IDOT Report to Senate on highways and bridges

[edwaleni]

Here is the report from Illinois Department of Transportation to the IL Senate sub-committee on transportation that occurred on Thursday.

Covered here is the Lake Shore Drive issue, Des Plaines River Bridge and host of other questions.

[edwaleni]

Highlights of the video:

- Differences between bridge rating types
- If LSD is US-41, why wasn't IDOT inspecting the bridge that is failing? (Chicago DOT was)
- Long discussion on the I-80 Des Plaines River Bridge (due to a media report)
- Disconcerting lack of candor on the concept of what closes a bridge, a kind of "its an internal technical issue"
- How much of our roads can be tolled legally?
- Committee chair obsession with concrete over asphalt highways
- Committee chair obsession over capacity improvements over maintenance
- Committee chair telling IDOT leaders to "get everyone together" when IDOT director says they do so monthly
- IDOT telling the committee that the current revenue sources has only 10% of the value it had when the last increase was reviewed (over 20 years ago)
- Illinois has 731 bridges listed in "poor" condition
- Only 3 representatives asked questions
- Committee chair making statement about FHWA "bringing in more bacon" because they set the rules.  Which means he has no clue how highway planning works.

I guess I was astounded at the lack of questions from the representation, and only one (the chair) seem to be the only one who had a very rudimentary knowledge of how highways are planned and work.

The shoulder shrug mentality of the IDOT bureaucrats and the lack of knowledge of the representation sends a huge message that this will not be resolved until a catastrophic event occurs.

I see why IDOT has that approach. They have been ignored for over 25 years, they deal with ill informed or disinterest from the committee continuously, and the money has been brokered off to pay yet more debt.

[Brandon]

 Because CDOT maintains LSD & all other state routes inside the City of Chicago except the freeways.

[mgk920]

Because CDOT maintains LSD & all other state routes inside the City of Chicago except the freeways.

Further, if I were the Benevolent Dictator of IDOT, I would remove all of the state and US highway route markers from Chicago city streets except for US 12, US 20 and US 14 west of the Edens, as well as IL 43, IL 50 and IL 171 as needed for route continuity purposes, extend I-41 southward to replace I-94 through the city to end at the Lansing interchange with a liberal use of the same '[US 41] follow [I-41]' signs that WisDOT has all over the place (rerouting I-94 to follow the entire Tri-State Tollway as part of this) and remark Skokie Highway in Lake County as 'IL 641'.



Mike

[Crash_It]

Because CDOT maintains LSD & all other state routes inside the City of Chicago except the freeways.

Further, if I were the Benevolent Dictator of IDOT, I would remove all of the state and US highway route markers from Chicago city streets except for US 12, US 20 and US 14 west of the Edens, as well as IL 43, IL 50 and IL 171 as needed for route continuity purposes, extend I-41 southward to replace I-94 through the city to end at the Lansing interchange with a liberal use of the same '[US 41] follow [I-41]' signs that WisDOT has all over the place (rerouting I-94 to follow the entire Tri-State Tollway as part of this) and remark Skokie Highway in Lake County as 'IL 641'.



Mike

Just the East/West state route markers can be removed at the city limits (eg IL64 and IL19). But the reason they're in the city is so that they can end at LSD (US41). Removing IL43. IL50 and US12/20 from the city would ruin the overall routing of the state route system since IL50 starts in Lincolnwood and goes to nearly Champaign and IL43 starts in Waukegan and ends in Will County. It would create a nasty segmental gap like what other states have.

[Super Mateo]

Because CDOT maintains LSD & all other state routes inside the City of Chicago except the freeways.

Further, if I were the Benevolent Dictator of IDOT, I would remove all of the state and US highway route markers from Chicago city streets except for US 12, US 20 and US 14 west of the Edens, as well as IL 43, IL 50 and IL 171 as needed for route continuity purposes, extend I-41 southward to replace I-94 through the city to end at the Lansing interchange with a liberal use of the same '[US 41] follow [I-41]' signs that WisDOT has all over the place (rerouting I-94 to follow the entire Tri-State Tollway as part of this) and remark Skokie Highway in Lake County as 'IL 641'.



Mike

Just the East/West state route markers can be removed at the city limits (eg IL64 and IL19). But the reason they're in the city is so that they can end at LSD (US41). Removing IL43. IL50 and US12/20 from the city would ruin the overall routing of the state route system since IL50 starts in Lincolnwood and goes to nearly Champaign and IL43 starts in Waukegan and ends in Will County. It would create a nasty segmental gap like what other states have.

IL 50 only goes to Kankakee.  It doesn't get anywhere close to Champaign.

[mgk920]

Because CDOT maintains LSD & all other state routes inside the City of Chicago except the freeways.

Further, if I were the Benevolent Dictator of IDOT, I would remove all of the state and US highway route markers from Chicago city streets except for US 12, US 20 and US 14 west of the Edens, as well as IL 43, IL 50 and IL 171 as needed for route continuity purposes, extend I-41 southward to replace I-94 through the city to end at the Lansing interchange with a liberal use of the same '[US 41] follow [I-41]' signs that WisDOT has all over the place (rerouting I-94 to follow the entire Tri-State Tollway as part of this) and remark Skokie Highway in Lake County as 'IL 641'.



Mike

Just the East/West state route markers can be removed at the city limits (eg IL64 and IL19). But the reason they're in the city is so that they can end at LSD (US41). Removing IL43. IL50 and US12/20 from the city would ruin the overall routing of the state route system since IL50 starts in Lincolnwood and goes to nearly Champaign and IL43 starts in Waukegan and ends in Will County. It would create a nasty segmental gap like what other states have.

IL 50 only goes to Kankakee.  It doesn't get anywhere close to Champaign.

I did say "...except for (several major routes)...".



Mike

[Crash_It]

Because CDOT maintains LSD & all other state routes inside the City of Chicago except the freeways.

Further, if I were the Benevolent Dictator of IDOT, I would remove all of the state and US highway route markers from Chicago city streets except for US 12, US 20 and US 14 west of the Edens, as well as IL 43, IL 50 and IL 171 as needed for route continuity purposes, extend I-41 southward to replace I-94 through the city to end at the Lansing interchange with a liberal use of the same '[US 41] follow [I-41]' signs that WisDOT has all over the place (rerouting I-94 to follow the entire Tri-State Tollway as part of this) and remark Skokie Highway in Lake County as 'IL 641'.



Mike

Just the East/West state route markers can be removed at the city limits (eg IL64 and IL19). But the reason they're in the city is so that they can end at LSD (US41). Removing IL43. IL50 and US12/20 from the city would ruin the overall routing of the state route system since IL50 starts in Lincolnwood and goes to nearly Champaign and IL43 starts in Waukegan and ends in Will County. It would create a nasty segmental gap like what other states have.

IL 50 only goes to Kankakee.  It doesn't get anywhere close to Champaign.

One can use it to get to Champaign (via US45). With that logic, they can keep I41 continuing to the Indiana State line. It doesn't really need to exist in Illinois as it would create the same redundancy that's now in WI.