AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: I-69 Ohio River Bridge  (Read 241955 times)

edwaleni

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 418
  • Last Login: June 19, 2019, 10:43:18 PM
Re: I-69 Ohio River Bridge
« Reply #900 on: August 13, 2018, 10:21:33 PM »

Only problem with that might be giving those in Henderson false hope that there will always be a four-lane free alternative as you keep both bridges open. Better to cut them off from the start, get them used to the two-lane option from the beginning.

I wonder in any case if there will be a temporary time when the I-69 bridge will be free so that they can work on the US 41 bridges, do what they need to do and reconfigure the highway to fit the new arrangement. When that is all finished then they start the tolls on the I-69 bridge.

As for the pedestrian stuff, would a set up along the new I-69 bridge (similar to what was done with the East End Bridge) work if they don't want to preserve one of the old bridges. I suppose being out of the way of both Evansville and Henderson might work against this idea. Still I'm curious.

Rare are Interstate bridges with a separated pedestrian walkway on them, but a few exist. I-494 in Mendota Heights, MN over the Minnesota River. The cost of providing such a walkway would be substantial, so it would be desirable to have a reasonable amount of demand for it, and it would likely attract more bicyclists than pedestrians for that length of a trip.

https://www.johnweeks.com/bridges/pages/mn02.html

I have also been involved in studies that propose attaching an external walkway to an existing truss bridge, but many times they are cost prohibitive to retro-fit, with supporting the weight cantilevered on the existing foundations, or building a whole new separate structure.

FDOT District 5 got in a lot of trouble in 2016 when on the I-95 (Fuller Warren Bridge upgrade) they tried to state that having pedestrian access on an Interstate signed highway bridge was illegal.  It is not illegal and it is used on many urban interstate signed bridges nationally.  Seems they just didn't want to have to design pedestrian access into the project and got called out on it. So rather than trying, they simply tried to bluff their way against it.  It's under construction now. They are driving new caissons into the St Johns River for them today.  If any DOT tries to tell anyone that federally funded highways can't have pedestrian access included, they are full of nonsense.

Logged

sparker

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 5613
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: Today at 04:11:27 PM
Re: I-69 Ohio River Bridge
« Reply #901 on: August 15, 2018, 05:56:25 PM »

FDOT District 5 got in a lot of trouble in 2016 when on the I-95 (Fuller Warren Bridge upgrade) they tried to state that having pedestrian access on an Interstate signed highway bridge was illegal.  It is not illegal and it is used on many urban interstate signed bridges nationally.  Seems they just didn't want to have to design pedestrian access into the project and got called out on it. So rather than trying, they simply tried to bluff their way against it.  It's under construction now. They are driving new caissons into the St Johns River for them today.  If any DOT tries to tell anyone that federally funded highways can't have pedestrian access included, they are full of nonsense.

The O'Callaghan/Tillman bridge over the Colorado River canyon on I-11 says hello; it features a very prominent separated pedestrian walkway on its north side -- just don't venture out onto it if you have acrophobia! 
Logged

SSR_317

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 213
  • Why does FHWA hate "Exit 0"?

  • Age: 62
  • Location: Indianapolis
  • Last Login: June 15, 2019, 05:18:21 PM
Re: I-69 Ohio River Bridge
« Reply #902 on: August 16, 2018, 05:05:30 PM »

The O'Callaghan/Tillman bridge over the Colorado River canyon on I-11 says hello; it features a very prominent separated pedestrian walkway on its north side -- just don't venture out onto it if you have acrophobia!
When I walked that structure in 2011, I wonder just how many cell/smart phones have been (and would soon be) accidentally dropped into Black Canyon below by people trying to get photos/videos of Hoover Dam just upstream. Look out below!
Logged

edwaleni

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 418
  • Last Login: June 19, 2019, 10:43:18 PM
Re: I-69 Ohio River Bridge
« Reply #903 on: August 17, 2018, 11:21:28 AM »

The O'Callaghan/Tillman bridge over the Colorado River canyon on I-11 says hello; it features a very prominent separated pedestrian walkway on its north side -- just don't venture out onto it if you have acrophobia!
When I walked that structure in 2011, I wonder just how many cell/smart phones have been (and would soon be) accidentally dropped into Black Canyon below by people trying to get photos/videos of Hoover Dam just upstream. Look out below!

I have walked across it. Yes, it can give you the willies. And I thought the same thing....how many cell phones ended up dropped in the canyon below. But putting a ped access across the entire bridge was the right thing to do.
Logged

LM117

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1873
  • Age: 30
  • Location: Danville, VA 👎
  • Last Login: Today at 03:38:37 PM
Re: I-69 Ohio River Bridge
« Reply #904 on: August 17, 2018, 01:14:51 PM »

The O'Callaghan/Tillman bridge over the Colorado River canyon on I-11 says hello; it features a very prominent separated pedestrian walkway on its north side -- just don't venture out onto it if you have acrophobia!

Welp, that rules me out! :crazy:
Logged
“I don’t know whether to wind my ass or scratch my watch!” - Jim Cornette

SSR_317

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 213
  • Why does FHWA hate "Exit 0"?

  • Age: 62
  • Location: Indianapolis
  • Last Login: June 15, 2019, 05:18:21 PM
Re: I-69 Ohio River Bridge
« Reply #905 on: August 21, 2018, 04:25:50 PM »

The O'Callaghan/Tillman bridge over the Colorado River canyon on I-11 says hello; it features a very prominent separated pedestrian walkway on its north side -- just don't venture out onto it if you have acrophobia!
When I walked that structure in 2011, I wonder just how many cell/smart phones have been (and would soon be) accidentally dropped into Black Canyon below by people trying to get photos/videos of Hoover Dam just upstream. Look out below!

I have walked across it. Yes, it can give you the willies. And I thought the same thing....how many cell phones ended up dropped in the canyon below. But putting a ped access across the entire bridge was the right thing to do.
Oh, and hats too, as the the winds through the canyon are quite high at times. Had to hang onto mine the day I visited.
Logged

thefro

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 368
  • Location: Indiana
  • Last Login: June 18, 2019, 01:22:01 PM
Re: I-69 Ohio River Bridge
« Reply #906 on: September 20, 2018, 12:20:34 PM »

https://i69ohiorivercrossing.com/surveys-and-field-work-continuing-for-i-69-crossing/

DEIS and preferred route expected to be revealed later this fall, then FEIS/ROD next year.
Logged

SSR_317

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 213
  • Why does FHWA hate "Exit 0"?

  • Age: 62
  • Location: Indianapolis
  • Last Login: June 15, 2019, 05:18:21 PM
Re: I-69 Ohio River Bridge
« Reply #907 on: September 22, 2018, 12:21:39 PM »

https://i69ohiorivercrossing.com/surveys-and-field-work-continuing-for-i-69-crossing/

DEIS and preferred route expected to be revealed later this fall, then FEIS/ROD next year.
Looking forward to reading the "justification" if they pick either of the "through Henderson" alternatives over the "Central" one, which seems to be the obvious choice (at least to me).
Logged

WKDAVE

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 10
  • Location: KY
  • Last Login: June 04, 2019, 04:20:48 PM
Re: I-69 Ohio River Bridge
« Reply #908 on: December 14, 2018, 12:28:31 PM »

Central Route chosen for bridge keeping older, north-bound bridge open for local US 41 traffic.
Logged

seicer

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1261
  • Last Login: Today at 12:38:05 PM
Re: I-69 Ohio River Bridge
« Reply #909 on: December 14, 2018, 12:30:28 PM »

I-69 ORX project team announces preferred route for new Evansville-Henderson bridge

"The I-69 Ohio River Crossing project team announced Friday its preferred route for a new bridge is Central Corridor 1, which is a new-terrain path east of Ellis Park."

"The project team, which consists of representatives of the Indiana Department of Transportation and Kentucky Transportation Cabinet, said Central Corridor 1 includes a new four-lane I-69 bridge.

The team recommends the existing northbound U.S. 41 bridge remain open for two-way local traffic.

New interchanges are to be built on the south end of U.S. 41, as well as at U.S. 60 and Veterans Memorial Parkway."
Logged

Buck87

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 897
  • Aesculus glabra

  • Age: 31
  • Location: Bellevue, Ohio
  • Last Login: Today at 08:16:41 AM
Re: I-69 Ohio River Bridge
« Reply #910 on: December 14, 2018, 03:02:18 PM »

Isn't that the one that will make downtown Evansville to I-69 North traffic go around a gigantic loop ramp where the new freeway from the bridge joins the current one? 
Logged
When it comes to volume, the Ohio River is not a tributary. The Upper Mississippi is.

Roadsguy

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1465
  • Age: 20
  • Location: Here
  • Last Login: June 19, 2019, 10:53:57 PM
Re: I-69 Ohio River Bridge
« Reply #911 on: December 14, 2018, 03:22:57 PM »

Isn't that the one that will make downtown Evansville to I-69 North traffic go around a gigantic loop ramp where the new freeway from the bridge joins the current one?

According to the rendering video in the article, yes, and it won't even be a two lane loop...

I-69 on a new-terrain connector is the best choice for sure, but that loop seems just silly.
Logged
[thing you don't like] is better than [thing you like]

mgk920

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3329
  • Location: Appleton, WI USA
  • Last Login: Today at 12:47:41 PM
Re: I-69 Ohio River Bridge
« Reply #912 on: December 14, 2018, 03:48:01 PM »

Without reading the article, what will be the fate of the existing southbound US 41 bridge, removal, conversion to a pedestrian/bicycle crossing, etc?

I also hope that steps will be taken to better integrate the overall local street network in the south end of this, right now it looks like a total mess.

Mike
Logged

sparker

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 5613
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: Today at 04:11:27 PM
Re: I-69 Ohio River Bridge
« Reply #913 on: December 14, 2018, 04:05:36 PM »

Isn't that the one that will make downtown Evansville to I-69 North traffic go around a gigantic loop ramp where the new freeway from the bridge joins the current one?

According to the rendering video in the article, yes, and it won't even be a two lane loop...

I-69 on a new-terrain connector is the best choice for sure, but that loop seems just silly.

I'm surprised they just didn't reverse the trumpet to give the direct movement to the old I-164 route.  Maybe INDOT is calculating that the larger share of NB traffic into central Evansville would rather stay on I-69 (tolled or not) than slog through Henderson and across the river on a single lane of US 41, and they're configuring the interchange accordingly.  In any case, the rendering is certainly preliminary at best; with local feedback, it's likely that if the actual configuration remains, it'll feature more lanes than shown on this video. 
Logged

jnewkirk77

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 260
  • Location: Owensboro, KY
  • Last Login: June 19, 2019, 11:20:46 PM
Re: I-69 Ohio River Bridge
« Reply #914 on: December 14, 2018, 11:28:44 PM »

I find the recommendation to keep the northbound bridge quite interesting. It is, after all, 86 years old versus 52 for the southbound. It is also narrower (but not by much). But it also seems to require less-frequent repairs than the southbound ... so maybe that's the reason for that line of thinking???
Logged

Buck87

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 897
  • Aesculus glabra

  • Age: 31
  • Location: Bellevue, Ohio
  • Last Login: Today at 08:16:41 AM
Re: I-69 Ohio River Bridge
« Reply #915 on: December 15, 2018, 10:35:31 AM »

Just spitballing here, but if converting the closed bridge to bicycle/pedestrian use is in the plans, the southbound one is better positioned for that, as it allows bike traffic and any future trail connections the possibility of getting between Evansville and Henderson without having to cross over 41.
Logged
When it comes to volume, the Ohio River is not a tributary. The Upper Mississippi is.

Revive 755

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3587
  • Last Login: June 19, 2019, 10:17:13 PM
Re: I-69 Ohio River Bridge
« Reply #916 on: December 15, 2018, 11:43:47 AM »

^ One of the graphics with the linked article showed the southbound US 41 bridge being removed.

I find the recommendation to keep the northbound bridge quite interesting. It is, after all, 86 years old versus 52 for the southbound. It is also narrower (but not by much). But it also seems to require less-frequent repairs than the southbound ... so maybe that's the reason for that line of thinking???

Maybe it's for more sinister reasons - keep the old bridge for a few years, then have a sudden critical, very expensive maintenance need cause it to close and force everyone to the new I-69 bridge?
Logged

hbelkins

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 13187
  • It is well, it is well, with my soul.

  • Age: 57
  • Location: Kentucky
  • Last Login: June 19, 2019, 04:24:01 PM
    • Millennium Highway
Re: I-69 Ohio River Bridge
« Reply #917 on: December 15, 2018, 02:16:34 PM »

They're keeping the newer bridge.

Personally, I would keep both bridges. Kentucky's always had full responsibility for them, since the river is not the state line at this location, so the new bridge will not be any more of a funding burden since it will be tolled. If the older bridge is to be closed eventually, at least keep it until the end of its useful life and retire it whenever it might have critical maintenance coming due, such as a repainting (that shouldn't be necessary anytime soon, since it was painted not all that many years ago) or redecking.
Logged

jnewkirk77

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 260
  • Location: Owensboro, KY
  • Last Login: June 19, 2019, 11:20:46 PM
Re: I-69 Ohio River Bridge
« Reply #918 on: December 15, 2018, 02:24:24 PM »

They're keeping the newer bridge.

Personally, I would keep both bridges. Kentucky's always had full responsibility for them, since the river is not the state line at this location, so the new bridge will not be any more of a funding burden since it will be tolled. If the older bridge is to be closed eventually, at least keep it until the end of its useful life and retire it whenever it might have critical maintenance coming due, such as a repainting (that shouldn't be necessary anytime soon, since it was painted not all that many years ago) or redecking.

All the reporting and the documentation they've shown locally list the SB bridge as "removed." I hope they're wrong.  It just got a new driving surface last year.

As far as the paint job goes, it didn't hold up, within 5 years the bridges both looked pretty much like they did before the repaint. District 2 has a fairly lengthy Facebook post about it from 2013, but the gist of that is the paint manufacturer altered the formula without telling anyone. So they'll need a repaint sooner, probably, rather than later.
Logged

Captain Jack

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 232
  • Location: Southern Indiana
  • Last Login: May 31, 2019, 07:33:12 PM
Re: I-69 Ohio River Bridge
« Reply #919 on: December 15, 2018, 06:51:51 PM »

Henderson and Evansville officials are on record now stating they will work to keep both 41 spans open. I too can't find any logic to closing the newer and wider one, unless there is this so-called sinister plan to eventually close them.

It is simply illogical to downsize traffic arteries like this. There was another traffic tie up today, causing delays of over an hour to get across the bridge.

It also makes little sense as they are currently spending a large chunk of change replacing bridges on both sides over backwater just across the Indiana side. If you are going to reduce this down to two lanes over the river, you might as well do it before these bridges and save this cost.
Logged

civeng

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 13
  • Location: Evansville, IN
  • Last Login: Today at 03:29:32 PM
Re: I-69 Ohio River Bridge
« Reply #920 on: December 17, 2018, 09:48:43 AM »

Even though the main report states the southbound bridge should be removed, "Appendix O-1 US 41 Bridges Engineering and Evaluation Report" states the northbound should be removed.  Maybe it was a typo for the Central Alternative.  The southbound bridge made since in West Alternative 1 as that is nearer to where the proposed bridge would be located.

https://i69ohiorivercrossing.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/59_Appendix_O-1_US_41_Bridges_Engineering_and_Evaluation_Report.pdf
Logged

silverback1065

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2911
  • Age: 29
  • Location: Indianapolis
  • Last Login: June 19, 2019, 07:14:45 PM
Re: I-69 Ohio River Bridge
« Reply #921 on: December 18, 2018, 08:20:43 AM »

they gave louisville 3 bridges, why can't they give 3 to this metro area?
Logged

Henry

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 4813
  • Age: 49
  • Location: Chicago, IL/Seattle, WA
  • Last Login: Today at 03:55:57 PM
    • Henry Watson's Online Freeway
Re: I-69 Ohio River Bridge
« Reply #922 on: December 18, 2018, 09:50:37 AM »

I like that they chose the Central Alternative for I-69, but I'd hate to see US 41 lose a bridge. I hope they preserve the one that's closed to vehicles for pedestrian use.
Logged
Go Cubs Go! Go Cubs Go! Hey Chicago, what do you say? The Cubs are gonna win today!

seicer

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1261
  • Last Login: Today at 12:38:05 PM
Re: I-69 Ohio River Bridge
« Reply #923 on: December 18, 2018, 10:02:34 AM »

they gave louisville 3 bridges, why can't they give 3 to this metro area?

Because Henderson is a very small city in comparison to Louisville's metropolitan area. And I-65's traffic counts and the percentage of trucks that use that route justified the bridges to planners.

And as much as I supported the East End Bridge (I-265), I found that rebuilding the downtown interchange and adding a second interchange was premature and needed to wait until traffic settled out. And my projections were right. The twin I-65 bridges, with 12 lanes between them, are -very- far below projections, even during rush hour. Traffic simply shifted to the free I-64 and US 31 bridges. The East End Bridge (I-265) is operating near projections.

Maintaining three bridges for a small city (Henderson) and a mid-sized city (Evansville), whereas they are hardly connected in between because of miles of bottomland and sprawl, makes no fiscal sense.
Logged

silverback1065

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2911
  • Age: 29
  • Location: Indianapolis
  • Last Login: June 19, 2019, 07:14:45 PM
Re: I-69 Ohio River Bridge
« Reply #924 on: December 18, 2018, 10:13:27 AM »

they gave louisville 3 bridges, why can't they give 3 to this metro area?

Because Henderson is a very small city in comparison to Louisville's metropolitan area. And I-65's traffic counts and the percentage of trucks that use that route justified the bridges to planners.

And as much as I supported the East End Bridge (I-265), I found that rebuilding the downtown interchange and adding a second interchange was premature and needed to wait until traffic settled out. And my projections were right. The twin I-65 bridges, with 12 lanes between them, are -very- far below projections, even during rush hour. Traffic simply shifted to the free I-64 and US 31 bridges. The East End Bridge (I-265) is operating near projections.

Maintaining three bridges for a small city (Henderson) and a mid-sized city (Evansville), whereas they are hardly connected in between because of miles of bottomland and sprawl, makes no fiscal sense.

doesn't sound like the louisville bridges made fiscal sense either. 
Logged

 


Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.