Illinois Tollway Notes

[CtrlAltDel]

Thanks. That will make construction easier.

[kphoger]

For some reason, I thought partial interchanges were being deprecated these days.  Why do we keep seeing them constructed?

[triplemultiplex]

Because sometimes pragmatism dictates incomplete movements at some junctions still, despite overarching 'best practices' which advise against them.

[Rick Powell]

Because sometimes pragmatism dictates incomplete movements at some junctions still, despite overarching 'best practices' which advise against them.

And sometimes, like I-57 and I-294, the most useful movements are done first, and the others are added several years after the fact.

[lstone19]

For some reason, I thought partial interchanges were being deprecated these days.  Why do we keep seeing them constructed?

Despite the Illinois Tollway and others wanting us to think of I-490 as a new road (which will no doubt be reflected in high tolls), functionally it is 95% long new ramps of the I-90/I-294 O'Hare interchange. And when you think of it that way, there is absolutely no reason to build south to north connections at the 490/294 junction since that move in this now oversized interchange that completely surrounds O'Hare is 490>90>294 and v.v.

Even if you could go south 490 to north 294, the first place you could get off would be O'Hare and it's about a mile shorter from 390 to do that via 90.

[Joe The Dragon]

Because sometimes pragmatism dictates incomplete movements at some junctions still, despite overarching 'best practices' which advise against them.

And sometimes, like I-57 and I-294, the most useful movements are done first, and the others are added several years after the fact.

also with I-57 and I-294 the mainline moves done with I-80 / I-294 are missing and are just about useless to have.

[Rick Powell]

For some reason, I thought partial interchanges were being deprecated these days.  Why do we keep seeing them constructed?

Despite the Illinois Tollway and others wanting us to think of I-490 as a new road (which will no doubt be reflected in high tolls), functionally it is 95% long new ramps of the I-90/I-294 O'Hare interchange. And when you think of it that way, there is absolutely no reason to build south to north connections at the 490/294 junction since that move in this now oversized interchange that completely surrounds O'Hare is 490>90>294 and v.v.

Even if you could go south 490 to north 294, the first place you could get off would be O'Hare and it's about a mile shorter from 390 to do that via 90.

Granted it would be a low-demand movement. There might be a few people who'd want to access Balmoral Ave. off of NB I-294 in Rosemont, which exit is before O'Hare and does not have a SB exit where it could be accessed coming off of I-90.

[lstone19]

Granted it would be a low-demand movement. There might be a few people who'd want to access Balmoral Ave. off of NB I-294 in Rosemont, which exit is before O'Hare and does not have a SB exit where it could be accessed coming off of I-90.

I forget that one's there as thanks to it having a higher toll compared to continuing to O'Hare/River Rd. (used to be double but they left it unchanged when they almost doubled everything else), it's not one I would ever consider using. I do not reward the ISTHA for their rip-off tolls that charge you more for going less.

[jwags]

Granted it would be a low-demand movement. There might be a few people who'd want to access Balmoral Ave. off of NB I-294 in Rosemont, which exit is before O'Hare and does not have a SB exit where it could be accessed coming off of I-90.

I forget that one's there as thanks to it having a higher toll compared to continuing to O'Hare/River Rd. (used to be double but they left it unchanged when they almost doubled everything else), it's not one I would ever consider using. I do not reward the ISTHA for their rip-off tolls that charge you more for going less.

Isn't the general consensus that the new ramp tolls directly pay for the construction of the new ramps? I know if you map out I90 many of the toll combos make no sense unless you justify them in that way.

[lstone19]

Granted it would be a low-demand movement. There might be a few people who'd want to access Balmoral Ave. off of NB I-294 in Rosemont, which exit is before O'Hare and does not have a SB exit where it could be accessed coming off of I-90.

I forget that one's there as thanks to it having a higher toll compared to continuing to O'Hare/River Rd. (used to be double but they left it unchanged when they almost doubled everything else), it's not one I would ever consider using. I do not reward the ISTHA for their rip-off tolls that charge you more for going less.

Isn't the general consensus that the new ramp tolls directly pay for the construction of the new ramps? I know if you map out I90 many of the toll combos make no sense unless you justify them in that way.

Yes, that is what the ISTHA says and some of it does make sense when looked at that way. But it does not, IMHO, in any way JUSTIFY them. Plus there are several formerly untolled ramps that became tolled when the interchange was improved (these were not new ramps, just part of overall improvements of the interchange): Roselle Rd enter EB, Barrington Rd enter EB, IL-47 enter EB and exit WB, and Genoa Rd (exit both directions).

I encountered the most egregious result of this one night when due to an accident, I-90 was closed from US-20 (Hampshire/Marengo) to IL-47 (Huntley). Under normal operations, EB traffic would pay at the Hampshire toll, then at the Elgin toll. But with the detour, not only did you pay those two plus an extra $0.30 (I-Pass rate) for re-entering at IL-47. A higher toll to be inconvenienced by the detour.

Any way, again IMHO, over the last 25+ years, the ISTHA has demonstrated that they really no longer understand any of the tolling logic previously used by them as well as other non-ticket toll roads. Things like it should never cost you less to go one more exit and having paid a toll, there should be at least one opportunity to exit without paying another toll (enter I-90 at IL-47 EB or IL-25 EB or at Roselle Rd or Barrington Rd WB and you pay a toll at entry and cannot exit without paying a second toll). And then there's the mess they created when they removed the Deerfield toll. SB on the Tri-State (I-94/I-294), it's $0.95 to exit at the Edens Spur, Lake-Cook Rd., Willow Rd, or Golf Rd but only $0.75 to go all the way to the O'Hare complex after which you can then exit with no additional toll at Irving Park Rd. or I-290 continuing SB on I-294 or at Lee St., Elmhurst Rd., Arlington Heights Rd., or I-290 continuing WB on I-90 (and when I lived in Roselle and was coming south on the Tri-State, I was faced with the decision of exit at Willow Rd, pay $0.95, fight my way across Palatine Rd. to IL-53 and then south or continue to the O'Hare complex, pay $0.75, and out I-90 to I-290/IL-53. Slower and a higher toll vs. faster and a lower toll. Not much of a decision actually.

[SEWIGuy]

Yeah, I would take whatever exit is most convenient for me. If it costs me $.20 in the process, I really wouldn't care - if I even bothered to look it up in the first place.

I'm pretty sure that ISTHA counts on the vast majority of people being like me.

[jwags]

Granted it would be a low-demand movement. There might be a few people who'd want to access Balmoral Ave. off of NB I-294 in Rosemont, which exit is before O'Hare and does not have a SB exit where it could be accessed coming off of I-90.

I forget that one's there as thanks to it having a higher toll compared to continuing to O'Hare/River Rd. (used to be double but they left it unchanged when they almost doubled everything else), it's not one I would ever consider using. I do not reward the ISTHA for their rip-off tolls that charge you more for going less.

Isn't the general consensus that the new ramp tolls directly pay for the construction of the new ramps? I know if you map out I90 many of the toll combos make no sense unless you justify them in that way.

Yes, that is what the ISTHA says and some of it does make sense when looked at that way. But it does not, IMHO, in any way JUSTIFY them. Plus there are several formerly untolled ramps that became tolled when the interchange was improved (these were not new ramps, just part of overall improvements of the interchange): Roselle Rd enter EB, Barrington Rd enter EB, IL-47 enter EB and exit WB, and Genoa Rd (exit both directions).

I encountered the most egregious result of this one night when due to an accident, I-90 was closed from US-20 (Hampshire/Marengo) to IL-47 (Huntley). Under normal operations, EB traffic would pay at the Hampshire toll, then at the Elgin toll. But with the detour, not only did you pay those two plus an extra $0.30 (I-Pass rate) for re-entering at IL-47. A higher toll to be inconvenienced by the detour.

Any way, again IMHO, over the last 25+ years, the ISTHA has demonstrated that they really no longer understand any of the tolling logic previously used by them as well as other non-ticket toll roads. Things like it should never cost you less to go one more exit and having paid a toll, there should be at least one opportunity to exit without paying another toll (enter I-90 at IL-47 EB or IL-25 EB or at Roselle Rd or Barrington Rd WB and you pay a toll at entry and cannot exit without paying a second toll). And then there's the mess they created when they removed the Deerfield toll. SB on the Tri-State (I-94/I-294), it's $0.95 to exit at the Edens Spur, Lake-Cook Rd., Willow Rd, or Golf Rd but only $0.75 to go all the way to the O'Hare complex after which you can then exit with no additional toll at Irving Park Rd. or I-290 continuing SB on I-294 or at Lee St., Elmhurst Rd., Arlington Heights Rd., or I-290 continuing WB on I-90 (and when I lived in Roselle and was coming south on the Tri-State, I was faced with the decision of exit at Willow Rd, pay $0.95, fight my way across Palatine Rd. to IL-53 and then south or continue to the O'Hare complex, pay $0.75, and out I-90 to I-290/IL-53. Slower and a higher toll vs. faster and a lower toll. Not much of a decision actually.

That being said how many free sections exist? I can only think of a handful which is a shame especially surrounding the one-way tolling areas which should theoretically have no toll areas within them. The most annoying of these if having to pay to use the IL-47 exit in every direction except EB entry where you instead get to pay the double toll at Marengo (very frustrating since you're essentially paying the Rockford to Marengo toll to go like 2 miles). At some point wouldn't it make more sense to just go to a milage based system with gantries at every interchange? They could completely eliminate the mainline tolls except at the beginning and end. The current toll system just feels like it was haphazardly put together.

As an aside I'll often just take 294 south to get on I-90 EB to avoid paying the .95 Edens Spur toll, save .20, and have a smoother ride into the city. Been aware of that trick for a few years now. Coming from Wisconsin I've considered using 41 and getting on in Gurnee to avoid the Waukegan toll heading to ORD. Wouldn't make much sense when going to Chicago since at that point 41 is just a straight shot into the city.

Toll free sections I'm aware of:
I-90
State St (BUS 20) Rockford to I-39

I-94/294
Grand Ave (Gurnee) to Milwaukee St

I-88
The area between the start of ISTHA maintenance and Rt 26 (Dixon)
Rt 251 (Rochelle) to I-39

I-355 and IL-390
None that I'm aware of

[lstone19]

That being said how many free sections exist? I can only think of a handful which is a shame especially surrounding the one-way tolling areas which should theoretically have no toll areas within them. The most annoying of these if having to pay to use the IL-47 exit in every direction except EB entry where you instead get to pay the double toll at Marengo (very frustrating since you're essentially paying the Rockford to Marengo toll to go like 2 miles). At some point wouldn't it make more sense to just go to a milage based system with gantries at every interchange? They could completely eliminate the mainline tolls except at the beginning and end. The current toll system just feels like it was haphazardly put together.

You mean IL-23, not IL-47. That's a recently added exit and yes, the addition of exits, their desire to remove some choke points (Deerfield toll, WB entrance to I-90 at I-290, I-39 at Rockford) has resulted in it looking like a bad patch job.

Toll free sections I'm aware of:
I-90
State St (BUS 20) Rockford to I-39

I-94/294
Grand Ave (Gurnee) to Milwaukee St

I-88
The area between the start of ISTHA maintenance and Rt 26 (Dixon)
Rt 251 (Rochelle) to I-39

I-355 and IL-390
None that I'm aware of

Those probably exist more because it's not worth the cost of toll collection for the little traffic that would just use those segments without using a tolled portion. However, 20+ years ago, what's now the plaza east of Dixon was a between the ramps mainline plaza with ramp tolls in both directions for traffic entering or leaving at Dixon (and the same at Dekalb).

Regarding IL-390, sort of. I-290 west to Meacham Rd. puts you on the mainline road for a few hundred feet without a toll. EB the reverse move is direct to the I-290 ramp and the original plans for the WB move also had a direct ramp-to-ramp connection that was deleted. There's also a free move EB via the frontage road that does not exist WB: you can go from I-290 to Arlington Heights Rd. via the frontage road but WB you need to enter the mainline and pay a toll. Just more tolling inconsistency from ISTHA.

True mileage based tolls with gantries at every entrance and exit either greatly increase the back office complexity (something that other threads say the NYSTA is having a problem with) or requires read/write transponders (incompatible with the stickers ISTHA is moving to) so that a virtual ticket can be written to the transponder on entry (which I believe is what some of the EZ-Pass roads used to do).

[jwags]

You mean IL-23, not IL-47.

Yea, you're right. My error.

True mileage based tolls with gantries at every entrance and exit either greatly increase the back office complexity (something that other threads say the NYSTA is having a problem with) or requires read/write transponders (incompatible with the stickers ISTHA is moving to) so that a virtual ticket can be written to the transponder on entry (which I believe is what some of the EZ-Pass roads used to do).

I was always under the impression some internal database was used to track transponder ID's and then entry/exit points were linked up after exit. This system would've been in place in IN, OH, PA, NY, MA, and NJ along with Maine but only for Maine accounts (out of state passes pay cash rates which are not mileage based). I don't think the box transponders contain any form of writing capability. Regardless, the new sticker tags state they will be compatible with EZ-Pass so I assume the entire EZ-Pass Group has finally adopted 6C sticker tech (https://e-zpassiag.com/interoperability/85-interoperability). Additionally, Kansas and Florida have milage based toll systems and have used sticker tags for years.

[lstone19]

You mean IL-23, not IL-47.

Yea, you're right. My error.

True mileage based tolls with gantries at every entrance and exit either greatly increase the back office complexity (something that other threads say the NYSTA is having a problem with) or requires read/write transponders (incompatible with the stickers ISTHA is moving to) so that a virtual ticket can be written to the transponder on entry (which I believe is what some of the EZ-Pass roads used to do).

I was always under the impression some internal database was used to track transponder ID's and then entry/exit points were linked up after exit. This system would've been in place in IN, OH, PA, NY, MA, and NJ along with Maine but only for Maine accounts (out of state passes pay cash rates which are not mileage based). I don't think the box transponders contain any form of writing capability. Regardless, the new sticker tags state they will be compatible with EZ-Pass so I assume the entire EZ-Pass Group has finally adopted 6C sticker tech (https://e-zpassiag.com/interoperability/85-interoperability). Additionally, Kansas and Florida have milage based toll systems and have used sticker tags for years.

What I meant by the back office complexity is the matching of entries and exits.

I thought I had read that originally EZ-Pass was read/write with a virtual ticket written to the transponder at entry when on ticket systems.

[SEWIGuy]

I have used my IPass in EZPass states that are based on mileage.

I think the issue with the mileage based fares in Illinois is that its more of an interconnected system with "free" freeways than the Indiana Toll Road or Ohio Turnpike which is basically just one freeway.  Unless you have toll collection at the beginning and end of each tolled portion, it's never really going to be accurate. If they had made the decision to do this from the beginning, that would be fine. But they just pull the toll collection areas in places where they made some sense decades ago, and that's where they still are today.

I think you are looking for something logical for a system that isn't and really never meant to be. It's just a way to collect money based loosely on how much someone uses it.   

[Joe The Dragon]

they need to add more tolling points (to each road) like how IL-390 is setup.

Some added ramp tolls and reprice each point in the full system.

they don't need to put them at each entry/exit point. To get the most of what an mileage system has and can do it with less hardware.

[lstone19]

I think the issue with the mileage based fares in Illinois is that its more of an interconnected system with "free" freeways than the Indiana Toll Road or Ohio Turnpike which is basically just one freeway.  Unless you have toll collection at the beginning and end of each tolled portion, it's never really going to be accurate. If they had made the decision to do this from the beginning, that would be fine. But they just pull the toll collection areas in places where they made some sense decades ago, and that's where they still are today.

I think you are looking for something logical for a system that isn't and really never meant to be. It's just a way to collect money based loosely on how much someone uses it.

I disagree. While some people use it in a way where you enter, exit, enter again, and then exit again, there are distinct endpoints to the Tollway. And even today's system recognizes that it is an interconnected system so a toll paid on one road covers your use of the road you then connect to without exiting the tollway system (e.g. Enter on I-355 at Army Trail Rd, Exit on I-88 at IL-59: one toll plaza on I-355 but that toll also covers the I-88 use; Enter on I-90 at Arlington Heights Rd., exit on I-294 at I-290 (Ike): one toll on I-294 (Irving Park) that covers the whole trip). Some posts I've seen suggest that some people don't get that and think the tolls are per road and as a result, they don't understand how the O'Hare complex works (you pay a toll leaving the O'Hare interchange no matter what road you're on or if you exit to O'Hare or River Rd. and that toll covers whatever road you were on approaching the interchange and what road you're on leaving; those posts ask questions like why is there a toll WB on I-90 at Devon but not EB). The present system, by a summing of the tolls you'd pay regardless of roads involved, has a distinct toll for every pair of entry and exit points you can do in one continuous trip on the Tollway system.

[edwaleni]

For some reason, I thought partial interchanges were being deprecated these days.  Why do we keep seeing them constructed?

Despite the Illinois Tollway and others wanting us to think of I-490 as a new road (which will no doubt be reflected in high tolls), functionally it is 95% long new ramps of the I-90/I-294 O'Hare interchange. And when you think of it that way, there is absolutely no reason to build south to north connections at the 490/294 junction since that move in this now oversized interchange that completely surrounds O'Hare is 490>90>294 and v.v.

Even if you could go south 490 to north 294, the first place you could get off would be O'Hare and it's about a mile shorter from 390 to do that via 90.

I never have considered I-490 as any kind of standalone highway myself, but simply a way to reach 2 things:

- Future West Terminal
- Connecting I-390 to the system

Access from the east is for political reasons (after all it is a "Chicago" airport) and access from the west is to relieve I-90 & IL-64 and provide better suburban access.

[ran4sh]

I-Pass transponders are officially being replaced by windshield stickers.  Stickers will be available by the end of January, but motorists can keep using their existing transponders until they expire.

https://patch.com/illinois/across-il/il-tollway-transponders-being-replaced-stickers-report

This is probably in preparation for acceptance of SunPass Mini transponders as well as compatibility with K-Tag, PikePass, and the Texas transponders (all stickers).

could be a defection from E-Z Pass too

It's the other way around. E-ZPass will now accept sticker transponders. In Georgia we found out that Peach Pass transponders are now accepted throughout the E-ZPass region, and we've never had hard-case transponders here

[dvferyance]

I also have to pay $2.80 when I go to Gurnee Mills even though I exit the tollway like 2 miles past the toll point.

[jwags]

I also have to pay $2.80 when I go to Gurnee Mills even though I exit the tollway like 2 miles past the toll point.

If you're only going to Gurnee Mills or Six Flags from the north you are better off taking US-41 to Stearns School Rd and avoiding the tollway altogether.

[SSOWorld]

ISTHA has spoken  The agency has changed to stickers 😡

Those with I-PASS cartridge transponder can use them as long as they still work - but when they expire, you're stuck (pun intended). You won't be able to use them in rentals after are forced on to them just like with FL/GA, TX/OK/KS, CO and WA. 

I-PASS is still part of the E-ZPass network despite the change.

[oscar]

ISTHA has spoken  The agency has changed to stickers 😡

Those with I-PASS cartridge transponder can use them as long as they still work - but when they expire, you're stuck (pun intended). You won't be able to use them in rentals after are forced on to them just like with FL/GA, TX/OK/KS, CO and WA. 

I-PASS is still part of the E-ZPass network despite the change.

Will those of us with E-ZPass transponders from other states still be able to use them on Illinois toll roads? My guess is yes, since I-PASS will still be part of the E-ZPass network, and existing I-Pass cartridge (hard case?) transponders will still work (until their batteries die) on Illinois toll roads.

[SSOWorld]

The interoperability will not change.  Theory here is ISTHA is the first of the agencies to go sticker as this might be the start of standardization where stickers win.