Indiana Notes

[nwi_navigator_1181]

NW Indiana will always be eternally under construction 

I did not enjoy that section between the MI state line and US-421 last week going through.

This is the first year since I've lived here that there wasn't at least some construction on I-80/94 between Calumet and I-65.

With FlexRoad scheduled to begin at some point next year, the streak likely ends at one.

Speaking of I-80/94, bridge demolition has stared on the southbound side of Ripley Street over I-80/94. This week, more involved demolition will begin, which will result in extensive nightly lane closures. From 6pm to 5am nightly for the next 10 nights, demolition work will result in through traffic being reduced to only one lane in each direction; on top of that, the single lane will facilitate the temporary ramps to get around the demolition zone, with no access to Ripley Street in either direction. To mitigate delays, the following closures will take place (on top of the aforementioned):

• Exit 21 from the Indiana Toll Road will be closed in both directions
• Ripley Street will be closed between US 20 and Central Avenue

It is strongly advised to use the Toll Road or even US 30 to get to Indiana 49 (for eastbound interests) or I-65 (for westbound interests). US 20 is too close to I-94 and the Toll Road for recommendation, IMO.

Work on the southbound bridge is scheduled to be completed by year's end (which is quite ambitious), with work on the northbound side to begin next year.

UPDATE: per INDOT, bridge demolition above the mainline has been completed a week ahead of schedule, so no more nightly closures will be needed. As of this morning (August 23, 2025), all closures have been lifted. Toll Road access was restricted overnight for ramp resurfacing, but has since been completed.

[ITB]

In July, an INDOT contract was awarded under unusual circumstances. Two contractors — Beaty Construction Inc. and E & B Paving LLC — submitted identical low bid amounts for a project. To decide whom to award the contract to INDOT did a coin flip, which came up in favor of Beaty Construction.



   

[Revive 755]

This is the first year since I've lived here that there wasn't at least some construction on I-80/94 between Calumet and I-65.

With FlexRoad scheduled to begin at some point next year, the streak likely ends at one.

And INDOT is probably holding one of the two currently open Safezones photo enforcement slots for that project.

[ilpt4u]

In July, an INDOT contract was awarded under unusual circumstances. Two contractors — Beaty Construction Inc. and E & B Paving LLC — submitted identical low bid amounts for a project. To decide whom to award the contract to INDOT did a coin flip, which came up in favor of Beaty Construction.

Were representatives of the contractors present at the toss, and if so, which one got to make the "Heads/Tails" call?

Legitimately curious what the process of how the coin toss plays out. Does INDOT arbitrarily assign one bidder "Heads" and the other "Tails"?

[ITB]

Were representatives of the contractors present at the toss, and if so, which one got to make the "Heads/Tails" call?

Legitimately curious what the process of how the coin toss plays out. Does INDOT arbitrarily assign one bidder "Heads" and the other "Tails"?

While I don't know how it went down, I imagine INDOT's first step was to consult a contract lawyer.  In all likelihood, somewhere, sometime this situation had happened before, and it was in the books. Maybe the solution then was a coin toss. Maybe not.

In any event, regarding the present situation, the goal was to resolve the situation fairly. The two contractors involved were, undoubtedly, advised of the situation and of the proposed solution—the coin toss. Evidently, both agreed to proceed, as the coin flip did indeed happen.

Were contractor representatives present during the toss? Maybe. But more likely it took place during a video call. Doesn't really matter who called heads or tails. For all involved, it was apparently a fair resolution to an unusual situation. The only other option was to rebid the contract. If that had transpired, it's possible the two contractors would have lost out to another bidder.