AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

New rules for political content in signatures and user profiles. See this thread for details.

Author Topic: Update on I-69 Extension in Indiana  (Read 809982 times)

truejd

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 17
  • Last Login: October 14, 2019, 09:52:44 PM
Re: Update on I-69 Extension in Indiana
« Reply #3200 on: September 03, 2019, 03:18:20 PM »

Does anyone know what the exit number will be for the I-69, I-465 interchange?
Logged

silverback1065

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3017
  • Age: 30
  • Location: Indianapolis
  • Last Login: Today at 04:07:42 PM
Re: Update on I-69 Extension in Indiana
« Reply #3201 on: September 03, 2019, 06:50:46 PM »

Anyone know where the sign plans are?

Sign specs and drawings for a particular project can be accessed under INDOT's documents webpage. You'll need to know the project's 5-digit contract number to search.

https://erms.indot.in.gov/viewdocs/

You might have to open and view several Plan/Drawing sets before you find what you're looking for. Someone with experience in looking up sign specs could probably be of more assistance.

If you're looking for sign plans for the "Martinsville" segment of Section 6,  I think I found what your looking for. A search of documents for Contract #33493 brings up 28 Plan/Drawing Sets. Among these is Part 1 of 2 1800337 Contract Services. That's the drawings for traffic management, and includes all the signs that will be placed along the route in Martinsville. You'll have to select and download to view those drawings. There are 3 pages for Contract #33493 drawings. Part 1 of 2 1800337 is found on the second page. The page numbers are at the bottom of the results, and are simply enumerated 1, 2 or 3. Click on the number 2.

Here's a short INDOT guide on how to view drawings/contracts:

https://www.in.gov/dot/div/contracts/letting/archive/2019/aug07/view_a_contract.pdf

Edit: added INDOT "view contracts" guide info

DES mean "designation number" it's a number given to every indot project.  very similar to a contract number. 
Logged

tdindy88

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 1397
  • Last Login: Today at 04:35:20 PM
Re: Update on I-69 Extension in Indiana
« Reply #3202 on: September 03, 2019, 08:03:55 PM »

Does anyone know what the exit number will be for the I-69, I-465 interchange?

Well, just using a measuring tool from the intersection of SR 37 and SR 44, which will be Exit 140, the I-69/465 interchange will likely be Exit 163 or very close to that number.
Logged

abqtraveler

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 261
  • US-85 runs thru Albuquerque, but only on paper

  • Location: Albuquerque, NM
  • Last Login: October 18, 2019, 06:51:28 PM
Re: Update on I-69 Extension in Indiana
« Reply #3203 on: September 03, 2019, 09:12:45 PM »

Does anyone know what the exit number will be for the I-69, I-465 interchange?

Well, just using a measuring tool from the intersection of SR 37 and SR 44, which will be Exit 140, the I-69/465 interchange will likely be Exit 163 or very close to that number.

That sounds about right. Published documents on I-69 SIU 3 state that the extension from I-465 to I-64 is 142 miles. Add to that the 21 miles of former I-164, and you have 163 miles.
Logged
2-d Interstates traveled:  4, 5, 8, 10, 15, 20, 24, 25, 27, 29, 35, 37, 39, 40, 41, 43, 45, 49, 55, 57, 64, 65, 66, 69, 70, 71, 74, 75, 76(E), 77, 78, 81, 83, 85, 87(N), 89, 90, 91, 93, 94, 95

2-d Interstates Clinched:  12, 22, 30, 44, 59, 80, 84(E), 86(E), 238

tdindy88

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 1397
  • Last Login: Today at 04:35:20 PM
Re: Update on I-69 Extension in Indiana
« Reply #3204 on: September 03, 2019, 09:31:27 PM »

Which is what makes Exit 200 on the northeast side not make sense. It will not be 37 miles around the 465 beltway to connect the two I-69 interchanges. Yeah, making it 200 is easier on those who remember it as 0 and so on. INDOT as usual thinks people will care less about the technicality. It does make it harder if you want to see how long I-69 will be across the state. With most interstates that use mileage-based exits you can look at the last exit and make a guess as to how long. With I-69, it will not be close to 357 miles in length.
Logged

sprjus4

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 2461
  • Location: Hampton Roads, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 04:38:34 PM
Re: Update on I-69 Extension in Indiana
« Reply #3205 on: September 03, 2019, 11:51:27 PM »

Which is what makes Exit 200 on the northeast side not make sense. It will not be 37 miles around the 465 beltway to connect the two I-69 interchanges. Yeah, making it 200 is easier on those who remember it as 0 and so on. INDOT as usual thinks people will care less about the technicality. It does make it harder if you want to see how long I-69 will be across the state. With most interstates that use mileage-based exits you can look at the last exit and make a guess as to how long. With I-69, it will not be close to 357 miles in length.
The only solution would be route I-69 on the west side of I-465, which would be 33 miles, which isn't exactly 37 miles, but closer. Granted, other than getting the mileage closer to correct, this route makes just about no sense to actually implement. Nobody would follow it anyways, they'd still take I-465 around the east side. More direct, quicker, etc.
Logged

Henry

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 5085
  • Age: 49
  • Location: Chicago, IL/Seattle, WA
  • Last Login: Today at 08:56:31 AM
    • Henry Watson's Online Freeway
Re: Update on I-69 Extension in Indiana
« Reply #3206 on: September 04, 2019, 09:58:14 AM »

Well, I-465 is 53 miles long, so I-69's route as proposed would only be 20 miles, and provided the Exit 163 guess holds up, the exits on the original I-69 would have to be renumbered by subtracting 17 from their current numbers. After all this, the total length (including the former I-164) should come out to 340 miles.
Logged
Go Cubs Go! Go Cubs Go! Hey Chicago, what do you say? The Cubs are gonna win today!

thefarmerchris

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6
  • Location: Indiana
  • Last Login: October 18, 2019, 11:47:54 AM
Re: Update on I-69 Extension in Indiana
« Reply #3207 on: September 04, 2019, 06:21:46 PM »

Which is what makes Exit 200 on the northeast side not make sense. It will not be 37 miles around the 465 beltway to connect the two I-69 interchanges. Yeah, making it 200 is easier on those who remember it as 0 and so on. INDOT as usual thinks people will care less about the technicality. It does make it harder if you want to see how long I-69 will be across the state. With most interstates that use mileage-based exits you can look at the last exit and make a guess as to how long. With I-69, it will not be close to 357 miles in length.
The only solution would be route I-69 on the west side of I-465, which would be 33 miles, which isn't exactly 37 miles, but closer. Granted, other than getting the mileage closer to correct, this route makes just about no sense to actually implement. Nobody would follow it anyways, they'd still take I-465 around the east side. More direct, quicker, etc.

Remember too about the Ohio River bridge. How many miles will be cut off of the total amount when that realignment comes into the fold?
Logged

MikeSantNY78

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 121
  • Location: Depew, NY (suburban Buffalo)
  • Last Login: October 12, 2019, 08:32:43 PM
Re: Update on I-69 Extension in Indiana
« Reply #3208 on: September 04, 2019, 07:17:19 PM »

Which is what makes Exit 200 on the northeast side not make sense. It will not be 37 miles around the 465 beltway to connect the two I-69 interchanges. Yeah, making it 200 is easier on those who remember it as 0 and so on. INDOT as usual thinks people will care less about the technicality. It does make it harder if you want to see how long I-69 will be across the state. With most interstates that use mileage-based exits you can look at the last exit and make a guess as to how long. With I-69, it will not be close to 357 miles in length.

If you're traveling along I-465 between the two legs of I-69, you're using the 465's mileposts, and the distance calculation doesn't completely matter.  SO: Kentucky line to the southern leg of the 465 + the concurrency therewith + mileage along the original 69 to the Michigan line = total accumulated state mileage.  Forcing people to actually Do Some Math. 
Logged

Life in Paradise

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 246
  • Location: Indiana
  • Last Login: Today at 03:18:52 PM
Re: Update on I-69 Extension in Indiana
« Reply #3209 on: September 05, 2019, 02:24:27 PM »



Remember too about the Ohio River bridge. How many miles will be cut off of the total amount when that realignment comes into the fold?
[/quote]
It should be close to a wash.  It will occur close to the 2 mile marker, but then there is over a mile to the river to cross.
Logged

mgk920

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3451
  • Location: Appleton, WI USA
  • Last Login: Today at 12:31:39 AM
Re: Update on I-69 Extension in Indiana
« Reply #3210 on: September 05, 2019, 05:26:42 PM »

Which is what makes Exit 200 on the northeast side not make sense. It will not be 37 miles around the 465 beltway to connect the two I-69 interchanges. Yeah, making it 200 is easier on those who remember it as 0 and so on. INDOT as usual thinks people will care less about the technicality. It does make it harder if you want to see how long I-69 will be across the state. With most interstates that use mileage-based exits you can look at the last exit and make a guess as to how long. With I-69, it will not be close to 357 miles in length.

INDOT did that to lessen possible confusion when all of the MPs and interchange numbers were changed on the existing I-69 northeast of I-465 - just add 200 to each of them.

Mike
Logged

csw

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 599
  • Age: 22
  • Location: Virginia
  • Last Login: Today at 11:09:01 AM
Re: Update on I-69 Extension in Indiana
« Reply #3211 on: September 05, 2019, 06:09:27 PM »

Yeah, I think just adding 200 was way easier than renumbering it exactly...I don't think most people will notice or care that it doesn't add up exactly. I guess we'll have to see how many people are driving it end to end and then decide whether or not it was a good idea.

tdindy88

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 1397
  • Last Login: Today at 04:35:20 PM
Re: Update on I-69 Extension in Indiana
« Reply #3212 on: September 05, 2019, 09:38:16 PM »

Remember too about the Ohio River bridge. How many miles will be cut off of the total amount when that realignment comes into the fold?
It should be close to a wash.  It will occur close to the 2 mile marker, but then there is over a mile to the river to cross.
[/quote]

Doing a quick measurement based on the latest alternative map for I-69 over the Ohio River. It should be right on it, and that's just if you include the distance to the state line which comes before the river. Worse comes to worse you can tell Kentucky to piss off and count the mileage from the bridge, though it would have to probably be the northern end of the bridge. But it looks as if the mileage will be just about perfect.
Logged

ITB

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 261
  • Location: Indiana
  • Last Login: October 09, 2019, 06:14:07 PM
Re: Update on I-69 Extension in Indiana
« Reply #3213 on: September 08, 2019, 05:47:28 PM »


A few pictures of the construction currently underway in Martinsville, Indiana. Photos were taken August 18, 2019, unless otherwise noted.

Section 6, Martinsville, Indiana

The construction zone near the intersection of SR 37 and Grand Valley Blvd. in Martinsville, Indiana; looking east. Grand Valley Blvd. will be extended over SR 37 (future I-69) via an overpass to connect with South Street in Martinsville proper.


Stacks of MSE panels at the construction zone near Martinsville High School in Martinsville, Indiana.


The bridge that will carry Grand Valley Blvd./South Street over Sartor Ditch, and the Martinsville High School connecting multi-use access path (left); looking south


Another perspective of the construction zone; looking south.


Closer look at the construction zone; looking east. SR 37 is the road pictured. Work to now underway to construct the median bent for the Grand Valley Blvd. overpass (background; yellow excavator).
Logged

Ryctor2018

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 16
  • Location: Illinois
  • Last Login: Today at 02:35:15 PM
Re: Update on I-69 Extension in Indiana
« Reply #3214 on: September 12, 2019, 01:51:40 PM »

A small bit of news: https://www.hoosiertimes.com/reporter_times/free_access/grand-valley-ind-intersection-expected-to-permanently-close-saturday/article_5c79cb06-877d-502f-965e-c1347078546d.html

"The Indiana Department of Transportation is expected to close the intersection of Ind. 37 and Grand Valley Boulevard early Saturday morning."
Logged

X99

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 394
  • Location: South Dakota
  • Last Login: Today at 02:18:48 PM
Re: Update on I-69 Extension in Indiana
« Reply #3215 on: September 12, 2019, 01:59:05 PM »

A small bit of news: https://www.hoosiertimes.com/reporter_times/free_access/grand-valley-ind-intersection-expected-to-permanently-close-saturday/article_5c79cb06-877d-502f-965e-c1347078546d.html

"The Indiana Department of Transportation is expected to close the intersection of Ind. 37 and Grand Valley Boulevard early Saturday morning."
So Artesian Avenue is done and open to traffic? (In other words, can I take the construction tag off of it on OpenStreetMap?)
Logged

SSR_317

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 243
  • Why does FHWA hate "Exit 0"?

  • Age: 63
  • Location: Indianapolis
  • Last Login: September 28, 2019, 04:58:25 PM
Re: Update on I-69 Extension in Indiana
« Reply #3216 on: September 13, 2019, 02:20:17 PM »

Which is what makes Exit 200 on the northeast side not make sense. It will not be 37 miles around the 465 beltway to connect the two I-69 interchanges. Yeah, making it 200 is easier on those who remember it as 0 and so on. INDOT as usual thinks people will care less about the technicality. It does make it harder if you want to see how long I-69 will be across the state. With most interstates that use mileage-based exits you can look at the last exit and make a guess as to how long. With I-69, it will not be close to 357 miles in length.

INDOT did that to lessen possible confusion when all of the MPs and interchange numbers were changed on the existing I-69 northeast of I-465 - just add 200 to each of them.

Mike
Exactly, Mike.

BTW, this is why I objected to the entire "southern extension" project being called I-69 in the first place. The Indy to Evansville to Memphis portion SHOULD HAVE been designated as I-63, with sections further south and west being assigned appropriate  numbers that fit into the original grid. And yes, the W-E Lansing to Port Huron/Sarnia stretch should not be I-69 either (I-98 would've fit). But that's all water under the (Blue Water) bridge at this point.
Logged

silverback1065

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3017
  • Age: 30
  • Location: Indianapolis
  • Last Login: Today at 04:07:42 PM
Re: Update on I-69 Extension in Indiana
« Reply #3217 on: September 13, 2019, 02:24:36 PM »

I agree, never thought of that idea but I like it
Logged

X99

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 394
  • Location: South Dakota
  • Last Login: Today at 02:18:48 PM
Re: Update on I-69 Extension in Indiana
« Reply #3218 on: September 16, 2019, 12:59:04 PM »

Which is what makes Exit 200 on the northeast side not make sense. It will not be 37 miles around the 465 beltway to connect the two I-69 interchanges. Yeah, making it 200 is easier on those who remember it as 0 and so on. INDOT as usual thinks people will care less about the technicality. It does make it harder if you want to see how long I-69 will be across the state. With most interstates that use mileage-based exits you can look at the last exit and make a guess as to how long. With I-69, it will not be close to 357 miles in length.

INDOT did that to lessen possible confusion when all of the MPs and interchange numbers were changed on the existing I-69 northeast of I-465 - just add 200 to each of them.

Mike
Exactly, Mike.

BTW, this is why I objected to the entire "southern extension" project being called I-69 in the first place. The Indy to Evansville to Memphis portion SHOULD HAVE been designated as I-63, with sections further south and west being assigned appropriate  numbers that fit into the original grid. And yes, the W-E Lansing to Port Huron/Sarnia stretch should not be I-69 either (I-98 would've fit). But that's all water under the (Blue Water) bridge at this point.
They wanted a single number running border to border. That's why it's all I-69.
Logged

X99

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 394
  • Location: South Dakota
  • Last Login: Today at 02:18:48 PM
Re: Update on I-69 Extension in Indiana
« Reply #3219 on: September 16, 2019, 05:40:38 PM »

3 questions:
Is Artesian Avenue open to traffic?
Is the east side of Grand Valley Boulevard open to Cramertown Loop?
Is the west side of Grand Valley Boulevard between the future bridge site and SR 37 closed, and if so, is it permanent? (Like "remove from maps" permanent?)
Logged

ITB

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 261
  • Location: Indiana
  • Last Login: October 09, 2019, 06:14:07 PM
Re: Update on I-69 Extension in Indiana
« Reply #3220 on: September 18, 2019, 03:08:21 AM »

3 questions:
Is Artesian Avenue open to traffic?
Is the east side of Grand Valley Boulevard open to Cramertown Loop?
Is the west side of Grand Valley Boulevard between the future bridge site and SR 37 closed, and if so, is it permanent? (Like "remove from maps" permanent?)

Artesian Avenue was opened to traffic on August 30th.

Source: INDOT Section 6 Construction Update (Aug 27) https://content.govdelivery.com/accounts/INDOT/bulletins/25afe6e

Grand Valley Boulevard most likely is open to Cramertown Loop. I say most likely because I haven't seen an official INDOT notice stating that it is open. That doesn't mean there wasn't one. In early August, INDOT announced a 30-day closure of Cramertown Loop to rebuild a section and to complete the tie-in to Grand Valley Boulevard. Since 42 days have passed since the announced closure date, the tie-in is almost certainly completed.

Source: INDOT Section 6 Traffic Alert (Aug 6) https://content.govdelivery.com/accounts/INDOT/bulletins/256a657

I'm a little confused by the third question, but maybe the following will provide an answer. As you know, Grand Valley Boulevard is to be extended over SR 37 via an overpass to link into South Street in Martinsville proper. Prior to the recent closure of the SR 37/Grand Valley Boulevard intersection, Grand Valley Blvd. ran only east from that intersection. There is no road signed Grand Valley Blvd. west of SR 37. The road you might be thinking of is South Street. South Street, however, never intersected with SR 37, as it dead ends just prior to Sartor Creek. Currently, construction on a bridge over Sartor Creek is underway that will carry South Street/Grand Valley Blvd. INDOT in its bulletin of Sept 5 calls the bridge over Sartor Creek the "new South Street bridge." Construction of the Grand Valley Blvd. overpass over SR 37 has also commenced. The following link has a map that may be useful.

Link: INDOT Section 6 Construction Update (Sept 5) https://content.govdelivery.com/accounts/INDOT/bulletins/25d4c15

If your reference to the "west" side of Grand Valley Blvd. means the small section of roadway between the current SR 37/Grand Valley Blvd. intersection and the point where the new overpass will tie-in to Grand Valley — that small slice of roadway will be eliminated.

Update: On a rereading of the INDOT Section 6 bulletin of August 27, 2019, I believe it provides the information you seek:

"This closure will allow crews to complete the tie-in of the newly-aligned section of Cramertown Loop to the existing roadway. Once the tie-in is finished, work on Artesian Avenue, Cramertown Loop and the Grand Valley Boulevard extension will be complete and all will be open to traffic. "




« Last Edit: September 18, 2019, 12:17:55 PM by ITB »
Logged

sturmde

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 17
  • Location: Bangor, Maine, USA
  • Last Login: October 18, 2019, 02:33:47 PM
Re: Update on I-69 Extension in Indiana
« Reply #3221 on: September 18, 2019, 01:49:11 PM »

You objected to there being a route number that would be the same for a Mexico-to-Canada through route?  Please don't tell me you actually wrote a letter of complaint to AASHTO.

Which is what makes Exit 200 on the northeast side not make sense. It will not be 37 miles around the 465 beltway to connect the two I-69 interchanges. Yeah, making it 200 is easier on those who remember it as 0 and so on. INDOT as usual thinks people will care less about the technicality. It does make it harder if you want to see how long I-69 will be across the state. With most interstates that use mileage-based exits you can look at the last exit and make a guess as to how long. With I-69, it will not be close to 357 miles in length.

INDOT did that to lessen possible confusion when all of the MPs and interchange numbers were changed on the existing I-69 northeast of I-465 - just add 200 to each of them.

Mike
Exactly, Mike.

BTW, this is why I objected to the entire "southern extension" project being called I-69 in the first place. The Indy to Evansville to Memphis portion SHOULD HAVE been designated as I-63, with sections further south and west being assigned appropriate  numbers that fit into the original grid. And yes, the W-E Lansing to Port Huron/Sarnia stretch should not be I-69 either (I-98 would've fit). But that's all water under the (Blue Water) bridge at this point.
Logged

X99

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 394
  • Location: South Dakota
  • Last Login: Today at 02:18:48 PM
Re: Update on I-69 Extension in Indiana
« Reply #3222 on: September 18, 2019, 02:18:42 PM »

3 questions:
Is Artesian Avenue open to traffic?
Is the east side of Grand Valley Boulevard open to Cramertown Loop?
Is the west side of Grand Valley Boulevard between the future bridge site and SR 37 closed, and if so, is it permanent? (Like "remove from maps" permanent?)

Artesian Avenue was opened to traffic on August 30th.

Source: INDOT Section 6 Construction Update (Aug 27) https://content.govdelivery.com/accounts/INDOT/bulletins/25afe6e

Grand Valley Boulevard most likely is open to Cramertown Loop. I say most likely because I haven't seen an official INDOT notice stating that it is open. That doesn't mean there wasn't one. In early August, INDOT announced a 30-day closure of Cramertown Loop to rebuild a section and to complete the tie-in to Grand Valley Boulevard. Since 42 days have passed since the announced closure date, the tie-in is almost certainly completed.

Source: INDOT Section 6 Traffic Alert (Aug 6) https://content.govdelivery.com/accounts/INDOT/bulletins/256a657

I'm a little confused by the third question, but maybe the following will provide an answer. As you know, Grand Valley Boulevard is to be extended over SR 37 via an overpass to link into South Street in Martinsville proper. Prior to the recent closure of the SR 37/Grand Valley Boulevard intersection, Grand Valley Blvd. ran only east from that intersection. There is no road signed Grand Valley Blvd. west of SR 37. The road you might be thinking of is South Street. South Street, however, never intersected with SR 37, as it dead ends just prior to Sartor Creek. Currently, construction on a bridge over Sartor Creek is underway that will carry South Street/Grand Valley Blvd. INDOT in its bulletin of Sept 5 calls the bridge over Sartor Creek the "new South Street bridge." Construction of the Grand Valley Blvd. overpass over SR 37 has also commenced. The following link has a map that may be useful.

Link: INDOT Section 6 Construction Update (Sept 5) https://content.govdelivery.com/accounts/INDOT/bulletins/25d4c15

If your reference to the "west" side of Grand Valley Blvd. means the small section of roadway between the current SR 37/Grand Valley Blvd. intersection and the point where the new overpass will tie-in to Grand Valley — that small slice of roadway will be eliminated.

Update: On a rereading of the INDOT Section 6 bulletin of August 27, 2019, I believe it provides the information you seek:

"This closure will allow crews to complete the tie-in of the newly-aligned section of Cramertown Loop to the existing roadway. Once the tie-in is finished, work on Artesian Avenue, Cramertown Loop and the Grand Valley Boulevard extension will be complete and all will be open to traffic. "
okay good, because I already updated OpenStreetMap to match that. I left the old Grand Valley Blvd/IN 37 intersection there, but hidden, just in case.
Logged

X99

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 394
  • Location: South Dakota
  • Last Login: Today at 02:18:48 PM
Re: Update on I-69 Extension in Indiana
« Reply #3223 on: September 18, 2019, 10:34:57 PM »

Is the 465/69 South interchange under construction? It's marked as such on OSM, and I don't think it should be yet.
Logged

tdindy88

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 1397
  • Last Login: Today at 04:35:20 PM
Re: Update on I-69 Extension in Indiana
« Reply #3224 on: September 18, 2019, 10:41:04 PM »

Nope. It won’t be under construction for another couple of years at least.
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.