I-290 rebuild/expansion feedback

[dzlsabe]

Imagine the disappointment and future regret when none of these schemes mentioned in this...

http://eisenhowerexpressway.com/pdfs/i290%20alternatives%20evaluation%20summary2013apr02.pdf

turn out to do jachzhit. BTW this has not gotten any environmental approval. And it will shut down the IKE for how long to build any of these boondoggles?

http://www.cmap.illinois.gov/documents/10180/27214/CMAP-FreightReportFULL-07-11-12.pdf/622f29bf-572c-4b79-afff-110d880091a8

[hobsini2]

Killed by whom? Two dozen "road geeks"? Highway planners that apparently can not read a road map? Its simple physics. If you want to put the ball in the cup, or make that hard shot in the corner pocket, you HAVE to hit the ball in the exact right spot. Close is NOT "good enough".

The "problem" with the Ike (or Strangler) is NOT because of the Ike. Downtown Chicago is not at the south end of the lake. That is where the "pinch point" is (ie Indiana). No amount of widening the Ike, Ryan or Tri state is going to change that.

*mic drop*

I see reading is difficult for you DZ. I said "Your Hypo I-90 idea THREAD was killed."
Which it was. Hence why it was locked up by an admin.

We have discussed this idea AT LENGTH. You are the only one who is in support of it. 1>12? I don't think so. Time to move along if you didn't get the hint by having YOUR THREAD locked up by the admins.

[tribar]

Why does the staff continue to allow this?  Nearly every Chicagoland thread is clogged up with this hypotenuse bullshit.

[johndoe780]

Why does the staff continue to allow this?  Nearly every Chicagoland thread is clogged up with this hypotenuse bullshit.

Agreed. I see something about hypotenuse when it comes to every highway.

[dzlsabe]

Its about I-290 rebuild/expansion feedback. All I see is this...

http://eisenhowerexpressway.com/pdfs/i290%20alternatives%20evaluation%20summary2013apr02.pdf from 2013, nearly four years ago.

Surely by now there is something more forthcoming from IDOT. A drill down on what is actually proposed and how it relates to this...

http://www.cmap.illinois.gov/documents/10180/27214/CMAP-FreightReportFULL-07-11-12.pdf/622f29bf-572c-4b79-afff-110d880091a8 

If there is something else out there I/we have missed, feel free to volunteer that.

Otherwise, I see nothing that has been "discussed".

[ET21]

Then why are you talking then?  If you're so concerned about timetables then email IDOT (which I'm sure you have many times)

[dzlsabe]

Its your topic that hibernated for nearly two years. But OK.

IF theres a way to cram two or four lanes into the Ike (the only EW xway) without (basically) shutting it down, adding more traffic to already stressed North, Lake, Roosevelt, Cermak, Cicero, Harlem, Pulaski, Mannheim etal., bring it.

Yous (and IDOT) are the ones who all gung-ho on this. Maybe you can convince me this will actually do what you all think it will do in a decade? The geometry, civil engineering, factorials/contingencies just do not do it for me, but I am a "moron" (and idle hobbyist).

"Show where youre(sic) going, without forgetting where youre(sic) from". Thanx for that. Im reminded daily.

[ILRoad55]

Obviously no one likes this idea here. No one! Maybe you should think about going elsewhere to propose your idea because it's surely not any good on here. See what other negative responses you will get. I suggest you post your idea on the Chicago Reddit, they will laugh at you. And what will your response be when you get more negative responses? Tell everyone they are stupid for not wanting another expressway?

And then signing the Hypothenuse as I-90 will do any help

[ET21]

Its your topic that hibernated for nearly two years. But OK.

IF theres a way to cram two or four lanes into the Ike (the only EW xway) without (basically) shutting it down, adding more traffic to already stressed North, Lake, Roosevelt, Cermak, Cicero, Harlem, Pulaski, Mannheim etal., bring it.

Yous (and IDOT) are the ones who all gung-ho on this. Maybe you can convince me this will actually do what you all think it will do in a decade? The geometry, civil engineering, factorials/contingencies just do not do it for me, but I am a "moron" (and idle hobbyist).

"Show where youre(sic) going, without forgetting where youre(sic) from". Thanx for that. Im reminded daily.

I shared a news story about the topic, rather than making a brand new thread about it. It's called internet etiquette, something you clearly don't get since you try and make fun of a part of my public profile pretty much after every contradiction from myself. It's called a forum signature numbnuts, I'm reminded every time you post about your "ILS mantra"

[dzlsabe]

IDOT is unresponsive...So I will contact the officials in...

http://www.westchester-il.org/
http://broadview-il.gov/common.php?id=30
http://www.northriverside-il.org/
http://www.berwyn-il.gov/
http://www.thetownofcicero.com/

and see if they think this is a great, well thought out plan...basically shutting down the IKE (the ONLY EW interstate connection we have) for who knows how long? Forcing that traffic onto Rooosevelt, Cermak etal.

http://eisenhowerexpressway.com/pdfs/i290%20alternatives%20evaluation%20summary2013apr02.pdf

OR this...https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=16790.0 allowing a relief from/for the Strangler, Ike, xIKE and creating an eight mile, almost parallel (with I-55) for the traffic, the 1 in 6 vehicles, heavy trucks rolling through the area, who knows how many cars?

that may be a better solution for them and the entire region. Either one will cost $Bs. Which will give more BANG for the buck, with less disruption and resolve the most problems?

[hobsini2]

https://youtu.be/AjUmULa0R-8

[ILRoad55]

K let's see you out try a try make it happen. It's going to be like a Crosstown, no one wants a highway to split their towns.

And if you sign that as I-90, then what does that stretch from Woodfield to Edens become? I-190 can no longer be signed 190 because it would no longer touch 90 and that would apply to the future 490. There will be a ton of interstate signing issues then.



Anyways why does the CTA have more ROW at sections like Western to Racine while the Kennedy leaves little space for the Blue line. Did they plan on express rails or is it just for safety reasons on the Ike?

[US71]

dzlsabe, your posts seem more like pie in the sky cojecture than based on actual facts, so perhaps this belongs more on a fictional highways discussion?

[GeekJedi]

Make you a deal. If they tell you that the (fictional, BTW) "hypo" is a great, well thought out plan, you can come back and talk about it all you want. However, if they brush you off, you never mention it again. Mmkay?

[I-39]

dzlsabe, your posts seem more like pie in the sky cojecture than based on actual facts, so perhaps this belongs more on a fictional highways discussion?

It already has been, and it's been locked.

dzlsabe = troll

[Rick Powell]

Anyways why does the CTA have more ROW at sections like Western to Racine while the Kennedy leaves little space for the Blue line. Did they plan on express rails or is it just for safety reasons on the Ike?

Along the Ike, there was extra space that was going to be allotted to express service, possibly with the old Chicago, Aurora and Elgin interurban that used to run on the old Garfield branch of the CTA into the Loop, but with its abandonment in the late 50's. and the closing of many intermediary stations on the branch reducing the need for express service, the CTA no longer has plans to utilize the space. The CTA is performing a study in parallel with IDOT's I-290 study on what is needed to revitalize the Forest Park branch.

http://www.transitchicago.com/blueweststudy/

[dzlsabe]

dzlsabe, your posts seem more like pie in the sky cojecture than based on actual facts, so perhaps this belongs more on a fictional highways discussion?

Just trying to drill down to find out what IDOT has in mind in this EIS under "alternatives" (Table 4-1 pg 25 & 26) C11 "Other"??..

http://eisenhowerexpressway.com/pdfs/i290%20alternatives%20evaluation%20summary2013apr02.pdf

Seems this has not been considered   http://www.cmap.illinois.gov/documents/10180/27214/CMAP-FreightReportFULL-07-11-12.pdf/622f29bf-572c-4b79-afff-110d880091a8  pages 12 & 18

If the plan is to rip up almost SIX miles of the Ike to cram two or four more lanes into it, turn the chaos it is now into anarchy for how many years?, then an eight mile, new road to I-55 from the Strangler to "bypass" (one of the favorite words around here) the Ike and the "problem" completely, starts looking better by comparison. And if that is NOT on IDOTs C11, why not? and what is?

[hobsini2]

Make you a deal. If they tell you that the (fictional, BTW) "hypo" is a great, well thought out plan, you can come back and talk about it all you want. However, if they brush you off, you never mention it again. Mmkay?

DEAL! lol

[hobsini2]

Anyways why does the CTA have more ROW at sections like Western to Racine while the Kennedy leaves little space for the Blue line. Did they plan on express rails or is it just for safety reasons on the Ike?

Along the Ike, there was extra space that was going to be allotted to express service, possibly with the old Chicago, Aurora and Elgin interurban that used to run on the old Garfield branch of the CTA into the Loop, but with its abandonment in the late 50's. and the closing of many intermediary stations on the branch reducing the need for express service, the CTA no longer has plans to utilize the space. The CTA is performing a study in parallel with IDOT's I-290 study on what is needed to revitalize the Forest Park branch.

http://www.transitchicago.com/blueweststudy/

The extra space also was due to defunct L lines especially east of Illinois Medical Center District.

[johndoe780]

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=newssearch&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjD-O_moffQAhUKzmMKHb0eCesQqQIIGigAMAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.chicagotribune.com%2Fsuburbs%2Foak-park%2Fnews%2Fct-oak-interstate-290-tl-1222-20161215-story.html&usg=AFQjCNHSSs8p0M3c_7dPL6QKFoCPARex5Q&bvm=bv.141536425,d.cGc

What kind of bullshit is this. IDOT isn't allowed to toll the existing 4th lane from Austin to 90/94.

Backwards study. Create a 4th and 5th lane and make that 5th lane a HOT lane. How exactly is adding a toll lane going to help with congestion?

or at least toll the stupid inner shoulder lane.

[dzlsabe]

"The idea is to set a toll rate so you have a 45 mile-per-hour speed through there, minimum, so that is then a reliable trip. As we know, there's days when the Eisenhower is quite unreliable." Like EVERYDAY!

"This is analysis that needs to be done," Harmet said. "With an 8-year construction schedule, that infrastructure is the last thing that's going to be built so there is some time to think about that."

"We're not going to wipe out congestion as we know it on the Eisenhower, but we're going to provide a reliable trip," Harmet said. Mr Harmet does not sound that confident this will do jachzhit, me neither.

So why build it? Why not analyze a NEW, nearly parallel (BYPASS) road that WILL wipe out congestion as we know it on the Ike (and Strangler) AND provide that reliable trip? And get a good portion of the 1/6 of traffic (heavy trucks, and who knows how many cars) OFF the Ike/Strangler headed towards the rail and truck terminals OR EAST to Indiana. Finish the I-90 corridor once and for all.

[Brandon]

IDOT wants to put toll lanes on Eisenhower Expressway

A plan to add one car pool and express toll lanes to Interstate 290 has been identified as the Illinois Department of Transportation's preferred option for the roadway, officials announced.

During an advisory group meeting Wednesday at the Carleton Hotel in Oak Park, IDOT officials provided an update on their proposed reconstruction of the Eisenhower Expressway.

According to the proposal, IDOT hopes to add a fourth lane to I-290 in each direction between Mannheim Road and Austin Boulevard, which would bring the entire expressway to four lanes in each direction between Interstate 88 and Interstate 90/94.

IDOT would then convert the two center lanes, between I-88 and Racine Avenue, to a "Hot 3+" lane, which would allow car pool vehicles and buses to ride for free. Other commuters could also use the lane but would be charged a toll. Three traffic lanes in each direction would remain free for drivers.

Nutty idea, IMHO.  Would be better just to sell it to ISTHA and get IDOT out of the expressway business (which they're crap at anyway).

[johndoe780]

IDOT wants to put toll lanes on Eisenhower Expressway

A plan to add one car pool and express toll lanes to Interstate 290 has been identified as the Illinois Department of Transportation's preferred option for the roadway, officials announced.

During an advisory group meeting Wednesday at the Carleton Hotel in Oak Park, IDOT officials provided an update on their proposed reconstruction of the Eisenhower Expressway.

According to the proposal, IDOT hopes to add a fourth lane to I-290 in each direction between Mannheim Road and Austin Boulevard, which would bring the entire expressway to four lanes in each direction between Interstate 88 and Interstate 90/94.

IDOT would then convert the two center lanes, between I-88 and Racine Avenue, to a "Hot 3+" lane, which would allow car pool vehicles and buses to ride for free. Other commuters could also use the lane but would be charged a toll. Three traffic lanes in each direction would remain free for drivers.

Nutty idea, IMHO.  Would be better just to sell it to ISTHA and get IDOT out of the expressway business (which they're crap at anyway).

I'm not a civil engineer, but someone explain to me how this plan has the capability of increasing the capacity of the Ike.

[Rick Powell]

I'm not a civil engineer, but someone explain to me how this plan has the capability of increasing the capacity of the Ike.

The primary factor is getting four consistent through lanes in each direction from Mannheim to the Jane Byrne and eliminating the bottleneck from 25th to Austin.
Two secondary factors are -
  The HOT lane...if it can attract enough HOV and transit vehicles along with toll-paying SOVs, it can have as much or more throughput as a general purpose lane.
  Modernizing and getting better access to the CTA Blue Line - if it can attract more riders, it also helps the throughput of the entire corridor, and lessens the demand on 290 for the trips where it can be competitive with autos.

[johndoe780]

I'm not a civil engineer, but someone explain to me how this plan has the capability of increasing the capacity of the Ike.

The primary factor is getting four consistent through lanes in each direction from Mannheim to the Jane Byrne and eliminating the bottleneck from 25th to Austin.
Two secondary factors are -
  The HOT lane...if it can attract enough HOV and transit vehicles along with toll-paying SOVs, it can have as much or more throughput as a general purpose lane.
  Modernizing and getting better access to the CTA Blue Line - if it can attract more riders, it also helps the throughput of the entire corridor, and lessens the demand on 290 for the trips where it can be competitive with autos.

But you're also taking 4 lanes of toll free lanes into 3 lanes of toll free lanes + 1 tolled lane from Austin to 90/94. I don't understand how that will smooth out traffic. If I don't use the tolled lane, using the above logic, won't my commute be hurt? The only way my commute time will lessen is if I pay money for the tolled lane, otherwise my commute in the toll free lane will be immensely hurt as you're taking cramming 4 lanes into 3 lanes.

Yes I agree that 4 laning from 25th to Austin will "smooth out" but that's only if you use the tolled lanes. Unless you pony up $$$ for the tolls, you still have 290 and 88 merging into 3 lanes. I would even argue that 4 lanes of IKE is still heavily overcapacity. IKE needs to be at least 5 lanes.

Not sure where you're getting the blue line correlation from. How is this going to improve access to the blue line? IDOT mentioned no claim of extending the blue line, meaning I still have to drive on 290 and get off 1st ave to even use the blue line. At that point, might as well just drive downtown if I have to get off 1st ave.