Last week, I linked to an article about I-69 moving along with an award of a contract for a stretch around Bloomington. Today Ryan Sabalow has an article“There is no money to finish anything of consequence, much beyond routine maintenance and a few minor projects,” said Rep. Jeff Espich, chairman of the House’s tax-writing and finance committee.
So the choice for the next governor, although far from easy in practice, is fairly simple in principle: either come up with a new source of funds or stop the project — at least for the time being — in Bloomington.
They need $1.1 billion. Pence, Gregg (and Boneham) all support completing the project. None of them has any idea how to get the money. I predict even more dangerous and annoying stop-and-go traffic along SR 37. Ugh.
In various employments I have had to drive not only from Indy to Evansville, but throughout the SW Indiana area. I have been every route to Evansville, the mileage and the how long it takes. Those who advocate just upgrading U.S. 41, fail to appreciate Terre Haute is not “on the way” to Evansville. Other than the I-65 to I-64 Evansville route, the I-70-U.S. 41 route is the longest in terms of distance and mileage. (Over 200 miles and 3 hours and 40 minutes.) The shortest route in terms of distance and time is State Road 67 to State Road 57. State Road 67 to U.S. 41 is another option, a little longer in terms of time and distance You get to go through John Gregg’s hometown of Sandborn as a bonus.
I’ve been on narrow, hilly 23 1in SW Indiana filled with semi-trucks. Those trucks should not be on those roads. They not only are dangerous, they tear up roads that are not built for that sort of traffic.
Too many people suggest this is just about building an improved route from Indy to Evansville. While that is true, there are whole communities apart from Evansville that desperately need an interstate.
I am a strong supporter of the I-69 extension and hope they can find the money to complete it. I would point out that there were people who opposed I-65 and I-70 too, for exactly the same reasons that the I-69 extension is being opposed.
Closer to your place is Indiana 25 from Logansport to Lafayette.
There is construction in Carroll County to make it 4 lanes (dirt paths
are in and trees have been cut) but it looked like nothing was happening as soon as you crossed into Tippecanoe County.
As far as I know, that project is proceeding according to plan. I don’t know how many miles is planned for Tippecanoe County, but I wouldn’t expect too many. The SR 25/I-65 interchange is under construction. Seems like maybe there is 10 miles or so of the route between Carroll County and I-65 that is only 2 lanes.
They could have had I-69 plug into 37 around Bedford where it’s practically interstate anyway (two lanes each way, separated by a median). That’s a nice non-stop road from there to the outskirts of Indy except for a handful of stoplights on the west side of Bloomington and at Martinsville, mainly. Then bypass Martinsville or ungrade there later. But they had to have the all-new-terrain plan.
I agree that the leasing of the toll road without a plan that would continue to fund Indiana highways and the completion of I-69 was very poor planning. I often have to drive from the Evansville area to Indianapolis and the choice of routes without I-69 are poor. I am for I-69 but I agree that once you get to Bedford the 4 lane roads to Indianapolis are good enough. It is the Terre Haute route and the 57 to 231 to I70 route that are not good choices.
Indiana has other problems: McDaniel bypass in Terre Haute to I-70 has never opened. There is no plan to fix the New Harmony bridge. The lack of construction oversight that caused the closing of the Cline Avenue bridge in NW Indiana and the resulting inability to fix the problem by the State is another problem.
When a company looks to locate in a State, transportation and roads are important. If it takes more tax dollars to have decent transportation, then do it. This is an investment and one of the most important duties of State government is to provide for good transportation.
I believe there is also an interstate commerce purpose for I-69, with I-69 being the hopefully preferred route to transfer goods from Mexico to Canada. I cannot speak to the potential traffic volume, but it would seem that leaving a small stretch as non-interestate would make the route less appealling to long-haul truckers.