3467 on March 26, 2022, 05:38:56 PM
Post by: edwaleni on March 26, 2022, 08:49:52 PM
CSX found it was no longer profitable enough to assemble container through freights from Chicago to these states and therefore shippers will be forced to have them trucked to their docks.
This has had a profound impact on the number of trucks out of the Chicago Metro to Detroit, Cleveland and Indy. CN and the Indiana Railroad are the only ones who will route Asian containers directly to Indy.
Subsequently they are expanding their Senate Ave. terminal in downtown Indy as shippers move traffic over.
I-65 already has a significant amount of container truck traffic along with UPS and FedEx Ground between Chicago and Indy.
Once upon a time we used to avoid I-65 and take US-41 up to Kentland or Morocco and cut over to Illinois.
It would be interesting to see how much traffic has diverted from I-65 sooner after the UP and BNSF yards opened at Arsenal.
Post by: SkyPesos on March 26, 2022, 08:59:09 PM
Idk that much about Indy-Louisville, as I have no reason to use it based on my location, but Indy-Chicago also takes in traffic from Cincinnati (I-74, which I commonly use) and Columbus (I-70) to Chicago. And in Louisville, NB I-65 loses some traffic to I-71 going towards Ohio, western PA and western NY. So I would imagine that Indy-Chicago is busier.
Post by: ilpt4u on March 26, 2022, 09:43:45 PM
Conversely, I-65 south of Indy gets the “Chicagoland Bypass” traffic from I-39/I-74 that is headed to the Southeast USIdk that much about Indy-Louisville, as I have no reason to use it based on my location, but Indy-Chicago also takes in traffic from Cincinnati (I-74, which I commonly use) and Columbus (I-70) to Chicago. And in Louisville, NB I-65 loses some traffic to I-71 going towards Ohio, western PA and western NY. So I would imagine that Indy-Chicago is busier.
Also gets the Michigan traffic headed down I-69 to points south
Post by: mvak36 on March 27, 2022, 09:29:34 AM
Conversely, I-65 south of Indy gets the “Chicagoland Bypass” traffic from I-39/I-74 that is headed to the Southeast USIdk that much about Indy-Louisville, as I have no reason to use it based on my location, but Indy-Chicago also takes in traffic from Cincinnati (I-74, which I commonly use) and Columbus (I-70) to Chicago. And in Louisville, NB I-65 loses some traffic to I-71 going towards Ohio, western PA and western NY. So I would imagine that Indy-Chicago is busier.
Also gets the Michigan traffic headed down I-69 to points south
I agree with you on the I-69 traffic on the Indy-Louisville stretch.
If I calculated right, there will be about 46 miles on this stretch remaining that will need to be widened after the STIP projects are completed. Scottsburg-Seymour (approx. mile marker 30 to Exit 50) and from Exit 64 to Exit 90.
Post by: JoePCool14 on March 27, 2022, 09:30:23 AM
I get why it makes sense to work from each end when filling in that gap, but from a traffic standpoint, I'd rather have them do IN 114 to US 24 next, to give people a spot to get by all the trucks they've been stuck behind.
Wholeheartedly agree. I personally find it more useful and relieving to see a 6-laned section after endless miles of 4-lane. It's like having a passing lane on a 2-land road.
Also that map really puts the current 6-laning into perspective. To put it another way, not much of it is 6-laned.
Post by: mukade on March 27, 2022, 03:10:25 PM
I favor spreading the upgrades across all of the Interstates rather than just widening I-65. Yes, driving I-65 is frustrating, but the same goes for sections of I-69 and I-70. I think that is the way INDOT is looking at it as well.
Post by: NWI_Irish96 on March 27, 2022, 03:27:20 PM
Pointing back to one of my posts in the US 31 upgrade thread (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=25334.msg2678660#msg2678660). Go down to the fourth post to see traffic volumes and a discussion on which freeways should be widened first.
I favor spreading the upgrades across all of the Interstates rather than just widening I-65. Yes, driving I-65 is frustrating, but the same goes for sections of I-69 and I-70. I think that is the way INDOT is looking at it as well.
I rarely drive I-70 so I can't speak to that, but there are absolutely zero sections of I-69 that are only 4 lanes that are as bad as I-65. Traffic volumes may be comparable but I-69 has far, far fewer trucks.
I don't remember where I saw it, but I-65 has significantly higher accident rates than I-70.
Post by: mukade on March 27, 2022, 03:32:50 PM
Pointing back to one of my posts in the US 31 upgrade thread (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=25334.msg2678660#msg2678660). Go down to the fourth post to see traffic volumes and a discussion on which freeways should be widened first.
I favor spreading the upgrades across all of the Interstates rather than just widening I-65. Yes, driving I-65 is frustrating, but the same goes for sections of I-69 and I-70. I think that is the way INDOT is looking at it as well.
I rarely drive I-70 so I can't speak to that, but there are absolutely zero sections of I-69 that are only 4 lanes that are as bad as I-65. Traffic volumes may be comparable but I-69 has far, far fewer trucks.
I don't remember where I saw it, but I-65 has significantly higher accident rates than I-70.
Actually, I-69 is also very truck heavy as it is a primary corridor between Canada and the US. I maintain the two sections of I-69 in that table are legitimate. If you can find objective truck volume numbers to indicate otherwise, please share.
Post by: NWI_Irish96 on March 27, 2022, 03:40:11 PM
Pointing back to one of my posts in the US 31 upgrade thread (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=25334.msg2678660#msg2678660). Go down to the fourth post to see traffic volumes and a discussion on which freeways should be widened first.
I favor spreading the upgrades across all of the Interstates rather than just widening I-65. Yes, driving I-65 is frustrating, but the same goes for sections of I-69 and I-70. I think that is the way INDOT is looking at it as well.
I rarely drive I-70 so I can't speak to that, but there are absolutely zero sections of I-69 that are only 4 lanes that are as bad as I-65. Traffic volumes may be comparable but I-69 has far, far fewer trucks.
I don't remember where I saw it, but I-65 has significantly higher accident rates than I-70.
Actually, I-69 is also very truck heavy as it is a primary corridor between Canada and the US. I maintain the two sections of I-69 in that table are legitimate. If you can find objective truck volume numbers to indicate otherwise, please share.
Those segments of I-69 are both pretty short. You're not getting held up for very long by traffic in those segments. If we're talking about getting the most increase in traffic flow and safety on the dollar, the 65 and 70 upgrades should be prioritized.
Post by: mukade on March 27, 2022, 10:36:42 PM
My opinion is that the most increase in traffic flow and safety for the dollar will be based on actual traffic volumes. It would be very hard for INDOT to justify favoring only two highways when there is objective evidence suggesting the needs are higher on other highways.
One factor not mentioned for I-65 south of Indy is that the completion of I-69 should reduce some of the I-65 traffic headed to places like Nashville.
Post by: I-39 on March 28, 2022, 07:44:31 AM
Pointing back to one of my posts in the US 31 upgrade thread (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=25334.msg2678660#msg2678660). Go down to the fourth post to see traffic volumes and a discussion on which freeways should be widened first.
I favor spreading the upgrades across all of the Interstates rather than just widening I-65. Yes, driving I-65 is frustrating, but the same goes for sections of I-69 and I-70. I think that is the way INDOT is looking at it as well.
I rarely drive I-70 so I can't speak to that, but there are absolutely zero sections of I-69 that are only 4 lanes that are as bad as I-65. Traffic volumes may be comparable but I-69 has far, far fewer trucks.
I don't remember where I saw it, but I-65 has significantly higher accident rates than I-70.
Actually, I-69 is also very truck heavy as it is a primary corridor between Canada and the US. I maintain the two sections of I-69 in that table are legitimate. If you can find objective truck volume numbers to indicate otherwise, please share.
Those segments of I-69 are both pretty short. You're not getting held up for very long by traffic in those segments. If we're talking about getting the most increase in traffic flow and safety on the dollar, the 65 and 70 upgrades should be prioritized.
With I-65 between Indy and Louisville getting the first priority as it is a bit shorter than Indy-Chicago and Kentucky has already six laned the road throughout the state. Plus, with Tennessee now beginning to widen between Kentucky and Nashville, it will create a continuous six lane from Indy to Nashville.
Post by: NWI_Irish96 on March 28, 2022, 09:58:15 AM
The current I-65 widenings are also short sections.
My opinion is that the most increase in traffic flow and safety for the dollar will be based on actual traffic volumes. It would be very hard for INDOT to justify favoring only two highways when there is objective evidence suggesting the needs are higher on other highways.
One factor not mentioned for I-65 south of Indy is that the completion of I-69 should reduce some of the I-65 traffic headed to places like Nashville.
Sure, you can cherry pick data in lots of ways to make your argument. A better determination of need would not be traffic counts over short segments, but average traffic counts over longer stretches. You might wait a mile or two to get by a truck on 69, you can wait 10+ miles on 65.
Post by: Crash_It on March 28, 2022, 07:56:16 PM
Post by: Max Rockatansky on March 28, 2022, 08:07:48 PM
Or even better INDOT can just implement lane restrictions and also ban trucks from passing. Can't count how many times invested been cut off by a truck just so he can pass the other one that's going 0.5mph slower.
I'm sure you have video clips for every single instance you had a nominal incursion with a trucker by which you applied excessive amounts of horn to. We don't call you "Lord Car Horn" around these parts for nothing.
Post by: mukade on March 28, 2022, 09:24:52 PM
The current I-65 widenings are also short sections.
My opinion is that the most increase in traffic flow and safety for the dollar will be based on actual traffic volumes. It would be very hard for INDOT to justify favoring only two highways when there is objective evidence suggesting the needs are higher on other highways.
One factor not mentioned for I-65 south of Indy is that the completion of I-69 should reduce some of the I-65 traffic headed to places like Nashville.
Sure, you can cherry pick data in lots of ways to make your argument. A better determination of need would not be traffic counts over short segments, but average traffic counts over longer stretches. You might wait a mile or two to get by a truck on 69, you can wait 10+ miles on 65.
Luckily, INDOT seems to be taking a more evenhanded approach that at least somewhat corresponds with traffic counts.
Since around 2005, both I-69 and I-70 each had four sections widened and I-64 is getting one section widened in addition to the approximately nine or ten I-65 widening projects. I believe a section of I-70 west of Richmond is also going to get widened.
I rarely drive I-70 so I can't speak to that, but there are absolutely zero sections of I-69 that are only 4 lanes that are as bad as I-65. Traffic volumes may be comparable but I-69 has far, far fewer trucks.
I don't remember where I saw it, but I-65 has significantly higher accident rates than I-70.
So yeah, if I was only familiar with I-65, that is the road I would favor also. But I live closer to I-69 and I-70. I can guarantee both highways carry heavy traffic volumes.
FWIW, the busiest section of I-69 has an AADT of 155K while busiest section of I-65 (other than where it overlaps with I-70 in downtown Indy) has an AADT of 126K. The I-465/I-69 north interchange is the busiest one in the Indianapolis area. So it is not like I-65 is in a league by itself.
Post by: ilpt4u on March 28, 2022, 09:46:48 PM
FWIW, the busiest section of I-69 has an AADT of 155K while busiest section of I-65 (other than where it overlaps with I-70 in downtown Indy) has an AADT of 126K. The I-465/I-69 north interchange is the busiest one in the Indianapolis area. So it is not like I-65 is in a league by itself.To get an Apples-Apples comparison for I-69 at the Northeast Side and I-65 on the Northwest side, traffic counts on I-65 approaching the 865 exit would be a better comparison, since I-65 doesn’t carry all of its traffic to the I-465 Beltway, whereas I-69 has no such “early” split - it funnels its traffic to the Northeast corner of 465
Is 465/69 really busier than the 465/70/IND Airport interchange?
Post by: SkyPesos on March 28, 2022, 10:11:32 PM
I haven't driven I-70 between Indy and Dayton in a while, so no opinions on that, but I-70 between I-57 and Indy is noticeably busy (thanks to truck traffic coming from places like Texas/Mexico towards Michigan/Canada from NB 57), but not as much as I-65.Pointing back to one of my posts in the US 31 upgrade thread (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=25334.msg2678660#msg2678660). Go down to the fourth post to see traffic volumes and a discussion on which freeways should be widened first.
I favor spreading the upgrades across all of the Interstates rather than just widening I-65. Yes, driving I-65 is frustrating, but the same goes for sections of I-69 and I-70. I think that is the way INDOT is looking at it as well.
I rarely drive I-70 so I can't speak to that, but there are absolutely zero sections of I-69 that are only 4 lanes that are as bad as I-65. Traffic volumes may be comparable but I-69 has far, far fewer trucks.
I don't remember where I saw it, but I-65 has significantly higher accident rates than I-70.
Post by: silverback1065 on March 29, 2022, 08:25:27 AM
Post by: tdindy88 on March 29, 2022, 10:35:02 AM
Back to I-65 from Indy to Chicago, I would imagine that the part from SR 10 to SR 2 would be more imminent than not since they went through the trouble of widening those bridges over the Kankakee River. I would guess that widening that would be pretty simple at this stage. As for where to go next, I think they should finish widening I-65 from SR 47 up to SR 28 to create a six-lane corridor from I-865 to Lafayette. Then they can slowly go north from there and work on the White/Jasper County portion of the highway.
Post by: SkyPesos on March 29, 2022, 10:45:40 AM
I believe INDOT announced that I-70 from SR 1 to ohio state line will be widened. :hmmm: I seem to remember hearing that the Mt. Comfort to SR 3 part will be too but I can't find info on that one.OhioDOT could look to widen their part of I-70 between the IN line and MM 29 then, if INDOT will get that far. East of MM 29, with existing ODOT widening projects wrapping up, it's pretty much 6+ lanes all the way to the I-670 split.
Post by: mukade on March 29, 2022, 06:51:08 PM
FWIW, the busiest section of I-69 has an AADT of 155K while busiest section of I-65 (other than where it overlaps with I-70 in downtown Indy) has an AADT of 126K. The I-465/I-69 north interchange is the busiest one in the Indianapolis area. So it is not like I-65 is in a league by itself.To get an Apples-Apples comparison for I-69 at the Northeast Side and I-65 on the Northwest side, traffic counts on I-65 approaching the 865 exit would be a better comparison, since I-65 doesn’t carry all of its traffic to the I-465 Beltway, whereas I-69 has no such “early” split - it funnels its traffic to the Northeast corner of 465
Is 465/69 really busier than the 465/70/IND Airport interchange?
- I-65 just north of I-865: 79K
- I-69 just north of I-465: 155K+
Quote
This is an area that has seen tremendous growth over the last 25 years,” said Scott Manning, Deputy Director with INDOT.Source: How a major I-465 project will help make the I-69 corridor safer (https://fox59.com/news/how-a-major-i-465-project-will-help-make-the-i-69-corridor-safer/)
If you drive the interchange during the morning or a night on a regular basis, the corridor is a very high traffic area and INDOT says it’s no surprise.
Manning said the interchange is Indiana’s busiest with nearly 100,000 drivers traveling through the area every day.
Another way to look at it is:
- I-65 connects the largest, 2nd largest, 6th largest, and 8th largest metro areas in the state
- I-65 connects the largest, 4th largest, 8th largest, 9th largest, and 10th largest cities in the state
- I-69 connects the largest, 2nd largest, 3rd largest, 4th largest, 6th largest, 7th largest, 11th largest and 12th and largest cities in the state
- I-69 connects the largest, 3rd largest, 5th largest, and 9th largest metro areas in the state
| Rank | Name | 2022 Pop. | 2010 Census | Change | I-65 | I-69 |
| 1 | Indianapolis | 892,656 | 821,579 | 8.65% | X | X |
| 2 | Fort Wayne | 279,228 | 254,161 | 9.86% | X | |
| 3 | Evansville | 117,736 | 120,091 | -1.96% | X | |
| 4 | Carmel | 106,843 | 84,508 | 26.43% | X | X |
| 5 | South Bend | 102,191 | 101,197 | 0.98% | ||
| 6 | Fishers | 101,019 | 77,832 | 29.79% | X | |
| 7 | Bloomington | 87,603 | 80,612 | 8.67% | X | |
| 8 | Hammond | 74,457 | 80,718 | -7.76% | X | |
| 9 | Gary | 73,886 | 80,155 | -7.82% | X | |
| 10 | Lafayette | 70,185 | 68,925 | 1.83% | X | |
| 11 | Noblesville | 68,763 | 52,909 | 29.96% | X | |
| 12 | Muncie | 67,651 | 70,193 | -3.62% | X |
This is a modified list: X denotes highway is within 6.5 miles of city which is the distance from I-65 to Hammond City limits. In case the point is lost, I-65 is not the only highway deserving of upgrades.
Post by: NWI_Irish96 on March 29, 2022, 09:32:21 PM
Post by: ilpt4u on March 29, 2022, 09:55:33 PM
All of that there conveniently ignores that 65 connects the Chicago and Louisville metro areas, which dwarf Fort Wayne, Evansville and the rest.Never let FACTS get in the way of a good STORY…come on, now
Post by: dvferyance on April 04, 2022, 08:26:36 PM
Yeah, that Mt. Comfort to SR 3 part should be the next thing to be widened along I-70, I think it may very well begin this year.The part from US 231 to SR 2 was overkill enough. Why go even further? While I supported the widening from US 30 to US 231 100% going all the way to SR 2 was not needed and was a waste of money. It's not that busy it did not need 3 lanes.
Back to I-65 from Indy to Chicago, I would imagine that the part from SR 10 to SR 2 would be more imminent than not since they went through the trouble of widening those bridges over the Kankakee River. I would guess that widening that would be pretty simple at this stage. As for where to go next, I think they should finish widening I-65 from SR 47 up to SR 28 to create a six-lane corridor from I-865 to Lafayette. Then they can slowly go north from there and work on the White/Jasper County portion of the highway.
Post by: silverback1065 on April 04, 2022, 08:31:50 PM
Can you post the traffic study you did to warrant that opinion?Yeah, that Mt. Comfort to SR 3 part should be the next thing to be widened along I-70, I think it may very well begin this year.The part from US 231 to SR 2 was overkill enough. Why go even further? While I supported the widening from US 30 to US 231 100% going all the way to SR 2 was not needed and was a waste of money. It's not that busy it did not need 3 lanes.
Back to I-65 from Indy to Chicago, I would imagine that the part from SR 10 to SR 2 would be more imminent than not since they went through the trouble of widening those bridges over the Kankakee River. I would guess that widening that would be pretty simple at this stage. As for where to go next, I think they should finish widening I-65 from SR 47 up to SR 28 to create a six-lane corridor from I-865 to Lafayette. Then they can slowly go north from there and work on the White/Jasper County portion of the highway.
Post by: I-55 on April 04, 2022, 09:07:26 PM
Yeah, that Mt. Comfort to SR 3 part should be the next thing to be widened along I-70, I think it may very well begin this year.The part from US 231 to SR 2 was overkill enough. Why go even further? While I supported the widening from US 30 to US 231 100% going all the way to SR 2 was not needed and was a waste of money. It's not that busy it did not need 3 lanes.
Back to I-65 from Indy to Chicago, I would imagine that the part from SR 10 to SR 2 would be more imminent than not since they went through the trouble of widening those bridges over the Kankakee River. I would guess that widening that would be pretty simple at this stage. As for where to go next, I think they should finish widening I-65 from SR 47 up to SR 28 to create a six-lane corridor from I-865 to Lafayette. Then they can slowly go north from there and work on the White/Jasper County portion of the highway.
Are you measuring traffic at 1 AM or anytime people are actually awake? 65 should be 6 lanes all the way from I-80/94 to TN-396 or US-412.
Post by: Buck87 on April 04, 2022, 09:58:46 PM
Can you post the traffic study you did to warrant that opinion?
The "Avalanchez71" study
Post by: SignGeniusPTOE on April 26, 2022, 03:29:42 PM
Post by: I-55 on April 26, 2022, 03:42:01 PM
All I-65 needs is a good chip and seal job, which should take it to 2050 easily.
They just did this last year on US-24 between Wabash and Peru and it sucks. If it rains at night good luck.
Post by: silverback1065 on April 26, 2022, 03:43:17 PM
Post by: JoePCool14 on April 26, 2022, 11:43:26 PM
All I-65 needs is a good chip and seal job, which should take it to 2050 easily.
Chipping-and-sealing adds a third lane in each direction... how?
Post by: Rothman on April 27, 2022, 08:18:15 AM
All I-65 needs is a good chip and seal job, which should take it to 2050 easily.Heh. Either you're being sarcastic or are from Wyoming. :D
Post by: dvferyance on May 02, 2022, 03:22:09 PM
Just take a drive down there. Have you ever been there? Nothing but cornfields as for as the eye can see. The development stops around 231 by then you are out of Chicagoland.Can you post the traffic study you did to warrant that opinion?Yeah, that Mt. Comfort to SR 3 part should be the next thing to be widened along I-70, I think it may very well begin this year.The part from US 231 to SR 2 was overkill enough. Why go even further? While I supported the widening from US 30 to US 231 100% going all the way to SR 2 was not needed and was a waste of money. It's not that busy it did not need 3 lanes.
Back to I-65 from Indy to Chicago, I would imagine that the part from SR 10 to SR 2 would be more imminent than not since they went through the trouble of widening those bridges over the Kankakee River. I would guess that widening that would be pretty simple at this stage. As for where to go next, I think they should finish widening I-65 from SR 47 up to SR 28 to create a six-lane corridor from I-865 to Lafayette. Then they can slowly go north from there and work on the White/Jasper County portion of the highway.
Post by: NWI_Irish96 on May 02, 2022, 03:28:39 PM
Just take a drive down there. Have you ever been there? Nothing but cornfields as for as the eye can see. The development stops around 231 by then you are out of Chicagoland.Can you post the traffic study you did to warrant that opinion?Yeah, that Mt. Comfort to SR 3 part should be the next thing to be widened along I-70, I think it may very well begin this year.The part from US 231 to SR 2 was overkill enough. Why go even further? While I supported the widening from US 30 to US 231 100% going all the way to SR 2 was not needed and was a waste of money. It's not that busy it did not need 3 lanes.
Back to I-65 from Indy to Chicago, I would imagine that the part from SR 10 to SR 2 would be more imminent than not since they went through the trouble of widening those bridges over the Kankakee River. I would guess that widening that would be pretty simple at this stage. As for where to go next, I think they should finish widening I-65 from SR 47 up to SR 28 to create a six-lane corridor from I-865 to Lafayette. Then they can slowly go north from there and work on the White/Jasper County portion of the highway.
Development is not the only indication, and really not even the primary indication, that 6-laning is warranted. Indy-Chicago is one of the highest truck corridors in the nation, regardless of whether they're driving through dense development or cornfields.
Post by: SkyPesos on May 02, 2022, 03:33:00 PM
Your traffic study had no mention of the road itself, just the surroundings.Just take a drive down there. Have you ever been there? Nothing but cornfields as for as the eye can see. The development stops around 231 by then you are out of Chicagoland.The part from US 231 to SR 2 was overkill enough. Why go even further? While I supported the widening from US 30 to US 231 100% going all the way to SR 2 was not needed and was a waste of money. It's not that busy it did not need 3 lanes.Can you post the traffic study you did to warrant that opinion?
Post by: silverback1065 on May 02, 2022, 03:56:19 PM
Just take a drive down there. Have you ever been there? Nothing but cornfields as for as the eye can see. The development stops around 231 by then you are out of Chicagoland.Can you post the traffic study you did to warrant that opinion?Yeah, that Mt. Comfort to SR 3 part should be the next thing to be widened along I-70, I think it may very well begin this year.The part from US 231 to SR 2 was overkill enough. Why go even further? While I supported the widening from US 30 to US 231 100% going all the way to SR 2 was not needed and was a waste of money. It's not that busy it did not need 3 lanes.
Back to I-65 from Indy to Chicago, I would imagine that the part from SR 10 to SR 2 would be more imminent than not since they went through the trouble of widening those bridges over the Kankakee River. I would guess that widening that would be pretty simple at this stage. As for where to go next, I think they should finish widening I-65 from SR 47 up to SR 28 to create a six-lane corridor from I-865 to Lafayette. Then they can slowly go north from there and work on the White/Jasper County portion of the highway.
Driven it multiple times, I question whether you have :-D