IDOT chief finally admits his agency is behind

[Revive 755]

However luckily Illinois isn't as terrain challenged as other states. Think mountains, rivers, bridges, tunnels, etc. Those cost insane $$$$

Maybe not the extremely large bridges to be found near the coasts, but there are enough waterways on the borders and within the state to require a decent amount of funding.

[Rick Powell]

Now we have IDOT wanting to expand the blue line to schaumburg on one end and to Oak brook on the other end, while at the same time there's going to be a future rebuild of the Ike. Common sense would be to rebuild the Ike with space available for a future blue line down the median. At the same time you have those crazy NIMBY'ers in Oak Park fighting the widening of the Ike.

The Blue Line expansions on both ends will be a CTA project, not IDOT, although there'd be a ton of coordination.  It is not a priority of CTA to do either expansion right now; they are mostly concentrating on the Red Line extension on the south end.  The 290 median is being designed for a future transit expansion that could either be BRT or rail to at least Mannheim Road.  Latest info on the Ike expansion is at www.eisenhowerexpressway.com, check the presentations of the Community Advisory Group there.

http://eisenhowerexpressway.com/info_center/meeting_materials.aspx

There is also a parallel study being done by CTA.

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

[Duke87]

I can count the number of modern SPUIs here on one hand

At least Illinois warrants the use of a hand. I can count the number of SPUIs in Connecticut on one finger. Sounds like both state DOTs have a similar resistance to trying anything new.

[johndoe780]

However luckily Illinois isn't as terrain challenged as other states. Think mountains, rivers, bridges, tunnels, etc. Those cost insane $$$$

Maybe not the extremely large bridges to be found near the coasts, but there are enough waterways on the borders and within the state to require a decent amount of funding.

That's true, but it's nothing like the NY/NJ border where there are literally 2 overpriced toll bridges/tunnels to get across: George washington bridge and lincoln tunnel.

I was mainly referring to cutting through mountains and hilly terrain. I imagine tunnels are a bit cheaper than bridges.

[johndoe780]

However luckily Illinois isn't as terrain challenged as other states. Think mountains, rivers, bridges, tunnels, etc. Those cost insane $$$$

Maybe not the extremely large bridges to be found near the coasts, but there are enough waterways on the borders and within the state to require a decent amount of funding.

That's true, but it's nothing like the NY/NJ border where there are literally 2 overpriced toll bridges/tunnels to get across: George washington bridge and lincoln tunnel.

I was mainly referring to cutting through mountains and hilly terrain. I imagine tunnels are a bit more expensive to build than bridges.

[AlexandriaVA]

However luckily Illinois isn't as terrain challenged as other states. Think mountains, rivers, bridges, tunnels, etc. Those cost insane $$$$

Maybe not the extremely large bridges to be found near the coasts, but there are enough waterways on the borders and within the state to require a decent amount of funding.

That's true, but it's nothing like the NY/NJ border where there are literally 2 overpriced toll bridges/tunnels to get across: George washington bridge and lincoln tunnel.

I was mainly referring to cutting through mountains and hilly terrain. I imagine tunnels are a bit cheaper than bridges.

They closed the Holland Tunnel? 

Additionally, there's the PATH tunnel into lower Manhattan (ex Hudson & Manhattan) and the Amtrak/NJ Transit tunnel (ex PRR) into midtown. Plus the ferries. Plenty of ways to get from Jersey into the city. It's silly, I think, to look at the Hudson River crossings only in terms of total road lanes.

Addendum: There's also the NJ-Staten Island-Long Island approach via Goethals and then Verrazano-Narrows.

[silverback1065]

Why is IDOT in charge of transit in the chicago area? shouldn't that be a local issue?

[johndoe780]

However luckily Illinois isn't as terrain challenged as other states. Think mountains, rivers, bridges, tunnels, etc. Those cost insane $$$$

Maybe not the extremely large bridges to be found near the coasts, but there are enough waterways on the borders and within the state to require a decent amount of funding.

That's true, but it's nothing like the NY/NJ border where there are literally 2 overpriced toll bridges/tunnels to get across: George washington bridge and lincoln tunnel.

I was mainly referring to cutting through mountains and hilly terrain. I imagine tunnels are a bit cheaper than bridges.

They closed the Holland Tunnel? 

Additionally, there's the PATH tunnel into lower Manhattan (ex Hudson & Manhattan) and the Amtrak/NJ Transit tunnel (ex PRR) into midtown. Plus the ferries. Plenty of ways to get from Jersey into the city. It's silly, I think, to look at the Hudson River crossings only in terms of total road lanes.

Addendum: There's also the NJ-Staten Island-Long Island approach via Goethals and then Verrazano-Narrows.

A bit off topic from IDOT, but I'm under the impression that railroad freight can't enter NYC. They have to unload in NJ and bring it in via semi-trucks mostly on the GW bridge. Semi trucks beat the crap out of NYC local roads that were primarily designed for horses. Here in the Chicago area, the extensive rail system helps cut down the amount of semis who beat up the highways and local roads.

[AlexandriaVA]

When you talk about freight entering NYC, I presume you mean from the mainland. Technically LIRR has a freight subsidiary which operates on the island and in theory could enter to the city, but I don't think they move much tonnage.

Only rail accesses into the city from the mainland are via Bronx on the old NY Central and PRR routes. Both of those are passenger lines, so any freight would be minimal. Plus they don't have the yards needed in Manhattan to unload the stuff.

[AlexandriaVA]

Also, Chicago is more of a railroad hub than it is a terminal rail destination. In other words, most goods coming on rail into Chicago aren't intended to get offloaded into the Chicago area, but rather continue on to other destinations. So if the rail lines weren't going through Chicago, it's not so much that trucks would take their place, but rather that other rail lines, like through St. Louis, would be used instead.

[johndoe780]

Also, Chicago is more of a railroad hub than it is a terminal rail destination. In other words, most goods coming on rail into Chicago aren't intended to get offloaded into the Chicago area, but rather continue on to other destinations. So if the rail lines weren't going through Chicago, it's not so much that trucks would take their place, but rather that other rail lines, like through St. Louis, would be used instead.

I'll give you that, but regardless of where the freight is actually moving, I'd rather the freight be on the rail rather than on the highways, especially some of these outdated highways that were never designed to move freight traffic.

[AlexandriaVA]

Also, Chicago is more of a railroad hub than it is a terminal rail destination. In other words, most goods coming on rail into Chicago aren't intended to get offloaded into the Chicago area, but rather continue on to other destinations. So if the rail lines weren't going through Chicago, it's not so much that trucks would take their place, but rather that other rail lines, like through St. Louis, would be used instead.

I'll give you that, but regardless of where the freight is actually moving, I'd rather the freight be on the rail rather than on the highways, especially some of these outdated highways that were never designed to move freight traffic.

No need to worry - shippers already put as much as they can on rail. It's simply cheaper per ton-mile to do so, if your product allows.

Non-perishable commodities are (almost?) always shipped by rail. Coal doesn't go bad, for example. It can wait for days to clear the Chicago yards (which it often does)

Trucks are the least efficient because of how small the trucks are. Consider labor costs. A single shipping container by truck requires a single driver for it. On rail, a single shipping container takes up half a gondola railcar. And there can be dozens and dozens of these gondola railcars double-stacking the shipping containers. And the train is run by a two-man crew. Granted rail has a much higher overhead, but those are fixed costs.

Trucks have advantage when it comes to perishable products, although refrigerator railcars exist (CSX's Tropicana juice train is a sight to see here in the East), or to go to places without rail access.

[kharvey10]

If you thought IDOT was behind in Chicagoland, get down towards District 8/9.  They're making I-57 6 lanes yet there are critical routes through the Metro East that get ignored.  Locals were bitter over their handling of the canal bridge project on I-270.  The lane closures on I-64 last month near I-55 drew major heat from the locals.  Some of their 1980's-1990s projects were epic fails, namely the interchange of I-64 and I-255.  And if you live in the Metro East, this agency is still bold enough to pull off 24/7 lane closures even on the major highways - that includes last year double lane closure on 255 north of 55/70.  (MoDOT very rarely attempts that behavior, with the project on I-44 near I-270 being the rare exception.)

[johndoe780]

If you thought IDOT was behind in Chicagoland, get down towards District 8/9.  They're making I-57 6 lanes yet there are critical routes through the Metro East that get ignored.  Locals were bitter over their handling of the canal bridge project on I-270.  The lane closures on I-64 last month near I-55 drew major heat from the locals.  Some of their 1980's-1990s projects were epic fails, namely the interchange of I-64 and I-255.  And if you live in the Metro East, this agency is still bold enough to pull off 24/7 lane closures even on the major highways - that includes last year double lane closure on 255 north of 55/70.  (MoDOT very rarely attempts that behavior, with the project on I-44 near I-270 being the rare exception.)

To be fair, the 10 mile widening of I-57 between Johnson city and Marion was cheap at $10.6 million

You want an epic fail? Read this

http://www.dailyherald.com/article/20150910/news/150919881/

[Rick Powell]

Why is IDOT in charge of transit in the chicago area? shouldn't that be a local issue?

IDOT is not in charge of transit in the Chicago area.  The three transit service agencies (CTA, Pace and Metra) are funded by the RTA sales tax, fares and other federal and state aid, and have their own management and boards of directors.  RTA is an umbrella agency that mainly serves as a tax collector and distributor, although they do some joint agency planning.  IDOT does have a Division of Public and Intermodal Transportation, but its main function is to provide funding and studies, not to run things.

[SSOWorld]

The only thing IDOT has a say in around Chicago is the freeways - specifically non-tolled Interstates.

EDIT: And some of the signed urban arterials outside the city proper.

[johndoe780]

The only thing IDOT has a say in around Chicago is the freeways - specifically non-tolled Interstates.

EDIT: And some of the signed urban arterials outside the city proper.

Not necessarily true. IDOT provided half the funds (the other half from UP) to third rail UP-W from West Chicago to Geneva.

[Revive 755]

The only thing IDOT has a say in around Chicago is the freeways - specifically non-tolled Interstates.

EDIT: And some of the signed urban arterials outside the city proper.

IDOT gets a partial say on any state routes inside Chicago, but Chicago frequently ignores them.  IIRC there were a few newspaper articles regarding this when IDOT was for a time blocking protected bike lanes on state routes inside Chicago.

IDOT also gets a partial say in projects funded with either federal or state gas tax dollars - this is why IDOT details show up in non-IDOT projects such as this Lake County resurfacing project (78 MB pdf)

[Rick Powell]

The only thing IDOT has a say in around Chicago is the freeways - specifically non-tolled Interstates.

EDIT: And some of the signed urban arterials outside the city proper.

IDOT gets a partial say on any state routes inside Chicago, but Chicago frequently ignores them.  IIRC there were a few newspaper articles regarding this when IDOT was for a time blocking protected bike lanes on state routes inside Chicago.

IDOT also gets a partial say in projects funded with either federal or state gas tax dollars - this is why IDOT details show up in non-IDOT projects such as this Lake County resurfacing project (78 MB pdf)

Technically, IDOT gets a "partial say" in any local road project in the state for which Motor Fuel Tax monies are spent.  In practice, MFT funds can be used for anything theoc agency desires, as long as the project conforms to state Local Road standards and the money is not diverted illegally for non MFT purposes.  In its local road role, IDOT is basically an auditor.

Fixed quote -sso

[kharvey10]

Not so much on the I-57 widening,  it was actually packaged in with bridge replacement and other improvements that were done during that same time in Marion.