More US 31 upgrades between Indy and South Bend

[SSR_317]

Rather than saying I-65 and I-70 should get widened to 6 lanes before any other freeways, I would prioritize by traffic volume - and what the busiest sections are might surprise you. The top 15 busiest 4 lane sections include five on I-265, three on I-69 and one on I-74 as shown in the top 25 table below.

Rank	Location	AADT
1	I-265 between Grant Line Rd and Charlestown Rd	63,118
2	I-265 between I-64 and State St (New Albany)	61,532
3	I-265 between Charlestown Rd and I-65 (Clarksville)	59,997
4	I-265 between State St and Grant Line Rd (New Albany)	56,431
5	I-70 between SR 39 and SR 267  (Plainfield-Monrovia)	48,934
6	SR-265 between I-65 and SR 62 (Jeffersonville)	47,876
7	I-65 between 71st St and I-465 (Indianapolis)	46,632
8	I-65 between SR 252 and SR 44	44,992
9	I-65 between US 31 and SR 252	43,614
10	I-69 between SR 1 and Union Chapel (Fort Wayne)	43,004
11	I-65 between Memphis and SR 160	42,003
12	I-69 between SR 9/SR 109 and Daleville	41,701
13	I-65 between SR 10 and SR 2	39,527
14	I-74 between Post Rd and I-465 (Indianapolis)	39,089
15	I-69 between Airport Expy and Jefferson St. (Fort Wayne)	38,921
16	I-65 between SR 47 and SR 28	38,787
17	I-70 between SR 46 and US 41 (Terre Haute)	38,655
18	I-70 between SR 109 and SR 3	37,989
19	I-65 between SR 28 and SR 38	37,885
20	I-70 between Centerville exit and US 35	37,661
21	I-70 between SR 9 and SR 109	37,584
22	I-65 between SR 160 and US 31	37,384
23	I-70 between US 27 and SR 227 (Richmond)	37,332
24	I-70 between US 231 and SR 39	36,650
25	I-65 between SR 114 and SR 14	36,441

(I did not see a traffic count from I-865 to 71st St)

...

No disrespect intended, but what was your source for those figures? They seem to exclude I-465 (which, of course, has almost no 4-lanes sections remaining). And I know that I-465 was excluded from the topic originally addressed (as were I-80, I-90, and I-94 in NW Indiana), but other roads (e.g., I-265) were included in the above figures which we were also not specifically talking about. By excluding any route, its gives many out-of-state readers a very skewed idea of what are actually Indiana's busiest freeway segments. Better (IMHO) to have included the figures for all routes in the state and then highlighted those on segments of routes we were actually talking about (though I know that would've been a lot of work).

I agree with the subsequent comments about the percentage of commercial vehicle (truck) volume on any segment being an important component of which areas to prioritize for widening from 4 to 6 overall lanes. Together with AADT, that would provide a better statistical discussion point than AADT alone.

Also, I agree that we need to get this thread back on topic, which is "More US 31 upgrades between Indy and South Bend". Perhaps this particular discussion belongs on another (or its own) thread, though having the State of Indiana divided between two separate discussion boards here is a serious hindrance to that goal.

[mukade]

I am sure it makes sense to move the relevant posts into a new thread about the program to widen the major freeways in Indiana (which is/was called Major Moves 2020). Just like any conversation, other topics come up during a discussion. I think you will find multiple such diversions in this and most other threads. That said, the traffic volume numbers in the INDOT database are highly relevant to the the US 31 upgrade discussion - the volumes posted far exceed those on US 31 so we need to be realistic about a lot happening on US 31 north of US 24.

But, for the record, I have numerous specific posts on the US 31 upgrade.

The numbers cited come from the INDOT Traffic Count DB (https://indot.public.ms2soft.com/tcds/tsearch.asp?loc=Indot&mod). The numbers I posted show the highest traffic counts for four lane sections of freeway. Unless you count the interchange with I-865 at the northwest corner, I-465 has no four lane sections - it is all six or eight lanes. I-865 itself has four lanes, but the counts were not sufficient to make the list. Moreover, INDOT already has active plans to upgrade that interchange as well as the two I-69 interchanges on I-465.

I agree with the subsequent comments about the percentage of commercial vehicle (truck) volume on any segment being an important component of which areas to prioritize for widening from 4 to 6 overall lanes. Together with AADT, that would provide a better statistical discussion point than AADT alone.

Of course there are multiple factors. I posted traffic counts, but it would be great for someone to post truck volume and accident statistics in whatever thread this ends up in.

[monty]

I deliberated posting this between US 31 upgrades and the general Indiana thread but settled here because the US 31 upgrade is the influencing factor.
According to the Nov 23 Tipton Tribune, INDOT is offering to relocate SR 19 away from its current Tipton downtown routing to Park Road east to Ash Street (known locally as "the bypass" ) where it continues north out of town. This eliminates the SR 28 concurrency along Jefferson St. through downtown Tipton.
Then the offer gets more interesting. INDOT is proposing to hand over SR 28 to the county at CR 560 W, just east of the US 31 interchange. The county would take over the some three miles to the city limits wherein the city gets all of Jefferson St (currently controlled by the state).  It is not noted where / if SR 28 resumes east of Tipton. My guess is at the SR 19 intersection.
Discussion at the board of commissioners meeting quipped that truck traffic would be required to avoid downtown Tipton in favor of Division Road. Which then, would encourage/ require an interchange to be built at US 31 and Division Road. An estimated 4,000 - 5,000 trucks a day may be diverted around Tipton on this route.
Apparently the offer has been on the table since August. INDOT would pay the city $7.5 million and the county $1.5 million.
Recall that INDOT offered an exchange of SR 213 in eastern Tipton County for a Division Road interchange at US 31 in an earlier offer turned down by the county. After that, INDOT stated they'd "study"  Tipton County US 31 improvements (again). Local Officials have pushed for the Division Road interchange, in part because SR 28 was the only state-planned interchange.

[silverback1065]

I deliberated posting this between US 31 upgrades and the general Indiana thread but settled here because the US 31 upgrade is the influencing factor.
According to the Nov 23 Tipton Tribune, INDOT is offering to relocate SR 19 away from its current Tipton downtown routing to Park Road east to Ash Street (known locally as "the bypass" ) where it continues north out of town. This eliminates the SR 28 concurrency along Jefferson St. through downtown Tipton.
Then the offer gets more interesting. INDOT is proposing to hand over SR 28 to the county at CR 560 W, just east of the US 31 interchange. The county would take over the some three miles to the city limits wherein the city gets all of Jefferson St (currently controlled by the state).  It is not noted where / if SR 28 resumes east of Tipton. My guess is at the SR 19 intersection.
Discussion at the board of commissioners meeting quipped that truck traffic would be required to avoid downtown Tipton in favor of Division Road. Which then, would encourage/ require an interchange to be built at US 31 and Division Road. An estimated 4,000 - 5,000 trucks a day may be diverted around Tipton on this route.
Apparently the offer has been on the table since August. INDOT would pay the city $7.5 million and the county $1.5 million.
Recall that INDOT offered an exchange of SR 213 in eastern Tipton County for a Division Road interchange at US 31 in an earlier offer turned down by the county. After that, INDOT stated they'd "study"  Tipton County US 31 improvements (again). Local Officials have pushed for the Division Road interchange, in part because SR 28 was the only state-planned interchange.

Why the hell would indot propose this? Are they just going to have gaps in all their routes and expect people to know where they're going?

[Interstate 69 Fan]

Then the offer gets more interesting. INDOT is proposing to hand over SR 28 to the county at CR 560 W, just east of the US 31 interchange.

Yay for more unnecessary decommissioned routes inside cities creating unnecessary gaps. Been happening way too much recently.

[silverback1065]

Just build the damn interchange, throw 28 onto it from 31 to 19 and boom it makes sense.

[monty]

Just build the damn interchange, throw 28 onto it from 31 to 19 and boom it makes sense.

Agreed. The route will still land in Tipton at a logical place. Truck route achieved.

[tdindy88]

Just build the damn interchange, throw 28 onto it from 31 to 19 and boom it makes sense.

But then INDOT would have to maintain the Division Rd-turned SR 28. Seriously though is INDOT really hurting for money that they have to bargain with Tipton County to maintain one of their highways to build the interchange? It's a bridge, four ramps and presumably two roundabouts. With the new infrastructure bill plus a decent funding for INDOT already there should be enough to build a freaking small exit.

Just leave SR 28 where it is. Reroute SR 19 on that bypass route, that's actually not a bad idea. And then just build the damn Division Road exit. Only reroute SR 28 if Tipton actually wants to do it. I know in places like Lafayette and Franklin the local communities wanted to do their own thing to the roadways through town, if Tipton desires this then okay, reroute SR 28 via Division Rd. If not then don't worry about it.

[mukade]

CR 560W is the eastern edge of the Stellantis transmission plant so it sounds like the starting proposal from INDOT is to have a gap in SR 28 rather than a bypass. If the state were proposing re-routing SR 28, I don't think they would offer $9M in exchange for relinquishing control. The ball is apparently in Tipton's and Tipton County's court to come up with a counter-offer.

If SR 28 would be moved to Division Rd from US 31 to SR 19, it would be similar to what INDOT did in Bluffton over ten years ago. For that matter, the US 50 bypass in North Vernon and SR 38 re-routed on to I-69 in Pendleton also are about removing state highways through the center of these smaller cities.

Personally, I would favor them asking for a re-routing of SR 28 on to Division Rd. Overall, that wouldn't all bad because:
- It lessens heavy truck traffic from these downtowns
- It places full control of the the cities' main streets where it really should be (local)
- Although Division Rd was rebuilt (presumably to state highway standards) several years ago, additional safety improvements such as turn lanes or roundabouts would be more likely under INDOT control over time. I doubt that current SR 28 would get any such improvements
- It promotes growth where the relocated state route would be

All that said, I definitely favor having the interchange on US 31 at Division Rd, but INDOT could also be wanting to use CR 560W and Division road as the bypass. Wasn't CR 560W just improved a few years ago (with state funding)? If that were the case, the interchange still would not be required.

I also would have taken the offer from the state to relinquish control of SR 213 because you know traffic counts don't warrant any big investment on that road from the state - ever. As a former resident of eastern Howard County and frequent user of SR 213, the worst part of that plan for the people would be with the quality of plowing in the winter. INDOT does a good job, and most counties do not. Anyway, that part of the deal still might be required in order to get the interchange.

As for INDOT hurting for money, my guess is that it is more that they really wants to get out of the business of maintaining city streets anywhere other than where it has to.

[monty]

CR 560W was built to support Stellantis.  All trucks entering the factory is routed onto CR 560. It is a quality road. Future plan is to develop industry along it. It is currently an adequate bypass route connecting SR 28 and Division Road. As development occurs, it'll be more of an industrial service corridor.

[NWI_Irish96]

What about just designating CR 560 W, Division Rd, and SR 19 as Truck SR 28? I think the other Truck routes in the state are still locally maintained even though they're signed, but they direct the truck traffic off the mainline route.

[silverback1065]

What about just designating CR 560 W, Division Rd, and SR 19 as Truck SR 28? I think the other Truck routes in the state are still locally maintained even though they're signed, but they direct the truck traffic off the mainline route.

That makes sense, hence indot won't do it

[mukade]

What about just designating CR 560 W, Division Rd, and SR 19 as Truck SR 28? I think the other Truck routes in the state are still locally maintained even though they're signed, but they direct the truck traffic off the mainline route.

The only signed two "truck routes" I am aware of are 1)  for SR 9 in Shelbyville, and that uses I-74 and SR 44 and 2) for SR 15 in Wabash which zig-zags for about 6 blocks over local streets. These two truck routes both have a parallel regular route for cars. Probably there are several others, but none are coming to mind. Giving CR 560W and Division Rd the "truck" SR 28 designation would mean a very long locally maintained alternate. Business routes in Indiana are all locally maintained, AFAIK.
 
Anyway, only doing that suggestion wouldn't help the state meet its goal of decommissioning existing SR 28 in and west of Tipton. If control of current SR 28 were relinquished to the county and city, that would result in a truck route without a non-truck alternate.

Doesn't all this sort of go back to the distinction between "state roads" and "state routes" - the latter could be locally maintained while still aiding motorists.

[Life in Paradise]

What about just designating CR 560 W, Division Rd, and SR 19 as Truck SR 28? I think the other Truck routes in the state are still locally maintained even though they're signed, but they direct the truck traffic off the mainline route.

The only signed two "truck routes" I am aware of are 1)  for SR 9 in Shelbyville, and that uses I-74 and SR 44 and 2) for SR 15 in Wabash which zig-zags for about 6 blocks over local streets. These two truck routes both have a parallel regular route for cars. Probably there are several others, but none are coming to mind. Giving CR 560W and Division Rd the "truck" SR 28 designation would mean a very long locally maintained alternate. Business routes in Indiana are all locally maintained, AFAIK.
 
Anyway, only doing that suggestion wouldn't help the state meet its goal of decommissioning existing SR 28 in and west of Tipton. If control of current SR 28 were relinquished to the county and city, that would result in a truck route without a non-truck alternate.

Doesn't all this sort of go back to the distinction between "state roads" and "state routes" - the latter could be locally maintained while still aiding motorists.

Unless you get rid of most of the idiots at INDOT that are pushing these "gaps", the best alternative is to push legislators to mandate that the former state route is still marked in some way that directs traffic even if the state is not maintaining it.

[mukade]

Yeah. I think it is perfectly fine to move a state road from the center of a town, but somehow everything should be logically connected when a road is decommissioned. That could be by improving signage or by creating some sort of bypass.

For Tipton, specifically, the state holds the winning cards. Just ask Bloomington. The state has to approve any MPO spending so they can in effect suspend any transportation funding. Hence, Tipton needs to seek the best deal they can realizing that they will not get everything they're asking for. I think the three things Tipton and Tipton County most want are:
- To have the US 31 - Division Road interchange
- To not have to take responsibility for a lot of miles of poorly maintained roads
- To reduce heavy truck traffic on downtown streets

The state wants:
- To shed miles of state roads with low traffic volumes (i.e. SR 213)
- To not maintain streets in towns (especially through the center like Jefferson St. on SR 28)

Everything else is pretty insignificant. It seems to me that both sides can get what they most want.

[silverback1065]

Yeah. I think it is perfectly fine to move a state road from the center of a town, but somehow everything should be logically connected when a road is decommissioned. That could be by improving signage or by creating some sort of bypass.

For Tipton, specifically, the state holds the winning cards. Just ask Bloomington. The state has to approve any MPO spending so they can in effect suspend any transportation funding. Hence, Tipton needs to seek the best deal they can realizing that they will not get everything they're asking for. I think the three things Tipton and Tipton County most want are:
- To have the US 31 - Division Road interchange
- To not have to take responsibility for a lot of miles of poorly maintained roads
- To reduce heavy truck traffic on downtown streets

The state wants:
- To shed miles of state roads with low traffic volumes (i.e. SR 213)
- To not maintain streets in towns (especially through the center like Jefferson St. on SR 28)

Everything else is pretty insignificant. It seems to me that both sides can get what they most want.

I have an easy one to solve the low traffic state road problem. Get rid of SR 16.

[mukade]

I have an easy one to solve the low traffic state road problem. Get rid of SR 16.

Haha. My first thought was that this really would be a great one one to look at, but....

Unlike SR 213 which has a parallel state highway about four miles west and six miles east, SR 16 doesn't have that and removing it would leave 20 miles with no state road in places. So that is one factor to consider.

I did a very quick check of the traffic count map: SR 213 ranges from 1376 to 2053, and SR 16 is < 1000 east of US 35 and generally low across the state except around Monon.

The lowest I saw were:
- SR 71 in Benton County has a few locations where it is less than 100 with the lowest points being 70 and 76
- SR 18 at the Illinois state line is 99
- SR 352 a mile north of SR 26 is 90
- There are a ton of locations around the state with traffic volumes of less than 500

So I would guess more cuts will be coming.

[silverback1065]

I have an easy one to solve the low traffic state road problem. Get rid of SR 16.

Haha. My first thought was that this really would be a great one one to look at, but....

Unlike SR 213 which has a parallel state highway about four miles west and six miles east, SR 16 doesn't have that and removing it would leave 20 miles with no state road in places. So that is one factor to consider.

I did a very quick check of the traffic count map: SR 213 ranges from 1376 to 2053, and SR 16 is < 1000 east of US 35 and generally low across the state except around Monon.

The lowest I saw were:
- SR 71 in Benton County has a few locations where it is less than 100 with the lowest points being 70 and 76
- SR 18 at the Illinois state line is 99
- SR 352 a mile north of SR 26 is 90
- There are a ton of locations around the state with traffic volumes of less than 500

So I would guess more cuts will be coming.

Benton county is the least populated county in the state. None of the roads in that county get any traffic but us 52. You could take a nap in the middle of SR 71 and not be worried about getting hit.

[NWI_Irish96]

What about just designating CR 560 W, Division Rd, and SR 19 as Truck SR 28? I think the other Truck routes in the state are still locally maintained even though they're signed, but they direct the truck traffic off the mainline route.

The only signed two "truck routes" I am aware of are 1)  for SR 9 in Shelbyville, and that uses I-74 and SR 44 and 2) for SR 15 in Wabash which zig-zags for about 6 blocks over local streets. These two truck routes both have a parallel regular route for cars. Probably there are several others, but none are coming to mind. Giving CR 560W and Division Rd the "truck" SR 28 designation would mean a very long locally maintained alternate. Business routes in Indiana are all locally maintained, AFAIK.
 
Anyway, only doing that suggestion wouldn't help the state meet its goal of decommissioning existing SR 28 in and west of Tipton. If control of current SR 28 were relinquished to the county and city, that would result in a truck route without a non-truck alternate.

Doesn't all this sort of go back to the distinction between "state roads" and "state routes" - the latter could be locally maintained while still aiding motorists.

Albany has a Truck 28, one segment of which is not also a state highway.

I agree that INDOT should drop the practice of removing signage from roads that get turned over to local control. They've set a precedent by signing the new Cline Ave bridge as IN 912 even though it's not state-owned.

Also, if we're talking about INDOT ditching lightly traveled roads, 111 south of 211 should be at the top of the list.

[mukade]

I agree that INDOT should drop the practice of removing signage from roads that get turned over to local control. They've set a precedent by signing the new Cline Ave bridge as IN 912 even though it's not state-owned.

Also, if we're talking about INDOT ditching lightly traveled roads, 111 south of 211 should be at the top of the list.

The East End Crossing and the Indiana Toll Road are also operated by private consortiums and are part of the state highway system.

SR 111 has one point with an AADT of 52. It is a strange area. SR 166 at the south terminus has an AADT of 47.

[NWI_Irish96]

I agree that INDOT should drop the practice of removing signage from roads that get turned over to local control. They've set a precedent by signing the new Cline Ave bridge as IN 912 even though it's not state-owned.

Also, if we're talking about INDOT ditching lightly traveled roads, 111 south of 211 should be at the top of the list.

The East End Crossing and the Indiana Toll Road are also operated by private consortiums and are part of the state highway system.

SR 111 has one point with an AADT of 52. It is a strange area. SR 166 at the south terminus has an AADT of 47.

So at the far south end of 111, right at the Ohio River, there is what I would describe as a "gated compound" of a half dozen or so houses, and all I can figure is that someone who does or used to live there has some clout because there's no other reason that segment of road should be a state highway.

[silverback1065]

it's official 28 is gone. but the article i saw in the kokomo tribune made it sound 28 might be signed on the county roads.

[NWI_Irish96]

it's official 28 is gone. but the article i saw in the kokomo tribune made it sound 28 might be signed on the county roads.

I'd prefer they just leave 28 discontinuous. For thru traffic that isn't trucks, continuing straight through town on what was 28 until yesterday is still the fastest route. Signing 28 up 560 to Division Rd and back down 19 only serves to frustrate/confuse people who aren't familiar with the area.

[silverback1065]

it's official 28 is gone. but the article i saw in the kokomo tribune made it sound 28 might be signed on the county roads.

I'd prefer they just leave 28 discontinuous. For thru traffic that isn't trucks, continuing straight through town on what was 28 until yesterday is still the fastest route. Signing 28 up 560 to Division Rd and back down 19 only serves to frustrate/confuse people who aren't familiar with the area.

since it's a straight shot you may not even notice 28 ended  .

[Mapmikey]

I agree that INDOT should drop the practice of removing signage from roads that get turned over to local control. They've set a precedent by signing the new Cline Ave bridge as IN 912 even though it's not state-owned.

Also, if we're talking about INDOT ditching lightly traveled roads, 111 south of 211 should be at the top of the list.

The East End Crossing and the Indiana Toll Road are also operated by private consortiums and are part of the state highway system.

SR 111 has one point with an AADT of 52. It is a strange area. SR 166 at the south terminus has an AADT of 47.

So at the far south end of 111, right at the Ohio River, there is what I would describe as a "gated compound" of a half dozen or so houses, and all I can figure is that someone who does or used to live there has some clout because there's no other reason that segment of road should be a state highway.

July 2021 GMSV shows 111 and 211 ending at each other now...
https://goo.gl/maps/TjMQRRJwAi73z9Lw9