AARoads Forum

B3, between Wilmington, IL and Cedar Lake/Lowell, IN

The presentation is located at http://www.illianacorridor.org/pdfs/illiana_cpgttf7ppt_020712_final.pdf

Quote from: Rick Powell on February 11, 2012, 01:47:20 PM
B3, between Wilmington, IL and Cedar Lake/Lowell, IN

The presentation is located at http://www.illianacorridor.org/pdfs/illiana_cpgttf7ppt_020712_final.pdf

Living here, I must concur.  B-3 (near the Will/Kankakee County Line) is the best one.  It will still pick up a lot of truck traffic from I-80 and the intermodal yards, but be far enough from I-80 to allow both corridors to be used.  It will also allow a westward extension to meet up with the Prairie Parkway in the future.

I'm happy to see B3 being the choice corridor. Not only can i see an extension to connect to the Prairie Pkwy proposal but I can see it eventually head east and tie into IN 49 expressway near Valpo and hook up with I-94 by the Indiana Dunes. That would make almost a complete outer bypass around the Chicago area.

On one hand I'm happy to see B3 advance as a bypass corridor, but I had kind of hoped for something a tad closer in that would have helped relieve US 30 between IL 394 and I-65.

Quote from: Revive 755 on February 11, 2012, 08:53:58 PM
On one hand I'm happy to see B3 advance as a bypass corridor, but I had kind of hoped for something a tad closer in that would have helped relieve US 30 between IL 394 and I-65.

The problem with a closer corridor is where to place it.  There may be a lot of farmland between the intermodal centers and I-57, but those areas (especially Manhattan) are growing.  In addition, a bridge across the Kankakee is far cheaper than a new bridge across the Des Plaines (where height must be maintained to allow for barge traffic along the busy waterway).  Then, there's nowhere to go west from I-55 as it is all urban and suburban in Channahon.

Some interesting speculation on when land may be purchased for the tollway and information about eminent domain laws in the two states.

"Homeowners in the path of proposed routes for the Illiana Expressway already are wondering how Indiana's swift and sure eminent domain laws will affect their lives and property values."

Illiana bears down on south Lake Co. homeowners (http://www.nwitimes.com/news/local/lake/lowell/illiana-bears-down-on-south-lake-co-homeowners/article_44f1f5a9-67bd-5940-9c17-2524c7a915f7.html) (Northwest Indiana Times)

I'm moderately surprised that no direct connection to I-80 is planned. They couldn't bring it 8 miles farther west to meet up near Morris? It seems like they're missing out on big income not having that in place.

If I were an Indiana DOT leader, I'd be examining connection options to US-30 east of Valparaiso, and north to the Toll Road and I-94 near LaPorte and Michigan City (give the ITRCC skin in the game if necessary).

Edited to remove "I-30".  :pan:

Quote from: JREwing78 on April 21, 2012, 10:49:53 PM
I'm moderately surprised that no direct connection to I-80 is planned. They couldn't bring it 8 miles farther west to meet up near Morris? It seems like they're missing out on big income not having that in place.

If I were an Indiana DOT leader, I'd be examining connection options to I-30 east of Valparaiso, and north to the Toll Road and I-94 near LaPorte and Michigan City (give the ITRCC skin in the game if necessary).

I-30 in Indiana? I need to clinch the highway, just didn't know that it was extended from Little Rock to Valparaiso. JK, I'm sure you meant US 30, and in all seriousness, a complete bypass of the Northwest Indiana area up to Michigan City wouldn't be a horrible idea for those heading north on 65 whose destination include the west coast of Michigan and vincinity. Sadly, I don't think INDOT is thinking of such an idea at the moment and with recent improvments on I-65 south of the Borman and along 80/94 east to the Toll Road, they probably won't be considering it.

I think the idea was originally suggested by Mitch Daniels, but the eastern/northern piece to Michigan City/Westville/Valpo was dropped.

I guess I don't see that removed part of the new tollway as a viable thing at the moment. Indiana is spending a lot of money on US 31 upgrade from South Bend to Indianapolis. Given the route of I-65, the US 31 routing is far preferable to western Michiganders than a bypass going south from Michigan City. As for a bypass of I-80 to Morris, I again think that the economics may not be there. Most of current I-80 is free and much of the route has been improved in the last five or six years. So I can't see a sufficient number of people wanting to travel on this new tollway.

As far as building an alternative to US 30 from Merrillville and Crown Point to Valpo, that is needed. The current proposed location of the Illiana is much too far south to work for that, IMO. Although I have never heard any talk of such a bypass, I could only see it as an expressway (for cost reasons) at 93rd Avenue going east from I-65 to SR 49. I seriously doubt that will happen either, but if it was considered, it would most likely have to be pushed from the local level to create something like Ronald Reagan Parkway in Hendricks County or University Pkwy. in Vanderburgh County.

Quote from: JREwing78 on April 21, 2012, 10:49:53 PM
I'm moderately surprised that no direct connection to I-80 is planned. They couldn't bring it 8 miles farther west to meet up near Morris? It seems like they're missing out on big income not having that in place.

If I were an Indiana DOT leader, I'd be examining connection options to I-30 east of Valparaiso, and north to the Toll Road and I-94 near LaPorte and Michigan City (give the ITRCC skin in the game if necessary).

The extension to Morris is not as far along in the planning stages.  ISTHA has it on their map of the Illiana, and the I-55 interchange will be built to accommodate an extension.

Quote from: hobsini2 on February 11, 2012, 07:01:37 PM
I'm happy to see B3 being the choice corridor. Not only can i see an extension to connect to the Prairie Pkwy proposal but I can see it eventually head east and tie into IN 49 expressway near Valpo and hook up with I-94 by the Indiana Dunes. That would make almost a complete outer bypass around the Chicago area.

I thought that the Illiana Expressway couldn't connect to the I-94 corridor since it would intersect the Indiana Tollroad and thus be considered a "competing" tollroad. I remember reading somewhere that the Indiana Tollroad didn't want another tollway built near it. I could be misinformed however and will gladly retract my comment, if that's the case.

Quote from: Lightning Strike on April 25, 2012, 12:47:37 AM
I thought that the Illiana Expressway couldn't connect to the I-94 corridor since it would intersect the Indiana Tollroad and thus be considered a "competing" tollroad.

https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=5113.msg111770#msg111770
The approved route is all more than 10 miles from the Tollway. If it heads north then to I-94, it would not have 20 continuous miles within 10 miles of the Tollway unless it goes at a rather shallow angle.

When Illiana first became a hot topic, there were talks of building it east of I-65 and curving northward to I-94 and the Toll Road. Plans for that were scuttled pretty quickly.

Not that I know the lay of the land east of I-65, but it looks to be a very tight fit if the expressway were to turn northward from there.

Quote from: nwi_navigator_1181 on June 02, 2012, 09:50:40 PM
When Illiana first became a hot topic, there were talks of building it east of I-65 and curving northward to I-94 and the Toll Road. Plans for that were scuttled pretty quickly.

Not that I know the lay of the land east of I-65, but it looks to be a very tight fit if the expressway were to turn northward from there.

IIRC, it was supposed to connect to IN-49.  IN-49 is a divided highway (and partial freeway) from Valpo north to US-20.

I think it was supposed to go east of Valpo thru Westville and up to Michigan City.

As far as SR 49 goes, I wish it was a freeway, but it really isn't. The CR 400N interchange will be the fourth one between US 30 and ITR, but there are several at grade intersections including the ITR ramps.

It would make more sense to tie into the IN 49 expressway. ROW to make it a "freeway style" highway is already in place as is a couple of interchanges.

Taking the route through the Chesterton area though may be a bit of a chore. Work would need to be done in the vicinity of Indian Boundary Road and the stoplights to the south toward the Toll Road, unless the freeway portion would end at the Toll Road itself, then there would be little problem.

Illiana would be a somewhat quicker way from Springfield, St. Louis, and other points south and west to Gary, Detroit, Cleveland, and other points north and east. It would also take this traffic off already crowded I-80 through south suburban Chicago.

Quote from: ftballfan on June 03, 2012, 06:23:43 PM
Illiana would be a somewhat quicker way from Springfield, St. Louis, and other points south and west to Gary, Detroit, Cleveland, and other points north and east. It would also take this traffic off already crowded I-80 through south suburban Chicago.

A new I-74 to Lafayette four-lane (including a Lafayette bypass), along with the current SR 25-US 24 project, would be even better for most of this.

Quote from: NE2 on June 03, 2012, 06:56:39 PM

Quote from: ftballfan on June 03, 2012, 06:23:43 PM
Illiana would be a somewhat quicker way from Springfield, St. Louis, and other points south and west to Gary, Detroit, Cleveland, and other points north and east. It would also take this traffic off already crowded I-80 through south suburban Chicago.

A new I-74 to Lafayette four-lane (including a Lafayette bypass), along with the current SR 25-US 24 project, would be even better for most of this.

I-74 to Lafayette?

Quote from: adt1982 on June 03, 2012, 08:03:16 PM

Quote from: NE2 on June 03, 2012, 06:56:39 PM

Quote from: ftballfan on June 03, 2012, 06:23:43 PM
Illiana would be a somewhat quicker way from Springfield, St. Louis, and other points south and west to Gary, Detroit, Cleveland, and other points north and east. It would also take this traffic off already crowded I-80 through south suburban Chicago.

A new I-74 to Lafayette four-lane (including a Lafayette bypass), along with the current SR 25-US 24 project, would be even better for most of this.

I-74 to Lafayette?

Yes, I-74 somewhere around Danville to Lafayette.

Don't you mean I-72 since I-74 goes east to Indianapolis and southeast to Columbus, OH.

No, I mean I-74. This four-lane would begin at I-74 near Danville and end near Lafayette.

Quote from: NE2 on June 04, 2012, 07:03:51 AM
No, I mean I-74. This four-lane would begin at I-74 near Danville and end near Lafayette.

Then duplex I-72 with I-74 between C-U and Danville, perhaps developing part of this 'I-72' as a south loop around C-U?

Mike

Who cares what it's numbered?

Quote from: NE2 on June 03, 2012, 06:56:39 PM

Quote from: ftballfan on June 03, 2012, 06:23:43 PM
Illiana would be a somewhat quicker way from Springfield, St. Louis, and other points south and west to Gary, Detroit, Cleveland, and other points north and east. It would also take this traffic off already crowded I-80 through south suburban Chicago.

A new I-74 to Lafayette four-lane (including a Lafayette bypass), along with the current SR 25-US 24 project, would be even better for most of this.

Maybe, but that's not the reason for building the Illiana Expressway.  The reason is as an alternative to I-80, especially for the trucks coming and going to and from the two massive intermodal yards between Joliet and Elwood.

Quote from: NE2 on June 04, 2012, 07:03:51 AM
No, I mean I-74. This four-lane would begin at I-74 near Danville and end near Lafayette.

That would only work if this "I-74" is a 3di, like I-174 or I-374.  Still, extending I-72 to Lafayette would go someways to someday extending I-72 to Fort Wayne, IN and Toledo, OH along US-24.

Quote from: Lyon Wonder on June 05, 2012, 02:20:10 AM

Quote from: NE2 on June 04, 2012, 07:03:51 AM
No, I mean I-74. This four-lane would begin at I-74 near Danville and end near Lafayette.

That would only work if this "I-74" is a 3di, like I-174 or I-374.

What the hell are you talking about? The four-lane would not be I-74. It would begin at I-74.

Quote from: NE2 on June 05, 2012, 08:09:22 AM

Quote from: Lyon Wonder on June 05, 2012, 02:20:10 AM

Quote from: NE2 on June 04, 2012, 07:03:51 AM
No, I mean I-74. This four-lane would begin at I-74 near Danville and end near Lafayette.

That would only work if this "I-74" is a 3di, like I-174 or I-374.

What the hell are you talking about? The four-lane would not be I-74. It would begin at I-74.

Note to all - reread the orriginal concept. "NE2" is saying that there would be a four-lane FROM I-74 TO Lafayette. He's not saying the four-lane would BE 74.

And then there were three: http://www.arcgis.com/apps/OnePane/basicviewer/index.html?appid=cd46d7351179458ebd20f4b4e5ce1538 (http://www.arcgis.com/apps/OnePane/basicviewer/index.html?appid=cd46d7351179458ebd20f4b4e5ce1538)

Route B4 is back on the drawing board, along with the favorited B3 and A3S2 routes. According to nwi.com, Indiana interchanges would be located at I-65, Indiana 55, and U.S. 41. Illinois interchanges would be Illinois 1, U.S. 45, I-57, Illinois 53, Interstate 55, and possibly U.S. 52.

A final route could be decided by year's end.

http://www.dot.il.gov/desenv/Illiana/Illiana_deis.html

Public Hearings July 31 5-8 pm Peotone High School (IL); August 1 5-8 PM Lowell Middle School (IN)

Interesting that it does not seem that an interchange is being considered at IL 50 to serve Peotone without having to use I-57.  I could also see one at Will Center Rd if the Peotone (3rd Chicago) Airport is ever built.

Quote
Heightened concerns about the proposed Illiana Expressway drew more than 750 people to Lowell Middle School on Wednesday...

Illiana Expressway opposition intensifies (http://www.nwitimes.com/niche/inbusiness/illiana-expressway-opposition-intensifies/article_bb977a75-5408-55b5-bed1-aa2d55271389.html) (NWI Times)

I really dont think this will ever get built if it does it will be a very long time from now

Quote from: silverback1065 on August 03, 2012, 12:31:15 PM
I really dont think this will ever get built if it does it will be a very long time from now

Problem is, we need it now, before we overload I-80 any further.  Unless, of course, these morons who oppose it like heavy trucks barreling down their two-lane roads at all hours of the day and night.  Short-sighted twits.

Thing is, the latest upgrade of the Borman Expressway is the last possible upgrade that can be done on this system. There is no more space left. I'm pretty sure the same can be said for the Indiana Toll Road.

There are going to be people who bitch and moan about any major project that is proposed. That's part of the territory; that is the risk one has to be willing to take if you live on or near a major regional thoroughfare. The same applies if you live in open land where the prospect of new roads can happen. Change happens; we deal with it and we move on.

There's no greater example of the need for the Illiana Expressway than what happened in 2008. The flood that shut down the Borman paralyzed traffic for days, and there was no way U.S. 30 could handle the load. With rising Tollway/Skyway fees looming (50 cent raise on the Skyway next year, electronic toll discounts ending in 2016), you can bet more people will drive the extra miles to avoid that fiasco.

INDOT and IDOT just need to get the road built. Decide which corridor works best, prepare for inevitable backlash, and get it going. I feel bad for those who feel displaced, but money talks and...you know the rest.

Quote from: nwi_navigator_1181 on August 10, 2012, 12:34:38 AM

There are going to be people who bitch and moan about any major project that is proposed. That's part of the territory; that is the risk one has to be willing to take if you live on or near a major regional thoroughfare. The same applies if you live in open land where the prospect of new roads can happen. Change happens; we deal with it and we move on.

Yep, it happens all the time. People can get so self-defensive that nobody really wins, and those people need to see the light- the light being that this is a way they can contribute to their citizenship of the United States. No wonder why the government gets blamed so much for the lack of productivity- after all, we live in a democracy. (NOTE: I am NOT trying to be political. I'm just trying to say that people need to be responsible citizens more often than I see.)
Change is indeed something we need to embrace.

Quote from: nwi_navigator_1181 on August 10, 2012, 12:34:38 AM
There's no greater example of the need for the Illiana Expressway than what happened in 2008. The flood that shut down the Borman paralyzed traffic for days, and there was no way U.S. 30 could handle the load.

In fact, US 30 itself became flooded out during those storms. It took me 8 hours to get from I-80 at 394 to the Michigan line, using US 30, IN 2, I-65, US 30 (again), various local streets in Valparaiso, and then IN 49. It was not pleasant.

Quote from: nwi_navigator_1181 on August 10, 2012, 12:34:38 AM
Thing is, the latest upgrade of the Borman Expressway is the last possible upgrade that can be done on this system. There is no more space left. I'm pretty sure the same can be said for the Indiana Toll Road.

In some areas toward Illinois, it will be very expensive to widen it again, but other areas it goes through are vacant land. When I looked at the newest overpasses last time I went through there, it looked like they are wide enough for a another lane.

Quote from: nwi_navigator_1181 on August 10, 2012, 12:34:38 AM
There's no greater example of the need for the Illiana Expressway than what happened in 2008. The flood that shut down the Borman paralyzed traffic for days, and there was no way U.S. 30 could handle the load. With rising Tollway/Skyway fees looming (50 cent raise on the Skyway next year, electronic toll discounts ending in 2016), you can bet more people will drive the extra miles to avoid that fiasco.

Was the flooding at the I-65 exit?  I know INDOT is installing pumping stations there next year.

Quote from: nwi_navigator_1181 on August 10, 2012, 12:34:38 AM
INDOT and IDOT just need to get the road built. Decide which corridor works best, prepare for inevitable backlash, and get it going. I feel bad for those who feel displaced, but money talks and...you know the rest.

I still wonder how many vehicles would use this route as a tollway. I doubt that the tolls will be cheap. It will do little good for a large majority of NWI commuters because it will be so far south. As someone who would come up from the south to go to Chicago, I can't imagine using it except under extreme circumstances. If I want to go to the Loop, I will take ITR and the Skyway. Otherwise I would take the Borman.

I can see trucks going west on I-80 past Joliet benefiting some, but anyone going to Chicago would still hit congestion on Ill. 394 or I-57 (in addition to paying tolls when a free alternate route is available).

It's purpose is geared more for the Indianapolis to west of Chicago traffic esp the semi trucks. I-65 and I-80 are some of the most heavily traveled highways for semis.  That's the real need for it.

Would this eventually turn into a long haul east west highway following the  us 30 corridor?

Quote from: hobsini2 on August 10, 2012, 02:31:31 PM
It's purpose is geared more for the Indianapolis to west of Chicago traffic esp the semi trucks. I-65 and I-80 are some of the most heavily traveled highways for semis.  That's the real need for it.

I don't think that will cut it to support a new road. Think about all the truck traffic leaving I-65 northbound headed west. It is a good amount, but some are bound for Cline Avenue, some for Chicago, and some for the Tri-State. Also, another way to look at it is how many trucks are on I-80 west of Joliet? Of all those trucks, how many came up I-65? I just don't see that volume supporting an expensive new toll road.

From when I lived up there, it seemed that a large part of the truck traffic came from the steel mills (coils and other steel products) of NW Indiana. Of course a lot is either headed to or coming from Chicago and the the suburbs. Neither of these destinations or origins would usually use such a road.

The Chicago area tollways are full and profitable because they are heavy commuter routes and handle some inter-city traffic. This would essentially be part of an inter-city route (bypass) except for the rare individual living in a place like Lowell or Demotte and working in Joliet.

Quote from: mukade on August 10, 2012, 07:28:56 AMWas the flooding at the I-65 exit?  I know INDOT is installing pumping stations there next year.

Not just at I-65, but also between Grant and Burr Street, as well as (the most infamous area) the Kennedy Avenue Interchange. What was most painful about that event was that I-65 was closed for construction between the Borman and the Toll Road, cutting off a major connector. As for the pumping stations, that explains the off-road construction that just ended at the Borman/65 interchange.

Even if the Illiana is meant to funnel westbound trucks not heading for Chicago, it would alleviate the already building pressure on the Borman Expressway. If such a catastrophe like 2008 happens again, it will be THE route to Chicago. It needs to get done.

Quote from: nwi_navigator_1181 on August 10, 2012, 08:03:30 PM
Even if the Illiana is meant to funnel westbound trucks not heading for Chicago, it would alleviate the already building pressure on the Borman Expressway. If such a catastrophe like 2008 happens again, it will be THE route to Chicago. It needs to get done.

I agree it would be nice. What I question is whether or not there would be enough traffic on it for it to be profitable. In Indiana, it is to be a public-private partnership, right? Being a backup route for a 50 year flood is not sufficient reason to build the highway. Back when this was first discussed (1970s?) it was supposed to be between Merrillville and Crown Point. If it were there, it would surely be profitable because it would relieve US 30 traffic. That is the difference between being like the Illinois tollways and it being only a bypass. Now, it is proposed for a route way out past any built up area.

Quote from: mukade on August 10, 2012, 07:17:08 PM

Quote from: hobsini2 on August 10, 2012, 02:31:31 PM
It's purpose is geared more for the Indianapolis to west of Chicago traffic esp the semi trucks. I-65 and I-80 are some of the most heavily traveled highways for semis.  That's the real need for it.

I don't think that will cut it to support a new road. Think about all the truck traffic leaving I-65 northbound headed west. It is a good amount, but some are bound for Cline Avenue, some for Chicago, and some for the Tri-State. Also, another way to look at it is how many trucks are on I-80 west of Joliet? Of all those trucks, how many came up I-65? I just don't see that volume supporting an expensive new toll road.

From when I lived up there, it seemed that a large part of the truck traffic came from the steel mills (coils and other steel products) of NW Indiana. Of course a lot is either headed to or coming from Chicago and the the suburbs. Neither of these destinations or origins would usually use such a road.

The Chicago area tollways are full and profitable because they are heavy commuter routes and handle some inter-city traffic. This would essentially be part of an inter-city route (bypass) except for the rare individual living in a place like Lowell or Demotte and working in Joliet.

That is not quite what I said.  I was talking about the cross country semi traffic on I-80, of which there is a lot more than the majority of other east-west interstates, to avoid the Borman Expy. This has nothing to do with relieving US 30. Besides, if you line up the Illiana and the Prairie Parkway, it is not far fetched at all to see a possible link built between the 2 highways for an outer bypass of the Chicago/NW Indiana area.

Yes you have truck traffic that comes from the city and from the steel mills but the majority of truck traffic on 80 is cross country. I do read the cities that the trucks are based out of and while that may have nothing to do with it, those trucks would still have to go back to their bases.

As to you questioning how much truck traffic is on 80 west of Joliet, from my personal experience driving that highway, the ratio of truck traffic to cars is close to 1 to 1.

Quote from: hobsini2 on August 11, 2012, 06:33:01 AM

Quote from: mukade on August 10, 2012, 07:17:08 PM

Quote from: hobsini2 on August 10, 2012, 02:31:31 PM
It's purpose is geared more for the Indianapolis to west of Chicago traffic esp the semi trucks. I-65 and I-80 are some of the most heavily traveled highways for semis.  That's the real need for it.

I don't think that will cut it to support a new road. Think about all the truck traffic leaving I-65 northbound headed west. It is a good amount, but some are bound for Cline Avenue, some for Chicago, and some for the Tri-State. Also, another way to look at it is how many trucks are on I-80 west of Joliet? Of all those trucks, how many came up I-65? I just don't see that volume supporting an expensive new toll road.

From when I lived up there, it seemed that a large part of the truck traffic came from the steel mills (coils and other steel products) of NW Indiana. Of course a lot is either headed to or coming from Chicago and the the suburbs. Neither of these destinations or origins would usually use such a road.

The Chicago area tollways are full and profitable because they are heavy commuter routes and handle some inter-city traffic. This would essentially be part of an inter-city route (bypass) except for the rare individual living in a place like Lowell or Demotte and working in Joliet.

That is not quite what I said.  I was talking about the cross country semi traffic on I-80, of which there is a lot more than the majority of other east-west interstates, to avoid the Borman Expy. This has nothing to do with relieving US 30. Besides, if you line up the Illiana and the Prairie Parkway, it is not far fetched at all to see a possible link built between the 2 highways for an outer bypass of the Chicago/NW Indiana area.

Yes you have truck traffic that comes from the city and from the steel mills but the majority of truck traffic on 80 is cross country. I do read the cities that the trucks are based out of and while that may have nothing to do with it, those trucks would still have to go back to their bases.

As to you questioning how much truck traffic is on 80 west of Joliet, from my personal experience driving that highway, the ratio of truck traffic to cars is close to 1 to 1.

Several points: when it was first proposed many years ago, one of the most important benefits was about creating an alternate for US 30. As a matter of fact, that was the selling point to the locals. For quite a few years until things get built up, there really would be no other major benefit for NW Indiana unless any new major businesses were built along it.

Regarding the Prairie Parkway connection, that would offer some benefit to the far western Chicago suburbs, I agree, but for trucks coming down I-90 from Minnesota/Wisconsin/Rockford going to Indy, they already have a much better route that is free (I-39 to I-74). So again, that would be of of limited benefit.

As for I-80 cross-country traffic using it, with the Illiana ending at I-65, I have a difficult time understanding why truckers would choose to drive 20 miles south from I-80 to the Illiana unless I-80 is experiencing some sort of major backup. I can see benefit mostly for northbound I-55 and I-57 traffic going to NW Indiana and points east (and the reverse), but I'm not sure that is a high volume.

We'll see if INDOT finds a private partner after all studies are done. They may - they found one to lease the ITR, but that turned out not to be a very favorable deal for that company. I would want to hear some realistic use cases that would generate sufficient traffic before I invested. I favor building the highway, but the routing needs to be right for it to be successful. It would need to be as near to Crown Point and St. John as possible to have a hope (Merrillville/Schererville/Dyer are way too built up).

I would love to see it relieve traffic from US 30 as well. But once the regional intermodule terminal is built, I would see this road being used more by truckers than cars. That could change if Illinois got their ass in gear on building the 3rd Chicago Airport in Peotone like they were supposed to 10 years ago.

Quote from: hobsini2 on August 11, 2012, 04:36:19 PM
I would love to see it relieve traffic from US 30 as well. But once the regional intermodule terminal is built, I would see this road being used more by truckers than cars. That could change if Illinois got their ass in gear on building the 3rd Chicago Airport in Peotone like they were supposed to 10 years ago.

I don't think you mean it this way, but your argument seems to be this: sorry folks, there is nothing in it for you, but I am sure you won't mind sacrificing your land and lifestyle for some really important business in Illinois. Furthermore, your neighbor wants another airport nearby so it will need good access. Thanks for supporting your neighbor.

That really sounds more like a recipe for creating NIMBYs to me. If you read the articles in the NWI Times, the residents in southern Lake County are already complaining about the Illiana. If you went to a public meeting and shared that argument, I suspect you would not garner much support. The ICC around Indy was a somewhat similar proposal, and it was cancelled due to opposition. Somehow, some way, I suspect benefit to NW Indiana residents will need to be clearly shown - something more compelling than funneling trucks from Joliet or it could suffer the same fate.

I have always been in favor of the Illiana, but the current proposal seems to be simply for another Borman Expressway. That is, it will facilitate traffic to and from Chicago/Illinois with little benefit on the Indiana side. And it will probably be an eyesore.

The most probable route is at 153rd Avenue between Cedar Lake and Lowell and south of Crown Point. Opposition is becoming strong in that area. Another route is on the table again at 205th Avenue which is south of SR 2. That route ensures no benefit to the NWI commuter while the other one just means little benefit. Unfortunately, any of the routes north of 153rd are probably too built up and would surely encounter even more opposition.

The plan is to have interchanges at US 41 and SR 55, but no guarantees on SR 55. So potentially, there may be one Indiana interchange other than I-65. Even if there would be an interchange at SR 55, I can't see much value. It is a two lane road and is residential toward Crown Point so it never will be widened too far north. From the north side of Crown Point to US 30 in Merrillville, it follows Taft St. and is four lanes (plus a continuous turn lane), but that does not line up with the part south of Crown Point.

I still haven't seen a plan that describes the benefit to Indiana. A new giant truck stop at US 41 or some other incidental commercial development isn't sufficient economic benefit, IMO. Before Indiana goes forward, I hope they get that part defined - first things first. What does Indiana expect to get? Distribution centers? Light industries? Trucking terminals? Whatever it is, infrastructure needs to be planned out. Then they need to create a realistic proposal that would build a new north-south road west of Crown Point that is similar to Ronald Reagan Parkway in Hendricks County that would have the other interchange and would connect to US 30 to the Illiana. Probably, it should around Whitcomb Street as it needs to be roughly halfway between US 41 and I-65 while avoiding the center of Crown Point.

I can understand how Illinois wants good access to the multi-modal facilities and I can understand that another alternative to US 30 and the Borman would be nice, but those two things don't justify the highway on the Indiana side. BTW, if the 205th Avenue route were chosen, that would be about 15 miles south of US 30. Illinois seems to have ample reason for wanting it, but there needs to be something in it for both sides.

I also wonder what the traffic volumes would be. Even with the multi-modal access, eastbound to I-65 is one direction of many. I can't see this being a busy higway for some time.

South Lake County speaks out about Illiana Expressway (http://www.indianaeconomicdigest.net/main.asp?SectionID=31&SubSectionID=135&ArticleID=65965) (Post Tribune)
EDITORIAL: Tweak Illiana's NWI route (http://www.indianaeconomicdigest.net/main.asp?SectionID=31&subsectionID=198&articleID=66107) (Post Tribune)

Let's not bring up Peotone, please. I hope that never gets built.

Mukade, I can understand your concerns about "no benefit" for Indiana. But do you think that the Borman or US 30 is going to be able to handle the traffic of NW Indiana? Hell even Ridge Rd gets backed up badly from time to time. If you have the Illiana built and extended to I-94 in LaPorte County, it should take traffic off of all 3 of those roads. That to me would be a benefit for Indiana.

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

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.

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.

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.

Quote from: mukade on August 13, 2012, 07:07:20 AM
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.

crown point could be a control city

so could Islandia Florida

Quote from: hobsini2 on August 13, 2012, 01:58:33 PM
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.

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.

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.

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.

Quote from: hobsini2 on August 17, 2012, 08:46:00 PM
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.

Quote from: hobsini2 on August 17, 2012, 08:46:00 PM
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.

Quote from: Brandon on August 18, 2012, 12:03:51 AM
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.

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.

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.

Quote from: Rick Powell on October 19, 2012, 01:05:42 AM
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.

Upgrading US 30 is  a better idea

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

Quote from: ssummers72 on November 21, 2012, 05:52:37 PM
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.

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

Quote from: ssummers72 on November 21, 2012, 07:38:18 PM
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.

Quote from: ssummers72 on November 21, 2012, 07:38:18 PM
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.

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.

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?

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.

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.

Quote from: mukade on November 21, 2012, 11:42:44 PM
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?

Not if it's at enough of a diagonal. Assuming Corridor B3, a straight line drawn from I-65 to I-94 west of Chesterton would be about 20 miles, but only about 15 would be within 10 miles of the Toll Road. That gives another 5 miles of wiggle room before it becomes a "compensation event" that requires a bailout.

I seems to me that an extension of the freeway to Valpo and to Chesterton via SR-49 could be a winner to the ITR. It could help deliver more EB traffic (especially truck traffic) that might otherwise use US-30, US-6 or US-20.

Quote from: theline on November 23, 2012, 03:33:32 PM
I seems to me that an extension of the freeway to Valpo and to Chesterton via SR-49 could be a winner to the ITR. It could help deliver more EB traffic (especially truck traffic) that might otherwise use US-30, US-6 or US-20.

The extension of the Illiana was suggested, and the people toward Valpo shot it down.

Quote from: Brandon on November 23, 2012, 09:21:30 PM

Quote from: theline on November 23, 2012, 03:33:32 PM
I seems to me that an extension of the freeway to Valpo and to Chesterton via SR-49 could be a winner to the ITR. It could help deliver more EB traffic (especially truck traffic) that might otherwise use US-30, US-6 or US-20.

The extension of the Illiana was suggested, and the people toward Valpo shot it down.

NIMBY cretins.

Illiana Expressway route will get feds' stamp of approval (http://www.nwitimes.com/business/transportation/illiana-expressway-route-will-get-feds-stamp-of-approval/article_d48c8c38-a5a6-57fc-bee2-d655e75612d8.html) (NWI Times)

There is some good information in the article, but my favorite quote is from a Lowell town councilman:

Quote
"There is a huge benefit for us. It won't be something everyone wants. But we have to be involved in our own destiny...."

He also issued a warning of what will happen if local residents and officials are not involved.

"If we are not careful, this will just be an Indiana driveway to the Illinois Tollway"

News release on FEIS and ROD approval for Illiana Corridor Tier 1 EIS

http://www.in.gov/activecalendar/EventList.aspx?view=EventDetails&eventidn=63028&information_id=127137&type=&syndicate=syndicate

http://www.sj-r.com/breaking/x930805332/Illiana-Expressway-discussion-draws-property-owners?rssfeed=true

Quote from: Rick Powell on January 18, 2013, 10:59:11 PM
News release on FEIS and ROD approval for Illiana Corridor Tier 1 EIS

http://www.in.gov/activecalendar/EventList.aspx?view=EventDetails&eventidn=63028&information_id=127137&type=&syndicate=syndicate

Good map of the planned corridor:
http://www.illianacorridor.org/about/prelim_alternative.aspx

Will there be provisions to extend this at either end?

Mike

I recall one of the maps have a park or forest preserve of some sort just east of I-65 at the eastern terminus, so I would probably rule out a direct extension eastward.

As for the west end, I believe there are already plans for commercial (industrial?) developments in the area to the west of the I-55/IL 129 interchange (developments that were counting on the IL 129 interchange being changed to a full access design), so I would probably say a western extension is not going to make it either.

Quote from: Revive 755 on February 26, 2013, 05:54:38 PM
I recall one of the maps have a park or forest preserve of some sort just east of I-65 at the eastern terminus, so I would probably rule out a direct extension eastward.

As for the west end, I believe there are already plans for commercial (industrial?) developments in the area to the west of the I-55/IL 129 interchange (developments that were counting on the IL 129 interchange being changed to a full access design), so I would probably say a western extension is not going to make it either.

The only planned development west of the western terminus is a relocated railyard for the loading/unloading of vehicles being shipped by rail from the current intermodal center in Elwood.  That will be accessed via Lorenzo Road (Exit 240) and never relied on a full IL-129 interchange (Exit 238).  It should be easily bridged by any extension.  Now, the existing nuclear power plant (Dresden) may be an issue.

Quote from: Revive 755 on February 26, 2013, 05:54:38 PM
I recall one of the maps have a park or forest preserve of some sort just east of I-65 at the eastern terminus, so I would probably rule out a direct extension eastward.

As for the west end, I believe there are already plans for commercial (industrial?) developments in the area to the west of the I-55/IL 129 interchange (developments that were counting on the IL 129 interchange being changed to a full access design), so I would probably say a western extension is not going to make it either.

The current alignment of the east end is compatible with a future eastern extension.  The current alignment of the west end will include local access to IL 129 and the Ridgeport development as well as the system movements between I-55 and Illiana, although the geometrics are not finalized in either location.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/ct-met-illiana-detailed-path-20130417,0,5861511.story

Illinois opposition surfaces

Quote from: 3467 on April 17, 2013, 10:45:39 AM
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/ct-met-illiana-detailed-path-20130417,0,5861511.story

Illinois opposition surfaces

I saw it in the paper this morning.  Bunch of twits, IMHO.  It's the same small vocal group that is anti-airport.  I guess they'd rather have all that traffic, including all the heavy trucks on their surface streets instead.

The no-build option is a no-go with the intermodal centers at the west end of the road in Joliet and Elwood.

Yep and it would have to be Will county paying for those roads because the state cant afford it. We are back to 6 Year Plans like Blago . I will post a link here or one of the Illinois road topic sites when it comes out unless someone beats me to it.

Quote from: 3467 on April 17, 2013, 12:38:55 PM
Yep and it would have to be Will county paying for those roads because the state cant afford it. We are back to 6 Year Plans like Blago . I will post a link here or one of the Illinois road topic sites when it comes out unless someone beats me to it.

It's one of the main reason why the Will County Board is supporting the Illiana Expressway.  Either it gets built, or these will be overburdened two-lane roads.

http://www.dot.il.gov/opp/hip1419/hwyimprov.htm

Yawn

Interchange options for the Illiana:
http://www.illianacorridor.org/pdfs/conceptual%20interchange%20design%20concepts.pdf (http://www.illianacorridor.org/pdfs/conceptual%20interchange%20design%20concepts.pdf)

Quote from: Brandon on April 17, 2013, 11:02:52 AM

Quote from: 3467 on April 17, 2013, 10:45:39 AM
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/ct-met-illiana-detailed-path-20130417,0,5861511.story

Illinois opposition surfaces

I saw it in the paper this morning.  Bunch of twits, IMHO.  It's the same small vocal group that is anti-airport.  I guess they'd rather have all that traffic, including all the heavy trucks on their surface streets instead.

The no-build option is a no-go with the intermodal centers at the west end of the road in Joliet and Elwood.

Their reasons for being against this highway are completely invalid.  Hampering cops and ambulances?  Have they ever heard of overpasses?  Of course some roads will be permanently closed, but a 47 mile fence?  That's absurd, they make it sound like it will literally permanently close all roads that cross the area.  Also their gripe saying kids will be on school buses longer makes no sense at all to me.

Quote from: silverback1065 on June 10, 2013, 09:12:50 AM
Also their gripe saying kids will be on school buses longer makes no sense at all to me.

I thought the use of a road for school buses was often used as a criteria for whether to give a road an overpass?

Quote from: Revive 755 on June 11, 2013, 05:14:54 PM

Quote from: silverback1065 on June 10, 2013, 09:12:50 AM
Also their gripe saying kids will be on school buses longer makes no sense at all to me.

I thought the use of a road for school buses was often used as a criteria for whether to give a road an overpass?

I'm just saying using that as an excuse not to build this road is stupid and makes no sense, like I said before they can build overpasses to allow local traffic through.

http://www.krmg.com/news/ap/labor/illinois-indiana-governors-host-expressway-forum/nYSy9/

http://www.wbez.org/news/lawsuit-targets-planned-illiana-tollway-108038?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+cprmetro+%28WBEZ%27s+Metro+Desk+%29

Quote from: 3467 on July 14, 2013, 03:14:06 PM
http://www.wbez.org/news/lawsuit-targets-planned-illiana-tollway-108038?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+cprmetro+%28WBEZ%27s+Metro+Desk+%29

Sounds like another case of NIMBY, their reasoning looks extremely thin, their idea that they never established a need for the highway is absurd, plus I don't think anyone cares about grass being disturbed.  These lawsuits are a waste of time, they are just holding up the inevitable.  Sounds a lot like I-69 here in Indiana, there are still people thinking they can stop it! 

Purpose and need are important issues for an EIS and it is a national grassland which is important but.....the Illiana doesn't go through it so its a red hering P and N I think tied up 355 for a long time . I think the real motive here isn't the illiana its to prevent a revival of the Prairie Parkway and or an outer belt.....just a hunch

3467, I agree.  As far as we in north Will County are concerned, these folks need to be run out on a rail.

Sounds a lot like the Crosstown Expressway of old, which was cancelled in 1979, then revived in 2007, and hasn't had anything new since.

Quote from: 3467 on July 15, 2013, 09:51:25 AM
Purpose and need are important issues for an EIS and it is a national grassland which is important but.....the Illiana doesn't go through it so its a red hering P and N I think tied up 355 for a long time . I think the real motive here isn't the illiana its to prevent a revival of the Prairie Parkway and or an outer belt.....just a hunch

What is the Prairie Parkway?  I've not heard of this project

Quote from: silverback1065 on July 15, 2013, 11:02:14 AM

Quote from: 3467 on July 15, 2013, 09:51:25 AM
Purpose and need are important issues for an EIS and it is a national grassland which is important but.....the Illiana doesn't go through it so its a red hering P and N I think tied up 355 for a long time . I think the real motive here isn't the illiana its to prevent a revival of the Prairie Parkway and or an outer belt.....just a hunch

What is the Prairie Parkway?  I've not heard of this project

https://www.google.com/search?q=prairie+parkway

http://www.cmap.illinois.gov/2040/priority-capital-projects

The PP and the connector to the Illiana are still alive at least legally and for hennery so is the Crosstown -its called the mid-city transityway. The only way they are actually alive is if the tollway does them but being on this list makes it possible for the tollway to do it.

CMAP is seeking public comment for adding the Illiana to the long range plan for Chicagoland:

http://www.cmap.illinois.gov/documents/20583/1356626/IllianaV6--07-30-2013.pdf/4f71fb90-c416-4d3d-a771-ac819a20626a (http://www.cmap.illinois.gov/documents/20583/1356626/IllianaV6--07-30-2013.pdf/4f71fb90-c416-4d3d-a771-ac819a20626a)

Quote from: Revive 755 on August 26, 2013, 08:58:03 PM
CMAP is seeking public comment for adding the Illiana to the long range plan for Chicagoland:

http://www.cmap.illinois.gov/documents/20583/1356626/IllianaV6--07-30-2013.pdf/4f71fb90-c416-4d3d-a771-ac819a20626a (http://www.cmap.illinois.gov/documents/20583/1356626/IllianaV6--07-30-2013.pdf/4f71fb90-c416-4d3d-a771-ac819a20626a)

IDOT's response letter to the CMAP evaluation:
http://www.illianacorridor.org/pdfs/cmap_letter_secretaryschneider.pdf

Illiana news letter addressing CMAP:
http://www.illianacorridor.org/pdfs/IllianaFactSheet3_082613_FINAL_SinglePages.pdf

The Illiana Corridor Alternatives Technical Memorandum is posted.

http://www.illianacorridor.org/information_center/articles/_idot_and_indot_95959.aspx

Quote from: Rick Powell on September 08, 2013, 12:30:08 AM
The Illiana Corridor Alternatives Technical Memorandum is posted.

http://www.illianacorridor.org/information_center/articles/_idot_and_indot_95959.aspx

* I really hope I'm not reading something right, but on Page 37 (or 41 using the numbering given by the browser) and on C-19 (178), interchange options at IL 53 are severely limited because IL 53 once carried a bannered route of US 66?  WTF?   :banghead:  Why the hell are more stoplights or new driveways allowed to be installed on IL 53 then?

* The report needs to keep interchange names straight and stop calling folded diamonds 'partial cloverleafs.  IL 59 at I-90 is a partial cloverleaf; IL 53 at US 14 and the design proposed for the Illiana at Wilton Center Road are folded diamonds.

Quote from: Revive 755 on September 08, 2013, 01:36:42 AM
* I really hope I'm not reading something right, but on Page 37 (or 41 using the numbering given by the browser) and on C-19 (178), interchange options at IL 53 are severely limited because IL 53 once carried a bannered route of US 66?  WTF?   :banghead:  Why the hell are more stoplights or new driveways allowed to be installed on IL 53 then?

It's probably the difference between federal and local funding. Federal funding is more restrictive as to impacts on historic properties.

4 hearings scheduled for the Illiana, on a proposed route from I-65 in NW Indiana to I-55 in south suburban Chicago

Link:
http://abclocal.go.com/wls/story?section=news/local/indiana&id=9280698 (http://abclocal.go.com/wls/story?section=news/local/indiana&id=9280698)

http://www.ibj.com/proposed-illiana-expressway-loses-key-vote/PARAMS/article/43969 (http://www.ibj.com/proposed-illiana-expressway-loses-key-vote/PARAMS/article/43969)

Planning board calls for elimination of the Illiana after voting down the project 10-4.  The policy committee apparently can still approve the project for federal funding next week despite the vote.

Quote from: Gerald Bennett, head of the northeastern Illinois' planning agency
[T]he proposed $1.3 billion tollway south of Chicago into Indiana is "a highway in nowhere land."

Bennett is also mayor of Palos Hills. This quote confirms the opinion generally of Indiana held by Mr. Bennett's constituents.

Quote from: trafficsignal on October 10, 2013, 09:04:10 AM
http://www.ibj.com/proposed-illiana-expressway-loses-key-vote/PARAMS/article/43969 (http://www.ibj.com/proposed-illiana-expressway-loses-key-vote/PARAMS/article/43969)

Planning board calls for elimination of the Illiana after voting down the project 10-4.  The policy committee apparently can still approve the project for federal funding next week despite the vote.

Which is either a shame or a victory, depending on who you ask.

Quote from: trafficsignal on October 10, 2013, 09:04:10 AM
http://www.ibj.com/proposed-illiana-expressway-loses-key-vote/PARAMS/article/43969 (http://www.ibj.com/proposed-illiana-expressway-loses-key-vote/PARAMS/article/43969)

Planning board calls for elimination of the Illiana after voting down the project 10-4.  The policy committee apparently can still approve the project for federal funding next week despite the vote.

Fuck the Cook County and Chicago members.  They're just pissy that the power in the region is shifting away from Chicago and outward toward us.

Build it anyway and fuck Chicago and fuck Rahm.

/rant

Quote from: Brandon on October 10, 2013, 10:35:50 PM

Quote from: trafficsignal on October 10, 2013, 09:04:10 AM
http://www.ibj.com/proposed-illiana-expressway-loses-key-vote/PARAMS/article/43969 (http://www.ibj.com/proposed-illiana-expressway-loses-key-vote/PARAMS/article/43969)

Planning board calls for elimination of the Illiana after voting down the project 10-4.  The policy committee apparently can still approve the project for federal funding next week despite the vote.

Fuck the Cook County and Chicago members.  They're just pissy that the power in the region is shifting away from Chicago and outward toward us.

Build it anyway and fuck Chicago and fuck Rahm.

/rant

Go Tigers!

The CMAP Policy Committee (the vote that counts) passed Illiana into the regional transportation plan tonight by an 11-8 vote.  A similar vote will be required by Lake County, IN's planning agency.  These votes are a necessary step before final federal project approval.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/chi-illiana-20131017,0,381773.story

If the Lake County, IN agency votes against the Illiana, would there still be enough viability for just I-55 to I-57 or to IL 1, with or without the third airport?  I'm guessing the presence of signs to I-57 on IL 53 indicate some demand for the movement.  The Illiana would also provide a nice bypass to for the current bridge work on I-55 at the Des Plaines River and any future work on I-80 through Joliet.

Quote from: Rick Powell on October 17, 2013, 10:36:36 PM
The CMAP Policy Committee (the vote that counts) passed Illiana into the regional transportation plan tonight by an 11-8 vote.  A similar vote will be required by Lake County, IN's planning agency.  These votes are a necessary step before final federal project approval.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/chi-illiana-20131017,0,381773.story

As well as it should be passed by them.  Chicago and Cook County can suck it.

I just don't see Lake County, Indiana voting against it.  They know, as well as we do, that it is a viable alternative to the Borman.

US 30 is a good alternate for the toll road between 65 and 69, think INDOT would ever consider upgrading 30? 

Quote from: silverback1065 on October 18, 2013, 11:54:32 AM
US 30 is a good alternate for the toll road between 65 and 69, think INDOT would ever consider upgrading 30? 

US-30 is fine the way it is east of Merrillville.  It only really has problems with the signals in Merrillville, near Southlake.

No idea what US-30 has to do with the Illiana though.

Quote from: Brandon on October 18, 2013, 11:57:00 AM

Quote from: silverback1065 on October 18, 2013, 11:54:32 AM
US 30 is a good alternate for the toll road between 65 and 69, think INDOT would ever consider upgrading 30? 

US-30 is fine the way it is east of Merrillville.  It only really has problems with the signals in Merrillville, near Southlake.

No idea what US-30 has to do with the Illiana though.

The purpose of the Illiana is to decrease truck traffic on 80/94, US 30 could do the same east of 65

I'm not a trucker, but have driven 30 on both sides of 65 with some frequency. I'd guess that truckers are loathe to take 30 because of the heavy traffic and concentration of stoplights. The exception of course are the truckers who must travel it to reach businesses along 30.

I'm not sure what kind of upgrade you propose, but anything that would benefit truckers would have to include eliminating most stoplights. The cost of that would be prohibitive. Grade separations and interchanges would require displacement of lots of businesses. It's a no-go.

Quote from: theline on October 18, 2013, 03:26:10 PM
I'm not a trucker, but have driven 30 on both sides of 65 with some frequency. I'd guess that truckers are loathe to take 30 because of the heavy traffic and concentration of stoplights. The exception of course are the truckers who must travel it to reach businesses along 30.

I'm not sure what kind of upgrade you propose, but anything that would benefit truckers would have to include eliminating most stoplights. The cost of that would be prohibitive. Grade separations and interchanges would require displacement of lots of businesses. It's a no-go.

Hey, it's just a thought.  I agree with the cost aspect though

What makes more sense to me is to extend Illiana to the northeast from I-65 to hook up with 30, probably at SR-49. I'm pretty sure this was discussed upthread. That would permit trucks coming from points east on 30, 80/90, 94, and even US-6 to bypass the whole area when headed to points south on 55 or 57. I'm afraid I'm wandering into the fictional, since INDOT hasn't even studied the idea, AFAIK.

Quote from: theline on October 18, 2013, 03:56:39 PM
What makes more sense to me is to extend Illiana to the northeast from I-65 to hook up with 30, probably at SR-49. I'm pretty sure this was discussed upthread. That would permit trucks coming from points east on 30, 80/90, 94, and even US-6 to bypass the whole area when headed to points south on 55 or 57. I'm afraid I'm wandering into the fictional, since INDOT hasn't even studied the idea, AFAIK.

Not as fictional as you think.  The original INDOT proposal had the Illiana ending at IN-49.  It was axed after opposition from people around Valpo.

NIMBYs.  :banghead:

Quote from: Brandon on October 18, 2013, 04:33:09 PM

Quote from: theline on October 18, 2013, 03:56:39 PM
What makes more sense to me is to extend Illiana to the northeast from I-65 to hook up with 30, probably at SR-49. I'm pretty sure this was discussed upthread. That would permit trucks coming from points east on 30, 80/90, 94, and even US-6 to bypass the whole area when headed to points south on 55 or 57. I'm afraid I'm wandering into the fictional, since INDOT hasn't even studied the idea, AFAIK.

Not as fictional as you think.  The original INDOT proposal had the Illiana ending at IN-49.  It was axed after opposition from people around Valpo.

gotta love the NIMBYs

Now I will go totally fictional: skip Valpo and take the road to Plymouth. Truckers can hook up with 30 there, or go north on the new US 31 freeway to US-6, the ITR or I-94. Problem solved.

Quote from: theline on October 18, 2013, 03:26:10 PM
I'm not a trucker, but have driven 30 on both sides of 65 with some frequency. I'd guess that truckers are loathe to take 30 because of the heavy traffic and concentration of stoplights. The exception of course are the truckers who must travel it to reach businesses along 30.

I'm not sure what kind of upgrade you propose, but anything that would benefit truckers would have to include eliminating most stoplights. The cost of that would be prohibitive. Grade separations and interchanges would require displacement of lots of businesses. It's a no-go.

Something needs to be done to address the traffic issues along US-30 in NWI, even if it cannot be upgraded to freeway. but why cant we do a superstreet or some other sort of traffic enhancemnet project.. Even an ITS corridor with signal synchronization would be an excellent idea to address congestion. Building the Illiana Corridor so far to the south will not truly address all of the congestion issues along the US-30.

Quote from: Indyroads on October 18, 2013, 06:12:12 PM

Quote from: theline on October 18, 2013, 03:26:10 PM
I'm not a trucker, but have driven 30 on both sides of 65 with some frequency. I'd guess that truckers are loathe to take 30 because of the heavy traffic and concentration of stoplights. The exception of course are the truckers who must travel it to reach businesses along 30.

I'm not sure what kind of upgrade you propose, but anything that would benefit truckers would have to include eliminating most stoplights. The cost of that would be prohibitive. Grade separations and interchanges would require displacement of lots of businesses. It's a no-go.

Something needs to be done to address the traffic issues along US-30 in NWI, even if it cannot be upgraded to freeway. but why cant we do a superstreet or some other sort of traffic enhancemnet project.. Even an ITS corridor with signal synchronization would be an excellent idea to address congestion. Building the Illiana Corridor so far to the south will not truly address all of the congestion issues along the US-30.

However, it will help with the congestion along I-80.  The west end ties into two very large and growing intermodal yards (BNSF and UP) with a third smaller one being built currently (CN).  The BNSF auto facility will be moving south to the Lorenzo Road exit, and that yard will double in size.  The UP yard will be adding truck-to-train-to-barge capability as well.  These trucks will have to go somewhere, and the current I-80 and the current two-laners will not cut it.

If the current operators of the ITR became the operators of the Illiana, would that make an easterly extension more likely?

^^ I like your thinking. Throw 'em a bone. That might just work.

Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on October 18, 2013, 08:45:05 PM
If the current operators of the ITR became the operators of the Illiana, would that make an easterly extension more likely?

They better have an new road have gate free high speed toll lanes.

That's the only thing that makes sense in new toll road construction. Is anyone building new ones with anything but high speed collection?

Indiana planning group signs off on Illiana Corridor (http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/chi-indiana-planning-group-votes-on-illiana-plan-today-20131212,0,2091598.story)

QuoteThe board of the Northwestern Indiana Regional Planning Commission, made up of over 50 local officials, voted to include the Illiana in their comprehensive plan.

The decision mirrors one made in Illinois by the Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning's Policy Committee on Oct. 17. That panel approved the controversial Illiana proposal by an 11-8 vote.

The Illiana is only controversial to Cook County politicians who are afraid (rightly) that Will County will take some of their power and money away.

So the first dirt will be turned over in a few years, of course barring future opposition, so I wouldn't hold my breath.

more people against this http://www.urbanophile.com/2014/02/13/chicago-is-the-illiana-expressway-a-boondoggle-in-the-making/

Quote from: theline on October 19, 2013, 09:46:12 PM
That's the only thing that makes sense in new toll road construction. Is anyone building new ones with anything but high speed collection?

It doesn't quite qualify since it would be tolling of existing ramps to an existing toll road, but the currently free entrance ramps to EB I-90 from Barrington and Roselle Road will be receiving toll plazas with cash lanes in a couple years.

---

Quote from: silverback1065 on February 17, 2014, 08:41:29 PM
more people against this http://www.urbanophile.com/2014/02/13/chicago-is-the-illiana-expressway-a-boondoggle-in-the-making/

A few comments on the blog article:

1) I could say something regarding initial lack of the Illiana in the Goto 2040 Plan being a sign of how useful CMAP's planning is.

2) The current competition of the Illiana is a mostly free I-80.  ISTHA only has one small section that would directly compete against the Illiana.  Overall the Illiana is more of a route for those willing to pay to have a reliable route around most of Chicagoland

3) I'm curious on the 4x the existing toll rates for ISTHA - is it four times the general 75 cent rate or four times the $1.90 rate for the southern half of I-355?

Quote from: silverback1065 on February 17, 2014, 08:41:29 PM
more people against this http://www.urbanophile.com/2014/02/13/chicago-is-the-illiana-expressway-a-boondoggle-in-the-making/

The author says "Northwest Indiana has been foursquare behind it, and why wouldn't they be?", but I don't think the majority of people there are. AFAIK, its primary support is on the Illinois south suburbs side. While Lake County, Indiana and Chicago's far southern suburbs could use a good bypass thanks to the mess US 30 is, the Illiana route really would be too far south for commuter traffic (at least in NWI), and there is a high risk it will not get the necessary volume of traffic. Look at map, and you will see this cuts way south of the built up area.

Quote from: mukade on February 17, 2014, 10:31:48 PM

Quote from: silverback1065 on February 17, 2014, 08:41:29 PM
more people against this http://www.urbanophile.com/2014/02/13/chicago-is-the-illiana-expressway-a-boondoggle-in-the-making/

The author says "Northwest Indiana has been foursquare behind it, and why wouldn't they be?", but I don't think the majority of people there are. AFAIK, its primary support is on the Illinois south suburbs side. While Lake County, Indiana and Chicago's far southern suburbs could use a good bypass thanks to the mess US 30 is, the Illiana route really would be too far south for commuter traffic (at least in NWI), and there is a high risk it will not get the necessary volume of traffic. Look at map, and you will see this cuts way south of the built up area.

I was kinda ehhhh with the route location. I'm sure it's buried somewhere in this thread, but was there a reason why it wasn't connected with I-355s southern terminus? (Probably the routing had something to do with the Prairie Parkway proposal, but I could be completely wrong)

Quote from: mukade on February 17, 2014, 10:31:48 PM

Quote from: silverback1065 on February 17, 2014, 08:41:29 PM
more people against this http://www.urbanophile.com/2014/02/13/chicago-is-the-illiana-expressway-a-boondoggle-in-the-making/

The author says "Northwest Indiana has been foursquare behind it, and why wouldn't they be?", but I don't think the majority of people there are. AFAIK, its primary support is on the Illinois south suburbs side. While Lake County, Indiana and Chicago's far southern suburbs could use a good bypass thanks to the mess US 30 is, the Illiana route really would be too far south for commuter traffic (at least in NWI), and there is a high risk it will not get the necessary volume of traffic. Look at map, and you will see this cuts way south of the built up area.

Boondoggle my ass.  The Urbanophile blog owner has been against things like this from the start.  Mr. Renn was also against the I-355 extension, also calling it a boondoggle.  His record of calling things boondoggles is 0 for 1 in that regard.

The major reason for building the Illiana is not passenger car traffic.  It is truck traffic.  The western end is only a few miles from two very large intermodal yards, something the detractors consistently and conveniently forget.

It isn't connected with I-355 as there are now subdivisions in the way.

Quote from: Brandon on February 18, 2014, 06:44:56 AM

Quote from: mukade on February 17, 2014, 10:31:48 PM

Quote from: silverback1065 on February 17, 2014, 08:41:29 PM
more people against this http://www.urbanophile.com/2014/02/13/chicago-is-the-illiana-expressway-a-boondoggle-in-the-making/

The author says "Northwest Indiana has been foursquare behind it, and why wouldn't they be?", but I don't think the majority of people there are. AFAIK, its primary support is on the Illinois south suburbs side. While Lake County, Indiana and Chicago's far southern suburbs could use a good bypass thanks to the mess US 30 is, the Illiana route really would be too far south for commuter traffic (at least in NWI), and there is a high risk it will not get the necessary volume of traffic. Look at map, and you will see this cuts way south of the built up area.

Boondoggle my ass.  The Urbanophile blog owner has been against things like this from the start.  Mr. Renn was also against the I-355 extension, also calling it a boondoggle.  His record of calling things boondoggles is 0 for 1 in that regard.

The major reason for building the Illiana is not passenger car traffic.  It is truck traffic.  The western end is only a few miles from two very large intermodal yards, something the detractors consistently and conveniently forget.

It isn't connected with I-355 as there are now subdivisions in the way.

i feel he's (renn) against pretty much every new highway in existence.

^^ Aaron Renn used to be on mtr years ago, and yes, he was fairly anti-highway and very much pro-transit.  Why one cannot see that both go hand-in-hand blows my mind.

I want the Illiana and the Prairie Parkway built.  I also want extensions of the Metra Heritage Corridor to Braidwood and the Rock Island Line to Morris (Channahon if Grundy County doesn't want the RTA) as well as the STAR Line built (all the way east through Joliet to the South Suburbs).  If it helps my county (Will), all the better, even if it hurts Cook County.

I swore I read something a while back from Aaron that stated that he was in favor of the Indiana Commerce Connector to be built...eventually, when the traffic warrants it, so there's one new-terrain route that he would favor. And I think he is in favor of the new East End Bridge, he's just not a fan of how's it being funded and like many of us here hates the interference from rich people in Kentucky that had risen the cost. And when the I-69/I-465 interchange was nixed he was distraught about it much like most of us would, believing that it is one highway project that should be done. On the transit front for Indianapolis, while many like-minded people continue to argue that we should be building light rail through our city, he had been one of the few voices to declare that it is a bad idea, stating that it is not worth it for Indy and that improving the bus system (which is what the state government is probably going to do at this point) is the more worthy course of action, pissing off some of those pro-transit people who want nothing else but trains. In terms of Indy, though Chicago is obviously much different, he has stated that the car is going to remain the dominant form of transportation, again pissing off those who want us Naptowners to do nothing but walk and ride our bikes around and use transit. To me at least, he seems more reasonable than others in the same choir.

As for the Illiana, if it helps the trucks and they are willing to pay the extra toll, then good for them. The only thing I would like however is to at least see it extended to I-80, and to the Prairie Parkway to help form an outer-loop for the city, then I think the project could get that extra traffic to help justify it. 

Quote from: Brandon on February 18, 2014, 06:44:56 AM
The major reason for building the Illiana is not passenger car traffic.  It is truck traffic.  The western end is only a few miles from two very large intermodal yards, something the detractors consistently and conveniently forget.

From a Will County POV, I can see it. As an Indiana taxpayer who would be on the hook if there is not enough traffic, I don't like the risk. If the highway carried commuters, i could see it, but it would carry very few. I think that concern was brought up when one of the Chicago planning agencies did not approve it.

Except to avoid some traffic jams, I don't see why I would ever drive it with free alternatives with better connections.

Quote from: Brandon on February 18, 2014, 09:58:46 AM
I want the Illiana and the Prairie Parkway built.  I also want extensions of the Metra Heritage Corridor to Braidwood and the Rock Island Line to Morris (Channahon if Grundy County doesn't want the RTA) as well as the STAR Line built (all the way east through Joliet to the South Suburbs).  If it helps my county (Will), all the better, even if it hurts Cook County.

I guess that is an IMBY attitude.

Quote from: tdindy88 on February 18, 2014, 06:07:13 PM
I swore I read something a while back from Aaron that stated that he was in favor of the Indiana Commerce Connector to be built...eventually, when the traffic warrants it, so there's one new-terrain route that he would favor. And I think he is in favor of the new East End Bridge...

Yes, I think he favors most highway projects in metro areas. He also liked Accelerate465 and Super70 projects. He didn't like the I-69 extension because how many urbanophiles would want to travel down to Evansville?  I think I had a battle with him about I-69 in MTR.

I do like reading some of his material even though I certainly disagree with a lot of it.

Quote from: Brandon on February 18, 2014, 09:58:46 AM
I want the Illiana and the Prairie Parkway built.

Unfortunately, even if there weren't any wetland hurdles between the Illiana and a revived Prairie Parkway, it looks like development west of I-55 will doom any future connection.

I think a diamond interchange at US 41 is a dumb move. Then businesses will build on US 41 and create traffic issues. I'm aware this idea would be more expensive but 2 trumpet interchanges (with toll boths between the 2 trumpets would be a better option. Then INDOT could say we're leaving up the fences and frontage roads must be built along Hyw. 41 or businesses have to build on side streets.

Quote from: US 41 on February 22, 2014, 05:18:26 PM
I think a diamond interchange at US 41 is a dumb move. Then businesses will build on US 41 and create traffic issues. I'm aware this idea would be more expensive but 2 trumpet interchanges (with toll boths between the 2 trumpets would be a better option. Then INDOT could say we're leaving up the fences and frontage roads must be built along Hyw. 41 or businesses have to build on side streets.

Indot doesn't do frontage roads often for some reason, also they probably assume most traffic is on 65 anyway.

Quote from: silverback1065 on February 22, 2014, 09:33:15 PM

Quote from: US 41 on February 22, 2014, 05:18:26 PM
I think a diamond interchange at US 41 is a dumb move. Then businesses will build on US 41 and create traffic issues. I'm aware this idea would be more expensive but 2 trumpet interchanges (with toll boths between the 2 trumpets would be a better option. Then INDOT could say we're leaving up the fences and frontage roads must be built along Hyw. 41 or businesses have to build on side streets.

Indot doesn't do frontage roads often for some reason, also they probably assume most traffic is on 65 anyway.

Then they end up with huge traffic problems in Kokomo, southern Terre Haute, St. Johns area, and other places. Then they have to go back and spend millions to build a new interstate quality bypass (US 31 Eastern Kokomo Bypass, SR 641) to make sure the problem doesn't happen again. If they limited the access points in the first place and just built the frontage roads, it might save INDOT a lot of money.

Quote from: US 41 on February 23, 2014, 12:57:58 AM

Quote from: silverback1065 on February 22, 2014, 09:33:15 PM

Quote from: US 41 on February 22, 2014, 05:18:26 PM
I think a diamond interchange at US 41 is a dumb move. Then businesses will build on US 41 and create traffic issues. I'm aware this idea would be more expensive but 2 trumpet interchanges (with toll boths between the 2 trumpets would be a better option. Then INDOT could say we're leaving up the fences and frontage roads must be built along Hyw. 41 or businesses have to build on side streets.

Indot doesn't do frontage roads often for some reason, also they probably assume most traffic is on 65 anyway.

Then they end up with huge traffic problems in Kokomo, southern Terre Haute, St. Johns area, and other places. Then they have to go back and spend millions to build a new interstate quality bypass (US 31 Eastern Kokomo Bypass, SR 641) to make sure the problem doesn't happen again. If they limited the access points in the first place and just built the frontage roads, it might save INDOT a lot of money.

It's insane that they don't do this, sr 37 in noblesville should have frontage roads

Quote from: silverback1065 on February 22, 2014, 09:33:15 PM

Quote from: US 41 on February 22, 2014, 05:18:26 PM
I think a diamond interchange at US 41 is a dumb move. Then businesses will build on US 41 and create traffic issues. I'm aware this idea would be more expensive but 2 trumpet interchanges (with toll boths between the 2 trumpets would be a better option. Then INDOT could say we're leaving up the fences and frontage roads must be built along Hyw. 41 or businesses have to build on side streets.

Indot doesn't do frontage roads often for some reason, also they probably assume most traffic is on 65 anyway.

US 30 in Merrillville and Hobart has some frontage roads, but there are gaps. These were planned before the area was incorporated and mainly date back from the 1970s. A recent INDOT project improved some of these roads in Merrillville. The US 30 congestion situation in Lake and Porter Counties is far worse than US 31 in Kokomo.

http://www.in.gov/ifa/2763.htm

These documents on the Indiana Finance Authority's website say they intend for substantial completion of the Indiana portion by 2018.

They are doing a P3 with a private company.

Quote from: thefro on February 23, 2014, 08:55:28 AM
http://www.in.gov/ifa/2763.htm

These documents on the Indiana Finance Authority's website say they intend for substantial completion of the Indiana portion by 2018.

They are doing a P3 with a private company.

Not too surprising.  The Will County Board wants dirt turned starting in 2015 and completion in 2018.

I could see the "Illiana" eventually extending east to Fort Wayne, and maybe even to Mansfield, OH and becoming an extension of I-76. It'd help relieve some of the traffic on I-80/I-90, and also give Fort Wayne better Interstate access.

I'm jealous that all Indiana and Illinois have to do to build a highway is shovel some dirt and dig some artificial ponds. It beats having to blow out the side of a hill or mountain, build a bunch of extra-long bridge spans, figure out how to wedge it into a mountain gap next to other critical infrastructure because that's the only place it can go, etc.

Quote from: Gnutella on March 18, 2014, 09:12:19 PM
I could see the "Illiana" eventually extending east to Fort Wayne, and maybe even to Mansfield, OH and becoming an extension of I-76. It'd help relieve some of the traffic on I-80/I-90, and also give Fort Wayne better Interstate access.

I'm jealous that all Indiana and Illinois have to do to build a highway is shovel some dirt and dig some artificial ponds. It beats having to blow out the side of a hill or mountain, build a bunch of extra-long bridge spans, figure out how to wedge it into a mountain gap next to other critical infrastructure because that's the only place it can go, etc.

That would be nice, too, but US 30 is fine as it is.

Quote from: Henry on March 20, 2014, 03:29:54 PM

Quote from: Gnutella on March 18, 2014, 09:12:19 PM
I could see the "Illiana" eventually extending east to Fort Wayne, and maybe even to Mansfield, OH and becoming an extension of I-76. It'd help relieve some of the traffic on I-80/I-90, and also give Fort Wayne better Interstate access.

I'm jealous that all Indiana and Illinois have to do to build a highway is shovel some dirt and dig some artificial ponds. It beats having to blow out the side of a hill or mountain, build a bunch of extra-long bridge spans, figure out how to wedge it into a mountain gap next to other critical infrastructure because that's the only place it can go, etc.

That would be nice, too, but US 30 is fine as it is.

Other than for the STOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOP.... that one experiences as he or she crosses the state on it, it is fine.

:spin:

Mike

Ya there are way too many traffic lights on that road

SAMSUNG-SGH-I337

Quote from: mgk920 on March 25, 2014, 10:39:53 AM

Quote from: Henry on March 20, 2014, 03:29:54 PM

Quote from: Gnutella on March 18, 2014, 09:12:19 PM
I could see the "Illiana" eventually extending east to Fort Wayne, and maybe even to Mansfield, OH and becoming an extension of I-76. It'd help relieve some of the traffic on I-80/I-90, and also give Fort Wayne better Interstate access.

I'm jealous that all Indiana and Illinois have to do to build a highway is shovel some dirt and dig some artificial ponds. It beats having to blow out the side of a hill or mountain, build a bunch of extra-long bridge spans, figure out how to wedge it into a mountain gap next to other critical infrastructure because that's the only place it can go, etc.

That would be nice, too, but US 30 is fine as it is.

Other than for the STOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOP.... that one experiences as he or she crosses the state on it, it is fine.

:spin:

Mike

Quote from: silverback1065 on March 25, 2014, 10:49:56 AM
Ya there are way too many traffic lights on that road

And the sad part is, IIRC, the IN Toll Road does not want a competing limited-access facility within a certain distance of it, so the proposed Illiana/I-76 extension may not happen anytime soon. But still, it would be nice to have that.

No.

Quote from: NE2 on April 25, 2012, 12:59:13 AM

Quote from: Lightning Strike on April 25, 2012, 12:47:37 AM
I thought that the Illiana Expressway couldn't connect to the I-94 corridor since it would intersect the Indiana Tollroad and thus be considered a "competing" tollroad.

https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=5113.msg111770#msg111770
The approved route is all more than 10 miles from the Tollway. If it heads north then to I-94, it would not have 20 continuous miles within 10 miles of the Tollway unless it goes at a rather shallow angle.

Building a toll road to nowhere?

http://illinoistimes.com/article-14479-building-a-toll-road-to-nowhere.html

Quote from: mgk920 on March 25, 2014, 10:39:53 AM

Quote from: Henry on March 20, 2014, 03:29:54 PM

That would be nice, too, but US 30 is fine as it is.

Other than for the STOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOP.... that one experiences as he or she crosses the state on it, it is fine.

:spin:

For all the times I have driven US-30 across Indiana, I have only had issues with traffic from Valpo west to I-65.  East of Valpo, it's an easy drive except for Fort Wayne* , where you at least have some options on suffering.

* Either plow through Fort Wayne along the old US-30 alignment, or take the looooong I-69/I-269 bypass either north or south of town to continue on US-30 east into Ohio.

Mike

Quote from: Lyon Wonder on September 23, 2014, 06:18:04 PM
Building a toll road to nowhere?

http://illinoistimes.com/article-14479-building-a-toll-road-to-nowhere.html

Hardly.  It's a toll road to connect major interstate corridors (I-55, I-57, I-65) with the major intermodal center in Chicagoland.

Quote from: Lyon Wonder on September 23, 2014, 06:18:04 PM
Building a toll road to nowhere?

http://illinoistimes.com/article-14479-building-a-toll-road-to-nowhere.html

Article has issues:

1) The article states the toll "would be significantly higher than the average six cents per mile on existing Illinois toll roads."  Sure they state "existing," but ISTHA is supposed going for much higher rates (around twenty cents per mile) for the Elgin O'Hare, and IIRC the IL 53 extension would also use a higher rate.

2) The critics that say the road is unnecessary ought to be forced to sit in the congestion that results the next time I-55 over the Des Plaines is narrowed for construction, and however bad the congestion is on I-80 when IDOT gets around to widening and rebuilding it through Joliet.

3) There's a complaint about the project driving away animals?  I'm sure the industrial development in Will County is doing a much better job of it.

The idea that its going to do all that environmental damage i think is bs.

Quote from: Revive 755 on September 23, 2014, 10:35:27 PM

Quote from: Lyon Wonder on September 23, 2014, 06:18:04 PM
Building a toll road to nowhere?

http://illinoistimes.com/article-14479-building-a-toll-road-to-nowhere.html

Article has issues:

1) The article states the toll "would be significantly higher than the average six cents per mile on existing Illinois toll roads."  Sure they state "existing," but ISTHA is supposed going for much higher rates (around twenty cents per mile) for the Elgin O'Hare, and IIRC the IL 53 extension would also use a higher rate.

Hell, even existing roads are significantly higher than $.06 per mile. I-88 is $10.20 for a little less than a hundred miles, putting it at 67% higher than the average.

About the road not serving any population centers, that's the point. The most ideal locations for bypasses to go are where nobody lives. This doesn't only make property acquisition easier, but it also ensures that most of the traffic is actually thru traffic, which relieves congestion.

(IMO, the Illiana won't have the full bypass effect that it could have unless it's extended to I-80 near Morris, but that's another story.)

Quote from: pianocello on September 24, 2014, 10:17:29 PM
(IMO, the Illiana won't have the full bypass effect that it could have unless it's extended to I-80 near Morris and east to US-30 near Valparaiso, but that's another story.)

FTFY.

The Tier Two Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Illiana Corridor is released.

http://www.illianacorridor.org/tier_2/tier2_feis.aspx

Quote from: Brandon on September 23, 2014, 09:59:35 PM

Quote from: Lyon Wonder on September 23, 2014, 06:18:04 PM
Building a toll road to nowhere?

http://illinoistimes.com/article-14479-building-a-toll-road-to-nowhere.html

Hardly.  It's a toll road to connect major interstate corridors (I-55, I-57, I-65) with the major intermodal center in Chicagoland.

The idea would be to extend Illiana further east and west to connect to I-80/90 in the east and I-80 to the west making the parkway a true bypass for the greater Chicago and NWI metro area which are severely congested. The Illiana project was scaled back to its current scope due to cost and some objections, but I would not be surprised to see it resurrected in a new form to create these connections. This parkway would also create economic opportunities along its length as well.

Quote from: Indyroads on October 09, 2014, 07:07:03 AM

Quote from: Brandon on September 23, 2014, 09:59:35 PM

Quote from: Lyon Wonder on September 23, 2014, 06:18:04 PM
Building a toll road to nowhere?

http://illinoistimes.com/article-14479-building-a-toll-road-to-nowhere.html

Hardly.  It's a toll road to connect major interstate corridors (I-55, I-57, I-65) with the major intermodal center in Chicagoland.

The idea would be to extend Illiana further east and west to connect to I-80/90 in the east and I-80 to the west making the parkway a true bypass for the greater Chicago and NWI metro area which are severely congested. The Illiana project was scaled back to its current scope due to cost and some objections, but I would not be surprised to see it resurrected in a new form to create these connections. This parkway would also create economic opportunities along its length as well.

The Illiana was scaled back on the east, but extended on the west.  The original proposal was to have gone east from I-57 to IN-49.  I could see it being extended to the west to I-80.  At least it survived the CMAP meeting yesterday where Chicago again tried to kill it.

How can chicago kill something that doesn't even go through their city limits?

Quote from: silverback1065 on October 09, 2014, 09:17:48 AM
How can chicago kill something that doesn't even go through their city limits?

They have representatives on the Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning (CMAP) and the Metropolitan Planning Organization Policy Committee (MPO Board).  It completely bypasses them and threatens to take commerce south and out of the city.  Chicago is scared of Will County.  We have grown quickly, will top out somewhere in the neighborhood of 2 million in population, and have been aggressively pursuing businesses (including having the 2 largest intermodal facilities in the state).  That's one of the reasons they decided to split the county into several congressional districts, many of which are rooted in Chicago.  I mean, what the hell is a guy like Lipiniski, from Chicago, doing representing Romeoville and Crest Hill in Will County?

Quote from: Brandon on October 09, 2014, 09:28:41 AM

Quote from: silverback1065 on October 09, 2014, 09:17:48 AM
How can chicago kill something that doesn't even go through their city limits?

They have representatives on the Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning (CMAP) and the Metropolitan Planning Organization Policy Committee (MPO Board).  It completely bypasses them and threatens to take commerce south and out of the city.  Chicago is scared of Will County.  We have grown quickly, will top out somewhere in the neighborhood of 2 million in population, and have been aggressively pursuing businesses (including having the 2 largest intermodal facilities in the state).  That's one of the reasons they decided to split the county into several congressional districts, many of which are rooted in Chicago.  I mean, what the hell is a guy like Lipiniski, from Chicago, doing representing Romeoville and Crest Hill in Will County?

Yes, that is strange, because the Illiana is not going to enter the Chicago city limits at all. That's like Los Angeles opposing a project in Orange County :no:

The situation is more like SANDAG:  San Diego can stop a road project funded by the MPO in El Cajon

That's what regional commissions are for for. When a project affects an entire region, everyone has input into the decision. That way, Mayor Hayseed of the Village of Podunk, can't on his own re-route or block the project to suit his narrow interests.

Quote from: theline on October 10, 2014, 02:31:19 PM
That's what regional commissions are for for. When a project affects an entire region, everyone has input into the decision. That way, Mayor Hayseed of the Village of Podunk, can't on his own re-route or block the project to suit his narrow interests.

However, Chicago tried to hijack it in this case.  Thankfully, the members of the board from Kane, DuPage, Will, and south Cook saw it differently for a road that mostly affects Will, south Cook, and Kankakee.

Illiana Corridor Record of Decision is up at the public website.

http://www.illianacorridor.org/tier_2/tier2_rod.aspx

WOOT!  Take that Chicago and your Sierra Club allies!  We want the road, it will be built, and there's not a fucking thing you fuckers can do!  :thumbsup:  :cheers:

Quote from: Brandon on December 11, 2014, 06:30:31 AM
WOOT!  Take that Chicago and your Sierra Club allies!  We want the road, it will be built, and there's not a fucking thing you fuckers can do!  :thumbsup:  :cheers:

Do not taunt the Happy Fun Ball

QuoteWOOT!  Take that Chicago and your Sierra Club allies!  We want the road, it will be built, and there's not a fucking thing you fuckers can do!

Still gotta figure a way to pay for it.  Until that happens, I would put ZERO guarantees on it being built.

Quote from: froggie on December 12, 2014, 09:22:26 AM

QuoteWOOT!  Take that Chicago and your Sierra Club allies!  We want the road, it will be built, and there's not a fucking thing you fuckers can do!

Still gotta figure a way to pay for it.  Until that happens, I would put ZERO guarantees on it being built.

That's already in the pipeline, Froggie.  It will be built if the county board has anything to say about it (and they have plenty).

In my experience, being "in the pipeline" and being finalized are two very different things.

Quote from: froggie on December 12, 2014, 09:31:55 AM
In my experience, being "in the pipeline" and being finalized are two very different things.

Well, contrary to the opinions of the Chicago Tribune and a few people from Chicago, it is a very necessary piece of the regional infrastructure.

Quote from: Brandon on December 12, 2014, 10:46:26 AM

Quote from: froggie on December 12, 2014, 09:31:55 AM
In my experience, being "in the pipeline" and being finalized are two very different things.

Well, contrary to the opinions of the Chicago Tribune and a few people from Chicago, it is a very necessary piece of the regional infrastructure.

With it's current route i doubt it but we'll see. If it went from 55 east past 65 and tied into 94 and 90/80 near michigan city I'd say it would be useful and necessary. But that's just my opinion.

Quote from: Brandon on December 12, 2014, 09:24:04 AM

Quote from: froggie on December 12, 2014, 09:22:26 AM

QuoteWOOT!  Take that Chicago and your Sierra Club allies!  We want the road, it will be built, and there's not a fucking thing you fuckers can do!

Still gotta figure a way to pay for it.  Until that happens, I would put ZERO guarantees on it being built.

That's already in the pipeline, Froggie.  It will be built if the county board has anything to say about it (and they have plenty).

Last I heard, Illinois was practically broke and they elected a fiscally conservative governor. There's not even enough left to embezzle in the coffers.

Quote from: skluth on December 13, 2014, 01:21:34 AM

Quote from: Brandon on December 12, 2014, 09:24:04 AM

Quote from: froggie on December 12, 2014, 09:22:26 AM

QuoteWOOT!  Take that Chicago and your Sierra Club allies!  We want the road, it will be built, and there's not a fucking thing you fuckers can do!

Still gotta figure a way to pay for it.  Until that happens, I would put ZERO guarantees on it being built.

That's already in the pipeline, Froggie.  It will be built if the county board has anything to say about it (and they have plenty).

Last I heard, Illinois was practically broke and they elected a fiscally conservative governor. There's not even enough left to embezzle in the coffers.

That's why the building be by a P3.  There's already at least 3 proposals on the table.

Quote from: Brandon on December 12, 2014, 10:46:26 AM

Quote from: froggie on December 12, 2014, 09:31:55 AM
In my experience, being "in the pipeline" and being finalized are two very different things.

Well, contrary to the opinions of the Chicago Tribune and a few people from Chicago, it is a very necessary piece of the regional infrastructure.

I would maintain that it is unnecessary and financially risky - especially for Indiana. Read this article (http://usa.streetsblog.org/2014/11/20/the-great-traffic-projection-swindle/) from Streetsblog. I don't generally subscribe to what this organation supports, but the inflated projections for toll roads this article describes clearly have been a problem, and that article does a good job documenting them.

If the the Indiana Toll Road - which is experiencing a decline in traffic, is underused and bankrupt, why would another toll road that is 20 miles south, would not serve commuters at all, and would be a bypass to a free route, be successful? In the sense that it could possibly support serve multi-modal terminals, draw new businesses at some interchanges, and serve as an alternative for congestion on the Borman or to bypass things like snow squalls, it would have limited value. If the route would be ten miles further north in Indiana, it would indeed be a great bypass for US 30. As planned, it is about 12 miles south of US 30.

Another way to look at it, what percentage of I-65 traffic in south Lake County is headed for for areas of Chicagoland that would be served by this highway? Probably at least half of the traffic is local going no further than Merrillvile. Some would be going east to Porter County or to Gary or Hammond. Of the thru traffic going toward Chicago, how many of those drivers will pay toll (especially if it is high) instead of using the free alternatives? How many major employers would this road directly serve? I think if you do the math, you might see yet another optimistic traffic volume projection is being made.

Theoretically, it could also carry shoppers from Cedar Lake to the Southlake area if they are willing to pay. I doubt that would amount to anything significant.

Indiana got a great deal when they leased the ITR, but now, ironically because of the success of that deal, we might be put at risk by an over-hyped project. At least ITHSA is a system with heavily used highways so the other tollways could subsidize it, but I am afraid Indiana would be putting itself at risk financially.

Quote from: silverback1065 on December 12, 2014, 10:49:11 AM
With it's current route i doubt it but we'll see. If it went from 55 east past 65 and tied into 94 and 90/80 near michigan city I'd say it would be useful and necessary. But that's just my opinion.

I would apply the same test - how much traffic would use this toll road when the ITR is already experiencing significant declines? Also, looking at the route, if I were a using this as an east-west bypass, I would consider how far south this road would take me. That also has both a financial cost and would add time.

Quote from: Brandon on December 13, 2014, 07:13:37 AM

Quote from: skluth on December 13, 2014, 01:21:34 AM

Quote from: Brandon on December 12, 2014, 09:24:04 AM

Quote from: froggie on December 12, 2014, 09:22:26 AM

QuoteWOOT!  Take that Chicago and your Sierra Club allies!  We want the road, it will be built, and there's not a fucking thing you fuckers can do!

Still gotta figure a way to pay for it.  Until that happens, I would put ZERO guarantees on it being built.

That's already in the pipeline, Froggie.  It will be built if the county board has anything to say about it (and they have plenty).

Last I heard, Illinois was practically broke and they elected a fiscally conservative governor. There's not even enough left to embezzle in the coffers.

That's why the building be by a P3.  There's already at least 3 proposals on the table.

The ROD focused on the planned corridor between I-55 and I-65. Has there been any discussion among media, politicians, etc. to extend it east at least to the Indiana Toll Road? Or is this the final corridor? Back when I lived in the Chicago area, I always felt what is now called the Illiana corridor would incorporate a link to I-80/90; otherwise, who wants to drive 80 west, 65 south, Illiana west, 55 north, and 80 east? I get there is usefulness if you want to go south on 55, but it's not easy to drive through Lake Station where 80, 90, and 94 converge.

Quote from: andy3175 on December 15, 2014, 01:52:11 AM

Quote from: Brandon on December 13, 2014, 07:13:37 AM

Quote from: skluth on December 13, 2014, 01:21:34 AM

Quote from: Brandon on December 12, 2014, 09:24:04 AM

Quote from: froggie on December 12, 2014, 09:22:26 AM

QuoteWOOT!  Take that Chicago and your Sierra Club allies!  We want the road, it will be built, and there's not a fucking thing you fuckers can do!

Still gotta figure a way to pay for it.  Until that happens, I would put ZERO guarantees on it being built.

That's already in the pipeline, Froggie.  It will be built if the county board has anything to say about it (and they have plenty).

Last I heard, Illinois was practically broke and they elected a fiscally conservative governor. There's not even enough left to embezzle in the coffers.

That's why the building be by a P3.  There's already at least 3 proposals on the table.

The ROD focused on the planned corridor between I-55 and I-65. Has there been any discussion among media, politicians, etc. to extend it east at least to the Indiana Toll Road? Or is this the final corridor? Back when I lived in the Chicago area, I always felt what is now called the Illiana corridor would incorporate a link to I-80/90; otherwise, who wants to drive 80 west, 65 south, Illiana west, 55 north, and 80 east? I get there is usefulness if you want to go south on 55, but it's not easy to drive through Lake Station where 80, 90, and 94 converge.

The I-65 interchange is configured to be expandable to a full interchange accommodating an eastern extension.  There was no other consideration in this study to going further east, but it could be considered in a future study.

http://capitolfax.com/2015/01/13/rauners-spending-freeze/#comments

Well Pat Quinn is gone and it looks like the Illiana is going with him. I assume the Macomb Bypass would be included. I hope the Beardstown bridge is not I did not realize the new head of IDOT hated the Illiana .  There are several stories linked here . There is almost no funding for any other new construction projects in the 5 year plan anyway . One poster here put Illinois 336 between Monmouth and Peoria . I assure you I-74 is still there .

The tollway can just take over for the Illiana.

The Tollway could but it wont happen for years because neither it nor the Prairie  Parkway would make money . I would hope the corridor of both would be protected so that option will exist

Quote from: 3467 on January 13, 2015, 08:28:59 PM
http://capitolfax.com/2015/01/13/rauners-spending-freeze/#comments

Well Pat Quinn is gone and it looks like the Illiana is going with him. I assume the Macomb Bypass would be included. I hope the Beardstown bridge is not I did not realize the new head of IDOT hated the Illiana .  There are several stories linked here . There is almost no funding for any other new construction projects in the 5 year plan anyway . One poster here put Illinois 336 between Monmouth and Peoria . I assure you I-74 is still there .

So Illinois isn't going to build it now!? If that's so will Indiana still build their section?

Quote from: US 41 on January 13, 2015, 09:36:11 PM

Quote from: 3467 on January 13, 2015, 08:28:59 PM
http://capitolfax.com/2015/01/13/rauners-spending-freeze/#comments

Well Pat Quinn is gone and it looks like the Illiana is going with him. I assume the Macomb Bypass would be included. I hope the Beardstown bridge is not I did not realize the new head of IDOT hated the Illiana .  There are several stories linked here . There is almost no funding for any other new construction projects in the 5 year plan anyway . One poster here put Illinois 336 between Monmouth and Peoria . I assure you I-74 is still there .

So Illinois isn't going to build it now!? If that's so will Indiana still build their section?

I don't see why INDOT would, I really dont think Indiana even wanted it anyway. There are so many projects way more important in Indiana right now.

Quote from: silverback1065 on January 13, 2015, 09:42:06 PM

Quote from: US 41 on January 13, 2015, 09:36:11 PM

Quote from: 3467 on January 13, 2015, 08:28:59 PM
http://capitolfax.com/2015/01/13/rauners-spending-freeze/#comments

Well Pat Quinn is gone and it looks like the Illiana is going with him. I assume the Macomb Bypass would be included. I hope the Beardstown bridge is not I did not realize the new head of IDOT hated the Illiana .  There are several stories linked here . There is almost no funding for any other new construction projects in the 5 year plan anyway . One poster here put Illinois 336 between Monmouth and Peoria . I assure you I-74 is still there .

So Illinois isn't going to build it now!? If that's so will Indiana still build their section?

I don't see why INDOT would, I really dont think Indiana even wanted it anyway. There are so many projects way more important in Indiana right now.

I'm actually kind of happy about this news.

Me too this roads usefulness is debatable. I don't think it goes east enough in indiana to make any sense

This article more or less says the same thing and is a bit more explicit about the Illiana Expressway:

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/I/IL_ILLIANA_EXPRESSWAY_ILOL-?SITE=ILBLO&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

QuoteA planned 47-mile expressway between Illinois and Indiana is on hold after new Illinois Gov. Bruce Rauner issued an executive order aimed at addressing the state's deep budget problems.

In his first act after taking office Monday, the Republican suspended planning and development of any major interstate construction projects pending a "careful review" of costs and benefits. Rauner spokesman Lance Trover said Tuesday the planned Illiana Expressway is among the projects that fall under the executive order, adding that it's part of "a broader review to maximize taxpayer investment in infrastructure."

Quote from: silverback1065 on January 13, 2015, 09:42:06 PM

Quote from: US 41 on January 13, 2015, 09:36:11 PM

Quote from: 3467 on January 13, 2015, 08:28:59 PM
http://capitolfax.com/2015/01/13/rauners-spending-freeze/#comments

I don't see why INDOT would, I really dont think Indiana even wanted it anyway. There are so many projects way more important in Indiana right now.

Actually, this was Mitch Daniels' initiative all the way, with Illinois coming in a few years later after they saw more economic development opportunities if it was extended to I-55.  Daniels' INDOT original concept connected I-57 with I-80/94, and was truncated back to I-65 after opposition from Porter and LaPorte Counties.  INDOT's feasibility study went from I-57 to I-65, and IDOT later contracted with the same consulting firm to do a less detailed study of the economics of extending it to I-55.   

Quote from: Rick Powell on January 14, 2015, 06:12:22 PM

Quote from: silverback1065 on January 13, 2015, 09:42:06 PM

Quote from: US 41 on January 13, 2015, 09:36:11 PM

Quote from: 3467 on January 13, 2015, 08:28:59 PM
http://capitolfax.com/2015/01/13/rauners-spending-freeze/#comments

I don't see why INDOT would, I really dont think Indiana even wanted it anyway. There are so many projects way more important in Indiana right now.

Actually, this was Mitch Daniels' initiative all the way, with Illinois coming in a few years later after they saw more economic development opportunities if it was extended to I-55.  Daniels' INDOT original concept connected I-57 with I-80/94, and was truncated back to I-65 after opposition from Porter and LaPorte Counties.  INDOT's feasibility study went from I-57 to I-65, and IDOT later contracted with the same consulting firm to do a less detailed study of the economics of extending it to I-55.   

Daniels and the Will County Board.  Which, I hope the county board can find a way to push this forward as it is needed.

When serious talks about a 3rd Chicago-area airport south of town start gaining traction, then the pressure will be on to take the Illiana off the back burner. 

Maybe getting the airport authority to build it will become an option

Quote from: thenetwork on January 14, 2015, 10:29:29 PM
When serious talks about a 3rd Chicago-area airport south of town start gaining traction, then the pressure will be on to take the Illiana off the back burner. 

It's already needed due to the massive intermodal centers on the west end of it.  There's two now with a third on the way.

Quote from: Brandon on January 15, 2015, 07:31:43 AM

Quote from: thenetwork on January 14, 2015, 10:29:29 PM
When serious talks about a 3rd Chicago-area airport south of town start gaining traction, then the pressure will be on to take the Illiana off the back burner. 

It's already needed due to the massive intermodal centers on the west end of it.  There's two now with a third on the way.

Didn't IDOT just spend tens of millions of dollars to upgrade the interchange on I-55 near the intermodal centers? I know there was a lot of construction that just wrapped up around that area on I-55.

That still ends up dumping huge numbers of trucks onto I-80 heading east.

Quote from: Stratuscaster on January 16, 2015, 12:56:28 PM
That still ends up dumping huge numbers of trucks onto I-80 heading east.

And onto county highways as well.

Will County Residents Deliver Petitions Against Illiana Tollway

Will County residents delivered close to 13,000 petitions to state offices on Wednesday calling on Gov. Bruce Rauner to drop plans for the Illiana Tollway.

Those against the proposed expressway call it a boondoggle that will cost taxpayers money and farmland, while adversely affecting those who live near the designated area for the would-be tollway.

"When this process began we worried that we were alone, but the overwhelming response to this petition drive from taxpayers across the state lets me know that we have a chance to stop this boondoggle before it goes any further," said Virginia Hamann, who lives close to the proposed expressway and spearheads the organization No Illiana 4 Us.

Hamann's group rounded up some 4,500 petition signatures, while other organizations including Sierra Club, Openlands, Environmental Law & Policy Center, Active Transportation Alliance and Illinois PIRG collected thousands more, amounting to a collective total of 12,856 signatures from all the participating parties.

The proposed tollway is expected to cost $1.1 billion, according to the Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning. Last month, Rauner issued an executive order putting a stop to progress on the public-private partnership until a cost-benefit analysis is done on the proposed 47-mile tollway, which would connect Illinois' I-55 to Indiana's I-65.

http://progressillinois.com/news/content/2015/02/18/will-county-residents-deliver-petitions-against-illiana-tollway

^^ And they are a very vocal and small minority.  The Will County Board, on the other hand, is solidly behind the building of the Illiana.  it needs to be built for the expanding intermodal centers at the western end of the road.  otherwise, these twits are going to have trucks after truck after truck on the two-lane roads by the homes.  They nothing more than blind NIMBYs.

This should be built only if the Prairie Parkway is built and a connector is built. Otherwise, it is worthless in it's current form.

Quote from: adamlanfort on February 19, 2015, 06:46:27 PM
This should be built only if the Prairie Parkway is built and a connector is built. Otherwise, it is worthless in it's current form.

Hardly worthless.  It's potentially a major connector across the county and will provide a much needed alternate to I-80 and the current 2-lane highways for a lot of truck traffic.

Quote from: Brandon on February 19, 2015, 07:06:38 PM

Quote from: adamlanfort on February 19, 2015, 06:46:27 PM
This should be built only if the Prairie Parkway is built and a connector is built. Otherwise, it is worthless in it's current form.

Hardly worthless.  It's potentially a major connector across the county and will provide a much needed alternate to I-80 and the current 2-lane highways for a lot of truck traffic.

You're still going to get traffic on I-80 even if this is built. It is not a true bypass, it does not tie directly into I-80 or 94, truckers will have to go out of their way to use it. Build it with the Prairie Parkway and it will be used heavily.

I-80 needs to be widened anyway.

Quote from: adamlanfort on February 19, 2015, 07:23:15 PM

Quote from: Brandon on February 19, 2015, 07:06:38 PM

Quote from: adamlanfort on February 19, 2015, 06:46:27 PM
This should be built only if the Prairie Parkway is built and a connector is built. Otherwise, it is worthless in it's current form.

Hardly worthless.  It's potentially a major connector across the county and will provide a much needed alternate to I-80 and the current 2-lane highways for a lot of truck traffic.

You're still going to get traffic on I-80 even if this is built. It is not a true bypass, it does not tie directly into I-80 or 94, truckers will have to go out of their way to use it. Build it with the Prairie Parkway and it will be used heavily.

I-80 needs to be widened anyway.

Plus, Rauner will cancel it anyway. Not cost effective enough for the state.

I don't think anyone implied that the Illiana would magically make all the traffic of I-80 disappear.

(Long-term it could be beneficial, but the politicians really only think until their term is up. Then they leave the bad stuff for the next guy.)

I just don't understand why it is necessary for truck traffic when you already have I-39/74 you can use as a bypass of Chicago.

Quote from: adamlanfort on February 20, 2015, 09:29:10 PM
I just don't understand why it is necessary for truck traffic when you already have I-39/74 you can use as a bypass of Chicago.

And all of the truck traffic going through the I-55 interchange with Arsenal Road or up IL 53 to I-80 would actually go down south to I-74, then back up north to rejoin I-80/I-90 or I-94?  Or go down to I-74, then east to use I-65 south of Indianapolis rather than use either I-80 or local routes to access I-65?

Both I-55 and I-80 need an much closer alternate option for the next time one of the Des Plaines crossings has to have long term lane closures.

Quote from: adamlanfort on February 20, 2015, 09:29:10 PM
I just don't understand why it is necessary for truck traffic when you already have I-39/74 you can use as a bypass of Chicago.

There are two very large intermodal yards, with plans for yet another, at the western end of it.

BNSF and UP are in the image here: https://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ll=41.429342,-88.124599&spn=0.109529,0.154324&t=h&z=13

The other one (BNSF) is going here: https://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ll=41.342278,-88.197212&spn=0.109676,0.154324&t=h&z=13
(I-55 & Lorenzo Rd)

I think everyone understands there are intermodal yards in Will County, and we all understand that they are important to the economy of Joliet. Everyone also understands that the Illiana would have served them well. But the Illiana was not envisioned to to simply serve these facilities. As a matter of fact, the idea of the Illiana expressway predated intermodal facility plans by a long time.

When I was growing up and lived in Northwest Indiana, the idea was to have a bypass of US 30 which was congested and filled with stoplights even back in the 1970s. The US 30 congestion existed in both Indiana and Illinois, and the bypass would have at least gone from I-65 to Ill. 394. I don't remember if the maps showed it going to SR 49 or I-57, but the point was that it would relieve local, commuter, and intercity travel traffic through built-up areas.

Looking back through the years, in the corridor that was proposed, what sort of growth has occurred? In south Lake County Indiana, only limited residential growth occurred. The original general route (Crown Point, Schererville, St John) boomed. On the Illinois side, i think the south suburbs have generally stagnated until you reach Frankfort, Mokena, etc. (which are really far southwest suburbs).

What are future growth prospects? I would say uncertain, at best. Lake County, Indiana population has not increased. I don't see any reason why the south suburbs will grow substantially. I know some people push the Peotone Airport, but that truly would be a boondoggle which no airline wants. The businesses are established around O'Hare - not near Monee and Peoptone. How well did the expensive MidAmerica Airport (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MidAmerica_St._Louis_Airport) work out?

So the problem those of us against the most recent proposal have is that the routing would not serve the original intent and there do not seem to be prospects for substantial growth in the area. Building a toll road where traffic volumes would be light and in an area with limited growth is a very bad idea. I just do not see investing billions of dollars of public money to subsidize BNSF.

From an Indiana perspective, what would be good to see in my opinion, is a scaled back project following a route more toward Crown Point/Merrillville, Schererville, and St. John. If such as an expressway bypassing Southlake Mall and connecting I-65 to Ill. 394 were built, this would be well worth the investment unlike the tollway proposal that might benefit a few truckers. Illinois residents know their area better, but I bet some similar, scaled back project would reap dividends.

http://capitolfax.com/2015/03/26/illiana-cover-up/#comments
The latest ..............................

Quote from: 3467 on March 26, 2015, 11:24:10 PM
http://capitolfax.com/2015/03/26/illiana-cover-up/#comments
The latest ..............................

I'm not surprised. Illiana should be a dead project. Until or if Peotene airport is constructed, Illiana will never be successful. I hope Gov. Rauner does the right thing and kills this project in its entirety. There's been way too many useless planning and study projects wasted already.

Right now, there's much more important projects that need to be completed. Elgin O'hare western extension, Kennedy and Eisenhower reconstruction, etc.

I am going to stand in the middle and get run down by the gung ho supporters and those that think its a total waste. I don't think it should be built now BUT the  corridor should be protected and then the ISTHA can look at if and when it becomes feasible . The Fox Valley freeway is an example of what I am talking about

Quote from: johndoe780 on March 27, 2015, 09:59:48 AM

Quote from: 3467 on March 26, 2015, 11:24:10 PM
http://capitolfax.com/2015/03/26/illiana-cover-up/#comments
The latest ..............................

I'm not surprised. Illiana should be a dead project. Until or if Peotene airport is constructed, Illiana will never be successful.

Bunk.  There are two very large and growing intermodal facilities at the west end of the Illiana.  Even without the Peotone airport, it still will be successful.

If the Illiana proposal gets shot down for good, it'll come back to haunt future generations who will have to sit in endless bumper-to-bumper traffic on I-80 and US 30, like the current ones do now.

Quote from: Henry on March 27, 2015, 02:51:50 PM
If the Illiana proposal gets shot down for good, it'll come back to haunt future generations who will have to sit in endless bumper-to-bumper traffic on I-80 and US 30, like the current ones do now.

It would be nice to upgrade US 30 to interstate standards from I-65 to I-69. 

Quote from: 3467 on March 27, 2015, 10:26:41 AM
I am going to stand in the middle and get run down by the gung ho supporters and those that think its a total waste. I don't think it should be built now BUT the  corridor should be protected and then the ISTHA can look at if and when it becomes feasible . The Fox Valley freeway is an example of what I am talking about

Exactly! IDOT is reluctant for whatever reason to use corridor protection, particularly around the Chicagoland area.

Quote from: Henry on March 27, 2015, 02:51:50 PM
If the Illiana proposal gets shot down for good, it'll come back to haunt future generations who will have to sit in endless bumper-to-bumper traffic on I-80 and US 30, like the current ones do now.

Exactly!  I'm sick of seeing IDOT District 1 focus solely on $hitcago instead of where the real needs are.  Who gives a shit about the Ike rebuild?  The last try failed miserably, and there is nowhere to expand it.  IDOT should spend its money in growing areas, not areas that could be better served by transit to take vehicles off the Ike.  This project takes what is brought in by train and bypasses $hitcago for trucks, keeping congestion out of there.  If anything, IDOT should start it as a set of Texas-style frontage roads with expansion room for a full freeway in the middle.

As might have been expected, a federal lawsuit was filed last week by a coalition of environmental groups to stop the Illiana Tollway.

News article link: http://www.chicagotribune.com/suburbs/daily-southtown/news/ct-sta-illiana-lawsuit-st-0528-20150527-story.html (http://www.chicagotribune.com/suburbs/daily-southtown/news/ct-sta-illiana-lawsuit-st-0528-20150527-story.html)

Quote from: RevZimmerman on May 28, 2015, 10:56:20 AM
As might have been expected, a federal lawsuit was filed last week by a coalition of environmental groups to stop the Illiana Tollway.

News article link: http://www.chicagotribune.com/suburbs/daily-southtown/news/ct-sta-illiana-lawsuit-st-0528-20150527-story.html (http://www.chicagotribune.com/suburbs/daily-southtown/news/ct-sta-illiana-lawsuit-st-0528-20150527-story.html)

A very small group of very vocal twits, most of whom don't even hail from Will County.  Sounds like the crap they pulled on the I-355 extension, and I hope it ends the same way for them.

Quote from: Brandon on May 28, 2015, 10:57:49 AM

Quote from: RevZimmerman on May 28, 2015, 10:56:20 AM
As might have been expected, a federal lawsuit was filed last week by a coalition of environmental groups to stop the Illiana Tollway.

News article link: http://www.chicagotribune.com/suburbs/daily-southtown/news/ct-sta-illiana-lawsuit-st-0528-20150527-story.html (http://www.chicagotribune.com/suburbs/daily-southtown/news/ct-sta-illiana-lawsuit-st-0528-20150527-story.html)

A very small group of very vocal twits, most of whom don't even hail from Will County.  Sounds like the crap they pulled on the I-355 extension, and I hope it ends the same way for them.

These environmentalists fail to see that the environment will get better if less cars are stuck in traffic and idling and therefore better air for their lungs. The do nothing approach is almost always the worst one. Also economically it helps everyone with less hrs lost for productivity. Ugh I hate it when people like this lose their collective shit for no valid reason.

http://capitolfax.com/2015/06/02/rauner-announces-budget-react/

I think it's time we change the name of the topic

All I have to say is...

FUCK RAUNER!

Quote from: Brandon on May 28, 2015, 10:57:49 AM

Quote from: RevZimmerman on May 28, 2015, 10:56:20 AM
As might have been expected, a federal lawsuit was filed last week by a coalition of environmental groups to stop the Illiana Tollway.

News article link: http://www.chicagotribune.com/suburbs/daily-southtown/news/ct-sta-illiana-lawsuit-st-0528-20150527-story.html (http://www.chicagotribune.com/suburbs/daily-southtown/news/ct-sta-illiana-lawsuit-st-0528-20150527-story.html)

A very small group of very vocal twits, most of whom don't even hail from Will County.  Sounds like the crap they pulled on the I-355 extension, and I hope it ends the same way for them.

And the same people who are holding up the Route 53 extension and are whining even after the Tollway pandered to them by watering it down to a four lane parkway.

Here we go again...

Quote from: I-39 on June 03, 2015, 04:56:51 PM

Quote from: Brandon on May 28, 2015, 10:57:49 AM

Quote from: RevZimmerman on May 28, 2015, 10:56:20 AM
As might have been expected, a federal lawsuit was filed last week by a coalition of environmental groups to stop the Illiana Tollway.

News article link: http://www.chicagotribune.com/suburbs/daily-southtown/news/ct-sta-illiana-lawsuit-st-0528-20150527-story.html (http://www.chicagotribune.com/suburbs/daily-southtown/news/ct-sta-illiana-lawsuit-st-0528-20150527-story.html)

A very small group of very vocal twits, most of whom don't even hail from Will County.  Sounds like the crap they pulled on the I-355 extension, and I hope it ends the same way for them.

And the same people who are holding up the Route 53 extension and are whining even after the Tollway pandered to them by watering it down to a four lane parkway.

It's not like they're trying to plow the thing through some massive city park...oh wait, that's Baltimore.

Quote from: Henry on June 05, 2015, 01:33:27 PM
Here we go again...

Quote from: I-39 on June 03, 2015, 04:56:51 PM

Quote from: Brandon on May 28, 2015, 10:57:49 AM

Quote from: RevZimmerman on May 28, 2015, 10:56:20 AM
As might have been expected, a federal lawsuit was filed last week by a coalition of environmental groups to stop the Illiana Tollway.

News article link: http://www.chicagotribune.com/suburbs/daily-southtown/news/ct-sta-illiana-lawsuit-st-0528-20150527-story.html (http://www.chicagotribune.com/suburbs/daily-southtown/news/ct-sta-illiana-lawsuit-st-0528-20150527-story.html)

A very small group of very vocal twits, most of whom don't even hail from Will County.  Sounds like the crap they pulled on the I-355 extension, and I hope it ends the same way for them.

And the same people who are holding up the Route 53 extension and are whining even after the Tollway pandered to them by watering it down to a four lane parkway.

It's not like they're trying to plow the thing through some massive city park...oh wait, that's Baltimore.

These people must love constant gridlock and smog.

Quote from: Brandon on June 03, 2015, 01:29:45 PM
All I have to say is...

FUCK RAUNER!

Brandon, just curious. Did you vote for him? I did not because he felt way to slimy for my liking. Not that Quinn would have been much better.

Quote from: hobsini2 on June 07, 2015, 06:32:52 PM

Quote from: Brandon on June 03, 2015, 01:29:45 PM
All I have to say is...

FUCK RAUNER!

Brandon, just curious. Did you vote for him? I did not because he felt way to slimy for my liking. Not that Quinn would have been much better.

How can you hate the guy? Illinois is finally going to have a balanced budget and they did it without raising taxes. Put this guy in Washington. We need more politicians like Rauner. He's done a great job as governor so far and if I lived in Illinois I would vote for him whenever he is running for reelection.

Quote from: US 41 on June 07, 2015, 06:39:02 PM

Quote from: hobsini2 on June 07, 2015, 06:32:52 PM

Quote from: Brandon on June 03, 2015, 01:29:45 PM
All I have to say is...

FUCK RAUNER!

Brandon, just curious. Did you vote for him? I did not because he felt way to slimy for my liking. Not that Quinn would have been much better.

How can you hate the guy? Illinois is finally going to have a balanced budget and they did it without raising taxes. Put this guy in Washington. We need more politicians like Rauner. He's done a great job as governor so far and if I lived in Illinois I would vote for him whenever he is running for reelection.

As long as Gov.........um.......... Speaker Mike Madigan and the Cook County Democratic Party are still running this state, there will never be a truly balanced budget. Not to sound political or partisan, but Republicans have virtually no chance of ever taking control of the state legislature again, so get used to Chicago Democrats running this state.

Anyway, I think 3467 said it best earlier, it's not necessarily needed right now, but the corridor should be protected for future construction. I think I-80 and I-55 should be rebuilt/widened first and see how that goes before constructing the Illiana. Also, I would change the plans to include a connector between I-80 and I-55 (which is not in the current plans).

Good luck building those getting those 2-lane substandard bridges I-55 crosses the Des Plaines River replaced.

Quote from: US 41 on June 07, 2015, 06:39:02 PM

Quote from: hobsini2 on June 07, 2015, 06:32:52 PM

Quote from: Brandon on June 03, 2015, 01:29:45 PM
All I have to say is...

FUCK RAUNER!

Brandon, just curious. Did you vote for him? I did not because he felt way to slimy for my liking. Not that Quinn would have been much better.

How can you hate the guy? Illinois is finally going to have a balanced budget and they did it without raising taxes. Put this guy in Washington. We need more politicians like Rauner. He's done a great job as governor so far and if I lived in Illinois I would vote for him whenever he is running for reelection.

I'm going to not reply to this out of respect.

Quote from: SSOWorld on June 07, 2015, 07:10:56 PM
Good luck building those getting those 2-lane substandard bridges I-55 crosses the Des Plaines River replaced.

And they just did a bridge decking and repaving on them.

I wish they did tear down those bridges and widen them and the ones over the Kankakee River too.

Quote from: I-39 on June 07, 2015, 07:03:02 PM

Quote from: US 41 on June 07, 2015, 06:39:02 PM

Quote from: hobsini2 on June 07, 2015, 06:32:52 PM

Quote from: Brandon on June 03, 2015, 01:29:45 PM
All I have to say is...

FUCK RAUNER!

Brandon, just curious. Did you vote for him? I did not because he felt way to slimy for my liking. Not that Quinn would have been much better.

How can you hate the guy? Illinois is finally going to have a balanced budget and they did it without raising taxes. Put this guy in Washington. We need more politicians like Rauner. He's done a great job as governor so far and if I lived in Illinois I would vote for him whenever he is running for reelection.

As long as Gov.........um.......... Speaker Mike Madigan and the Cook County Democratic Party are still running this state, there will never be a truly balanced budget. Not to sound political or partisan, but Republicans have virtually no chance of ever taking control of the state legislature again, so get used to Chicago Democrats running this state.

Anyway, I think 3467 said it best earlier, it's not necessarily needed right now, but the corridor should be protected for future construction. I think I-80 and I-55 should be rebuilt/widened first and see how that goes before constructing the Illiana. Also, I would change the plans to include a connector between I-80 and I-55 (which is not in the current plans).

And thank God Madigan's in his 70s'. In a short while, he'll get a ruptured aneurysm, or a stroke, or a heart attack.

I-39 has me right ....Madigan though looks in good health at 71 pretty comparable to my mother and aunt for that matter . If that's an indication he has 20 -30- years left -15 to 20 in good enough shape to keep ruling .He aint going anywhere unless the feds can get him and they have been trying for years As to Rauner ....well Hobsini said it very well . I do predict we will have MJM long after Rauner is gone
BTW A point of fact How did Rauner make his fortune? State Government . His PE fund GCTR got most of its capital from the TRS

Back to I-39s point . We might have had the Foxway if the ROW had been protected but even if it wasn't a lot of NIMBY there was just so much development .... The mini Crosstown is still possible because there is still the railroad ROW.
The sad news about the Illiana is Rauner appears to have just plain killed it. He pulled every cent and unlike some of the other things on the list he really has full authority to do that . I suspect Indiana will follow and this one will be harder to revive than the Prairie Parkway  which has the whole Hastert back story.  Rauner is also planning on dumping the Tollway board too . That could wipe out a lot of the innovative ideas they have had. Once again he has full authority to do this . One thing  I did learn at the open is that members of the GA are getting more skeptical of IDOT and all the administrations on their road priorities. There was a thinly veiled hint that they had better stop pissing off the GA or expect earmarks

Quote from: hobsini2 on June 07, 2015, 06:32:52 PM

Quote from: Brandon on June 03, 2015, 01:29:45 PM
All I have to say is...

FUCK RAUNER!

Brandon, just curious. Did you vote for him? I did not because he felt way to slimy for my liking. Not that Quinn would have been much better.

Yes, I did.  First Quinn betrays us, now Rauner.  Is there no one in this state who won't betray us here?
/end rant.

Quote from: 3467 on June 07, 2015, 09:23:32 PM
I-39 has me right ....Madigan though looks in good health at 71 pretty comparable to my mother and aunt for that matter . If that's an indication he has 20 -30- years left -15 to 20 in good enough shape to keep ruling .He aint going anywhere unless the feds can get him and they have been trying for years As to Rauner ....well Hobsini said it very well . I do predict we will have MJM long after Rauner is gone
BTW A point of fact How did Rauner make his fortune? State Government . His PE fund GCTR got most of its capital from the TRS

His father died of a heart attack at 60. Given that Madigan grew up in Chicago during the era of high lead levels and probably was a smoker, hopefully it'll hit his arteries and send him towards his father. Oh and madigan lives in the southwest side by midway (trains=soot)

Really off topic. But the hell with Quinn. All that guy did was send his cronny friends to go work at Idoit.

Quote from: 3467 on June 07, 2015, 09:36:55 PM
Back to I-39s point . We might have had the Foxway if the ROW had been protected but even if it wasn't a lot of NIMBY there was just so much development .... The mini Crosstown is still possible because there is still the railroad ROW.
The sad news about the Illiana is Rauner appears to have just plain killed it. He pulled every cent and unlike some of the other things on the list he really has full authority to do that . I suspect Indiana will follow and this one will be harder to revive than the Prairie Parkway  which has the whole Hastert back story.  Rauner is also planning on dumping the Tollway board too . That could wipe out a lot of the innovative ideas they have had. Once again he has full authority to do this . One thing  I did learn at the open is that members of the GA are getting more skeptical of IDOT and all the administrations on their road priorities. There was a thinly veiled hint that they had better stop pissing off the GA or expect earmarks

The Foxway (Fox Valley Freeway for those who don't know) may be a reality if they had considered a corridor west of the Fox River along Randall Road. They were so bent on building it along IL-59, and that area was already developed much more than  areas west of the Fox River. Elgin didn't want it along Randall though, so they continued on with studying alignments on the east side. I would have put a corridor protection in place on an alignment a half mile west of Randall Road, before they built all the development.

I think that the Illiana Corridor project would be well underway if we still had Blagojevich.

That is funny about Blago. Blago wanted a capital bill but Madigan thought he would steal the money from those Madigan wanted to reward and pocket it.
Capitol Fax is full of the Rauner Madigan war -I keep thinking its like Godzilla v Mothra and we are the civilians trapped underneath

Quote from: I-39 on June 08, 2015, 11:01:11 AM

Quote from: 3467 on June 07, 2015, 09:36:55 PM
Back to I-39s point . We might have had the Foxway if the ROW had been protected but even if it wasn't a lot of NIMBY there was just so much development .... The mini Crosstown is still possible because there is still the railroad ROW.
The sad news about the Illiana is Rauner appears to have just plain killed it. He pulled every cent and unlike some of the other things on the list he really has full authority to do that . I suspect Indiana will follow and this one will be harder to revive than the Prairie Parkway  which has the whole Hastert back story.  Rauner is also planning on dumping the Tollway board too . That could wipe out a lot of the innovative ideas they have had. Once again he has full authority to do this . One thing  I did learn at the open is that members of the GA are getting more skeptical of IDOT and all the administrations on their road priorities. There was a thinly veiled hint that they had better stop pissing off the GA or expect earmarks

The Foxway (Fox Valley Freeway for those who don't know) may be a reality if they had considered a corridor west of the Fox River along Randall Road. They were so bent on building it along IL-59, and that area was already developed much more than  areas west of the Fox River. Elgin didn't want it along Randall though, so they continued on with studying alignments on the east side. I would have put a corridor protection in place on an alignment a half mile west of Randall Road, before they built all the development.

But you got to remember what Rt 59 was like prior to 1990. 2 lanes of traffic from I-55 to Joliet Rd in Plainfield. A very short 4 laning from Joliet Rd to Lockport St. Back to 2 lanes all the way up to 75th St in Naperville. The section between 75th and North Ave for the most part is the same as it was except for the short 6 lane section right at North Ave. Then it was back to 2 lanes all the way to Barrington Rd. I can tell you that it always was 1 hour from 75th to I-90.

If the Fox Valley was built out by Randall, it would have been too far west to relieve 59.

People EVERYWHERE don't understand that highways HELP - not hurt. But, most of the cities did not heed this thing and ended up with tons of cancelled freeways (Southern California, I'm looking at you). Baltimore would have a finished network if people understood this.

Quote from: 02 Park Ave on June 08, 2015, 11:08:43 AM
I think that the Illiana Corridor project would be well underway if we still had Blagojevich.

Seconded on that!

Will the Illiana get built or be dead, but only time will tell.
http://www.theherald-news.com/2015/06/16/u-s-district-judge-declares-illiana-expressway-federal-approval-invalid/a1tkmab/

Quote
U.S. District judge declares Illiana Expressway federal approval 'invalid'
Ruling: Impact study did not consider alternatives, relied on 'faulty' forecasts
Published: Tuesday, June 16, 2015 6:10 p.m. CDT
By LAUREN LEONE—CROSS - lleonecross@shawmedia.com

Considered by some to be a potential nail in the Illiana Expressway project's coffin, a U.S. District Court judge Tuesday ruled the federal government's approval of the $1.3 billion tollway project is invalid.

A critical piece in the Federal High Administration's record of decision – handed down late last year – was "arbitrary and capricious"  and violates federal environmental law, according to U.S. District Court Judge Jorge Alonso.

The action doesn't put a definite end to the bi-state tollway project linking Interstate 55 in Illinois to Interstate 65 in Indiana. But in declaring the federal record of decision and the Tier I environmental impact study invalid, the decision sends Illinois and Indiana transportation officials back to square one without money or backing from the governor's office.

Illinois Department of Transportation spokesman Guy Tridgell said via email Tuesday the state agency is still reviewing the ruling and "exploring our options at this time."

"This is a victory,"  said Howard Learner, executive director of the Environmental Law and Policy Center, which brought the suit to U.S. District Court on behalf of several regional environmental protection groups.

The decision handed down Tuesday noted the federal government's approval of the expressway was based on a faulty "no build" analysis, and failed to consider other alternatives.

"The flawed 'no build' forecast is the foundation for the agencies' projection of future traffic in the study area and their conclusion that the existing roadways cannot adequately serve the future transportation needs,"  the decision stated.

Because that analysis does not substantiate the purpose and need, the FHWA's approval of the ROD and final EIS is arbitrary and capricious and in violation of the National Environmental Policy Act, the ruling added.

The court Tuesday granted the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment.

Learner said the decision is "well-grounded,"  and should be viewed by Gov. Bruce Rauner, who singled out the project earlier this year by placing it on hold, as "the last straw."

"Rauner had already put the Illiana on terminal life support. The state doesn't have any money to pay for it,"  Learner said.

Stacy Myers, with Openlands Chicago, said the ruling is a "tremendous step forward"  for those opposed to the project. She said the ruling "called out" flawed and exaggerated population projections, noting the analysis thereby fails to justify the need for the road.

Supporters have said the controversial $1.5 billion tollway project – which would serve as a 47-mile east-west link from I-55 in Wilmington to I-65 near Lowell, Indiana – would relieve congestion on local roads and promote economic growth.

Quote from: JamesT456 on June 16, 2015, 09:16:27 PM
Will the Illiana get built or be dead, but only time will tell.
http://www.theherald-news.com/2015/06/16/u-s-district-judge-declares-illiana-expressway-federal-approval-invalid/a1tkmab/

Quote
U.S. District judge declares Illiana Expressway federal approval 'invalid'
Ruling: Impact study did not consider alternatives, relied on 'faulty' forecasts
Published: Tuesday, June 16, 2015 6:10 p.m. CDT
By LAUREN LEONE—CROSS - lleonecross@shawmedia.com

Considered by some to be a potential nail in the Illiana Expressway project's coffin, a U.S. District Court judge Tuesday ruled the federal government's approval of the $1.3 billion tollway project is invalid.

A critical piece in the Federal High Administration's record of decision – handed down late last year – was "arbitrary and capricious"  and violates federal environmental law, according to U.S. District Court Judge Jorge Alonso.

The action doesn't put a definite end to the bi-state tollway project linking Interstate 55 in Illinois to Interstate 65 in Indiana. But in declaring the federal record of decision and the Tier I environmental impact study invalid, the decision sends Illinois and Indiana transportation officials back to square one without money or backing from the governor's office.

Illinois Department of Transportation spokesman Guy Tridgell said via email Tuesday the state agency is still reviewing the ruling and "exploring our options at this time."

"This is a victory,"  said Howard Learner, executive director of the Environmental Law and Policy Center, which brought the suit to U.S. District Court on behalf of several regional environmental protection groups.

The decision handed down Tuesday noted the federal government's approval of the expressway was based on a faulty "no build" analysis, and failed to consider other alternatives.

"The flawed 'no build' forecast is the foundation for the agencies' projection of future traffic in the study area and their conclusion that the existing roadways cannot adequately serve the future transportation needs,"  the decision stated.

Because that analysis does not substantiate the purpose and need, the FHWA's approval of the ROD and final EIS is arbitrary and capricious and in violation of the National Environmental Policy Act, the ruling added.

The court Tuesday granted the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment.

Learner said the decision is "well-grounded,"  and should be viewed by Gov. Bruce Rauner, who singled out the project earlier this year by placing it on hold, as "the last straw."

"Rauner had already put the Illiana on terminal life support. The state doesn't have any money to pay for it,"  Learner said.

Stacy Myers, with Openlands Chicago, said the ruling is a "tremendous step forward"  for those opposed to the project. She said the ruling "called out" flawed and exaggerated population projections, noting the analysis thereby fails to justify the need for the road.

Supporters have said the controversial $1.5 billion tollway project – which would serve as a 47-mile east-west link from I-55 in Wilmington to I-65 near Lowell, Indiana – would relieve congestion on local roads and promote economic growth.

Let's be honest, this is probably the final nail in the coffin. With that, I truly feel that IDOT needs to focus its funding on widening I-80 from US 30 to IL Route 47. No matter what, it will need it regardless. I still feel if they had made the original plan for this to connect I-80 to I-65, or even potential to tie in to a future Prairie Parkway (i.e. so it could go up to I-88 or even I-90 in the future), this would have been much more feasible and practical. The overall concept of a far south bypass is not ill advised, just not planned with sufficient future accommodation in mind. Another thing that would have helped was reserving right of way at the south end of I-355 to where it could have tied into this as well. I had mixed feelings on this to begin with, and I feel that, in the short term, this could be for the better, but I would worry about 20-30 years down the line.

So the real question now is if Indiana will build the Illiana between I-65 and US 41. Personally I think SR 14 does that job (bypassing St Johns / getting over to 65) pretty well.

Here is my wish list if Indiana builds their section and Illinois doesn't.

1) Name it SR 841.
2) A trumpet interchange at the US 41 interchange rather than a diamond with stub ramps to the west that may never connect to the Illinois part.
3) Build it as a free route.
4) Don't let Walmart / other stores build south of the interchange with 41 and ruin the bypass.

Quote from: US 41 on June 21, 2015, 06:00:00 PM
So the real question now is if Indiana will build the Illiana between I-65 and US 41. Personally I think SR 14 does that job (bypassing St Johns / getting over to 65) pretty well.

Here is my wish list if Indiana builds their section and Illinois doesn't.

1) Name it SR 841.
2) A trumpet interchange at the US 41 interchange rather than a diamond with stub ramps to the west that may never connect to the Illinois part.
3) Build it as a free route.
4) Don't let Walmart / other stores build south of the interchange with 41 and ruin the bypass.

would this be at all useful though?  if illinois wont build their portion, what's the point of indiana doing their part?  just use the money to 6 lane 65 and 70 instead.

Quote from: silverback1065 on June 21, 2015, 06:22:23 PM

Quote from: US 41 on June 21, 2015, 06:00:00 PM
So the real question now is if Indiana will build the Illiana between I-65 and US 41. Personally I think SR 14 does that job (bypassing St Johns / getting over to 65) pretty well.

Here is my wish list if Indiana builds their section and Illinois doesn't.

1) Name it SR 841.
2) A trumpet interchange at the US 41 interchange rather than a diamond with stub ramps to the west that may never connect to the Illinois part.
3) Build it as a free route.
4) Don't let Walmart / other stores build south of the interchange with 41 and ruin the bypass.

would this be at all useful though?  if illinois wont build their portion, what's the point of indiana doing their part?  just use the money to 6 lane 65 and 70 instead.

For commuters and long-distance travellers who use to go from Evansville and Terre Haute to Chicagoland, it might be useful to save a couple of traffic lights even if they had to take a route a bit longer to reach I-80/94 from US-41 and IN-63 via a future SR-841 and I-65. 

Quote from: silverback1065 on June 21, 2015, 06:22:23 PM

Quote from: US 41 on June 21, 2015, 06:00:00 PM
So the real question now is if Indiana will build the Illiana between I-65 and US 41. Personally I think SR 14 does that job (bypassing St Johns / getting over to 65) pretty well.

Here is my wish list if Indiana builds their section and Illinois doesn't.

1) Name it SR 841.
2) A trumpet interchange at the US 41 interchange rather than a diamond with stub ramps to the west that may never connect to the Illinois part.
3) Build it as a free route.
4) Don't let Walmart / other stores build south of the interchange with 41 and ruin the bypass.

would this be at all useful though?  if illinois wont build their portion, what's the point of indiana doing their part?  just use the money to 6 lane 65 and 70 instead.

Reminds me of conversations around here regarding I-99 in NY. :D

Quote from: Stephane Dumas on June 21, 2015, 06:33:02 PM

Quote from: silverback1065 on June 21, 2015, 06:22:23 PM

Quote from: US 41 on June 21, 2015, 06:00:00 PM
So the real question now is if Indiana will build the Illiana between I-65 and US 41. Personally I think SR 14 does that job (bypassing St Johns / getting over to 65) pretty well.

Here is my wish list if Indiana builds their section and Illinois doesn't.

1) Name it SR 841.
2) A trumpet interchange at the US 41 interchange rather than a diamond with stub ramps to the west that may never connect to the Illinois part.
3) Build it as a free route.
4) Don't let Walmart / other stores build south of the interchange with 41 and ruin the bypass.

would this be at all useful though?  if illinois wont build their portion, what's the point of indiana doing their part?  just use the money to 6 lane 65 and 70 instead.

For commuters and long-distance travellers who use to go from Evansville and Terre Haute to Chicagoland, it might be useful to save a couple of traffic lights even if they had to take a route a bit longer to reach I-80/94 from US-41 and IN-63 via a future SR-841 and I-65. 

Exactly. I find 41 is a much better way to get to Evansville and Nashville than going on 65.

Quote from: silverback1065 on June 21, 2015, 06:22:23 PM

Quote from: US 41 on June 21, 2015, 06:00:00 PM
So the real question now is if Indiana will build the Illiana between I-65 and US 41. Personally I think SR 14 does that job (bypassing St Johns / getting over to 65) pretty well.

Here is my wish list if Indiana builds their section and Illinois doesn't.

1) Name it SR 841.
2) A trumpet interchange at the US 41 interchange rather than a diamond with stub ramps to the west that may never connect to the Illinois part.
3) Build it as a free route.
4) Don't let Walmart / other stores build south of the interchange with 41 and ruin the bypass.

would this be at all useful though?  if illinois wont build their portion, what's the point of indiana doing their part?  just use the money to 6 lane 65 and 70 instead.

Very much yes please.

Rauner has signed a bill approving $5.5 million in additional money for the Illiana.

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20150709/BLOGS02/150709836/rauner-okays-new-spending-on-illiana-despite-promised-ban

Quote from: adt1982 on July 09, 2015, 06:22:59 PM
Rauner has signed a bill approving $5.5 million in additional money for the Illiana.

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20150709/BLOGS02/150709836/rauner-okays-new-spending-on-illiana-despite-promised-ban

Though this is getting into fictional territory, I think a completed Illinani could be part of a rerouted I-80 between Morris, IL and Toledo, OH.  This reroute of I-80 would utilize the Illiana to I-65, and from there a freeway that mostly utilizes an upgraded US 30 to Fort Wayne, and takes the already mostly upgraded US 24 freeway to the I-90 Ohio turnpike in Toledo.  Of course for this pipedream reroute of I-80 to work the Illiana would have to be extended west to I-80 near Morris, and the expressway US 30 in IN would have to be upgraded to interstate standards too.

And the existing I-80 in IL between Morris and I-294 would have to be given a 3DI.

Quote from: Lyon Wonder on July 09, 2015, 07:00:04 PM
Though this is getting into fictional territory, I think a completed Illinani could be part of a rerouted I-80 between Morris, IL and Toledo, OH.  This reroute of I-80 would utilize the Illiana to I-65, and from there a freeway that mostly utilizes an upgraded US 30 to Fort Wayne, and takes the already mostly upgraded US 24 freeway to the I-90 Ohio turnpike in Toledo.  Of course for this pipedream reroute of I-80 to work the Illiana would have to be extended west to I-80 near Morris, and the expressway US 30 in IN would have to be upgraded to interstate standards too.

If they actually were planning to reroute 80 onto it, I actually think this project would happen. They could tout the same crap they used for 69. (Important for trucks and the economy)
Us 30 should be an interstate quality highway imo.

Quote from: adt1982 on July 09, 2015, 06:22:59 PM
Rauner has signed a bill approving $5.5 million in additional money for the Illiana.

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20150709/BLOGS02/150709836/rauner-okays-new-spending-on-illiana-despite-promised-ban

WOOT!!!!!

He finally sees the light about spending on growing areas and the infrastructure they need.

Fuck Cook County

Quote from: Brandon on July 09, 2015, 07:06:18 PM

Quote from: adt1982 on July 09, 2015, 06:22:59 PM
Rauner has signed a bill approving $5.5 million in additional money for the Illiana.

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20150709/BLOGS02/150709836/rauner-okays-new-spending-on-illiana-despite-promised-ban

WOOT!!!!!

He finally sees the light about spending on growing areas and the infrastructure they need.

Fuck Cook County

Read the article.  It's about paying the consultants the rest of their contract and that's it.

Quote from: Brandon on July 09, 2015, 07:06:18 PM

Quote from: adt1982 on July 09, 2015, 06:22:59 PM
Rauner has signed a bill approving $5.5 million in additional money for the Illiana.

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20150709/BLOGS02/150709836/rauner-okays-new-spending-on-illiana-despite-promised-ban

WOOT!!!!!

He finally sees the light about spending on growing areas and the infrastructure they need.

Fuck Cook County

"The governor's office says the money will be used to pay consultants to wind down the project and to handle any costs from continuing litigation. Most of the latter is coming from foes who want to drive a legal stake through the road's heart.

A Rauner aide adds that the money is only being reappropriated from last year, and just because the state is allowed to spend the money doesn't mean it will."

Quote from: ET21 on July 10, 2015, 11:22:18 AM

Quote from: Brandon on July 09, 2015, 07:06:18 PM

Quote from: adt1982 on July 09, 2015, 06:22:59 PM
Rauner has signed a bill approving $5.5 million in additional money for the Illiana.

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20150709/BLOGS02/150709836/rauner-okays-new-spending-on-illiana-despite-promised-ban

WOOT!!!!!

He finally sees the light about spending on growing areas and the infrastructure they need.

Fuck Cook County

"The governor's office says the money will be used to pay consultants to wind down the project and to handle any costs from continuing litigation. Most of the latter is coming from foes who want to drive a legal stake through the road's heart.

A Rauner aide adds that the money is only being reappropriated from last year, and just because the state is allowed to spend the money doesn't mean it will."

Damn.  Again, fuck him and Madigan.  We'll just have to build our own stuff here in Will County while Cook continues to empty and get money anyway.

Quote from: ChiMilNet on June 16, 2015, 11:05:24 PM
Let's be honest, this is probably the final nail in the coffin. With that, I truly feel that IDOT needs to focus its funding on widening I-80 from US 30 to IL Route 47. No matter what, it will need it regardless. I still feel if they had made the original plan for this to connect I-80 to I-65, or even potential to tie in to a future Prairie Parkway (i.e. so it could go up to I-88 or even I-90 in the future), this would have been much more feasible and practical. The overall concept of a far south bypass is not ill advised, just not planned with sufficient future accommodation in mind. Another thing that would have helped was reserving right of way at the south end of I-355 to where it could have tied into this as well. I had mixed feelings on this to begin with, and I feel that, in the short term, this could be for the better, but I would worry about 20-30 years down the line.

In my opinion, they aligned it too far south to the point where enough people saw it as a road in the middle of nowhere that they'd never use.  They should have selected a route close enough to 80/94 for it to be a practical bypass for the traffic mess on the Borman Expy.  Expecting people to drive 20 miles south on I-55 and then 20 miles north again on I-65 to avoid the NW Indiana bottleneck is a bit much. 

Quote from: Quimby on July 15, 2015, 05:21:31 PM

Quote from: ChiMilNet on June 16, 2015, 11:05:24 PM
Let's be honest, this is probably the final nail in the coffin. With that, I truly feel that IDOT needs to focus its funding on widening I-80 from US 30 to IL Route 47. No matter what, it will need it regardless. I still feel if they had made the original plan for this to connect I-80 to I-65, or even potential to tie in to a future Prairie Parkway (i.e. so it could go up to I-88 or even I-90 in the future), this would have been much more feasible and practical. The overall concept of a far south bypass is not ill advised, just not planned with sufficient future accommodation in mind. Another thing that would have helped was reserving right of way at the south end of I-355 to where it could have tied into this as well. I had mixed feelings on this to begin with, and I feel that, in the short term, this could be for the better, but I would worry about 20-30 years down the line.

In my opinion, they aligned it too far south to the point where enough people saw it as a road in the middle of nowhere that they'd never use.  They should have selected a route close enough to 80/94 for it to be a practical bypass for the traffic mess on the Borman Expy.  Expecting people to drive 20 miles south on I-55 and then 20 miles north again on I-65 to avoid the NW Indiana bottleneck is a bit much. 

However, it was only going to be 3-5 miles south of the major intermodal centers at the west end of the tollway, near I-55, so it really wasn't a bit much.

Quote from: Brandon on July 15, 2015, 05:56:20 PM

Quote from: Quimby on July 15, 2015, 05:21:31 PM

Quote from: ChiMilNet on June 16, 2015, 11:05:24 PM
Let's be honest, this is probably the final nail in the coffin. With that, I truly feel that IDOT needs to focus its funding on widening I-80 from US 30 to IL Route 47. No matter what, it will need it regardless. I still feel if they had made the original plan for this to connect I-80 to I-65, or even potential to tie in to a future Prairie Parkway (i.e. so it could go up to I-88 or even I-90 in the future), this would have been much more feasible and practical. The overall concept of a far south bypass is not ill advised, just not planned with sufficient future accommodation in mind. Another thing that would have helped was reserving right of way at the south end of I-355 to where it could have tied into this as well. I had mixed feelings on this to begin with, and I feel that, in the short term, this could be for the better, but I would worry about 20-30 years down the line.

In my opinion, they aligned it too far south to the point where enough people saw it as a road in the middle of nowhere that they'd never use.  They should have selected a route close enough to 80/94 for it to be a practical bypass for the traffic mess on the Borman Expy.  Expecting people to drive 20 miles south on I-55 and then 20 miles north again on I-65 to avoid the NW Indiana bottleneck is a bit much. 

However, it was only going to be 3-5 miles south of the major intermodal centers at the west end of the tollway, near I-55, so it really wasn't a bit much.

If they would have linked it directly to I-80 on the west end, then it wouldn't have looked so bad.

It was going to eventually link up with the I-355.

Quote from: 02 Park Ave on July 15, 2015, 09:45:06 PM
It was going to eventually link up with the I-355.

In early plans, but that was dropped years ago. I-355 will probably not be extended further south.

Quote from: I-39 on July 16, 2015, 07:53:13 PM

Quote from: 02 Park Ave on July 15, 2015, 09:45:06 PM
It was going to eventually link up with the I-355.

In early plans, but that was dropped years ago. I-355 will probably not be extended further south.

Due to development in the way, they'd likely have build a westward crossover (I-88/355 style?) along I-80 through that broad 'S' curve to economically extend I-355 southward.

I do remember seeing map scribblings to that effect in the New Lenox village plan back in the 1990s(?).

Mike

Quote from: mgk920 on July 17, 2015, 12:06:14 AM

Due to development in the way, they'd likely have build a westward crossover (I-88/355 style?) along I-80 through that broad 'S' curve to economically extend I-355 southward.

I do remember seeing map scribblings to that effect in the New Lenox village plan back in the 1990s(?).

Mike

New Lenox actually had a corridor reserved for the I-355 south of I-80 extension at one time.  The corridor was quietly dropped with the construction of a residential subdivision and I think a new planned Lincoln-Way HS campus; apparently the village couldn't, or wouldn't, hold off development long enough to save the planning corridor.  The concept was also dropped from Will County's long range plan a short time later.    FWIW, the corridor did have a jog to the west of the current I-355 connection at I-80, similar to the I-355/I-88 interchange.  What would have been difficult to route an I-355 extension south of 80 would now be that much harder.

There has been at least one article in the Chicagoland newspapers indicating that Will County may look into four-laning Williamton - Peotone Road for somewhere over $200 million if the Illiana completely dies.  Now if they do go that route, it would certainly be nice for the design to allow for upgrading most of the corridor to a freeway/tollway later on.

EDIT:  Didn't realize the Access Justification Reports had been posted for some of the Illiana Interchanges.  Page 193/298 of this 16 MB pdf has a conceptual signing plan for the Illiana at I-57. (http://nepa.illianacorridor.org/pdfs/i_57_ajr_part3.pdf)  Interesting how the control city is Kankakee for I-57 when at I-80 Memphis is used.

EDIT2:Page 51/323 of this pdf contains a conceptual signing plan for I-55 at the Illiana. (http://nepa.illianacorridor.org/pdfs/i-55_ajr_with_appendices_part9.pdf)

Needless to say, the Illiana is quickly becoming the 21st century's answer to the Crosstown Expressway, a major corridor that could've been very useful in helping through traffic avoid the downtown Loop.

I spotted this interesting rant written in June 2013 about the Illiana expressway.
http://tollroadsnews.com/news/illiana-expressway-south-of-chicago-gets-lots-of-political-accolades-but-viability-in-doubt

Quote from: Stephane Dumas on July 20, 2015, 02:41:57 PM
I spotted this interesting rant written in June 2013 about the Illiana expressway.
http://tollroadsnews.com/news/illiana-expressway-south-of-chicago-gets-lots-of-political-accolades-but-viability-in-doubt

I think the assessment in that article is correct. Why would a large amount of I-55, I-57, or I-65 traffic divert to this toll road that is so far out? If the area was booming, I might see it, but I think the area is actually losing population. I am sure the highway would look good on a map, but it seems like a very bad investment - like the Mid-America Airport near St. Louis.

There are many very good points in the article, but I especially agree with this quote:

Quote
Yet so far there is no sign or talk of any traffic and revenue study to assess the strength of demand by motorists and truckers for this road or even the most cursory analysis of the financial viability of the project.

If someone has that, I would like to see it.

Quote from: Brandon on July 15, 2015, 05:56:20 PM

Quote from: Quimby on July 15, 2015, 05:21:31 PM
In my opinion, they aligned it too far south to the point where enough people saw it as a road in the middle of nowhere that they'd never use.  They should have selected a route close enough to 80/94 for it to be a practical bypass for the traffic mess on the Borman Expy.  Expecting people to drive 20 miles south on I-55 and then 20 miles north again on I-65 to avoid the NW Indiana bottleneck is a bit much.

However, it was only going to be 3-5 miles south of the major intermodal centers at the west end of the tollway, near I-55, so it really wasn't a bit much.

No one is debating the intermodal centers would probably have liked it, but why should Indiana risk its tax dollars for something that might help these particular businesses in another state? On the west end, it might be close to these possible users of the road, but it would cross well south of any built up area of Northwest Indiana. The farmers in the proposed path were also pretty outspoken opponents.

Here's a bizarre turn.

Rauner's administration is now seeking tax breaks on materials to build the Illiana.

http://www.theherald-news.com/2015/07/28/rauner-seeks-tax-breaks-for-illiana-expressway-project/aej6jwa/

Quote from: adt1982 on July 28, 2015, 05:45:00 PM
Here's a bizarre turn.

Rauner's administration is now seeking tax breaks on materials to build the Illiana.

http://www.theherald-news.com/2015/07/28/rauner-seeks-tax-breaks-for-illiana-expressway-project/aej6jwa/

Bizarre indeed. One minute he's canceling it and the next he's moving forward. He ought to be focusing on the IL-53 extension before this. Protect the corridor, but don't build it right now because there are more pressing needs.

He can barely keep the budget talks going, sounds like the Illiana is becoming his procrastination project

I hate people who can't make up their minds! Either build the road, or don't build it at all.

Quote from: Henry on July 29, 2015, 12:12:09 PM
I hate people who can't make up their minds! Either build the road, or don't build it at all.

:sombrero: At this point, I think that Rauner is just messing with Brandon.

I'm pretty sure IDOT and INDOT are slamming their heads against their desks right now because of how hard Rauner is trolling them.

Build it!!! :-D

I hope this never gets built. There isn't really a traffic problem in the corn fields south of Chicago. Upgrade 80 when needed. The only thing the Illiana will succeed in is making Chicago bigger.

Quote from: US 41 on August 01, 2015, 06:21:49 PM
I hope this never gets built. There isn't really a traffic problem in the corn fields south of Chicago. Upgrade 80 when needed. The only thing the Illiana will succeed in is making Chicago bigger.

As my pavement design professor would always say "if you build it, they will come"

Quote from: US 41 on August 01, 2015, 06:21:49 PM
I hope this never gets built. There isn't really a traffic problem in the corn fields south of Chicago. Upgrade 80 when needed. The only thing the Illiana will succeed in is making Chicago bigger.

Bunk.  The traffic is already using the two-lane county roads through there, and development comes even without a freeway.  It is a much needed truck transportation corridor.

Quote from: Brandon on August 01, 2015, 08:01:34 PM

Quote from: US 41 on August 01, 2015, 06:21:49 PM
I hope this never gets built. There isn't really a traffic problem in the corn fields south of Chicago. Upgrade 80 when needed. The only thing the Illiana will succeed in is making Chicago bigger.

Bunk.  The traffic is already using the two-lane county roads through there, and development comes even without a freeway.  It is a much needed truck transportation corridor.

This road (roughly parallels Illiana Corridor) has a horrible traffic issue. Just look at all the cars.

https://goo.gl/maps/OzLJU

Quote from: US 41 on August 01, 2015, 06:21:49 PM
The only thing the Illiana will succeed in is making Chicago bigger.

And Chicago is not going to eventually grow/sprawl out that way anyway?  I think this same argument was used against the Fox Valley Corridor (which growth has since gone west of without any freeway or tollway being built).

Quote from: Revive 755 on August 01, 2015, 10:19:01 PM

Quote from: US 41 on August 01, 2015, 06:21:49 PM
The only thing the Illiana will succeed in is making Chicago bigger.

And Chicago is not going to eventually grow/sprawl out that way anyway?  I think this same argument was used against the Fox Valley Corridor (which growth has since gone west of without any freeway or tollway being built).

I would think that the road should be built to prepare to future devolopment. The only way you can prevent more devolopment is put an urban growth boundary similar to what Portland has. While that might help traffic problems it would mean the population would be harder to grow and could turn into a barrier for the city. Perhaps put an boundary that still makes room for future devolopment?

I would think the dozens of towns and villages in between the corridor and the city limits would effectively stop any southern expansion by the City of Chicago.

(Or, did you mean "the Chicago Metropolitan Area"? Because that will grow on it's own, regardless of the Illiana.)

Don't build it now, but protect the corridor. Rebuild and Widen I-80 first and see if that helps.

I'm honestly not entirely sold on it being necessary.

Quote from: I-39 on August 01, 2015, 11:37:41 PM
Don't build it now, but protect the corridor. Rebuild and Widen I-80 first and see if that helps.

I'm honestly not entirely sold on it being necessary.

It would help, if at the bare minimum, I-80 was widened to 6 lanes from I-355 to I-55.

Quote from: johndoe780 on August 02, 2015, 03:56:00 PM

Quote from: I-39 on August 01, 2015, 11:37:41 PM
Don't build it now, but protect the corridor. Rebuild and Widen I-80 first and see if that helps.

I'm honestly not entirely sold on it being necessary.

It would help, if at the bare minimum, I-80 was widened to 6 lanes from I-355 to I-55.

True, but I'd go eight lane from I-55 to I-294 and six lanes from I-55 to Morris

Quote from: I-39 on August 01, 2015, 11:37:41 PM
Don't build it now, but protect the corridor. Rebuild and Widen I-80 first and see if that helps.

I'm honestly not entirely sold on it being necessary.

This is my assessment too.

Quote from: johndoe780 on August 02, 2015, 03:56:00 PM

Quote from: I-39 on August 01, 2015, 11:37:41 PM
Don't build it now, but protect the corridor. Rebuild and Widen I-80 first and see if that helps.

I'm honestly not entirely sold on it being necessary.

It would help, if at the bare minimum, I-80 was widened to 6 lanes from I-355 to I-55.

That's what's needed just for the traffic we have currently.  It'll never be enough for the future there.

Seriously. It needs to be rebuilt to accomodate at least 5 lanes in each direction.

Quote from: Stratuscaster on August 01, 2015, 10:57:13 PM
I would think the dozens of towns and villages in between the corridor and the city limits would effectively stop any southern expansion by the City of Chicago.

(Or, did you mean "the Chicago Metropolitan Area"? Because that will grow on it's own, regardless of the Illiana.)

Maybe some of them are at least privately entertaining the idea of seeking to join the city, in the same manner as the City of East Cleveland, OH is now actively seeking to join the City of Cleveland, OH.

:-o

Mike

Thank Rauner this boondoggle has been axed. Finish I-90. The sixteen mile "Hypotenuse" between the Skyway in Englewood and the Strangler in Hillside. Watch as Schaumburg and Gary magically become TEN miles closer.

Heres the MAP  http://imgur.com/u9L0fFx Hypotenuse (in Fictional) the cure for Illiana fever

Quote from: dzlsabe on October 24, 2015, 02:20:41 PM
Thank Rauner this boondoggle has been axed. Finish I-90. The sixteen mile "Hypotenuse" between the Skyway in Englewood and the Strangler in Hillside. Watch as Schaumburg and Gary magically become TEN miles closer.

Go fuck yourself.  Boondoggle, my ass.  Why should we spend any more money on that giant sucking asshole we call Chicago.  It should be spent on growing Will County, not dying Cook (or is that Crook) County.

Wow, somebody still has bad case of Illiana fever. Take some hypotenuse and swear some more. Even pound your head against a wall. :banghead: Heres the MAP  http://imgur.com/u9L0fFx

Some of Cook County is dying and has been for FIFTY? years...this would be a plan to turn that around as well as solve at least five major X-way Fups. :pan: Talk about giant, sucking assholes...Will County should be banished from District 1. Nobody but southern Will County and Indiana ever thought Illiana was even a fair idea.

Quote from: dzlsabe on October 24, 2015, 03:12:26 PM
Wow, somebody still has bad case of Illiana fever. Take some hypotenuse and swear some more. Even pound your head against a wall.

Some of Cook County is dying and has been for FIFTY? years...this would be a plan to turn that around as well as solve at least five major X-way Fups. Will County should be banished from District 1. Nobody but southern Will County and Indiana ever thought Illiana was even a fair idea.

I can tell Chicago is not on my bucket list on where to go. They wanted the ruining Illiana expressway.

Illiana was a start of a great idea, for those that bothered to actually put some thought into it. Extending it west to I-55 and back to I-80 to serve the Joliet area intermodal would have made it better. Extending it east to come back up to I-80 would complete the bypass and make it even more viable.

This "hypotenuse plan" as presented so far does absolutely nothing for truck traffic using I-80 through the area and into Indiana. It does seem like it would create quite the eyesore, though - as well as consume more than a few homes and businesses.

The hypotenuse would take some interstate traffic off of I-80 and put it on I-90. And avoid downtown Chicago, the Ryan, the Ike and Kennedy x-ways. It would go over existing railyards, ROWs and adjacent to 59th from Damen to Halsted, and yes, some houses and business would be affected. Mostly, positively. Weve got loads of intermodal here too, and improving logistics around here would certainly attract more industry, hence jobs and so on. Get the 20% of under-performing Chicago up to snuff and maybe godawful Houston dosent become #3 in ten years. :clap:

Heres the MAP  http://imgur.com/u9L0fFx Hypotenuse (in Fictional) the cure for Illiana fever

How is that interstate traffic getting from I-80 to I-90 in the first place? I-80 already avoids downtown Chicago.

Quote from: Stratuscaster on October 24, 2015, 04:15:51 PM
Illiana was a start of a great idea, for those that bothered to actually put some thought into it. Extending it west to I-55 and back to I-80 to serve the Joliet area intermodal would have made it better. Extending it east to come back up to I-80 would complete the bypass and make it even more viable.

This "hypotenuse plan" as presented so far does absolutely nothing for truck traffic using I-80 through the area and into Indiana. It does seem like it would create quite the eyesore, though - as well as consume more than a few homes and businesses.

Exactly.  The Illiana's primary goal was to serve truck traffic from those intermodal yards, the two biggest in the Six County Area, I might add.  These yards are even being expanded as I type.  I-80 cannot and will never be able to handle all of the traffic from these yards, much less the routine, and growing, cross-country traffic that goes through here daily.  Damn near every day there's an issue with I-80 backing up due to an accident due to being very overloaded with traffic.

Quote from: dzlsabe on October 24, 2015, 03:12:26 PM
Wow, somebody still has bad case of Illiana fever. Take some hypotenuse and swear some more. Even pound your head against a wall.

Some of Cook County is dying and has been for FIFTY? years...this would be a plan to turn that around as well as solve at least five major X-way Fups. Will County should be banished from District 1. Nobody but southern Will County and Indiana ever thought Illiana was even a fair idea.

Actually, we wish we were a part of District 3.  We might actually get paid attention to from time to time instead of being continually ignored by District 1.

Your plan is on par with FritzOwl.

Finish the missing link in I-90. Heres the MAP  http://imgur.com/u9L0fFx Hypotenuse (now in Fictional and IDOT files somewhere) the cure for Illiana fever  :banghead:

Um... Pretty sure there's no "missing link". https://www.google.com/maps/dir/41.6877653,-87.5217865/42.0608828,-88.0542571/@41.807807,-87.7109969,11.04z/data=!4m2!4m1!5i1

Seriously, any progress your hypotenuse idea could possibly make in bypassing downtown was done then the Tri-State was opened, and even more when it was widened.

Um..REALLY? Well just put this on the list of dumass ideas. Lets make Chicago great again...in our lifetime.

Piano..I just pulled up your spot and it told me to go up to 31st St, get on 55 and go to the Tristate and go north. A reverse Nway to go. Even at midnight. Brilliant. Im just trying to get the Sways resolved. Thanx for your help. Thats a great app.  Heres the MAP  http://imgur.com/u9L0fFx

See..thats the point. More flexibility. Its 12am Sunday morning. Its not going to be that way THIS morning. And sure as hell not Monday morning. ANY weather, construction, accidents or ALL three? Good luck!

Quote from: dzlsabe on October 25, 2015, 12:20:31 AM
See..thats the point. More flexibility. Its 12am Sunday morning. Its not going to be that way THIS morning. And sure as hell not Monday morning. ANY weather, construction, accidents or ALL three? Good luck!

:confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused:

what?

Quote from: ET21 on October 25, 2015, 06:00:57 PM

Quote from: dzlsabe on October 25, 2015, 12:20:31 AM
See..thats the point. More flexibility. Its 12am Sunday morning. Its not going to be that way THIS morning. And sure as hell not Monday morning. ANY weather, construction, accidents or ALL three? Good luck!

:confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused:

what?

Dzlsabe is probably still either in middle school still or he failed all of his English classes. That's why nothing he has posted on here has made any sense.  :)

Cancelled road projects get revived all the time. Take the ICC, for example. Years back, a MD governor (Glendening, IIRC) pulled a Rauner and cancelled the whole thing, but then the next governor (Ehrlich) reversed that decision and by the end of the O'Malley administration, the ICC was finished. So the Illiana and Fox Valley can still get built, just not until after Rauner leaves office.

Quote from: Henry on October 26, 2015, 12:53:53 PM
Cancelled road projects get revived all the time. Take the ICC, for example. Years back, a MD governor (Glendening, IIRC) pulled a Rauner and cancelled the whole thing, but then the next governor (Ehrlich) reversed that decision and by the end of the O'Malley administration, the ICC was finished. So the Illiana and Fox Valley can still get built, just not until after Rauner leaves office.

The Fox Valley Freeway will never be revived. The area has filled in with development. If you meant the Prairie Parkway, that's unlikely to get revived either. I think the general consensus on that is people want IL-47 improved.

Quote from: US 41 on October 26, 2015, 11:36:43 AM

Quote from: ET21 on October 25, 2015, 06:00:57 PM

Quote from: dzlsabe on October 25, 2015, 12:20:31 AM
See..thats the point. More flexibility. Its 12am Sunday morning. Its not going to be that way THIS morning. And sure as hell not Monday morning. ANY weather, construction, accidents or ALL three? Good luck!

:confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused:

what?

Dzlsabe is probably still either in middle school still or he failed all of his English classes. That's why nothing he has posted on here has made any sense.  :)

*ahem*  :bigass: I'm in 6th grade...

Quote from: noelbotevera on October 26, 2015, 04:47:23 PM

Quote from: US 41 on October 26, 2015, 11:36:43 AM

Quote from: ET21 on October 25, 2015, 06:00:57 PM

Quote from: dzlsabe on October 25, 2015, 12:20:31 AM
See..thats the point. More flexibility. Its 12am Sunday morning. Its not going to be that way THIS morning. And sure as hell not Monday morning. ANY weather, construction, accidents or ALL three? Good luck!

:confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused:

what?

Dzlsabe is probably still either in middle school still or he failed all of his English classes. That's why nothing he has posted on here has made any sense.  :)

*ahem*  :bigass: I'm in 6th grade...

So you're saying that I'm right then.

Quote from: US 41 on October 26, 2015, 05:27:44 PM

Quote from: noelbotevera on October 26, 2015, 04:47:23 PM

Quote from: US 41 on October 26, 2015, 11:36:43 AM

Quote from: ET21 on October 25, 2015, 06:00:57 PM

Quote from: dzlsabe on October 25, 2015, 12:20:31 AM
See..thats the point. More flexibility. Its 12am Sunday morning. Its not going to be that way THIS morning. And sure as hell not Monday morning. ANY weather, construction, accidents or ALL three? Good luck!

:confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused:

what?

Dzlsabe is probably still either in middle school still or he failed all of his English classes. That's why nothing he has posted on here has made any sense.  :)

*ahem*  :bigass: I'm in 6th grade...

So you're saying that I'm right then.

Yup.

Quote from: dzlsabe on October 25, 2015, 12:08:14 AM
Piano..I just pulled up your spot and it told me to go up to 31st St, get on 55 and go to the Tristate and go north. An Nway to go. Brilliant. Im just trying to get the Sways resolved. Thanx for your help. Thats a great app.

Welp, I just learned a valuable lesson: Never try to make a point using Google Maps directions that are based on current traffic. The point I was trying to make was... well, never mind. Arguing this is a waste of time.

Quote from: pianocello on October 27, 2015, 09:50:42 PM

Quote from: dzlsabe on October 25, 2015, 12:08:14 AM
Piano..I just pulled up your spot and it told me to go up to 31st St, get on 55 and go to the Tristate and go north. An Nway to go. Brilliant. Im just trying to get the Sways resolved. Thanx for your help. Thats a great app.

Welp, I just learned a valuable lesson: Never try to make a point using Google Maps directions that are based on current traffic. The point I was trying to make was... well, never mind. Arguing this is a waste of time.

You're wrestling a pig in the mud with this one.  Sooner or later you realize he likes it.

Quote from: dzlsabe on October 27, 2015, 10:10:04 PM
Why was the IKE and its extension called I-90 until 1978?????

Can you stick to one thread per question, please?

Didnt mean to overload you or Mr. Brake. Its a pretty easy question. See Ike before 1978.

Quote from: pianocello on October 27, 2015, 09:50:42 PM

Welp, I just learned a valuable lesson: Never try to make a point using Google Maps directions that are based on current traffic. The point I was trying to make was... well, never mind. Arguing this is a waste of time.

I always add extra time to whatever Google says to allow for slow traffic &/or rest stops

Quote from: dzlsabe on October 28, 2015, 12:32:03 PM
Didnt mean to overload you or Mr. Brake. Its a pretty easy question.

Except you posted the same one in 2 other topics

Heres the MAP  http://imgur.com/u9L0fFx      Hypotenuse (in Fictional) the cure for Illiana fever.

IDOT, Federal Highway Administration drop appeal of Illiana Expressway court ruling

http://www.theherald-news.com/2015/09/22/idot-federal-highway-administration-drop-appeal-of-illiana-expressway-court-ruling/at3yr0p/ (http://www.theherald-news.com/2015/09/22/idot-federal-highway-administration-drop-appeal-of-illiana-expressway-court-ruling/at3yr0p/)

Looks like a new environmental impact study would be needed, a new analysis of the no-build alternative would be needed, a new analysis of traffic projections would be needed, a new analysis of toll revenue would be needed, and hopefully after the traffic projections and toll revenue is analyzed a new alignment would be concluded as necessary.

It would make sense to build it as I-480 from I-80 in Illinois to I-80 in Indiana for traffic bypassing the Chicago megalopolis, but just building it from I-55 to I-65 makes no sense.  The farmers opposing the road don't need an interstate to drive across their rural southern Will county.

Why not just connect it from I-355 to I-65, if its never going to be built from I-80 in Illinois to I-80 in Indiana?

Perhaps give the IL-53 extension and the existing IL-53 expressway an I-12 designation and cosign with I-355 from I-290 to I-80, to have a continuous Interstate 12 designation from IL-120 and US 12 to I-65 in Indiana, and give US 12 in Wisconsin an Interstate 12 designation and extend it to I-39, with a temporary (or permanent unfortunately most likely) discontinuity in I-12 from the Illinois state line with Wisconsin to IL-120 and US 12.  The road direction would still be east-west due to traveling from Illinois to Indiana, so an even interstate number could be used.

Or alternatively, for a north-south interstate number, US 41 could be upgraded to interstate standards south to IL 120 and cosigned as I-41, then I-41 could be cosigned with the IL-120 tollway, then I-41 could be cosigned with the IL-53 tollway, then I-41 could replace I-355, then I-41 could turn east to head to I-65.

I-41 would make more sense in Illinois than I-12 would in Illinois in keeping with the original intention of the interstate highway system of having two digit interstates actually be INTER-STATE highways running though multiple states.

Quote from: dzlsabe on October 29, 2015, 12:19:59 AM
https://www.google.com/maps/dir/41.6877653,-87.5217865/42.0608828,-88.0542571/@41.807807,-87.7109969,11z/data=!4m2!4
The cure for Illiana fever

Uh, no.  That in no way would ever serve the growing giant intermodal yards south of Joliet on I-55.

Quote from: dzlsabe on October 28, 2015, 12:32:03 PM
Didnt mean to overload you or Mr. Brake. Its a pretty easy question.

Posting multiple times or in multiple threads is considered spamming. Ideally, you should have started a new topic thread with your original question as opposed to multiple posts across multiple discussions.

I-12?  What the hell?

I know I can be a little dogmatic about numbering conventions, but come on.

We have have every Class I railroad, but one, colliding here in southside Chicago with many existing intermodal yards. And I-55 at present is the ONLY way out. The more I think about it, Will County should move to IDOT D3 as then these different needs wont compete for attention and funding like they do now.

Spamming? Some things affect several posts and it takes time for new or radical thoughts to sink in.

Heres the MAP  http://imgur.com/u9L0fFx Hypotenuse: Cure for Illiana fever.

No. It's spamming. Perhaps you should take some time to understand how things work around here instead of telling long-term contributors how it's going to be. Internet etiquette and all that.

Perhaps? How much time? How do things work? Could you splain it to me better GeekJEDI? Or try and move forward and reply with a thoughtful answer to some of the questions posed?
Or just give some more of your "contributions" to the ever-brilliant WI sign controversies.

Quote from: dzlsabe on October 29, 2015, 01:22:57 PM
We have have every Class I railroad, but one, meeting here in south Chicago with many existing intermodal yards. And I-55 at present is the ONLY way out.

Hence the need for the Illiana and why it is not a "boondoggle".

Of course, you might realize that if you left Chicago every once in a while.

I said southside Chicago, not sixty miles south of ChicagoDF. Hypotenuse, the cure for Illiana fever. If you think its still a good idea, get Will County into IDOT District 3. We have way bigger fish to fry up here in D1, instead of wasting scarce funds developing our one downstate county. And Ive left Chicago too many times to count, driven virtually everywhere in this country many times, lots of London, lots of Europe as well. A big part of our problem is a lack of concrete and imagination.

Heres the MAP  http://imgur.com/u9L0fFx   also see Hypotenuse in Fictional

Quote from: dzlsabe on October 29, 2015, 06:17:25 PM
We have way bigger fish to fry up here in D1, instead of wasting scarce funds developing our one downstate county.

And somehow this fictional project, which has not even been realistic proposed in the real world to merit this much discussion out of the fictional section, and does nothing for I-80 traffic, would someone jump to the top of the list over all of the other projects waiting in line for funding?  Between the Circle rebuild, any Ike rebuild, however many dollars rebuilding the north half of Lake Shore Drive takes, and a bunch of other illustratively listed projects, funds are gonna be a little tight for any brand new corridors, much less all of the engineering and environmental studies to even consider a new corridor.

Quote from: dietermoreno on October 29, 2015, 02:27:39 AM
IDOT, Federal Highway Administration drop appeal of Illiana Expressway court ruling

http://www.theherald-news.com/2015/09/22/idot-federal-highway-administration-drop-appeal-of-illiana-expressway-court-ruling/at3yr0p/ (http://www.theherald-news.com/2015/09/22/idot-federal-highway-administration-drop-appeal-of-illiana-expressway-court-ruling/at3yr0p/)

Looks like a new environmental impact study would be needed, a new analysis of the no-build alternative would be needed, a new analysis of traffic projections would be needed, a new analysis of toll revenue would be needed, and hopefully after the traffic projections and toll revenue is analyzed a new alignment would be concluded as necessary.

It would make sense to build it as I-480 from I-80 in Illinois to I-80 in Indiana for traffic bypassing the Chicago megalopolis, but just building it from I-55 to I-65 makes no sense.  The farmers opposing the road don't need an interstate to drive across their rural southern Will county.

Why not just connect it from I-355 to I-65, if its never going to be built from I-80 in Illinois to I-80 in Indiana?

Perhaps give the IL-53 extension and the existing IL-53 expressway an I-12 designation and cosign with I-355 from I-290 to I-80, to have a continuous Interstate 12 designation from IL-120 and US 12 to I-65 in Indiana, and give US 12 in Wisconsin an Interstate 12 designation and extend it to I-39, with a temporary (or permanent unfortunately most likely) discontinuity in I-12 from the Illinois state line with Wisconsin to IL-120 and US 12.  The road direction would still be east-west due to traveling from Illinois to Indiana, so an even interstate number could be used.

Or alternatively, for a north-south interstate number, US 41 could be upgraded to interstate standards south to IL 120 and cosigned as I-41, then I-41 could be cosigned with the IL-120 tollway, then I-41 could be cosigned with the IL-53 tollway, then I-41 could replace I-355, then I-41 could turn east to head to I-65.

I-41 would make more sense in Illinois than I-12 would in Illinois in keeping with the original intention of the interstate highway system of having two digit interstates actually be INTER-STATE highways running though multiple states.

I-12 already exists in Louisiana, using that number up here makes no sense for many reasons.  Keep it as a 3 digit child route of one of the routes up there. 

Quote from: dzlsabe on October 29, 2015, 01:59:52 PM
Perhaps? How much time? How do things work? Could you splain it to me better GeekJEDI? Or try and move forward and respond or answer some of the questions posed?

Enough time to understand that you're acting like a jerk? There. I answered one of the questions posed.

Quote from: dzlsabe on October 29, 2015, 01:59:52 PM
Perhaps? How much time? How do things work? Could you splain it to me better GeekJEDI? Or try and move forward and respond or answer some of the questions posed?

Kinda hard to do that when we give you an answer and you slap it back at our face and continue to promote this fictional idea that will never work (if it did work, wouldn't you think this would have been built by now?)

Quote from: ET21 on October 30, 2015, 05:53:26 PM

Quote from: dzlsabe on October 29, 2015, 01:59:52 PM
Perhaps? How much time? How do things work? Could you splain it to me better GeekJEDI? Or try and move forward and respond or answer some of the questions posed?

Kinda hard to do that when we give you an answer and you slap it back at our face and continue to promote this fictional idea that will never work (if it did work, wouldn't you think this would have been built by now?)

Or even seriously proposed, like the Crosstown Expressway (which, BTW, existed as an idea long before Madigan even entered the House).

Quote from: dzlsabe on October 29, 2015, 01:59:52 PM
Perhaps? How much time? How do things work? Could you splain it to me better GeekJEDI? Or try and move forward and respond or answer some of the questions posed?

If the answer is that important, why don't you Google it instead of constantly harassing other posters?

Crosstown? Rejected. Illiana? Rejected. Hypotenuse? Never analyzed or considered.

Again, why was the Ike and its extension called I-90 until 1978? Other than the Skyway, why are there no complete SE to NW routes on the southside? No guessing. Looking for answers that require thought.

Heres the MAP  http://imgur.com/u9L0fFx Hypotenuse (in Fictional) the cure for Illiana fever! :clap: 

Quote from: dzlsabe on October 30, 2015, 08:09:30 PMAgain, why was the Ike and its extension called I-90 until 1978?

Because there was apparently some change in "federal interstate guidelines" that lead to the renumbering, per a short blurb in the five star final edition of the Chicago Tribune on Friday, February 23, 1979.

There's no point in arguing with an 11 year old that is in the 6th grade. I've always found 11 year old middle schoolers to be very immature anyways. 

Quote from: dzlsabe on October 30, 2015, 08:09:30 PM
Again, why was the Ike and its extension called I-90 until 1978?

The Ike was originally built as I-90.

Quote from: dzlsabe on October 30, 2015, 08:09:30 PM
Other than the Skyway, why are there no complete SE to NW routes on the southside? No guessing. Looking for answers that require thought.

Define "complete". At the time back in the late 1920's, everything was planned centric to Chicago.

The plans were for a network of superhighways emanating from the Loop to the south (today's Dan Ryan), southwest (Stevenson), west (Eisenhower), and northwest (Kennedy), as well as a lakefront route (Lake Shore Drive). A north-south route on Chicago's West Side was added later and then dropped, to be resurrected much later as the Crosstown and then dropped again.

The Skyway came to pass when Indiana decided to move the terminus of the IN Toll Road to the state line at Indianapolis Boulevard and 106th Street in 1954 and Chicago had no direct link other than surface streets.

The blurb Revive 755 refers to reads:

Quote
New signs went up on the Eisenhower Expressway just west of the Main Post Office Thursday. The designations for several area roads are being revised to conform to federal interstate guidelines. The Eisenhower was changed from I-90 to I-290: the Kennedy between the Dan Ryan and Edens expressways will carry both I-90 and I-94 signs; and Ill. Hwy. 194. between Ill. Hwy. 53 and the Edens, becomes Int. Hwy. 90.

Define "complete"? No SE to NW diagonals on the southside. US 12 & 20? West on 95th, north on US 45. Forever. Skyway? Lost interest at the Ryan. Even the most downtown Chicago-centric folks (myself included) will concede that theres no need to come to Byrnecircle and genuflect anymore. I-90 and 94 are by and large east-west routes for most of the country. Only here are they north-south because of that lake. So THE pinch-point is southeast Chicago, Lake and Porter IN. Not downtown. So if we want to start puttin' for birdie, we should aim there. Not downtown.

Heres the MAP  http://imgur.com/u9L0fFx

Quote from: dzlsabe on November 01, 2015, 11:49:12 AM
So THE pinch-point is southeast Chicago, Lake and Porter IN. Not downtown. So if we want to start puttin' for birdie, we should aim there. Not downtown.

Hence, the Illiana.

Ah, NO the Illiana has been summarily rejected. CMAP, IDOT D1, tollway builders/funders...We have already wasted $30M? and NO one is standing in line to build this turkey because it does nothing to address the SIX major traffic bottlenecks or the pinch-points in Cook County where most of the people live and the traffic occurs. And Peotone International will never fly either.

Again, for any that still thinks this is a worthy project, get Will County into IDOT D3...then you will have access to the 55% of state highway funds, instead of the 45% D1 gets. We have way bigger fish to fry up here.   Heres the MAP  http://imgur.com/u9L0fFx

Quote from: pianocello on November 01, 2015, 03:14:29 PM

Quote from: dzlsabe on November 01, 2015, 11:49:12 AM
So THE pinch-point is southeast Chicago, Lake and Porter IN. Not downtown. So if we want to start puttin' for birdie, we should aim there. Not downtown.

Hence, the Illiana.

He'll never get the point.  He's got a blind spot to the southwest and south, not unlike many in Cook County who can't see past 87th Street.

Quote from: dzlsabe on November 01, 2015, 03:46:42 PM
Ah, NO the Illiana has been summarily rejected. CMAP, IDOT D1, tollway builders/funders...

Please provide a link to a news story where IDOT D1 rejected the Illiana.

The above agencies would definitely reject any hypotenuse corridor - too much ROW acquisition, too many 4f impacts, too many visual impacts, too much special waste disturbance, and way too costly.

Google IDOT and Illiana and pretty much take your pick.

Minimal 4f on Hypotenuse...I think theres three parks and all would remain intact and usable. All air rights lease over rail ROW with possibility of two express freight rail lines with 4-6 lane tollway above. Beauty is in the eye of beerholder, esp. if it helped resolve FIVE or SIX major bottlenecks affecting tens of thousands of vehicles daily, as opposed to maybe a thousand on Illianas best day. $4B for a serious PPP project financed by railroads (and some of their major stockholders Messrs. Gates and Buffett?), CREATE, ISHTA, tollway funders, even the bastards that stole the Skyway is not unreasonable. There seems to be some consensus on a "Crosstownish" route at least from the Skyway to I-55 and Cicero Av. Then its a question of the more logical way to go from there. North to the Edens?(NO) Or NW to the Strangler? (Yes)
Heres the MAP  http://imgur.com/u9L0fFx :ded:

Still advocating for a transit rail line from Midway to JeffPark on the Kenton corridor. 

If you want to see what Illiana would look like, take a drive down to I-72 from ChamU to Decatur or Springfield. Has there ever been a traffic jam on that road since the day it opened?

Quote from: dzlsabe on November 02, 2015, 08:54:44 PM
Google IDOT and Illiana and pretty much take your pick.

That's not a direct link. So in short, no you can't find it

What kind of studies are showing that the Hypotenuse Expressway would resolve "five or six" major bottlenecks?

It might reduce some traffic issues, but I do not believe it would resolve any of them.

As one that used to live in Champaign and that traveled I-72, it works very well for it's intent and purpose. Not every Interstate is - or should be - jam packed with traffic.

Why would the railroads be up for financing ANY part of this? What do they get out of the deal?

There are NO Hypotenuse studies that Im aware of. Thats the point. There may be some Crosstown studies that are relevant for the southern portion.

I-72 is the poster child for NOT traveled.

What do RRs get? Two? new grade separated thru rail lines from CN on the west to NS on the east for use by them all. A possible additional source for CREATE funding.

Its simple. The population of IDOT D1 (last #s I could find) without Will County is 7,684,000. Will is 632K. IDOT D3 is 614K. If you want Illiana or Peotone to move forward, get Will into D3. Then youll have access to a whole different bucket of funds and be able to move these turkeys forward (or not). Then D1 will be able to focus on the dozens and dozens of more worthy projects that are needed where the overwhelming majority of people live, instead of sponging precious funds and time on these two very rural distractions that affect very few people.

Quote from: dzlsabe on November 03, 2015, 11:56:29 AMI-72 is the poster child for NOT traveled.

An ADT of 14,000 is not traveled?

Quote from: dzlsabe on November 03, 2015, 11:56:29 AMIts simple. The population of IDOT D1 (last #s I could find) without Will County is 7,684,000. Will is 632K. IDOT D3 is 614K.

So?  Per Google, Kane County's population is only 523,643.  McHenry County only has 301,409.  Why is Will County more worthy of being sent to another IDOT district than those counties?

Quote from: dzlsabe on November 03, 2015, 11:56:29 AMThen D1 will be able to focus on the dozens and dozens of more worthy projects that are needed where the overwhelming majority of people live, instead of sponging precious funds and time on these two very rural distractions that affect very few people.

Let's take this one step farther and stop funding the roads the roads in the "rural distractions" that bring goods into Chicago, and see how well Chicago does then.

Quote from: Revive 755 on November 03, 2015, 08:43:07 PM

Quote from: dzlsabe on November 03, 2015, 11:56:29 AMI-72 is the poster child for NOT traveled.

An ADT of 14,000 is not traveled?

Quote from: dzlsabe on November 03, 2015, 11:56:29 AMIts simple. The population of IDOT D1 (last #s I could find) without Will County is 7,684,000. Will is 632K. IDOT D3 is 614K.

So?  Per Google, Kane County's population is only 523,643.  McHenry County only has 301,409.  Why is Will County more worthy of being sent to another IDOT district than those counties?

Quote from: dzlsabe on November 03, 2015, 11:56:29 AMThen D1 will be able to focus on the dozens and dozens of more worthy projects that are needed where the overwhelming majority of people live, instead of sponging precious funds and time on these two very rural distractions that affect very few people.

Let's take this one step farther and stop funding the roads the roads in the "rural distractions" that bring goods into Chicago, and see how well Chicago does then.

So thats 15 -30 VPM on the worst hours ever. Thats barely traveled. You could land and fly a plane on I-72 at night.

Kane Co has I-90 going thru it. Mchenry has the straightest rail Ive seen going all the way to Janesville, Madison and beyond. METRA could do well with a few trains a day going to and fro Ohare.

Will in D3 would double its scope (what do those people do all day?) If Willco wasnt defunding D1s funds what would we do? Have a party?

Quote from: Revive 755 on November 03, 2015, 08:43:07 PM

Quote from: dzlsabe on November 03, 2015, 11:56:29 AMI-72 is the poster child for NOT traveled.

An ADT of 14,000 is not traveled?

Quote from: dzlsabe on November 03, 2015, 11:56:29 AMIts simple. The population of IDOT D1 (last #s I could find) without Will County is 7,684,000. Will is 632K. IDOT D3 is 614K.

So?  Per Google, Kane County's population is only 523,643.  McHenry County only has 301,409.  Why is Will County more worthy of being sent to another IDOT district than those counties?

Quote from: dzlsabe on November 03, 2015, 11:56:29 AMThen D1 will be able to focus on the dozens and dozens of more worthy projects that are needed where the overwhelming majority of people live, instead of sponging precious funds and time on these two very rural distractions that affect very few people.

Let's take this one step farther and stop funding the roads the roads in the "rural distractions" that bring goods into Chicago, and see how well Chicago does then.

He's a myopic twit.

Will County can live without Chicago,  Chicago cannot live without Will County.

We produce their electricity: Dresden and Braidwood nuclear power plants are here.  There are none in Cook County.

We produce their fuel.  Both ExxonMobil and Citgo are here.  The other is in Lake County, Indiana.  Cook County has no refining capacity.

We connect them to the Mississippi River.

We also have the two largest intermodal yards in the region.

Yet, we get ignored by D1 and told we should be in D3.

What the hell is the Hypotenuse Expressway, and could someone draw a map of where it would go? I never heard of such a proposal before.

Quote from: Henry on November 04, 2015, 10:40:19 AM
What the hell is the Hypotenuse Expressway, and could someone draw a map of where it would go? I never heard of such a proposal before.

I think that is here:  https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=10605.25  .  Probably should be in fictional...

Will there ever be an expressway in the Illiana Corridor? Or will it only be built in Fictional Highways?

Quote from: The Ghostbuster on November 04, 2015, 03:00:18 PM
Will there ever be an expressway in the Illiana Corridor? Or will it only be built in Fictional Highways?

Depends.  If Rahm Emmanuel has his way, no.  (That's the only reason CMAP rejected it - filled with Rahm's lackeys.)  If Will County has its way, yes.  And yes, I have picked sides (see my location as to why).

Quote from: dzlsabe on November 04, 2015, 12:51:01 AM

Quote from: Revive 755 on November 03, 2015, 08:43:07 PM

Quote from: dzlsabe on November 03, 2015, 11:56:29 AMI-72 is the poster child for NOT traveled.

An ADT of 14,000 is not traveled?

Quote from: dzlsabe on November 03, 2015, 11:56:29 AMIts simple. The population of IDOT D1 (last #s I could find) without Will County is 7,684,000. Will is 632K. IDOT D3 is 614K.

So?  Per Google, Kane County's population is only 523,643.  McHenry County only has 301,409.  Why is Will County more worthy of being sent to another IDOT district than those counties?

Quote from: dzlsabe on November 03, 2015, 11:56:29 AMThen D1 will be able to focus on the dozens and dozens of more worthy projects that are needed where the overwhelming majority of people live, instead of sponging precious funds and time on these two very rural distractions that affect very few people.

Let's take this one step farther and stop funding the roads the roads in the "rural distractions" that bring goods into Chicago, and see how well Chicago does then.

So thats 15 -30 VPM on the worst hours ever. Thats barely traveled. You could land and fly a plane on I-72 at night.

You could say that to any rural interstate in Illinois except I-55 and I-90...

Quote from: dzlsabe on November 04, 2015, 12:51:01 AM
Kane Co has I-90 going thru it. Mchenry has the straightest rail Ive seen going all the way to Janesville, Madison and beyond.

Using that logic, Will County should remain part of D1 since it has I-80 (major crossing country intestate and I-55 (major trucking corridor between Los Angeles and Chicagoland), both of which have much higher truck counts than I-90.  Additionally, Will County contains the BNSF transcon line, much more important the UP line through McHenry County (which doesn't even make it onto maps of major rail lines and only sees three freights per day per the ICC).

---

Quote from: The Ghostbuster on November 04, 2015, 03:00:18 PM
Will there ever be an expressway in the Illiana Corridor? Or will it only be built in Fictional Highways?

Depending what the county does, you could see an expressway as defined by downstate standards - four lanes divided with at grade access allowed, maybe a traffic signal or two at the some of the major cross roads.

Quote from: ET21 on November 04, 2015, 05:35:17 PM

Quote from: dzlsabe on November 04, 2015, 12:51:01 AM

Quote from: Revive 755 on November 03, 2015, 08:43:07 PM

Quote from: dzlsabe on November 03, 2015, 11:56:29 AMI-72 is the poster child for NOT traveled.

An ADT of 14,000 is not traveled?

Quote from: dzlsabe on November 03, 2015, 11:56:29 AMIts simple. The population of IDOT D1 (last #s I could find) without Will County is 7,684,000. Will is 632K. IDOT D3 is 614K.

So?  Per Google, Kane County's population is only 523,643.  McHenry County only has 301,409.  Why is Will County more worthy of being sent to another IDOT district than those counties?

Quote from: dzlsabe on November 03, 2015, 11:56:29 AMThen D1 will be able to focus on the dozens and dozens of more worthy projects that are needed where the overwhelming majority of people live, instead of sponging precious funds and time on these two very rural distractions that affect very few people.

Let's take this one step farther and stop funding the roads the roads in the "rural distractions" that bring goods into Chicago, and see how well Chicago does then.

So thats 15 -30 VPM on the worst hours ever. Thats barely traveled. You could land and fly a plane on I-72 at night.

You could say that to any rural interstate in Illinois except I-55 and I-90...

I dare you to do it on I-80 as well, LOL!  :-D

Quote from: Brandon on November 04, 2015, 04:23:13 PM

Quote from: The Ghostbuster on November 04, 2015, 03:00:18 PM
Will there ever be an expressway in the Illiana Corridor? Or will it only be built in Fictional Highways?

Depends.  If Rahm Emmanuel has his way, no.  (That's the only reason CMAP rejected it - filled with Rahm's lackeys.)  If Will County has its way, yes.  And yes, I have picked sides (see my location as to why).

Theres loads of reasons it was rejected. Start with low traffic count and NO tollway funders (who basically like EVERY tollway project ever, but not this ONE). Then theres putting every other project in D1 on hold to finance(and the huge possibility of holding the bag forever) this downstate turkey.

Get Willco into D3 and there may be an icebergs chance in hell. As long as theyre in D1...NO WAY!

Quote from: dzlsabe on November 05, 2015, 12:05:02 PM

Quote from: Brandon on November 04, 2015, 04:23:13 PM

Quote from: The Ghostbuster on November 04, 2015, 03:00:18 PM
Will there ever be an expressway in the Illiana Corridor? Or will it only be built in Fictional Highways?

Depends.  If Rahm Emmanuel has his way, no.  (That's the only reason CMAP rejected it - filled with Rahm's lackeys.)  If Will County has its way, yes.  And yes, I have picked sides (see my location as to why).

Theres loads of reasons it was rejected. Start with low traffic count and NO tollway funders (who basically like EVERY tollway project ever, but not this ONE). Then theres putting every other project in D1 on hold to finance(and huge possibility of holding the bag forever) this downstate turkey.

Get Willco into D3 and there may be an icebergs chance in hell. As long as theyre in D3...NO WAY!

Um, we're not downstate, dipwad.  The ONLY reason it got rejected by CMAP was that Rahm's people were on the board.  Read the actual stories about it instead of holing up in Crook County.

Quote from: dcharlie on November 04, 2015, 11:21:59 AM

Quote from: Henry on November 04, 2015, 10:40:19 AM
What the hell is the Hypotenuse Expressway, and could someone draw a map of where it would go? I never heard of such a proposal before.

I just saw that, and that has to be the craziest thing I've ever heard of!
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi58.tinypic.com%2Fkao3ko.png&hash=3b71dcfdf4eae29740536594869086af25db3953)


I think that is here:  https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=10605.25  .  Probably should be in fictional...

Quote from: Brandon on November 04, 2015, 07:25:40 PM

Quote from: ET21 on November 04, 2015, 05:35:17 PM

Quote from: dzlsabe on November 04, 2015, 12:51:01 AM

Quote from: Revive 755 on November 03, 2015, 08:43:07 PM

Quote from: dzlsabe on November 03, 2015, 11:56:29 AMI-72 is the poster child for NOT traveled.

An ADT of 14,000 is not traveled?

Quote from: dzlsabe on November 03, 2015, 11:56:29 AMIts simple. The population of IDOT D1 (last #s I could find) without Will County is 7,684,000. Will is 632K. IDOT D3 is 614K.

So?  Per Google, Kane County's population is only 523,643.  McHenry County only has 301,409.  Why is Will County more worthy of being sent to another IDOT district than those counties?

Quote from: dzlsabe on November 03, 2015, 11:56:29 AMThen D1 will be able to focus on the dozens and dozens of more worthy projects that are needed where the overwhelming majority of people live, instead of sponging precious funds and time on these two very rural distractions that affect very few people.

Let's take this one step farther and stop funding the roads the roads in the "rural distractions" that bring goods into Chicago, and see how well Chicago does then.

So thats 15 -30 VPM on the worst hours ever. Thats barely traveled. You could land and fly a plane on I-72 at night.

You could say that to any rural interstate in Illinois except I-55 and I-90...

I dare you to do it on I-80 as well, LOL!  :-D

No see you try and land on the moving trucks. Bonus points if it's auto-carriers or wide loads  :) :)

If the Illiana Corridor is constructed, will it have a highway designation added? Or will it just be signed as Illiana Expressway?

Quote from: The Ghostbuster on November 05, 2015, 04:39:46 PM
If the Illiana Corridor is constructed, will it have a highway designation added? Or will it just be signed as Illiana Expressway?

No idea as of yet, but it could be either I- or IL/IN- x55/x57/x65, judging from past such roads: IL-394, IL-390, IN-469 (prior to becoming an interstate).

i always thought it would be X55

Quote from: Henry on November 05, 2015, 12:15:26 PM

Quote from: dcharlie on November 04, 2015, 11:21:59 AM

Quote from: Henry on November 04, 2015, 10:40:19 AM
What the hell is the Hypotenuse Expressway, and could someone draw a map of where it would go? I never heard of such a proposal before.

I just saw that, and that has to be the craziest thing I've ever heard of!
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi58.tinypic.com%2Fkao3ko.png&hash=3b71dcfdf4eae29740536594869086af25db3953)


I think that is here:  https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=10605.25  .  Probably should be in fictional...

This is such a stupid "hypothetical" highway.

If you're going west on 90 to get to 294, why not just take 80 to 294 north to begin with? Most commuters are going towards the direction of downtown in the first place and the only people who would be heading in that direction (this hypothetical highway) would be travellers or trucks.

Quote from: Brandon on November 05, 2015, 05:23:53 PM

Quote from: The Ghostbuster on November 05, 2015, 04:39:46 PM
If the Illiana Corridor is constructed, will it have a highway designation added? Or will it just be signed as Illiana Expressway?

No idea as of yet, but it could be either I- or IL/IN- x55/x57/x65, judging from past such roads: IL-394, IL-390, IN-469 (prior to becoming an interstate).

More like TOLL IL/IN- x55/x57/x65 and the local news / bill broads will call it I-x55/x57/x65

Extend it back to I-80 on each end and it could easily be an I-x80.

Quote from: johndoe780 on November 05, 2015, 08:53:53 PM

Quote from: Henry on November 05, 2015, 12:15:26 PM

Quote from: dcharlie on November 04, 2015, 11:21:59 AM

Quote from: Henry on November 04, 2015, 10:40:19 AM
What the hell is the Hypotenuse Expressway, and could someone draw a map of where it would go? I never heard of such a proposal before.

I just saw that, and that has to be the craziest thing I've ever heard of!
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi58.tinypic.com%2Fkao3ko.png&hash=3b71dcfdf4eae29740536594869086af25db3953)


I think that is here:  https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=10605.25  .  Probably should be in fictional...

This is such a stupid "hypothetical" highway.

If you're going west on 90 to get to 294, why not just take 80 to 294 north to begin with? Most commuters are going towards the direction of downtown in the first place and the only people who would be heading in that direction (this hypothetical highway) would be travellers or trucks.

Stupid, crazy? Most commuters going downtown? Ah,NO? "The only people that would use it are travelers and trucks" (and trains trying to get thru Chicago in an hour). Yeah? That would be horrible? Heres the MAP  http://imgur.com/u9L0fFx Got one word for you. HYPOTENUSE (now in Fictional). Pythagoras rolls in his grave. We deny Euclidian geometry at our misery and peril. :banghead:



Illiana would be I-480. Good luck wit dat.

Quote from: dzlsabe on November 06, 2015, 02:26:12 AM

Sorry about the map. It was modified by someone that was comprehensionally-challenged.

Ouch, dude. Ouch.

This hypotenuse idea is just dumb. It would cost so much money to build and I-294 already does its job. A lot of truckers and cars go through downtown Chicago on I-94 that want to avoid tolls like me. There is no missing link in Chicago. Chicago is Chicago. It will continue to grow and unfortunately I-294 is the best bypass Chicago will ever have since it rests on Lake Michigan. IDOT (and INDOT) is better off just upgrading their existing interstates when they need widened.

Quote from: CtrlAltDel on November 06, 2015, 04:42:12 AM

Quote from: dzlsabe on November 06, 2015, 02:26:12 AM

Sorry about the map. It was modified by someone that was comprehensionally-challenged.

Ouch, dude. Ouch.

Sorry - you must not have realized that he's the smartest guy here. Just wait, he'll tell you.

The old Crosstown Expressway was proposed to much the same thing as the hypotenose drawing, although using a less direct routing.  It never got built.  I don't see it getting built now.

Quote from: RoadWarrior56 on November 06, 2015, 10:12:39 AM
The old Crosstown Expressway was proposed to much the same thing as the hypotenose drawing, although using a less direct routing.  It never got built.  I don't see it getting built now.

I imagine it would've been something like this?
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.scribblemaps.com%2Fapi%2Fmaps%2Fimages%2F450%2F450%2FYZxAObNwoj.png&hash=9e7ccc980cf2f9b9da5086687844a85d73535949)

Quote from: Henry on November 06, 2015, 01:11:06 PM

Quote from: RoadWarrior56 on November 06, 2015, 10:12:39 AM
The old Crosstown Expressway was proposed to much the same thing as the hypotenose drawing, although using a less direct routing.  It never got built.  I don't see it getting built now.

I imagine it would've been something like this?
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.scribblemaps.com%2Fapi%2Fmaps%2Fimages%2F450%2F450%2FYZxAObNwoj.png&hash=9e7ccc980cf2f9b9da5086687844a85d73535949)

Look closely. The 16 mile hypotenuse is a much better plan. Shorter, minimal destruction of neighborhoods, dosent parallel existing roads. Would also give RRs a quicker way thru town. Isnt an engineering near impossibility. Finishing I-90 makes way more sense than I-494 ever did or will. 

Heres the MAP  http://imgur.com/u9L0fFx   also see Hypotenuse in Fictional.

Quote from: dzlsabe on November 06, 2015, 05:26:27 PM

Quote from: Henry on November 06, 2015, 01:11:06 PM

Quote from: RoadWarrior56 on November 06, 2015, 10:12:39 AM
The old Crosstown Expressway was proposed to much the same thing as the hypotenose drawing, although using a less direct routing.  It never got built.  I don't see it getting built now.

I imagine it would've been something like this?
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.scribblemaps.com%2Fapi%2Fmaps%2Fimages%2F450%2F450%2FYZxAObNwoj.png&hash=9e7ccc980cf2f9b9da5086687844a85d73535949)

Look closely. The 16 mile hypotenuse is a much better plan. Shorter, minimal destruction of neighborhoods, dosent parallel existing roads. Would also give RRs a quicker way thru town. Isnt an engineering near impossibility. Finishing I-90 makes way more sense than I-494 ever did or will.

Hmm...

IL 50 is literally inches away from the road.
I-355 anyone?
South Side section is pointless. End it at I-55.

Quote from: Henry on November 05, 2015, 12:15:26 PM

Quote from: dcharlie on November 04, 2015, 11:21:59 AM

Quote from: Henry on November 04, 2015, 10:40:19 AM
What the hell is the Hypotenuse Expressway, and could someone draw a map of where it would go? I never heard of such a proposal before.

I just saw that, and that has to be the craziest thing I've ever heard of!
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi58.tinypic.com%2Fkao3ko.png&hash=3b71dcfdf4eae29740536594869086af25db3953)


I think that is here:  https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=10605.25  .  Probably should be in fictional...


Or this??  Heres the MAP  http://imgur.com/u9L0fFx  Hypotenuse now in fictional.

Quote from: GeekJedi on November 06, 2015, 08:55:51 AM

Quote from: CtrlAltDel on November 06, 2015, 04:42:12 AM

Quote from: dzlsabe on November 06, 2015, 02:26:12 AM

Sorry about the map. It was modified by someone that was comprehensionally-challenged.

Ouch, dude. Ouch.

Sorry - you must not have realized that he's the smartest guy here. Just wait, he'll tell you.

Dont have to be smart.
Just a map, basic geometry and path finding skills should do it. And read the Tribune Aug 26. http://www.cmap.illinois.gov/documents/10180/359519/2015-08-26-Chicago-traffic-among-worst-Chicago-Tribune.pdf/5338ec11-819c-4dda-a25e-a24593238775

Heres the MAP  http://imgur.com/u9L0fFx :hmmm: Hypotenuse in Fictional 2D

Quote from: noelbotevera on November 06, 2015, 06:00:26 PM
South Side section is pointless. End it at I-55.

It's not an adequate bypass for the Circle without reconnecting to I-94.  The section south of I-55 also provides better access to Midway.

---

Quote from: dzlsabe on November 06, 2015, 05:26:27 PM
[Look closely. The 16 mile hypotenuse is a much better plan. Shorter, minimal destruction of neighborhoods, dosent parallel existing roads.

Which means it would be rather destructive to the neighboorhoods south of I-55, ensuring that it would never be built.

Quote from: dzlsabe on November 06, 2015, 05:26:27 PMIsnt an engineering near impossibility.

This statement has yet to be adequately justified.  The original Circle Interchange managed to be built, so there's no reason the Crosstown could not be built.

[qquote author=dzlsabe link=topic=6135.msg2104210#msg2104210 date=1446848787]Finishing I-90 makes way more sense than I-494 ever did or will.[/quote]

Other than widening, modifying interchanges, and maybe a few minor geometric changes,  I-90 is finished in Chicagoland.

Quote from: dzlsabeJust a map, basic geometry and path finding skills should do it.

Takes a lot more than these to locate and design a freeway through a major urban area.

It all starts with a concept.

The only "neighborhood" south of the I-55 portion is the stretch just north of 59th from Damen to Halsted and then SE to the Skyway. And its been "destructed" for FIFTY+ years? Cicero Av. moves pretty well north of 55 past the Ike. Theres no need to go north from that point (I-55 & Cicero). There is a need to go NW to the Strangler. And I-90 isnt really "finished" if its conjoined with I-94 from the Skyway to the Edens. The Kennedy from Edens to Schaumburg would be renamed I-92, the answer to a question nobodies asked yet.

Quote from: dzlsabe on November 06, 2015, 11:14:30 PM
It all starts with a concept.

The only "neighborhood" south of the I-55 portion is the stretch just north of 59th from Damen to Halsted and then SE to the Skyway. And its been "destructed" for FIFTY+ years? Cicero Av. moves pretty well north of 55 past the Ike. Theres no need to go north from that point (I-55 & Cicero). There is a need to go NW to the Strangler. And I-90 isnt really "finished" if its conjoined with I-94 from the Skyway to the Edens. The Kennedy from Edens to Schaumburg would be renamed I-92, the answer to a question nobodies asked yet.

Kennedy designation goes from the Circle to O'Hare via I-190/90 FYI

How did a topic about the Illiana go to renaming an interstate to I-92????

How did Illiana progress as far as it did with such low potential traffic numbers in a very rural area on the fringe of D1 and complete lack of any tollway funding schemes?

Quote from: dzlsabe on November 06, 2015, 11:14:30 PM
It all starts with a concept.

The only "neighborhood" south of the I-55 portion is the stretch just north of 59th from Damen to Halsted and then SE to the Skyway. And its been "destructed" for FIFTY+ years?

"Destructed" is not the same as uninhabited.

Quote from: dzlsabe on November 06, 2015, 11:14:30 PMCicero Av. moves pretty well north of 55 past the Ike. Theres no need to go north from that point (I-55 & Cicero).

If 30 miles per hour and having to stop for many stoplights can be considered "moving well."

Quote from: dzlsabe on November 06, 2015, 11:14:30 PMTheres no need to go north from that point (I-55 & Cicero).

Unless one is trying to go to a destination north of I-290 (O'Hare, Evanston, Skokie).

Quote from: dzlsabe on November 06, 2015, 11:14:30 PMThere is a need to go NW to the Strangler.

This movement is already served by I-294.

Quote from: dzlsabe on November 06, 2015, 11:14:30 PMAnd I-90 isnt really "finished" if its conjoined with I-94 from the Skyway to the Edens.

So I-90 ain't finished between Rockford and Tomah either, then?  Myabe we should also work on the "unfinished" sections of I-80 too, such as from I-294 to Elyria, OH.

Quote from: dzlsabe on November 06, 2015, 11:14:30 PMThe Kennedy from Edens to Schaumburg would be renamed I-92, the answer to a question nobodies asked yet.

Which is way way too short for a two digit route, as well as putting a mainline interstate through two extremely overloaded ramps in Schaumburg

Quote from: Revive 755 on November 07, 2015, 11:55:24 AM

Quote from: dzlsabe on November 06, 2015, 11:14:30 PM
It all starts with a concept.

The only "neighborhood" south of the I-55 portion is the stretch just north of 59th from Damen to Halsted and then SE to the Skyway. And its been "destructed" for FIFTY+ years?

"Destructed" is not the same as uninhabited.  Thats why I said destructed, although uninhabited is close. And thats the only residential on the south portion. The rest is above RR ROW. 

Quote from: dzlsabe on November 06, 2015, 11:14:30 PMCicero Av. moves pretty well north of 55 past the Ike. Theres no need to go north from that point (I-55 & Cicero).

If 30 miles per hour and having to stop for many stoplights can be considered "moving well."
It moves pretty well. There really arent that many lights. Im certainly behind a CTA transit line on Kenton, from Midway (and maybe south and west) to JeffPark (and maybe NE to Evanston)

Quote from: dzlsabe on November 06, 2015, 11:14:30 PMTheres no need to go north from that point (I-55 & Cicero).

Unless one is trying to go to a destination north of I-290 (O'Hare, Evanston, Skokie).
Ohare and Evanston/Skokie are in two different directions. The north part of Crosstown has huge neighborhood opposition with good reason. It wouldnt be a Tollway (or PPP), hence it would never get funding. And if the Kennedy moved better, there would be no need.

Quote from: dzlsabe on November 06, 2015, 11:14:30 PMThere is a need to go NW to the Strangler.

This movement is already served by I-294. From I-55 & Cicero? Not really.

Quote from: dzlsabe on November 06, 2015, 11:14:30 PMAnd I-90 isnt really "finished" if its conjoined with I-94 from the Skyway to the Edens.

So I-90 ain't finished between Rockford and Tomah either, then?  Myabe we should also work on the "unfinished" sections of I-80 too, such as from I-294 to Elyria, OH.

Lets just stick to an easy 16-mile Tollway project that might actually get funded (PPP) and pay off someday. Tomah? A METRA train that went from Ohare to Madison to Eau Claire to MSP in four hours would "bypass" that.

Quote from: dzlsabe on November 06, 2015, 11:14:30 PMThe Kennedy from Edens to Schaumburg would be renamed I-92, the answer to a question nobodies asked yet.

Which is way way too short for a two digit route, as well as putting a mainline interstate through two extremely overloaded ramps in Schaumburg

Schaumburg needs new ramps. I dont think theres any required minimum distance for a two-digit. Think I-12 NOLA.

Quote from: dzlsabe on November 07, 2015, 05:01:01 PM
Schaumburg needs new ramps. I dont think theres any required minimum distance.

That's a no brainer.  However, it will take the coordination of both IDOT and ISTHA to do it.  Ideally, it should be a four-level stack, IMHO.

Quote from: dzlsabe on November 07, 2015, 10:53:07 AM
How did Illiana progress as far as it did with such low potential traffic numbers in a very rural area on the fringe of D1 and complete lack of any tollway funding schemes?

Because, as stated plenty of times already, the Illiana was/is (depending on the budget battle and House vote) to serve the expanding intermodal yards to the south, relieving traffic off of I-80, and potentially help to serve a possible airport in Peotone.

Quote from: ET21 on November 07, 2015, 08:44:29 PM

Quote from: dzlsabe on November 07, 2015, 10:53:07 AM
How did Illiana progress as far as it did with such low potential traffic numbers in a very rural area on the fringe of D1 and complete lack of any tollway funding schemes?

Because, as stated plenty of times already, the Illiana was/is (depending on the budget battle and House vote) to serve the expanding intermodal yards to the south, relieving traffic off of I-80, and potentially help to serve a possible airport in Peotone.

No offense sir, but that will never happen in IDOT D1. And I will show up to every meeting to throw my two cents and many others will as well. Your only hope for either of those projects to succeed is to get Willco into D3.

I would take a step back consider some realities. A hypotenuse-type highway might be a good solution if funding were no object (not true especially in Illinois), the citizens in the areas/neighborhoods where it would pass through supported it, and it would significantly reduce congestion on other highways. I don't think any of those three things are true.

As for the Illiana, some people complain about NIMBYism, but I think the truth of the matter is for any project to get the broad support it needs, you need to consider all parties' "what is in it for me" (WIIFM)? As has been stated numerous times, it should help trucks travelling to and from the intermodal facilities in western Will County as long as the tolls are affordable. So a big WIIFM there is that the new highway would give a competitive advantage to businesses that comprise a strategic and growing part of my county's tax base. It might reduce taxes and raise home values for citizens in that area. After that, the benefits become less clear. The south suburbs really have shown little, if any, growth in decades. What types of business might locate along the new highway? Warehouses and distribution centers, probably, but just a few miles down the road in Indiana, taxes are significantly lower. So if I were a resident of the south suburbs which are in Will County, but far away from the intermodal yards, I would not really see much in it for me unless I happened to frequently travel to central Indiana or west on I-80 west of Joliet.

On the Indiana side, I am really mystified as to why the State of Indiana would support it. My only thought is that they have been pretty scrupulous about investing in all areas of the state so they really wanted a major highway project in NW Indiana. The way I see it is if the highway gets sufficient traffic, the types of businesses that would build along the highway would most likely not be super-desirable: some warehouses, DCs, truck stops, and service businesses. It is doubtful that office parks and corporate buildings would ever locate along the highway, and no one wants another Borman going through their area. Secondly, the highway is so far south of the areas of Northwest Indiana that are populated that it really provides almost no relief to the congestion on highways like US 30. Thirdly, if the traffic volumes turn out to be lower than the projections, very few businesses would locate along the route and most importantly, the state would be on the hook for a big bailout. It would be the anti-Major Moves that would negatively affect highway investment all over the state.

So I only see a good WIIFM for only a small area - western Will County. I would like to understand the WIIFM for the Chicago region, the south suburbs, NW Indiana, the State of Illinois, and the State of Indiana. I think that is why we see so few people supporting this project and why it was so easy for Gov. Rauner to cut it so quickly.

If the project is revived again, someone needs to consider getting a broad base of support and clearly describe why this project deserves funding over other potential ones in the region. Not that I agree with the boondoggle of all of I-69 in places like Mississippi, Arkansas, and three legs in south Texas, but when Indiana wanted to extend it south of Indy, they worked hard to line up support across many states. They created (a somewhat bogus) narrative of a NAFTA highway. But at least states understood they would be supporting a major new highway that could give them a competitive advantage in a global economy. I have never read any compelling case put forth for the Illiana for the routing that was selected. All I read was that the farmers and other opponents are a bunch of NIMBYs. That type of response will not change any minds to build support for the project. Because there was no clear WIIFM for all stakeholders, it was an easy target.

Quote from: dzlsabe on November 06, 2015, 06:17:24 PM

Quote from: GeekJedi on November 06, 2015, 08:55:51 AM

Quote from: CtrlAltDel on November 06, 2015, 04:42:12 AM

Quote from: dzlsabe on November 06, 2015, 02:26:12 AM

Sorry about the map. It was modified by someone that was comprehensionally-challenged.

Ouch, dude. Ouch.

Sorry - you must not have realized that he's the smartest guy here. Just wait, he'll tell you.

Dont have to be smart.
Just a map, basic geometry and path finding skills should do it. And read the Tribune Aug 26. http://www.cmap.illinois.gov/documents/10180/359519/2015-08-26-Chicago-traffic-among-worst-Chicago-Tribune.pdf/5338ec11-819c-4dda-a25e-a24593238775

Why isn't this in Fictional Highways?

It is. See Hypotenuse in Fictional. But it is a CHOICE of doing Illiana that affects 1K vehicles a day, or Hypo that would affect tens of thousands a day.  Heres the MAP  http://imgur.com/u9L0fFx

^ The math on that 1K figure needs checking, particularly the next time a crash shuts down the Borman or I-80 through Joliet.

Quote from: Revive 755 on November 10, 2015, 09:25:29 PM
^ The math on that 1K figure needs checking, particularly the next time a crash shuts down the Borman or I-80 through Joliet.

Like last night when there was an accident at 183rd Street.  Traffic was backed up to New Lenox eastbound and onto the Tri-State westbound.  I-80 is extremely busy, and full of trucks.

http://www.gettingaroundillinois.com/gai.htm?mt=aadt

People have seemed to forget what got the Illiana started.

When the newly reconstructed 80/94 got its first first rain, it flooded out around Indianapolis
Blvd. INDOT closed the interstate, funneling traffic to US 30 to the south and the Toll Road to the north. They even removed the tolls!

Traffic on US 30 was a mess! The toll road was losing more money due to no income.

Thus the Illiana!

Quote from: 2trailertrucker on November 11, 2015, 05:20:56 PM
People have seemed to forget what got the Illiana started.

When the newly reconstructed 80/94 got its first first rain, it flooded out around Indianapolis
Blvd. INDOT closed the interstate, funneling traffic to US 30 to the south and the Toll Road to the north. They even removed the tolls!

Traffic on US 30 was a mess! The toll road was losing more money due to no income.

Thus the Illiana!

Hence the need for an alternate to I-80.

Quote from: 2trailertrucker on November 11, 2015, 05:20:56 PM
People have seemed to forget what got the Illiana started.

When the newly reconstructed 80/94 got its first first rain, it flooded out around Indianapolis
Blvd. INDOT closed the interstate, funneling traffic to US 30 to the south and the Toll Road to the north. They even removed the tolls!

Traffic on US 30 was a mess! The toll road was losing more money due to no income.

Thus the Illiana!

That happened once and would not justify a $1B+ highway. With a better routing, there would have been much more support.

Quote from: mukade on November 11, 2015, 06:50:05 PM

Quote from: 2trailertrucker on November 11, 2015, 05:20:56 PM
People have seemed to forget what got the Illiana started.

When the newly reconstructed 80/94 got its first first rain, it flooded out around Indianapolis
Blvd. INDOT closed the interstate, funneling traffic to US 30 to the south and the Toll Road to the north. They even removed the tolls!

Traffic on US 30 was a mess! The toll road was losing more money due to no income.

Thus the Illiana!

That happened once and would not justify a $1B+ highway. With a better routing, there would have been much more support.

The routing was fine, and it had plenty of support.

Quote from: Brandon on November 11, 2015, 06:58:50 PM

Quote from: mukade on November 11, 2015, 06:50:05 PM

Quote from: 2trailertrucker on November 11, 2015, 05:20:56 PM
People have seemed to forget what got the Illiana started.

When the newly reconstructed 80/94 got its first first rain, it flooded out around Indianapolis
Blvd. INDOT closed the interstate, funneling traffic to US 30 to the south and the Toll Road to the north. They even removed the tolls!

Traffic on US 30 was a mess! The toll road was losing more money due to no income.

Thus the Illiana!

That happened once and would not justify a $1B+ highway. With a better routing, there would have been much more support.

The routing was fine, and it had plenty of support.

Even if the amount of support for the route was 50%, that would not be fine, but it was not at 50%. You need broad support.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illiana_Expressway (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illiana_Expressway)

Believe me, I wanted the highway back when the routing made sense, but the final routing was a joke.

Something needs to be done so non-Chicago bound traffic can bypass the I-80/90/94 bottleneck around the south side of the lake. I went from Champaign to Lansing one Friday Afternoon and had no idea that stretch was stop and go from the Tri-State Junction all the way to around mile marker 26 in Indiana, what should have taken 30 minutes took nearly 2 hours. I was so pissed, had I known I'd have taken US 24 across Indiana like I did next time. The Illinana as proposed does not fit that need, What is needed is an I-480 from Morris to South Bend completely bypassing the region.

Quote from: captkirk_4 on November 26, 2015, 11:38:44 AM
Something needs to be done so non-Chicago bound traffic can bypass the I-80/90/94 bottleneck around the south side of the lake. I went from Champaign to Lansing one Friday Afternoon and had no idea that stretch was stop and go from the Tri-State Junction all the way to around mile marker 26 in Indiana, what should have taken 30 minutes took nearly 2 hours. I was so pissed, had I known I'd have taken US 24 across Indiana like I did next time. The Illinana as proposed does not fit that need, What is needed is an I-480 from Morris to South Bend completely bypassing the region.

The two week dead zombie is ALIVE. :-D

So youre sayin' the bypasses, Is-294 and 355 that bypass the city and dump into I-80 are not having the desired effect??? :confused:

Maybe we should consider bypassing the bypasses and get some more traffic on an extended, completed I-90? Which isnt actually a part of the "free, non-tolled" I80/94 bottleneck you cite. And kill a bunch of huge, zombie pteradactyls with one gigantic, 16-mile hunk of concrete. Forever.

How many think, like I do, that this road will never be constructed. I may be wrong, but I doubt it.

This project is all on Illinois, Indiana doesn't give a crap, I don't think they are really pushing for it like Illinois.  In a perfect world, east of 65 it would follow us 30 all the way to i-69

This project, which should be moved to Fictional, is actually all on IDOT D1. And Ill bet theyve had enough of it after wasting TENS of millions over the past decade. It was pushed by former Gov. Quinn and his former IDOT chief to curry favor with Willco voters and try and put some lipstick on the other downstate turkey, Peotone International.

Thankfully, CMAP, D1 and Gov. Rauner saw thru this farce which would have sponged precious funds (from the rest of D1) to the betterment of MAYBE a few thousand people in very rural southern Willco and Indiana, the detriment of all the rest of D1, with dozens and dozens of more worthy projects that would affect tens of thousands, maybe more, daily. 

No, it shouldn't be moved to "Fictional." If anything, label it "Historical." Ideas involving the Illiana Corridor date back to 1909. It still has validity as part of an overall bypass to serve the southern part of the larger Chicago Metropolitan Area AND for long-haul truck traffic.

Odd that one feels Indiana "doesn't give a crap" since the most recently feasibility study was done in 2009 - by Indiana.

Did someone mention it should be moved to fictional? Hardly. It seems to have more lives than a cat.

Fictional = a highway that hasn't or will likely not ever be planned (or exist) that was simply created in the mind of the poster.
Illiana = An actual project, proposed and planned, though added and removed from "active" status many, many times.

I agree that someday, in thirty years or so, Illiana may need another look.

But ya build this for the right reasons, not because the traffic or the gang violence or whatever in a handful of zip codes make "that giant, sucking asshole called Chicago" a Chernobyl to avoid. You build it because the whole metro is firing on ALL cylinders and naturally growing. Has its finances in order.

In 1909, or 1940 for that matter, nobody really anticipated the explosive growth of Chicago, the west, NW, even north suburbs and Ohare. Weve tried the bypasses and they will continue to bypass, the real problem! Theres only one thing I see that can possibly help to resolve a whole bunch of those problems in ten years without making the existing calamities even worse. Its taken fifty, sixty years to dig ourselves into this mess.

Quote from: dzlsabe on November 27, 2015, 03:01:35 PM
It was pushed by former Gov. Quinn and his former IDOT chief to curry favor with Willco voters and try and put some lipstick on the other downstate turkey, Peotone International.

Damn, are you full of shit.  The Illiana, in it's current form as a proposal, was pushed by the Will County Board and Will County County Executive, not by Quinn or by IDOT.  The extension from I-57 to I-55 was completely, 100% the Will County government's idea.  And it was pushed, not for the possible Peotone Airport, but for the expanding intermodal centers (the largest in the six county area, I might add) and the truck traffic they pour onto I-80 and adjoining roads.

But, never mind, you're so Chicago-centric and provincial, it won't matter what anyone says.

Quote from: Brandon on November 27, 2015, 05:07:44 PM

Quote from: dzlsabe on November 27, 2015, 03:01:35 PM
It was pushed by former Gov. Quinn and his former IDOT chief to curry favor with Willco voters and try and put some lipstick on the other downstate turkey, Peotone International.

Damn, are you full of shit.  The Illiana, in it's current form as a proposal, was pushed by the Will County Board and Will County County Executive, not by Quinn or by IDOT.  The extension from I-57 to I-55 was completely, 100% the Will County government's idea.  And it was pushed, not for the possible Peotone Airport, but for the expanding intermodal centers (the largest in the six county area, I might add) and the truck traffic they pour onto I-80 and adjoining roads.

But, never mind, you're so Chicago-centric and provincial, it won't matter what anyone says.

OK, it was pushed by Willco Board and executive, too. Who are Willco-centric. And embraced by Quinn, one of the many reasons he lost the election.

Im not "Chicago-centric", Im Chicagoland-centric. And theres priorities involved and very few north of 159th think Illiana  is even in the top fifty.

Quote from: dzlsabe on November 27, 2015, 05:35:24 PM

Quote from: Brandon on November 27, 2015, 05:07:44 PM

Quote from: dzlsabe on November 27, 2015, 03:01:35 PM
It was pushed by former Gov. Quinn and his former IDOT chief to curry favor with Willco voters and try and put some lipstick on the other downstate turkey, Peotone International.

Damn, are you full of shit.  The Illiana, in it's current form as a proposal, was pushed by the Will County Board and Will County County Executive, not by Quinn or by IDOT.  The extension from I-57 to I-55 was completely, 100% the Will County government's idea.  And it was pushed, not for the possible Peotone Airport, but for the expanding intermodal centers (the largest in the six county area, I might add) and the truck traffic they pour onto I-80 and adjoining roads.

But, never mind, you're so Chicago-centric and provincial, it won't matter what anyone says.

OK, it was pushed by Willco Board and executive, too. Who are Willco-centric. And embraced by Quinn, one of the many reasons he lost the election.

Im not "Chicago-centric", Im Chicagoland-centric. And theres priorities involved and very few north of 159th think Illiana  is even in the top fifty.

No, you're very Chicago-centric.  And the county line is 87th Street, which you seem to care nothing about south of.

What?? No love for Mitch Daniels?? He was totally on board with this when the Borman flooded out. Indiana had everything set to go. Illinois ...is Illinois.

Quote from: dzlsabe on November 27, 2015, 05:35:24 PM

Quote from: Brandon on November 27, 2015, 05:07:44 PM

Quote from: dzlsabe on November 27, 2015, 03:01:35 PM
It was pushed by former Gov. Quinn and his former IDOT chief to curry favor with Willco voters and try and put some lipstick on the other downstate turkey, Peotone International.

Damn, are you full of shit.  The Illiana, in it's current form as a proposal, was pushed by the Will County Board and Will County County Executive, not by Quinn or by IDOT.  The extension from I-57 to I-55 was completely, 100% the Will County government's idea.  And it was pushed, not for the possible Peotone Airport, but for the expanding intermodal centers (the largest in the six county area, I might add) and the truck traffic they pour onto I-80 and adjoining roads.

But, never mind, you're so Chicago-centric and provincial, it won't matter what anyone says.

OK, it was pushed by Willco Board and executive, too. Who are Willco-centric. And embraced by Quinn, one of the many reasons he lost the election.

Im not "Chicago-centric", Im Chicagoland-centric. And theres priorities involved and very few north of 159th think Illiana  is even in the top fifty.

Lmao please :rolleyes:

"And the county line is 87th Street, which you seem to care nothing about south of". (#412)

Why, youre right again! 87th St. does border Dupage County...then zig-zags to Steger Road (which is like 205th St.?) on the east...Which you seem to care nothing about north of. "Giant, sucking asshole called Chicago" IIRC.

This may have appeared someplace else in the Forum, but it appears the Illiana has been (somewhat) in the news since the last post in this thread from 2015 (these articles are from November 2016):

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20161103/BLOGS02/161109916/illiana-corridor-whacked-again-in-federal-court

QuoteA federal judge has stuck another knife into the just barely alive proposed Illiana Corridor.

In a decision released Nov. 1, U.S. District Court Judge Charles Norgle used terms such as "invalid" and "no longer effective" to describe a Tier 2 environmental impact statement prepared on behalf of the project by the Illinois Department of Transportation and its Indiana counterpart.

IDOT had hoped to forestall a ruling. But Norgle held the EIS no longer is valid because of prior court action, so there is no controversy to consider. ...

The ruling means IDOT and the Indiana agency "must start over their environmental reviews from the beginning based on much more realistic data and do it right without impermissible shortcuts," he said. That will take time and money, and if done right, "would very likely show that the proposed costly Illiana toll way is not economically justified and is not environmentally sensible."

IDOT spokesman Guy Tridgell would not comment on how long and how much it will take to revive the road. What he did say: "As we have said previously, the Illiana Expressway project is suspended. While the court this week found that the challenges to the Tier 2 Environmental Impact Statement and Record of Decision are moot due to unresolved questions with the Tier 1 ROD, the EIS includes other transportation projects, such as the I-55 interchange with Illinois 129 and Lorenzo Road. We will continue to work with the court on a solution."

http://www.chicagotribune.com/suburbs/daily-southtown/news/ct-sta-illiana-tollway-decision-st-1106-20161104-story.html

QuoteEnvironmental groups that oppose construction of the Illiana toll road are celebrating a second federal court judge's ruling that the Federal Highway Administration's 2014 approval of the bi-state project was invalid.

U.S. District Judge Charles Norgle ruled Tuesday that portions of the project's proposal that relied on its already legally invalidated foundation also were invalid.

The environmental plaintiffs – Openlands, Midewin Heritage Association and Sierra Club Illinois – had challenged both the Tier 1 and Tier 2 environmental impact statements and the federal government's "records of decision" greenlighting the 47-mile highway project through Will County. ...

Shortly after taking office in January 2015, Gov. Bruce Rauner suspended planning and development of the $1.3 billion Illiana project, which aims to connect Interstate 55 near Wilmington with Interstate 65 near Lowell, Ind., as an alternative to Interstate 80 for truckers.

While the project remains on hold in Illinois, Indiana is set on seeing it through.

In April, INDOT agreed to fund a new environmental impact statement to comply with the court order in an attempt to keep the controversial project alive.

"Indiana has always been committed to the Illiana Expressway and is ready to proceed with the project once Illinois is," INDOT spokesman Will Wingfield said following this week's ruling, which all but guarantees that both the Tier 1 and Tier 2 environmental impact statements will need to be revised.

Despite terminating all spending on the Illiana project, IDOT has said that it continues "working cooperatively" with INDOT to address the problematic environmental impact statement, as required by court order, because it includes other state transportation projects like the Interstate 55 interchange with Illinois 129 and Lorenzo Road.

"We will continue to work with the court on a solution," IDOT spokesman Guy Tridgell said following the judge's ruling this week. "The Illinois Department of Transportation will consult with (the) Federal Highway Administration and other stakeholders to determine the best path forward."

Quote from: andy3175 on January 10, 2017, 11:43:43 PM
This may have appeared someplace else in the Forum, but it appears the Illiana has been (somewhat) in the news since the last post in this thread from 2015 (these articles are from November 2016):

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20161103/BLOGS02/161109916/illiana-corridor-whacked-again-in-federal-court

QuoteA federal judge has stuck another knife into the just barely alive proposed Illiana Corridor.

In a decision released Nov. 1, U.S. District Court Judge Charles Norgle used terms such as "invalid" and "no longer effective" to describe a Tier 2 environmental impact statement prepared on behalf of the project by the Illinois Department of Transportation and its Indiana counterpart.

IDOT had hoped to forestall a ruling. But Norgle held the EIS no longer is valid because of prior court action, so there is no controversy to consider. ...

The ruling means IDOT and the Indiana agency "must start over their environmental reviews from the beginning based on much more realistic data and do it right without impermissible shortcuts," he said. That will take time and money, and if done right, "would very likely show that the proposed costly Illiana toll way is not economically justified and is not environmentally sensible."

IDOT spokesman Guy Tridgell would not comment on how long and how much it will take to revive the road. What he did say: "As we have said previously, the Illiana Expressway project is suspended. While the court this week found that the challenges to the Tier 2 Environmental Impact Statement and Record of Decision are moot due to unresolved questions with the Tier 1 ROD, the EIS includes other transportation projects, such as the I-55 interchange with Illinois 129 and Lorenzo Road. We will continue to work with the court on a solution."

http://www.chicagotribune.com/suburbs/daily-southtown/news/ct-sta-illiana-tollway-decision-st-1106-20161104-story.html

QuoteEnvironmental groups that oppose construction of the Illiana toll road are celebrating a second federal court judge's ruling that the Federal Highway Administration's 2014 approval of the bi-state project was invalid.

U.S. District Judge Charles Norgle ruled Tuesday that portions of the project's proposal that relied on its already legally invalidated foundation also were invalid.

The environmental plaintiffs – Openlands, Midewin Heritage Association and Sierra Club Illinois – had challenged both the Tier 1 and Tier 2 environmental impact statements and the federal government's "records of decision" greenlighting the 47-mile highway project through Will County. ...

Shortly after taking office in January 2015, Gov. Bruce Rauner suspended planning and development of the $1.3 billion Illiana project, which aims to connect Interstate 55 near Wilmington with Interstate 65 near Lowell, Ind., as an alternative to Interstate 80 for truckers.

While the project remains on hold in Illinois, Indiana is set on seeing it through.

In April, INDOT agreed to fund a new environmental impact statement to comply with the court order in an attempt to keep the controversial project alive.

"Indiana has always been committed to the Illiana Expressway and is ready to proceed with the project once Illinois is," INDOT spokesman Will Wingfield said following this week's ruling, which all but guarantees that both the Tier 1 and Tier 2 environmental impact statements will need to be revised.

Despite terminating all spending on the Illiana project, IDOT has said that it continues "working cooperatively" with INDOT to address the problematic environmental impact statement, as required by court order, because it includes other state transportation projects like the Interstate 55 interchange with Illinois 129 and Lorenzo Road.

"We will continue to work with the court on a solution," IDOT spokesman Guy Tridgell said following the judge's ruling this week. "The Illinois Department of Transportation will consult with (the) Federal Highway Administration and other stakeholders to determine the best path forward."

The route goes through a bunch of friggin' soybean fields, not Sequoia National Park, these environmental Wackos just really hate cars and want everyone riding around on bicycles. Tar and Feather these loons. I doubt congress will give Trump his trillion dollar highway stimulus, but if they did a complete southern bypass of Chicago, a I-480 from Morris to South Bend is desperately needed to deal with that awful Kingery Borman bottleneck. If they don't want to build there perhaps finish four-laneing US24 from Logansport IN to Peoria IL for a Toledo to Quad City transcontinental Chicago bypass.

Actually it goes through the area that used to be the Joliet Arsenal that they turned into Midewin National Grassland between I-55 and US 52. East of there is the soybean fields.

Quote from: hobsini2 on January 14, 2017, 02:24:21 PM
Actually it goes through the area that used to be the Joliet Arsenal that they turned into Midewin National Grassland between I-55 and US 52. East of there is the soybean fields.

It would've gone a bit south of the former arsenal, skirting the south side of Midewin, but not in Midewin.

Having traveled that area extensively over 30 years, now is the time to start planning it.  I didn't say build it now, just said to plan for it.  That means getting your EIS sorted, record of decision in place and the centerline approved so ROW can be incrementally acquired. Illinois has no money for new highway construction right now when many other needs are to be addressed.

Even if cars cease to exist, the worlds population still needs the means to travel and ways to collect whatever those future methods will be still need to be planned for.

With the Macomb Bypass sitting undone and eroding away, the Beardstown Bridge (US67) about to fall apart, parts of US50 in southern Illinois breaking up, I can think of some other action items the state can prioritize.

Quote from: Brandon on January 14, 2017, 09:11:50 PM

Quote from: hobsini2 on January 14, 2017, 02:24:21 PM
Actually it goes through the area that used to be the Joliet Arsenal that they turned into Midewin National Grassland between I-55 and US 52. East of there is the soybean fields.

It would've gone a bit south of the former arsenal, skirting the south side of Midewin, but not in Midewin.

It goes about half a mile south of Midewin.