Illiana Corridor progress

[mukade]

That would be more benefit, but it will end at I-65.

[silverback1065]

Wouldn't ending it at 65 not completely solve the problem?  Shouldn't it go further east to at least 69?  What I mean is, through traffic trucks will have to go back up 65 to 80/90 to travel east if they use this current proposal to avoid traffic, but it seems to me that it really isn't going to be enough to solve the problem.  It looks like this would just push all the traffic jams just east of 65, unless I'm totally wrong about this.

[nwi_navigator_1181]

We have to remember that the Illiana was conceived with the Borman in mind. The highest volume of traffic on I-80/94 is statistically between the Bishop Ford/Tri-State junction and the Northwest Connector at I-65; the expressway (tollway?) is designed to alleviate that. Commercial truck drivers looking to head toward Northern Ohio or Michigan will simply stay the course.

An idea is to give a control city that will give drivers an indication of where the highway leads. The westbound control city would obviously be Joliet. Eastbound, however, needs a little clever thinking.

Eastbound can be given Indianapolis, with the Illinois practice of secondary control cities at every ramp, such as Peotone, Kankakee, or Lafayette, IN. Use the I-57 concept of guiding drivers to other Interstates to reach said city; as drivers enter the Illiana from the western terminus, engineers can use a sign that says "To Indianapolis, Use I-65, xx miles."

The point is, the proper guidance can help drivers to determine if the Illiana is worth the effort. That's why I-65 was, more times than not, regarded as the eastern terminus. Anything east of that would be moot.

[mukade]

That illustrates the problem pretty well if you concede the logical control city should be Indy. I would guess it would actually be "I-65", though. Even in your scenario as a needed alternate route for severe flooding, if they build an interchange at US 41 and another at I-65, this road does little to help most NW Indiana people because it is not meant for local traffic. Yes, relieving Borman traffic would be good, but given a choice, cars and truck drivers will usually choose the free route. Look at ITR.

[hobsini2]

That illustrates the problem pretty well if you concede the logical control city should be Indy. I would guess it would actually be "I-65", though. Even in your scenario as a needed alternate route for severe flooding, if they build an interchange at US 41 and another at I-65, this road does little to help most NW Indiana people because it is not meant for local traffic. Yes, relieving Borman traffic would be good, but given a choice, cars and truck drivers will usually choose the free route. Look at ITR.

The problem that no one is talking about is the geography of the area.  Because of where Chicago is on Lake Michigan, if you want to go east of Chicago on a highway, you are forced to use the Borman or ITR. If the lake was not there, that would not be an issue. But anyone going from Chicago to Detroit, Cleveland, or Indianapolis gets squeezed into 2 highways. And not to mention anyone going to Ft Wayne uses US 30 east of I-65 because of it being a direct route.

[silverback1065]

crown point could be a control city

[NE2]

so could Islandia Florida

[mukade]

The problem that no one is talking about is the geography of the area.  Because of where Chicago is on Lake Michigan, if you want to go east of Chicago on a highway, you are forced to use the Borman or ITR. If the lake was not there, that would not be an issue. But anyone going from Chicago to Detroit, Cleveland, or Indianapolis gets squeezed into 2 highways. And not to mention anyone going to Ft Wayne uses US 30 east of I-65 because of it being a direct route.

I certainly know the geography of the area well - I lived there for 18 years. The issue is not that a road should be built, but it is an issue that a road that will bring benefit to the area that it goes through should be built. As a matter of fact, I don't think they even have a clear plan for much of anything on this road - including on the route it would take. As the plan stands, can you tell me what benefit in brings to Indiana (NW Indiana in particular)?

These would be needed:
- the route should be as close to the populated area as possible (preferably north of 153rd Avenue)
- there needs to be an adequate number of interchanges to adequate roads in NW Indiana. That would involve building at least one new major N-S road connecting the tollway to US 30. If the plan is only for US 41 or SR 55 and US 41 interchanges, I would be against the project.
- there needs to be a plan in NW Indiana for what type of businesses they plan to attract, then make sure there is a realistic plan to get funding to build that infrastructure. If the plan is simply "build the highway and they will come", you need to ask yourself why I-65 at US 231 and I-65 at SR 2 never developed in 45 years.
- avoid the critical wells and drainage areas as much as possible (if nothing else, reduce the risk of lawsuits that will stop construction)

Without at least these things, why should it be built on the Indiana side? To support businesses in Illinois? Just because roads are squeezed into a small area due to Lake Michigan does not negate the need to provide benefit to all areas where the road will be built. Perhaps waiting until there is clarity and consensus would be wise.

[hobsini2]

Mukade, that is reasonable. But I would also think that once the road is built, there would be growth along that corridor for industry and commercial who want to move into the area.  So i would say another benefit would be the possibility of more jobs for places like Crown Point, Dyer, and Munster.  Once you have new industrial parks built, those people are going to want services nearby such as gas stations, hotels, restaurants so that too would be more jobs coming into an area.
If I was running a logistics company and I wanted to move into the Lake County area, I would like to find a place that is close to a major highway but does not have so much density that it would take more time for my shipments to move out/in.

[mukade]

Agreed if there is both a plan and the highway is built so that plan can be implemented. The plan as it stands now makes that highly unlikely. A single interchange at US 41, for example, is a poor plan. Also, if they don't address the concerns of the people, it will be stopped anyway. One big difference with the Illiana vs. I-69 in Bloomington is that in Bloomington, it was a vocal minority (mainly in Government) protesting. Most people were fairly neutral. That does not seem to be the case in NWI.

In a way, a similar situation is going on near New Harmony, IN right across the Wabash from Illinois. That is certainly no super highway, but Indiana is willing to put up $10M to either repair a dangerous old bridge or build a new one. Illinois declined to provide any funds at all. To be consistent, if they don't see any economic benefit for Illinois, why should IDOT use funds at their disposal? Indiana should use the same logic with the Illiana until a much better plan that ensures success is devised.

[hobsini2]

Mukade, you do realize that quite often the highway is built well before a plan for an industrial park right? It really would be helpful if there was an actual developer who can to INDOT and IDOT to make this one big proposal with the ind park included with the highway. But i can not ever recall that happening.

It was not until I-355 (the original section) was finished that there were 3 large industrial parks built near the highway in Addison, Lombard, and Woodridge.

[Brandon]

Mukade, you do realize that quite often the highway is built well before a plan for an industrial park right? It really would be helpful if there was an actual developer who can to INDOT and IDOT to make this one big proposal with the ind park included with the highway. But i can not ever recall that happening.

It was not until I-355 (the original section) was finished that there were 3 large industrial parks built near the highway in Addison, Lombard, and Woodridge.

And to top that off, the county (Will County) has big plans for the area, and is not afraid to act on them.  They want this thing built yesterday.

[mukade]

Mukade, you do realize that quite often the highway is built well before a plan for an industrial park right? It really would be helpful if there was an actual developer who can to INDOT and IDOT to make this one big proposal with the ind park included with the highway. But i can not ever recall that happening.

It was not until I-355 (the original section) was finished that there were 3 large industrial parks built near the highway in Addison, Lombard, and Woodridge.

Ignoring the condescending tone, my comments are about maximizing the chance for success. If ifs and buts were gifts and nuts, every day would be Christmas.

As I lived less than a quarter mile away from I-355 when it was being built, I know the communities did a lot of planning for what the road could bring long before any dirt was moved. In the second section of I-355, I believe some cities and villages had to pay (or at least subsidize) intechange construction or there would be no interchanges in their community.

And to top that off, the county (Will County) has big plans for the area, and is not afraid to act on them.  They want this thing built yesterday.

Thanks, that precisely illustrates my point. You need an understanding of the potential economic benefits and put as much of the plan into action as possible. You might think Indiana might have an advantage over Illinois because of lower taxes and less regulation except for two key factors.  1) Illinois gives huge bribes generous subsidies to what they consider to be key companies (Sears, Motorola, CME, etc.) and 2) access plans to the Illiana in Indiana are apparently extremely minimal. If Will County is well prepared, but Northwest Indiana is not prepared, now is not the time to build the road from an Indiana perspective. Once it is built, you can't turn the clock back.

[3467]

Unlike 53 which is one county unified after a million years,this porject involves 2 states that often do not get along . It still has IDOT involved and Pat Quinn thinks its his legacy.
The ISTHA authority is the rational actor here and they will want to build it if it is profitable for them. I think it becomes more profitable if they can make it part of an outer belt incorporating the Prarie Parkway. This is where Indiana comes in This is the CATS/ISTHA vision. It may not be the Hoosiers
Will Indiana accept the ISTHA as the "private partner"? After so many flops by priavte toll roads I see the ISTHA as the only partner likely
Will Indiana accept this vision?
What are specific Hoosier wants and needs ?
After seeing how 53 has turned out the ISTHA will try to accomodate those desires IF they can.

[Rick Powell]

http://www.illianacorridor.org/pdfs/illiana_pref_correport_101212pdf.pdf

Preferred Corridor Report released, recommending Corridor B3 between Wilmington IL and Cedar Lake/Lowell, IN.

[SignGeniusPTOE]

http://www.illianacorridor.org/pdfs/illiana_pref_correport_101212pdf.pdf

Preferred Corridor Report released, recommending Corridor B3 between Wilmington IL and Cedar Lake/Lowell, IN.

Corridor is too far south.  What a waste!  Also does nothing to help terrible US 30 between Valparaiso and Merrillville.  This routing is almost as bad as the blunder of I-469 "Four Sixty Nowhere" on the south side of Fort Wayne, which should have been built where the Airport Expressway wound up, north of the airport.

[silverback1065]

Upgrading US 30 is  a better idea

[ssummers72]

Upgrading US-30 is a bad idea and here is why:

1. From the Indiana/Illinois state line you have a 5 lane highway with no median all the way to US-41.

2. Just East of US-41 you have a railroad bridge that goes over US-30 which limits the widening to 4 lanes.

3. From that point East of US-41 to IN-55 you have a 4 lane style expressway with numerous businesses lining the highway.

4. From IN-55 to IN-51, US-30 is lined with two parallel frontage roads on the North and South side of the highway.

5. From IN-51 to IN-49, US-30 becomes a 4 lane divided highway with numerous traffic signals along the route.

Other important factors to consider:

The corridor is running at or near capacity in many sections.

Also, the businesses lining US-30 are to close to even warrant any form of a Limited Access Facility.

Lastly, this corridor was considered in the early 1970's as the reliever to I-80/94 but as time went by it slowly crept south.

The main reason why the Illiana corridor lands in its present corridor is the trucks use I-65 to IN-10 to IL-114 to IL-17 to I-57 as alternate to I-80/94.

You can reference the "Northwest Indiana Corridor Study" and early NIRPC planning documents for more information.

SMS

[mukade]

Upgrading US-30 is a bad idea and here is why:

1. From the Indiana/Illinois state line you have a 5 lane highway with no median all the way to US-41.

2. Just East of US-41 you have a railroad bridge that goes over US-30 which limits the widening to 4 lanes.

3. From that point East of US-41 to IN-55 you have a 4 lane style expressway with numerous businesses lining the highway.

4. From IN-55 to IN-51, US-30 is lined with two parallel frontage roads on the North and South side of the highway.

5. From IN-51 to IN-49, US-30 becomes a 4 lane divided highway with numerous traffic signals along the route.

Other important factors to consider:

The corridor is running at or near capacity in many sections.

Also, the businesses lining US-30 are to close to even warrant any form of a Limited Access Facility.

Lastly, this corridor was considered in the early 1970's as the reliever to I-80/94 but as time went by it slowly crept south.

The main reason why the Illiana corridor lands in its present corridor is the trucks use I-65 to IN-10 to IL-114 to IL-17 to I-57 as alternate to I-80/94.

You can reference the "Northwest Indiana Corridor Study" and early NIRPC planning documents for more information.

SMS

I will disagree to an extent. US 30 should be upgraded, but an upgraded US 30 would not serve the same function that the Illiana is intended for. INDOT could rebuild US 30 with 6-8 lanes and double left turn lanes at all major intersections... and with PCCP so it would not have to be resurfaced so often. The Lloyd expressway (SR 66 on the east side of Evansville) and US 31 south of I-465 toward Greenwood are what examples where this has been done.

The part of US 30 west of US 41 has been built up since the 1940s, and by 1974, Merrillville was too built up. Despite complaints about congestion due to poor/no planning on US 30 around Merrillville (and what is now Hobart), IN DOH/INDOT let the same thing happen in Porter County from the late 1970s on. I would say the ship sailed on upgrading US 30 to freeway by 1971 when all the shopping centers near I-65 were announced. The 93rd Avenue corridor plan in the early 1980s was promising, but NIMBYs (mainly in St. John Twp.) did not agree.

That said, there are real problems with the current Illiana project and corridor as I see it. First and foremost, it will not benefit many Lake County commuters because it is way too far south. I think the impetus for it is coming from the multi-modal companies in Will County, Illinois. What I read was that Indiana interchanges would be at US 41 and I-65 with a possibility of one at SR 55. As I stated earlier in this thread, SR 55 becomes a narrow residential street in Crown Point so it will not be able to support the type of development envisioned. Even US 41 in Cedar Lake is far from ideal for warehousing, DC, and light manufacturing development. Unless Lake County and NIRPC push for a new high volume N-S corridor near Whitcomb St. at US 30/Clark St. on the south (like University Pkwy in Evansville, US 231 bypass in West Lafayette, Ronald Reagan Pkwy in Hendricks County, CR 17 in Elkhart County, etc.), the Illiana will provide little benefit to Lake County.  Who will be able to get to it? Maybe people near US 41 on their way to Indy. I also have my doubts that residents in Crown Point, Schereville, and Lake Dale would want a new N-S corridor so I am left to think this proposed tollway would essentially be a feeder to support Illinois businesses.

If a significant number of trucks use SR 10, maybe INDOT could make it a four lane highway or a super 2. I'd rather see that than have another Borman where Indiana gets a lot of headaches and little benefit.

[ssummers72]

The Borman needs a reliever, if you strip away all the cross-country traffic. I.E. tourists and trucks the Borman would be a manageable route to take. That being said, the Illiana would relieve part of the traffic that funnels North on I-65 to WB I-80/94 and vise versa. The traffic counts from the I-65 feeding into I-80/94 are enough to increase the  traffic counts at peak period to a level D just West of I-65. With that, The Borman is at its capacity and cannot be widened anymore. Source :"Northwest Indiana Corridor Study"

As far as the corridor being as far South as it is, the population increases in South Lake County are at the point,  a major East-West corridor is needed now before the area fills in to the point that the land is to expensive to purchase and easier to acquire.

SMS

[mukade]

The Borman needs a reliever, if you strip away all the cross-country traffic. I.E. tourists and trucks the Borman would be a manageable route to take. That being said, the Illiana would relieve part of the traffic that funnels North on I-65 to WB I-80/94 and vise versa. The traffic counts from the I-65 feeding into I-80/94 are enough to increase the  traffic counts at peak period to a level D just West of I-65. With that, The Borman is at its capacity and cannot be widened anymore. Source :"Northwest Indiana Corridor Study"

I still don't see the Illiana being much of a reliever. After all, the ITR, a perfectly placed reliever, exists a few miles north, and it carries a fraction of the traffic. Have they announced the tolls for the Illiana yet? They had better be pretty low for it to succeeed where ITR fails. Also, will they significantly expand Illinois 394 so it would carry traffic to Chicago? Now that the Prairie Parkway is dead or dormant, there would be no outer loop that the Illiana would be part of.

So I agree it would relieve some congestion, but I am not convinced it would save enough to justify cost and risk. As for the Borman being maxed out, maybe. Back around 1985, IN DOH said the same thing (before it was widened). Didn't they rebuild the overpasses with the ability to carry one more lane? I agree this would not happen anytime soon, and would cost a ton, but I would not say it cannot be widened.

As far as the corridor being as far South as it is, the population increases in South Lake County are at the point,  a major East-West corridor is needed now before the area fills in to the point that the land is to expensive to purchase and easier to acquire.

True. It would be wise to reserve land the way Lake County migrates further and further south, but the population south of Crown Point is still very small. Lowell + Cedar Lake together add up to 20,000 people (out of 496,000 in Lake County).

Again, if Lake County (and the state) have a plan for success, it would be worth it. I have not seen any such plan and it seems like the proposed road is very unpopular up there. Maybe if someone created a clear and realistic plan that would bring jobs and tax revenue, it might gain support.

[ssummers72]

As far as the Borman Expressway, it has been widened to its furthest extent from the IL/IN State line to Lake Street due to the limitations of the Little Calumet River watershed and the residential developments. Through the I-65 interchange area, they have built flood walls along the right-of-way lines throughout the interchange complex.

As far as the Illiana Expressway/Tollway, they need to do something. If they chose to build it as a freeway, then the funding would have to come from another source. I.E. Federal Funds. (INDOT and IDOT have decided not to wait for Congress to decide on a new highway bill) So, they went another route using a PPP to get the route constructed in the near future.

South County see this route as a relief route for North Lake county and they do not want anything to do with it. But, they do not see the larger picture, that if the route is not constructed in some fashion then they will have the problems in the future like Will County,IL had before the I-355 extension was constructed.

I believe that if a highway bill was created with an adequate funding source then it would be constructed as a free route. Yet, I do not see that happening, my contact at the FHWA in DC said with the present climate in the district that little will be done at this point.

So, we are stuck with a 2 year bill with no funding increases.

[mukade]

Agreed on funding and the flood plain constraint makes sense.

So as the plan is today, how does the Illiana benefit Indiana other than relief for the Borman drivers? That is the problem - it is essentially useless. I like roads, but if something like what is proposed was about to be built where I live, I would be pretty ticked off.

What do you as a region resident think they could change to make it more palatable? What other Indiana access do you propose?

[ssummers72]

The benefit I see to Indiana is the rerouting of the NB/SB traffic from I-65 to points West via I-57 into Chicago or I-55 to I-80 to the West. The I-55 to I-80 brings up other issues which is not for this discussion. They other tie in with the Illiana is Chicago's new third airport which they are still trying to build, this is not popularr with NW Indiana residents since we see Gary's airport as the new third airport.

As to making the route more palatable, I would provide access to IN-55 and one other North-South route to encourage the use of the route as real reliever for locals. Also, INDOT and NIRPC should consider an eventual Eastern/NorthEastern extension to I-94 near Michigan City. Albeit, it is not that popular presently.

[mukade]

Peotone would be a boondoggle.

Assuming residents who live near SR 55 are good with an interchange, that road will not likely draw the type of development NWI needs. Its a shame Cline Avenue doesn't go to southern Lake County - that was another idea I saw in the long-range plans years ago. I'm with you on needing three interchanges beyond I-65, though - certainly only having one at US 41 and I-65 would be stupid.

As for continuing east past I-65 to I-94, I think that would run afoul of the agreement made with ITR, wouldn't it? It could go to SR 49.