Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Revive 755]

Quit blaming the DOT's. It's about the money, so blame the legislatures who have been starving their DOT's of funding to prop up public service pensions.

DOT's can do really great things when they have good, properly funded budgets. But when you are given nothing but maintenance level type of funding for years and years, the DOT's can only respond in kind.

Yet I see a cash-strapped MoDOT still getting a decent amount done (though they do have some very questionable interchanges lately).  There may be more to the issue than just funding.

[Crash_It]

In Illinois, an efficient Interchange never happens

Says the person who's state has a majority of it's highways in need of resurfacing or reconstruction

Illinois is the only state I have ever seen a warning for "EXTREME ROUGH ROAD". Don't pretend IDOT is whollly superior to WisDOT or any DOT.

At least there's the decency to warn, unlike other states that would just throw you into the mess for miles on end

[edwaleni]

In Illinois, an efficient Interchange never happens

Says the person who's state has a majority of it's highways in need of resurfacing or reconstruction

Illinois is the only state I have ever seen a warning for "EXTREME ROUGH ROAD". Don't pretend IDOT is whollly superior to WisDOT or any DOT.

At least there's the decency to warn, unlike other states that would just throw you into the mess for miles on end

In some parts of the US, bumpy roads are considered a natural speed limiter. Which reduces the need for speed control by officers. Double savings bonus!

[JoePCool14]

My problem with IDOT isn't so much the poor roads, though that is a problem, but it's more so when they do actually do things, they do a terrible, cheap job and let things deteriorate.

[ChiMilNet]

My problem with IDOT isn't so much the poor roads, though that is a problem, but it's more so when they do actually do things, they do a terrible, cheap job and let things deteriorate.

I also am going to add that they have "misplaced" priorities. For instance, I noticed that IDOT is doing a project to replace the lighting structures (with out of place looking davit style poles) at Coal City Rd and I-55 near Diamond and Braidwood, which happens to be an interchange with perfectly sufficient lighting (a simple replacement of the lamps with LED on the existing lighting structures would have sufficed). Yet, just a couple of miles up I-55 is an interchange at IL 129 needing a bridge replacement to rebuild it as complete. Heck, the IL 53 interchange in Gardner about 10 miles down would be a better candidate for a full lighting replacement as it has more sporadic and that cheap weathered steel looking lighting that IDOT uses downstate more. I should also point out the pavement condition of I-55 through Will County as a whole. Again, why replace lighting at one select interchange that didn't need replacement (with a style I personally am not a fan of, but that's another thing altogether), when there is a laundry list of much more pressing needs along the corridor within the vicinity.

And then, of course, I have been looking at the designs of the I-80 through Joliet rebuild, and I just shake my head in disgust (a lane drop West of US 30 only to pick up a lane again closer to the Des Plaines River bridge). Ugh, PLEASE, convert this stretch over to the Tollway and let them do it... at least I know it'll be done right then! I won't mind paying a fee to use that.

[Rothman]

Are you seriously implying that if they didn't do the lighting project, they could afford the bridge replacement?  That's demonstrates a lack of understanding of what is involved with getting those types of projects going.

Prioritizing a capital project program is very intricate.  DOTs and other transportation agencies use models to get the best bang for their buck given available funding.  What happens is a few big projects can eat up the funds for a particular year and you're left with the rest which gets spread around smaller projects.

Doing a lighting project when a bridge may need to be replaced is no implication that an agency's priorities are out of whack.

If another lighting project would have been a better candidate is a question for the agency.

[ChiMilNet]

Are you seriously implying that if they didn't do the lighting project, they could afford the bridge replacement?  That's demonstrates a lack of understanding of what is involved with getting those types of projects going.

Prioritizing a capital project program is very intricate.  DOTs and other transportation agencies use models to get the best bang for their buck given available funding.  What happens is a few big projects can eat up the funds for a particular year and you're left with the rest which gets spread around smaller projects.

Doing a lighting project when a bridge may need to be replaced is no implication that an agency's priorities are out of whack.

If another lighting project would have been a better candidate is a question for the agency.

I don't pretend to know everything that goes into it at a DOT, especially when funding and cost priorities are given, so I appreciate you giving me this insight. What you are saying makes sense. However, I am just merely stating the optics of what I am seeing and what seems to be a pattern for IDOT in general, for which I can give plenty of other examples. Again, as I mentioned, if you're going to do a lower cost lighting project, why not at least do it where there is more of a need? I gave one such example in my post (a couple of exits down). From the optics of it, it just begs the question, cost aside, "why are you 'fixing' something here that seems fine when there are clearly other needs along this same corridor that are notable issues, or at least somewhere else where this 'fix' could be more beneficial"?

[Rick Powell]

Again, as I mentioned, if you're going to do a lower cost lighting project, why not at least do it where there is more of a need? I gave one such example in my post (a couple of exits down).

One factor is that projects at IDOT are programmed by district. The IL 53 interchange is the domain of IDOT District 3 and the IL 113 Coal City interchange is District 1. IDOT has tried to program its projects more uniformly and with a more orderly rationale with its recently enacted TAMP asset management plan, but still there is flexibility in programming where the people closest to the issues in each District help make the calls on what is fixed and to what extent.

[ChiMilNet]

Again, as I mentioned, if you're going to do a lower cost lighting project, why not at least do it where there is more of a need? I gave one such example in my post (a couple of exits down).

One factor is that projects at IDOT are programmed by district. The IL 53 interchange is the domain of IDOT District 3 and the IL 113 Coal City interchange is District 1. IDOT has tried to program its projects more uniformly and with a more orderly rationale with its recently enacted TAMP asset management plan, but still there is flexibility in programming where the people closest to the issues in each District help make the calls on what is fixed and to what extent.

Point taken, and we can go into a whole other topic on just how IDOT programs its costs and projects. Actually getting back to I-80, this is clearly seen on the portion from Minooka West to Morris where the pavement has for nearly 20 years been setup for an eventual 3rd lane each way while the portion through Western Will County pathetically has sat at 2 lanes each way (and the project plans for this rebuild don't give me much confidence that they actually are going to properly fix the capacity issues).