Crane non encroachment zone would be established by HB1022

.
.
.
.

One of two interchanges (231) in Greene County would be in this red zone.

GIS analysis:

road lengths inside the buffer is:

I-69,  3C - 5 mi.
SR 45 - 8.2 mi
US 231 - 6.2 mi

It should be noted that I-69 in the encroachment zone will come entirely out of Greene Co.'s portion of alt 3, which is about 19.5 miles long total.

"41/70" is west of Crane seen here running through the word "Sullivan".

How can anyone doubt that I-69 would be a major source of encroachment for this region?

Surely routing I-69 some miles west on the "Common Sense" US-41 and I-70 route would once again, prove more common sensible.

HB 1022 would establish a three mile zone beyond Crane's
boarders to protect the base from development encroachment.

This is shown in red on our map.
Too see this map larger, click here.

i69 would come within thousands of yards of Crane NSWC in Indiana. This included the area of non encroachment protection proposed by the state legislature.

i69 would come within thousands of yards of Crane NSWC in Indiana. This included the area of non encroachment protection proposed by the state legislature.

Three mile red zone approximate scale only

We respect the interest in preserving Crane Jobs and have long warned of the negative effects on Crane from I-69 related encroachment.

But, we believe HB 1022 is disingenuous given Indiana's selection of I-69, 3-C here. INDOT claims NAFTA Free Trade Interstate, will deliver 12,305 commercial trucks and untold thousands of cars each day through this "encroachment zone".

As amended HB1022 depends on zoning that does not exist and the bills author said there is no intent to bring zoning to the area.

Currently it is a bill with no teeth. If understood, it will likely be seen as a "trick" by members of the BRAC. We think this is a risky way of protecting Crane in the BRAC process. This might be viewed negatively.

If zoning did exist or were in the future established, the property owners of the red zone would see a marked devaluing of their properties value. Speculation value would decrease even without zoning.

We question the fairness of penalizing individual land owners by imposed development restrictions when this protection would not be required if a wiser routing of I-69 were requested in the form of a Revised Record of Decision.