Update on I-69 Extension in Indiana

[Alps]

Every example I can think of where an interchange with ghost ramps had the missing freeway built, the interchange in question was partially or entirely redesigned anyway.

Counterexample: I-84/CT 9.

CT 9 was never fully completed, but the overpasses were already in place, making a redesign very unlikely if it were. This happened at "PA 90" (Betsy Ross Bridge) and I-95, where the only change from the original design is that the overpasses weren't built across I-95 to connect NJ 90 to the local Philly street grid - but the ramps are identical.

[Revive 755]

I looked at Rand McNally's latest in Wal Mart and still see no showing of progress of freeways between Evansville and Indy.  I am glad to hear that it is happening.  Too bad they can't build it inside the 465 loop like originally planned, it would be interesting to see those ghost ramps to be used at the North- East end of the I-65 and I-70 con-currency that were abandoned.

There's not some idle plans for an at grade version beginning at the northern I-65/I-70 interchange?  It appears from Google Earth some of the bridges over the unbuilt ramps have seen some significant work when such bridges would have been removed elsewhere (as happens with most bridges over abandoned railroads).

[Grzrd]

FHWA has approved Section 4 from Crane to Bloomington.  Drama between INDOT and Bloomingtom MPO still has to play out:
http://www.chron.com/news/article/Federal-agency-approves-new-S-Ind-I-69-section-2162464.php

Federal officials have approved construction plans for a hotly debated section of the Interstate 69 extension in southern Indiana.
State officials say the Federal Highway Administration on Thursday endorsed the 27-mile stretch proposed for the highway from near the Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center to just south of Bloomington.
The state highway department expects construction to start on that section by year's end, but that is being complicated by a Bloomington area transportation board's decision to not support the route because of environmental and quality of life concerns.
The board is scheduled to discuss the plan Friday afternoon, although The Herald-Times reports Bloomington Mayor Mark Kruzan (kroo-ZAN') is asking members to postpone a vote until November so that the state can answer questions about the project.

[ShawnP]

Might be shallow but wouldn't it be sweet to see INDOT take all the exits and entrances out in the Bloomington area. They don't want it so they get no exits.

[InterstateNG]

Why should through traffic be punished with 10 miles without services due to the actions of a vocal minority?

[ShawnP]

Put up Service plazas.................that would make em mad. Pump the raw sewage right into their creeks or something.

[NE2]

It would be even funnier if we dropped a nuke on Bloomington without warning.

[ShawnP]

No they haven't gotten that level of bad people yet. Bloomington never wanted I-69 so it should recieve nothing from it's building. INDOT didn't start this as they to build this road to help Bloomington and sw Indiana. I would almost say reroute away from Bloomington but the trains already down the tracks.

[InterstateNG]

Bloomington never wanted the freeway to barrel through their city.  I think that's reasonable.

The opposition currently are the usual types, but they are the minority.  If you wish to heed their lamentations by taking out exits that already exist, screwing through traffic and traffic destined for the university, be my guest, but I would prefer solutions that aren't a spiteful, childish waste of resources.

[tdindy88]

The highway doesn't go through the city, it goes around it, even the interstate. Within the Bloomington city limits themselves, I wouldn't expect much work to be done except for building the bridges on the exisiting crossings of 37 and keeping the exits themselves. Back when the 37 bypass was built that was mostly country, the fact there there is now housing developments and strip malls along 37 (especially at 3rd Street) is evidently because B-Town isn't as committed to combating sprawl as they are to stopping highways. They hate building interstates through farmland and forest but have no problem with building strip malls and housing developments there? Though in the spirit of what's been said here so far, keep the routing and keep the exisiting interchanges, but build tollbooths at each of the exit ramps, and please don't nuke it (I'd hate to see Brown County get nuclear radiation.)

[ShawnP]

I think most people have gotten their fill of the NIMBY's in Bloomington and Monoroe County. I know in Louisville River Fields will have to enter a Witness Protection Program.

[tdindy88]

Just looked at the Record of Decision on Section 4, I-69 is slated to end at SR 37 at a stop light and not as an interchange, at least initally. The ROW for the interchange will be obtained and the space cleared out, but they aren't planning on building the exit until they start working on Section 5, whenever that would be.

[vtk]

Just looked at the Record of Decision on Section 4, I-69 is slated to end at SR 37 at a stop light and not as an interchange, at least initally. The ROW for the interchange will be obtained and the space cleared out, but they aren't planning on building the exit until they start working on Section 5, whenever that would be.

Will the intersection geometry favor through traffic on SR 37, or will it favor through traffic for I-69 ( / future I-69)?

[Stephane Dumas]

Will the intersection geometry favor through traffic on SR 37, or will it favor through traffic for I-69 ( / future I-69)?

I guess INDOT might favor through traffic for I-69 and by curiosity, someone posted the proposed future interchange on OpenStreetmap
http://mapper.acme.com/?ll=39.11085,-86.55935&z=15&t=K&marker0=39.16222%2C-86.52917%2CBloomington%2C%20Indiana

Wouldn't be ironic to see years later, some of those NIMBYs seeing the light and enjoy driving on I-69?

[hbelkins]

Why should through traffic be punished with 10 miles without services due to the actions of a vocal minority?

10 miles without services is a hardship or punishment? 

[tdindy88]

Through traffic on I-69 will be favored with the final interchange, as traffic going south that way will have to exit off of I-69 to continue on SR 37 south. Traffic going north on 37 will go through a loop to head south on I-69 and northbound traffic will flow straight into I-69.

[Grzrd]

Just looked at the Record of Decision on Section 4, I-69 is slated to end at SR 37 at a stop light and not as an interchange, at least initally. The ROW for the interchange will be obtained and the space cleared out, but they aren't planning on building the exit until they start working on Section 5, whenever that would be.

Environmental surveying for Section 5 is scheduled to begin on September 19; it will be conducted along SR 37 all the way to SR 39 in Morgan County (article has a photo of the Tapp Road/SR 37 intersection):
http://indianapublicmedia.org/news/indot-sending-surveyors-section-5-i69-corridor-20364/

Maybe INDOT is sending a message to Bloomington/Monroe County ...

[mukade]

Below is a link to an interesting article about the battle between Bloominington MPO and INDOT:
Feds' answers to I-69 questions show local MPO, state both have power, needs

Here is a photo of I-69 a mile south of SR 58 in Daviess County taken on September 30, 2011:


Looking east on I-69 from US 231 near Crane:


US 231 is being straightened at the new I-69 interchange:

[Revive 755]

Below is a link to an interesting article about the battle between Bloominington MPO and INDOT:
Feds' answers to I-69 questions show local MPO, state both have power, needs

[Somewhat related side rant] Maybe some good will come out of this conflict, and Indiana's Congressmen will get MPO's stripped of some of their powers so the state DOTs can get back to doing the job right.  Many MPOs such as the one for Bloomington only seem good for messing things up anymore.

[mukade]

Indiana Economic Digest - INDOT to Bloomington: No I-69, no road funding

"INDOT expects that construction of I-69 sections 4 and 5 will be included in the BMCMPO's TIP. If I-69 is not included in the TIP, the current TIP will expire and funds for federal transportation projects in the BMCMPO's planning area will be cut off until the impasse ends. INDOT does not expect, and is not planning for, a scenario in which I-69 is omitted from the BMCMPO's TIP."

[mukade]

Link to current INDOT I-69 contracts. The next contract northeast from US 231 is scheduled to be let in November, and the one taking I-69 up to the Monroe County line (SR 445) is scheduled for December. Beyond that, what happens with the Bloomington MPO decides whether or not it will connect to SR 37. INDOT says that Federal and state funding to transit systems in Bloomington will be withheld in addition to the road funding if I-69 is not added to the TIP.

Recent photos: US 231 being straightened and soil stabilized at I-69 interchange (10/22):


SR 58 bridge over I-69 (10/22):

[Brandon]

Should've just bypassed Bloomington using the Terre Haute route.

[vtk]

Should've just bypassed Bloomington using the Terre Haute route.

That's a bit of a drastic bypass.  Might be easier (particularly considering work already done) to bypass the county(s) covered by this stubborn MPO.

[hbelkins]

Should've just bypassed Bloomington using the Terre Haute route.

Which would have done nothing for the areas that will benefit from the new alignment.

[mukade]

Exactly. Also, that particular I-69 route was partially selected so people from around the state can safely and efficiently travel to IU. Whether or not you like Bloomington, that is where the largest university in the state is located. If that weren't the case, perhaps the I-70/US 41 route may have worked, but it still would have been sub-optimal.