I-69 Ohio River Bridge

[Henry]

So in the website's timeline, the bridge is undergoing a two-year preconstruction phase. I assume we'll know what the bridge is going to look like somewhere in that phase (unless we've already been told), but be it cable-stayed or tied arch, I'd be happy with the design they go with.

[edwaleni]

So in the website's timeline, the bridge is undergoing a two-year preconstruction phase. I assume we'll know what the bridge is going to look like somewhere in that phase (unless we've already been told), but be it cable-stayed or tied arch, I'd be happy with the design they go with.

They haven't presented the span design yet.

Construction is expected to begin in 2027 and be complete by 2031 on that part, so probably in the next 6 months I would expect.

[evvroads]

Does this mean that I-69 is going to be MORE susceptible to flooding than US 41?  If so, that's very shortsighted.

That entire area is Ohio River floodplain, and it's absolutely expected for it to flood regularly. It floods several times a year. Ellis Park (horseracing track off US 41 near the Twin Bridges) even has a permanent levee built around it. Current I-69 from Pollack Ave to west of US 41 actually sits atop the levee protecting the southeast side of Evansville. There's definitely a reason they're building the new approach with piers & bridges. Personally, I don't have any concern whatsoever that the new approach will be susceptible to flooding. They would have to pretty much intentionally build it lower than known flood stages for that to happen.

[Rick Powell]

Does this mean that I-69 is going to be MORE susceptible to flooding than US 41?  If so, that's very shortsighted.

That entire area is Ohio River floodplain, and it's absolutely expected for it to flood regularly. It floods several times a year. Ellis Park (horseracing track off US 41 near the Twin Bridges) even has a permanent levee built around it. Current I-69 from Pollack Ave to west of US 41 actually sits atop the levee protecting the southeast side of Evansville. There's definitely a reason they're building the new approach with piers & bridges. Personally, I don't have any concern whatsoever that the new approach will be susceptible to flooding. They would have to pretty much intentionally build it lower than known flood stages for that to happen.

The north approach could have been built on embankment, but being in the flood plain, the Corps of Engineers would have required an expensive "compensatory storage" scheme to compensate for the additional fill. Putting the approach on structure is also best for reducing any additional "backwater" upstream of the crossing, which sometimes comes into play when a roadway on embankment might make upstream residences and businesses more prone to flooding. I am sure that the hydraulic performance of the river approaches, and the upcoming bridge, were designed and reviewed meticulously using the latest river gage and rainfall information, which unsurprisingly have been trending upward in the last several years. 

[vdeane]

Does this mean that I-69 is going to be MORE susceptible to flooding than US 41?  If so, that's very shortsighted

I guess we have no idea if the piers were underwater or not.  If that is the case, then there is very much cause for concern.

That's what I was worried about, though it seems that they were poking out and it was just hard to see on the image.

[ITB]

From the satellite image, it appears this was a significant Ohio River flood at Evansville, but it actually wasn't. In fact, it merely approached being a "moderate" flood, reaching a stage level of 47.67 on April 12, 2025. The record level is 53.8 feet.


National Water Prediction Service

Although most of the Indiana approach will be placed on a viaduct, renderings show a small section on an embankment. I have no idea why the engineers decided to do this.


Credit: I-69 Ohio River Crossing

In regards to the image of the flood and the piers, it's not clear, but, no, the piers were not underwater. Although the pier foundations were covered, there's nothing to be concerned about here. As an above post notes, flooding in the area is not uncommon. That's why it's termed a floodplain.

I am sure that the hydraulic performance of the river approaches, and the upcoming bridge, were designed and reviewed meticulously using the latest river gage and rainfall information, which unsurprisingly have been trending upward in the last several years. 

Exactly. Nobody wants this screwed up.



Credit: I-69 Ohio River Crossing
Close up of the Pier 14 footer; looking west. This a very extensive foundation for just a pier. The piles, drilled down to bedrock, have been filled with concrete. Also, note how high the column stems will be.

[Rick Powell]

Although most of the Indiana approach will be placed on a viaduct, renderings show a small section on an embankment. I have no idea why the engineers decided to do this.

I checked the FEMA flood map of the area, and the entire length of project footprint from current I-69 in Evansville to the bluff on the Kentucky side is Zone AE flood plain (areas that present a 1% annual chance of flooding). All things being equal, I'm sure INDOT would like to put as much of the alignment on embankment as possible to reduce structure maintenance costs, but it's always a tradeoff in a flood plain where permitting requirements come into play. My guess is that there are ramp terminals on the embankment area, and building on embankment (if it can be permitted) saves a slightly more complex bridge structure from having to be built.

I was surprised by how much of Evansville is in a flood plain. Some of the risk is reduced by levees, but it looks like at least 1/4 of the city is at some flood risk from the river.

https://tinyurl.com/FEMA-flood-plain-Evansville

(type in "Evansville, IN" in the box a the upper left and it will take you there)

For what it's worth, I have worked on about 10 major river crossing projects in my career and also live in a flood plain, so am familiar with a lot of the challenges and standards of major river construction and flooding. Contractors assume the risk of flooding when they bid projects like this, and weigh the consequences of building high cofferdams to keep working in the dry vs. letting the area flood and pumping it out when the river goes down, and catching up when it's feasible.

[I-55]

Although most of the Indiana approach will be placed on a viaduct, renderings show a small section on an embankment. I have no idea why the engineers decided to do this.

In addition to Rick's comments, the embankment section could also be to allow a crossover between spans for maintenance of traffic purposes in the event of future bridge work. It's a little more difficult to build a bridge between two other bridges for a crossover.

[Rick Powell]

In addition to Rick's comments, the embankment section could also be to allow a crossover between spans for maintenance of traffic purposes in the event of future bridge work. It's a little more difficult to build a bridge between two other bridges for a crossover.

This is also true, good point. I suppose a crossover pad "on structure" could be built integral to the twin I-69 bridges on the Indiana side, but at a cost probably 5X higher per square foot than pavement on embankment. The one concern I have is that, if built as shown, the embankment doesn't allow a lot of room to cross the traffic over ahead of the ramp terminals (especially the NB to WB  ramp), and may require the temporary closure of one or both of the ramps in future bridge work if traffic is shifted from one bridge to the other.

[jnewkirk77]

In addition to Rick's comments, the embankment section could also be to allow a crossover between spans for maintenance of traffic purposes in the event of future bridge work. It's a little more difficult to build a bridge between two other bridges for a crossover.

This is also true, good point. I suppose a crossover pad "on structure" could be built integral to the twin I-69 bridges on the Indiana side, but at a cost probably 5X higher per square foot than pavement on embankment. The one concern I have is that, if built as shown, the embankment doesn't allow a lot of room to cross the traffic over ahead of the ramp terminals (especially the NB to WB  ramp), and may require the temporary closure of one or both of the ramps in future bridge work if traffic is shifted from one bridge to the other.

This is a problem with the US 231 Natcher Bridge, although in its now 23-year existence it's just now become so, with last year's resurfacing and this year's cable inspection/maintenance project.

Because of the closeness of the SR 66 interchange to the river, the Indiana crossover had to be located north of the NB offramp. That means, when traffic is shifted to the SB side of the bridge, you can't exit to 66 without going to the first intersection, a mile north at the AEP Rockport power plant. They've set up a temporary U-turn there so traffic can double back and use the SB ramp.  Later this year, when the switch is made, traffic from 66 to SB 231 will first have to go north and then use the same U-turn.

It's not the best solution, but given how it was built, it's all they could do.

[ITB]

Indiana and Kentucky officials are making another push for federal assistance with the Ohio River Bridge Project. A meeting with Department of Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy has been set for mid-May. During the Biden administration, the ORX Project seemed to have been given the cold shoulder, as grant applications were repeatedly turned down. Perhaps the Trump administration will be different.

[roadman65]

I see Kinsey Road won't cross US 41 or future I-69.   It will use the US 41 SB lanes and become a frontage road to the relocated freeway.

[KelleyCook]

I see Kinsey Road won't cross US 41 or future I-69.  It will use the US 41 SB lanes and become a frontage road to the relocated freeway.

Correct: This map is mostly accurate. https://osm.org/go/ZRPbh_IO

[mgk920]

I also strongly suspect that that massive interchange at US 41/ N Green St will be completely re-engineered and simplified when I-69 is completed.

Mike

[roadman65]

QUOTE

I see Kinsey Road won't cross US 41 or future I-69.  It will use the US 41 SB lanes and become a frontage road to the relocated freeway.

Correct: This map is mostly accurate. https://osm.org/go/ZRPbh_IO

Yeah, Kinsey uses the former US 41 carriageway to Van Wyk Road which that map not only shows, but Van Wyk and Kinsey are concurrent together.

[pianocello]

I also strongly suspect that that massive interchange at US 41/ N Green St will be completely re-engineered and simplified when I-69 is completed.

Mike

Maybe, if the bridges or pavement deteriorate to the point where they need to be fully replaced. Otherwise, there are better uses of funding.

(FWIW, while I haven't heard this reasoning about the US 41/US 60 interchange specifically, I have for the US 41/existing I-69/Veterans Memorial Pkwy interchange on the other side of the river.)

[edwaleni]

I also strongly suspect that that massive interchange at US 41/ N Green St will be completely re-engineered and simplified when I-69 is completed.

Mike

Probably a roundabout if the traffic counts drop enough.

[mgk920]

I also strongly suspect that that massive interchange at US 41/ N Green St will be completely re-engineered and simplified when I-69 is completed.

Mike

Probably a roundabout if the traffic counts drop enough.

Yea, I don't see any future for that area other than as local access once I-69 is finished.  Also, I can see the former I-164 west of the new I-69 in Indiana becoming an 'odd' I-x69 and the interchnage at US 41 becoming a standard diamond (a DDI?).

Mike

[Henry]

I also strongly suspect that that massive interchange at US 41/ N Green St will be completely re-engineered and simplified when I-69 is completed.

Mike

Probably a roundabout if the traffic counts drop enough.

Yea, I don't see any future for that area other than as local access once I-69 is finished.  Also, I can see the former I-164 west of the new I-69 in Indiana becoming an 'odd' I-x69 and the interchnage at US 41 becoming a standard diamond (a DDI?).

Mike

More likely, it'll just be unnumbered, as I don't recall any plans to make an I-69 spur out of the orphaned leftover.

[silverback1065]

I also strongly suspect that that massive interchange at US 41/ N Green St will be completely re-engineered and simplified when I-69 is completed.

Mike

Probably a roundabout if the traffic counts drop enough.

Yea, I don't see any future for that area other than as local access once I-69 is finished.  Also, I can see the former I-164 west of the new I-69 in Indiana becoming an 'odd' I-x69 and the interchnage at US 41 becoming a standard diamond (a DDI?).

Mike

More likely, it'll just be unnumbered, as I don't recall any plans to make an I-69 spur out of the orphaned leftover.

It will probably say VETERANS MEMORIAL PARKWAY TO US 41 on the BGS.

[mgk920]

I also strongly suspect that that massive interchange at US 41/ N Green St will be completely re-engineered and simplified when I-69 is completed.

Mike

Probably a roundabout if the traffic counts drop enough.

Yea, I don't see any future for that area other than as local access once I-69 is finished.  Also, I can see the former I-164 west of the new I-69 in Indiana becoming an 'odd' I-x69 and the interchnage at US 41 becoming a standard diamond (a DDI?).

Mike

More likely, it'll just be unnumbered, as I don't recall any plans to make an I-69 spur out of the orphaned leftover.

It will probably say VETERANS MEMORIAL PARKWAY TO US 41 on the BGS.

Also, "Downtown Evansville'.  That's why I am thinking an 'odd' I-x69 3DI.  Little additional cost other than for the signs.

Mike