Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[hbelkins]

There's not going to be an I-67 in Kentucky. Don't know where people are getting this stuff. Pulling it out of their rear ends is the most likely source.

[silverback1065]

Is another interstate really needed?

[NE2]

Is another bump really needed?

[silverback1065]

^you are the one bumping the topic i merely asked a question.

[NE2]

[agentsteel53]

^you are the one bumping the topic i mearly asked a question.

mearly, mearly, mearly, mearly, life is but a dream...

[jnewkirk77]

There's not going to be an I-67 in Kentucky. Don't know where people are getting this stuff. Pulling it out of their rear ends is the most likely source.

I know it's been a while since you said this, H.B., but I got a chuckle out of it.  The mayor of Owensboro (Ron Payne) and Daviess Co. Judge-Exec (Al Mattingly) are pretty high on this "I-67" thing.  Personally, I don't see it happening; my feeling is that 231's a fine connection to I-64, and the Audubon Pkwy. will do fine as an I-69 connector.

[hbelkins]

Plus, US 60 is not a bad drive east to the Fort Knox area. Much of it is two lanes but I always found it to be a fairly fast and very pleasant drive.

[jnewkirk77]

Plus, US 60 is not a bad drive east to the Fort Knox area. Much of it is two lanes but I always found it to be a fairly fast and very pleasant drive.

I like going that way myself.  My kids seem to enjoy it as much as I do, which is a plus. 

[mukade]

Interstate 67 would improve road safety and boost the economy of the counties it runs through as well as southern Indiana and western Kentucky, according to a recently completed study of the proposed interstate...

Study indicates I-67 needed, critical to Jasper region (Jasper Herald)
 

 
 
 

[tdindy88]

Is there a reason this has to be extended to Washington, is traffic honestly that bad from Washington to Jasper? The US 231 bypass of Jasper and Huntingburg is needed I feel, but wouldn't it make a little more sense to at least four-lane US 231 north to Crane instead of a new interstate to Washington? Just rambling off here...

[hbelkins]

The AP is working on some sort of story about I-67 in Kentucky. Here's what the reporter was told about the status of I-67 in Kentucky:

o       KYTC is not engaged in any I-67 feasibility work.

o       Our priority in that region is I-69 and will be for some time.

o       55 miles of I-69 already sport the red, white and blue interstate shield signs.

o       Just this past Friday, we opened bids for the project to rebuild the Dawson Springs interchange to interstate standards. (Have not yet awarded contract.)

o       KYTC understands the concept and the desire in the region for an enhanced connection between I-64 in southern Indiana and I-65 at Bowling Green.

o       There is no identified I-67 corridor. Interstate corridors must be approved by FHWA and AASHTO, which has not happened.

o       It would require more than just upgrading the Natcher Parkway. The Natcher Bridge, a fairly new structure, does not meet interstate standards, nor does the Owensboro Bypass, which is currently under construction.

o       At best, an I-67 corridor is on a far horizon.

[mukade]

I think everyone realizes this is not a serious proposal for a new designation anytime soon, but it is noteworthy for two reasons. The powers are gathering grassroot support all along the way and they are more or less following the strtategy that got the I-69 designation through seven states. That took a while, but obviously proved successful.

Personally, I think a road like US 231 from I-64 to I-65 is by and large sufficient as it is, but I would like to see the route "promoted". This is an example of why a secondary level of Interstate highway designation should be created for situations like this.

On the subject of the I-67 proposal, I also don't see why it would ever go to Washington, IN. It would be a tough sell to improve US 231 north of Jasper, but if money was no object, it should go north or northeast from Jasper.

[jnewkirk77]

I think everyone realizes this is not a serious proposal for a new designation anytime soon, but it is noteworthy for two reasons. The powers are gathering grassroot support all along the way and they are more or less following the strtategy that got the I-69 designation through seven states. That took a while, but obviously proved successful.

Personally, I think a road like US 231 from I-64 to I-65 is by and large sufficient as it is, but I would like to see the route "promoted". This is an example of why a secondary level of Interstate highway designation should be created for situations like this.

On the subject of the I-67 proposal, I also don't see why it would ever go to Washington, IN. It would be a tough sell to improve US 231 north of Jasper, but if money was no object, it should go north or northeast from Jasper.

I agree with promoting 231 ... it can stand on its own merits.  If I-67 is not to be a priority, what about these?

  * Reassign U.S. 60 from its current route between Henderson and Owensboro to KY 425 and the Audubon Parkway.  (The Audubon name could be retained if desired.)

  * Reassign U.S. 231 to the Natcher Parkway.  It ties in to 231 at both ends anyway ... why not?

[xonhulu]

I agree with promoting 231 ... it can stand on its own merits.  If I-67 is not to be a priority, what about these?

  * Reassign U.S. 60 from its current route between Henderson and Owensboro to KY 425 and the Audubon Parkway.  (The Audubon name could be retained if desired.)

  * Reassign U.S. 231 to the Natcher Parkway.  It ties in to 231 at both ends anyway ... why not?

For that matter, why not transfer US 62 onto the Western Kentucky and Bluegrass Parkways?

[NE2]

Once you go freeway you'll never go back.

[jnewkirk77]

I agree with promoting 231 ... it can stand on its own merits.  If I-67 is not to be a priority, what about these?

  * Reassign U.S. 60 from its current route between Henderson and Owensboro to KY 425 and the Audubon Parkway.  (The Audubon name could be retained if desired.)

  * Reassign U.S. 231 to the Natcher Parkway.  It ties in to 231 at both ends anyway ... why not?

For that matter, why not transfer US 62 onto the Western Kentucky and Bluegrass Parkways?

Works for me.

[Alps]

I agree with promoting 231 ... it can stand on its own merits.  If I-67 is not to be a priority, what about these?

  * Reassign U.S. 60 from its current route between Henderson and Owensboro to KY 425 and the Audubon Parkway.  (The Audubon name could be retained if desired.)

  * Reassign U.S. 231 to the Natcher Parkway.  It ties in to 231 at both ends anyway ... why not?

For that matter, why not transfer US 62 onto the Western Kentucky and Bluegrass Parkways?

Works for me.

I like US 62. Throughout KY, it's a quiet road that's usually not the fastest way from point A to point B, even among surface roads. But that's not what US routes are for. If KY has a spare low number kicking around, I'd reroute 62 and apply the number to the current road. Of course, there's no comprehensive website that actually lists which numbers are available. (Wikipedia is already wrong at KY 12, but I expect no better from them.)

[NE2]

OSM data shows that 50 is the only available two-digit number. (You may be able to extract the information from http://www.overpass-api.de/api/xapi?*[network=US:KY] with the <tag k="ref" v="627"/> lines. I opened a variant of that URL in JOSM, an OSM editor.)

I'd prefer to see low numbers assigned to the parkways, keeping the U.S. Routes where they are. KY 66 could be reassigned to the southern tier route ("future I-66") and over to Henderson or KY 80 could be rerouted there, though then Bowling Green to Henderson needs a number), with KY 50 on the central route west of Lexington, and KY 114 extended west over the Mountain Parkway. That leaves only the south part of the Pennyrile, an obvious candidate for an I-x69.

[Alps]

I'd prefer to see low numbers assigned to the parkways, keeping the U.S. Routes where they are. KY 66 could be reassigned to the southern tier route ("future I-66") and over to Henderson or KY 80 could be rerouted there, though then Bowling Green to Henderson needs a number), with KY 50 on the central route west of Lexington, and KY 114 extended west over the Mountain Parkway. That leaves only the south part of the Pennyrile, an obvious candidate for an I-x69.

I'd prefer to see numbers assigned in any sort of order whatsoever. How about 1-digit roads for parkways only, 2-digit routes for major roads in a grid system, then 3 and 4 digit roads filling in the spaces in the grid?

[NE2]

I'd prefer to see numbers assigned in any sort of order whatsoever. How about 1-digit roads for parkways only, 2-digit routes for major roads in a grid system, then 3 and 4 digit roads filling in the spaces in the grid?

Kentucky started out in the 1920s with a grid of one- and two-digit routes, and most of those remain. The only one-digit number that's been reassigned is 4 (now US 460 east of KY 80); the others are still in their original locations on the east side of the state.
http://transportation.ky.gov/Planning/Maps/1939KYF.pdf

[mukade]

I'd prefer to see low numbers assigned to the parkways, keeping the U.S. Routes where they are. KY 66 could be reassigned to the southern tier route ("future I-66") and over to Henderson or KY 80 could be rerouted there, though then Bowling Green to Henderson needs a number), with KY 50 on the central route west of Lexington, and KY 114 extended west over the Mountain Parkway. That leaves only the south part of the Pennyrile, an obvious candidate for an I-x69.

I'd prefer to see numbers assigned in any sort of order whatsoever. How about 1-digit roads for parkways only, 2-digit routes for major roads in a grid system, then 3 and 4 digit roads filling in the spaces in the grid?

Or route 67 for the Natcher and route 50 for the Bluegrass/Western Kentucky to have consistent numbering with a potential future Interstate designations?

[hbelkins]

Actually, KY 3 and US 23 were basically flip-flopped between Louisa and Catlettsburg, but that's not as dramatic a change as was relocating KY 4 from Pike County to Lexington.

Somewhere on KYTC's site there is a listing of truck weights that can be manipulated to produce a current listing of route numbers. I used to know where that was, but they've changed up a bunch of things as they've converted their site to content management via SharePoint. Digging around on the Maps or Planning pages might yield it.

[NE2]

Somewhere on KYTC's site there is a listing of truck weights that can be manipulated to produce a current listing of route numbers. I used to know where that was, but they've changed up a bunch of things as they've converted their site to content management via SharePoint. Digging around on the Maps or Planning pages might yield it.

http://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Atransportation.ky.gov+3630+3608+3571
Some idiot alphabetized the list though, so it goes KY 1 KY 10 KY 100 KY 1000 KY 1001...

Incidentally, these two numbers are duplicated:
http://apps.transportation.ky.gov/HIS_Reports/TruckWeightLimitsReport.aspx?sq=sub&prefix=KY&route=2390&suffix=
http://apps.transportation.ky.gov/HIS_Reports/TruckWeightLimitsReport.aspx?sq=sub&prefix=KY&route=3215&suffix=

[hbelkins]

http://www.wkyt.com/home/headlines/Owensboro-officials-tout-interstate-study-179462351.html

Funny that they talk about building the route without tolls vs. with tolls, since it would follow one of Kentucky's former toll roads.