News:

The AARoads Wiki is live! Come check it out!

Main Menu

Chicago-Kansas City Expressway

Started by MantyMadTown, April 26, 2018, 01:12:15 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

MantyMadTown

When I was looking at Google Maps around the Chicago area, I found that Interstate 290 in Chicago was part of what I discovered to be the "Chicago-Kansas City Expressway". Out of curiosity I looked it up to see what it was, and I found that the route turned out to be a mish-mash of highways throughout Illinois and Missouri. Ever since learning about this new route I've been fascinated with ways to drive to Kansas City. Is this a popular route? Would anyone recommend taking this route to drive there?

I like the initiative behind it (create a route between Chicago and Kansas City while avoiding heavy traffic along currently established highways); however, I hope there will be some improvements made to the route to make it a viable option to drive to Kansas City in the future.

I was thinking that the portion in western Illinois (from Quincy to Galesburg) should be listed under a single route designation (the entire route in Illinois is listed as IL 110; however it is not very prevalent when you look at a map), as the route shows up as the several highways that make up its length, rather than a single unifying highway designation.

I am also wondering about a potential upgrade of US 36 in Missouri (which forms the bulk of the CKC in Missouri) to interstate standards, possibly acommodating an extension of I-72 in the future. What would be the feasability of doing that?

There could also potentially be some flyover ramps at the interchanges with the interstates to allow easier access for vehicles traveling the route.

Hopefully this roadway will become an important highway in the future. I hope that it will alleviate traffic along the major corridors of I-55, I-80, and I-70, and bring development to the areas served.
Forget the I-41 haters


ilpt4u

The CKC is IL/MO 110 in both states.

Basically, it was the State of IL throwing a bone, in terms of IDOT money, to the West-Central part of the state, which is mostly void of Interstates.

Unless there is awful traffic or wrecks, I-55 to I-72/US 36 in Springfield, over to I-35 in MO and down to KC is probably the best route, and IMHO should have been designated the CKC route

IDOT and MoDOT were/are trying to get CKC traffic off of I-80/I-35 thru Iowa or I-55/I-70 thru STL that is traveling between the cities

It takes the far Western route thru IL, because Politically, it was easier to sell to add another route in a part of the state that is underserved for Long Distance Auto Routes, especially since the AOTS ended up using the MO/IA route, not the route between STL and the Quad Cities in IL/US 67 on its journey up to MSP

Older discussion on the CKC from the Great Lakes Board: https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3301.0

hbelkins

Is there anything that justifies the conversion of US 36 between Hannibal and I-35 to a full freeway? I sure don't see it. It's a four-lane arterial route with limited-access sections in many places, including bypasses of the towns it passes by. Granted, I've only driven it once, but traffic seemed to be light and flowing freely across the corridor.

Again I say ... not every four-lane needs to be a freeway built to Interstate standards (I'm looking at you, US 31 in Indiana and US 220 in Virginia.)


Government would be tolerable if not for politicians and bureaucrats.

mvak36

Quote from: hbelkins on April 26, 2018, 11:47:27 AM
Is there anything that justifies the conversion of US 36 between Hannibal and I-35 to a full freeway? I sure don't see it. It's a four-lane arterial route with limited-access sections in many places, including bypasses of the towns it passes by. Granted, I've only driven it once, but traffic seemed to be light and flowing freely across the corridor.

Again I say ... not every four-lane needs to be a freeway built to Interstate standards (I'm looking at you, US 31 in Indiana and US 220 in Virginia.)

As of now, probably not. But, in the future, if the truck traffic and traffic in general increases, then possibly. For the most part it has interchanges at the major intersections. So maybe a few more interchanges here and there if the need warrants it. Also, maybe fixing stuff like this.
Counties: Counties visited
Travel Mapping: Summary

Brandon

Quote from: mvak36 on April 26, 2018, 12:41:52 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on April 26, 2018, 11:47:27 AM
Is there anything that justifies the conversion of US 36 between Hannibal and I-35 to a full freeway? I sure don't see it. It's a four-lane arterial route with limited-access sections in many places, including bypasses of the towns it passes by. Granted, I've only driven it once, but traffic seemed to be light and flowing freely across the corridor.

Again I say ... not every four-lane needs to be a freeway built to Interstate standards (I'm looking at you, US 31 in Indiana and US 220 in Virginia.)

As of now, probably not. But, in the future, if the truck traffic and traffic in general increases, then possibly. For the most part it has interchanges at the major intersections. So maybe a few more interchanges here and there if the need warrants it. Also, maybe fixing stuff like this.

That's minor.  I'd settle for getting rid of the signals in Cameron, Missouri.
"If you think this has a happy ending, you haven't been paying attention." - Ramsay Bolton

"Symbolic of his struggle against reality." - Reg

mvak36

Quote from: Brandon on April 26, 2018, 01:17:59 PM
Quote from: mvak36 on April 26, 2018, 12:41:52 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on April 26, 2018, 11:47:27 AM
Is there anything that justifies the conversion of US 36 between Hannibal and I-35 to a full freeway? I sure don't see it. It's a four-lane arterial route with limited-access sections in many places, including bypasses of the towns it passes by. Granted, I've only driven it once, but traffic seemed to be light and flowing freely across the corridor.

Again I say ... not every four-lane needs to be a freeway built to Interstate standards (I'm looking at you, US 31 in Indiana and US 220 in Virginia.)

As of now, probably not. But, in the future, if the truck traffic and traffic in general increases, then possibly. For the most part it has interchanges at the major intersections. So maybe a few more interchanges here and there if the need warrants it. Also, maybe fixing stuff like this.

That's minor.  I'd settle for getting rid of the signals in Cameron, Missouri.

Those aren't that bad to be honest. It's not too busy in that area anyways. Those are probably there to stay unless it is decided to convert the road to interstate standards.
Counties: Counties visited
Travel Mapping: Summary

MantyMadTown

Quote from: mvak36 on April 26, 2018, 12:41:52 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on April 26, 2018, 11:47:27 AM
Is there anything that justifies the conversion of US 36 between Hannibal and I-35 to a full freeway? I sure don't see it. It's a four-lane arterial route with limited-access sections in many places, including bypasses of the towns it passes by. Granted, I've only driven it once, but traffic seemed to be light and flowing freely across the corridor.

Again I say ... not every four-lane needs to be a freeway built to Interstate standards (I'm looking at you, US 31 in Indiana and US 220 in Virginia.)

As of now, probably not. But, in the future, if the truck traffic and traffic in general increases, then possibly. For the most part it has interchanges at the major intersections. So maybe a few more interchanges here and there if the need warrants it. Also, maybe fixing stuff like this.

I'm guessing that US 36 in Missouri takes a similar form as WIS 29 in Wisconsin: a major four lane expressway that carries traffic across the state, but not so much that it justifies being a freeway for the entire route.
Forget the I-41 haters

mgk920

Quote from: MantyMadTown on April 26, 2018, 11:15:16 PM
Quote from: mvak36 on April 26, 2018, 12:41:52 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on April 26, 2018, 11:47:27 AM
Is there anything that justifies the conversion of US 36 between Hannibal and I-35 to a full freeway? I sure don't see it. It's a four-lane arterial route with limited-access sections in many places, including bypasses of the towns it passes by. Granted, I've only driven it once, but traffic seemed to be light and flowing freely across the corridor.

Again I say ... not every four-lane needs to be a freeway built to Interstate standards (I'm looking at you, US 31 in Indiana and US 220 in Virginia.)

As of now, probably not. But, in the future, if the truck traffic and traffic in general increases, then possibly. For the most part it has interchanges at the major intersections. So maybe a few more interchanges here and there if the need warrants it. Also, maybe fixing stuff like this.

I'm guessing that US 36 in Missouri takes a similar form as WIS 29 in Wisconsin: a major four lane expressway that carries traffic across the state, but not so much that it justifies being a freeway for the entire route.

Every time that I've seen Big Rig Steve drive US 36 across parts of Missouri, it was never all that busy.

Mike

mvak36

Quote from: mgk920 on April 26, 2018, 11:25:44 PM
Quote from: MantyMadTown on April 26, 2018, 11:15:16 PM
Quote from: mvak36 on April 26, 2018, 12:41:52 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on April 26, 2018, 11:47:27 AM
Is there anything that justifies the conversion of US 36 between Hannibal and I-35 to a full freeway? I sure don't see it. It's a four-lane arterial route with limited-access sections in many places, including bypasses of the towns it passes by. Granted, I've only driven it once, but traffic seemed to be light and flowing freely across the corridor.

Again I say ... not every four-lane needs to be a freeway built to Interstate standards (I'm looking at you, US 31 in Indiana and US 220 in Virginia.)

As of now, probably not. But, in the future, if the truck traffic and traffic in general increases, then possibly. For the most part it has interchanges at the major intersections. So maybe a few more interchanges here and there if the need warrants it. Also, maybe fixing stuff like this.

I'm guessing that US 36 in Missouri takes a similar form as WIS 29 in Wisconsin: a major four lane expressway that carries traffic across the state, but not so much that it justifies being a freeway for the entire route.

Every time that I've seen Big Rig Steve drive US 36 across parts of Missouri, it was never all that busy.

Mike
Yeah it really isn't the times I have driven it.


iPhone
Counties: Counties visited
Travel Mapping: Summary

MantyMadTown

Quote from: ilpt4u on April 26, 2018, 07:34:54 AM
Unless there is awful traffic or wrecks, I-55 to I-72/US 36 in Springfield, over to I-35 in MO and down to KC is probably the best route

Given that I live in Madison, I would probably take 151, 380, and 80 to get to I-35, so if I wanted to take 55 to 72/36 to I-35, I would have to take I-39 first, and it would be a much longer route (over an hour longer). However, lots of routes I looked at from Chicago and Madison involve taking US 36, so I'm guessing it's a good route.
Forget the I-41 haters

hbelkins

Quote from: MantyMadTown on April 26, 2018, 11:54:30 PM
Given that I live in Madison, I would probably take 151, 380, and 80 to get to I-35

Is that a better route than 151 to 20?


Government would be tolerable if not for politicians and bureaucrats.

In_Correct

#11
Quote from: hbelkins on April 26, 2018, 11:47:27 AM
Is there anything that justifies the conversion of US 36 between Hannibal and I-35 to a full freeway? I sure don't see it. It's a four-lane arterial route with limited-access sections in many places, including bypasses of the towns it passes by. Granted, I've only driven it once, but traffic seemed to be light and flowing freely across the corridor.

Again I say ... not every four-lane needs to be a freeway built to Interstate standards (I'm looking at you, US 31 in Indiana and US 220 in Virginia.)


It probably won't take much to build it to Interstate standards.

Quote from: mvak36 on April 26, 2018, 12:41:52 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on April 26, 2018, 11:47:27 AM
Is there anything that justifies the conversion of US 36 between Hannibal and I-35 to a full freeway? I sure don't see it. It's a four-lane arterial route with limited-access sections in many places, including bypasses of the towns it passes by. Granted, I've only driven it once, but traffic seemed to be light and flowing freely across the corridor.

Again I say ... not every four-lane needs to be a freeway built to Interstate standards (I'm looking at you, US 31 in Indiana and US 220 in Virginia.)

As of now, probably not. But, in the future, if the truck traffic and traffic in general increases, then possibly. For the most part it has interchanges at the major intersections. So maybe a few more interchanges here and there if the need warrants it. Also, maybe fixing stuff like this.

A rail crossing? A wider tunnel? Or a matching bridge?
Drive Safely. :sombrero: Ride Safely. And Build More Roads, Rails, And Bridges. :coffee: ... Boulevards Wear Faster Than Interstates.

mvak36

Quote from: In_Correct on April 27, 2018, 12:06:05 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on April 26, 2018, 11:47:27 AM
Is there anything that justifies the conversion of US 36 between Hannibal and I-35 to a full freeway? I sure don't see it. It's a four-lane arterial route with limited-access sections in many places, including bypasses of the towns it passes by. Granted, I've only driven it once, but traffic seemed to be light and flowing freely across the corridor.

Again I say ... not every four-lane needs to be a freeway built to Interstate standards (I'm looking at you, US 31 in Indiana and US 220 in Virginia.)


It probably won't take much to build it to Interstate standards.

Quote from: mvak36 on April 26, 2018, 12:41:52 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on April 26, 2018, 11:47:27 AM
Is there anything that justifies the conversion of US 36 between Hannibal and I-35 to a full freeway? I sure don't see it. It's a four-lane arterial route with limited-access sections in many places, including bypasses of the towns it passes by. Granted, I've only driven it once, but traffic seemed to be light and flowing freely across the corridor.

Again I say ... not every four-lane needs to be a freeway built to Interstate standards (I'm looking at you, US 31 in Indiana and US 220 in Virginia.)

As of now, probably not. But, in the future, if the truck traffic and traffic in general increases, then possibly. For the most part it has interchanges at the major intersections. So maybe a few more interchanges here and there if the need warrants it. Also, maybe fixing stuff like this.

A rail crossing? A wider tunnel? Or a matching bridge?
I think they should build a bridge over the rail line for the eastbound direction.


iPhone
Counties: Counties visited
Travel Mapping: Summary

SD Mapman

Quote from: In_Correct on April 27, 2018, 12:06:05 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on April 26, 2018, 11:47:27 AM
Is there anything that justifies the conversion of US 36 between Hannibal and I-35 to a full freeway? I sure don't see it. It's a four-lane arterial route with limited-access sections in many places, including bypasses of the towns it passes by. Granted, I've only driven it once, but traffic seemed to be light and flowing freely across the corridor.

Again I say ... not every four-lane needs to be a freeway built to Interstate standards (I'm looking at you, US 31 in Indiana and US 220 in Virginia.)


It probably won't take much to build it to Interstate standards.


Well the exit numbering seems to indicate MoDOT wants to take I-72 over to Cameron...

Also there's a local Hannibal group trying to extend I-72 to the US 24 trumpet interchange: http://www.hannibal.net/news/20170206/extended-interstate-designation-denied
The traveler sees what he sees, the tourist sees what he has come to see. - G.K. Chesterton

Revive 755

Quote from: In_Correct on April 27, 2018, 12:06:05 PM
Quote from: mvak36 on April 26, 2018, 12:41:52 PM
As of now, probably not. But, in the future, if the truck traffic and traffic in general increases, then possibly. For the most part it has interchanges at the major intersections. So maybe a few more interchanges here and there if the need warrants it. Also, maybe fixing stuff like this.

A rail crossing? A wider tunnel? Or a matching bridge?

Given the stubs at the interchange to the west, I am guessing over with a new set of WB lanes being constructed and EB traffic being moved to the current WB lanes.  With a couple large retaining walls they could save on ROW and build new EB lanes over the railroad in the current median.

froggie

^ Moot point since land pattens suggest they already own enough ROW on the north side of the WB lanes.

J N Winkler

I would not object to US 36 being upgraded to a full freeway, largely because the current expressway was developed by laying down a second carriageway while carrying out no meaningful upgrades to the existing one, which has many blind hills.  I am aware, of course, that Missouri has no money even for projects that take significantly higher priority than this.
"It is necessary to spend a hundred lire now to save a thousand lire later."--Piero Puricelli, explaining the need for a first-class road system to Benito Mussolini

sparker

Quote from: J N Winkler on April 29, 2018, 12:08:59 PM
I would not object to US 36 being upgraded to a full freeway, largely because the current expressway was developed by laying down a second carriageway while carrying out no meaningful upgrades to the existing one, which has many blind hills.  I am aware, of course, that Missouri has no money even for projects that take significantly higher priority than this.

At this point, MO has a significant backlog of "wants", some in the Interstate-expansion field -- but scant $$ to do any of them, much less several.  Given the fact that some of these concepts, particularly projects that cross state lines, have some political pressure added to their portfolios, I'd venture that MODOT will prioritize as follows:

(1) The completion of I-49 down to the AR state line to meet their Bella Vista facility.
(2) I-57 from the AR state line to I-55 at Sikeston using the Poplar Bluff freeway bypass.
(3) I'd rank this as a tie between extending I-72 over US 36 to Cameron or even St. Joseph, or:
     Finishing up the Avenue of the Saints (US 61/MO 27) as a full freeway facility, including a N-S Hannibal bypass.

Regarding (3) above -- unless a windfall occurs, one or the other will be undertaken in time -- but likely the other will be "back-burnered" until such time as funding can be eked out, likely several decades down the line. 

mvak36

Quote from: sparker on April 29, 2018, 09:06:07 PM
Quote from: J N Winkler on April 29, 2018, 12:08:59 PM
I would not object to US 36 being upgraded to a full freeway, largely because the current expressway was developed by laying down a second carriageway while carrying out no meaningful upgrades to the existing one, which has many blind hills.  I am aware, of course, that Missouri has no money even for projects that take significantly higher priority than this.

At this point, MO has a significant backlog of "wants", some in the Interstate-expansion field -- but scant $$ to do any of them, much less several.  Given the fact that some of these concepts, particularly projects that cross state lines, have some political pressure added to their portfolios, I'd venture that MODOT will prioritize as follows:

(1) The completion of I-49 down to the AR state line to meet their Bella Vista facility.
(2) I-57 from the AR state line to I-55 at Sikeston using the Poplar Bluff freeway bypass.
(3) I'd rank this as a tie between extending I-72 over US 36 to Cameron or even St. Joseph, or:
     Finishing up the Avenue of the Saints (US 61/MO 27) as a full freeway facility, including a N-S Hannibal bypass.

Regarding (3) above -- unless a windfall occurs, one or the other will be undertaken in time -- but likely the other will be "back-burnered" until such time as funding can be eked out, likely several decades down the line.
I think there is probably a 1a in your list above and that's the three-laning of I-70 statewide. Regarding number 2, I don't think I have heard anything about people from Poplar Bluff wanting an interstate through there. Most of what I heard is from Arkansas. But I suppose if they wanted it, now would be a good time to lobby their representatives since the Speaker of the House is from there.
Counties: Counties visited
Travel Mapping: Summary

sparker

Regarding the 3+3 concept for I-70 -- I was thinking of plans for new Interstate mileage rather than enhancement of existing ones -- although as a funding attractor, any I-70 project would be indeed formidable.   The rationale for the I-57 designation effort in AR was partially based upon much of the MO corridor mileage being either built (Poplar Bluff bypass) or upgradeable without significant ROW aquisition (US 60 between Poplar Bluff and I-55).  It would be naive for anyone to think than MODOT is unaware of the longer-range plans for that corridor -- although given their current fiscal situation it's not difficult to picture them dodging the issue in the near term.   

mvak36

#20
Quote from: sparker on April 30, 2018, 03:02:02 AM
Regarding the 3+3 concept for I-70 -- I was thinking of plans for new Interstate mileage rather than enhancement of existing ones -- although as a funding attractor, any I-70 project would be indeed formidable.   The rationale for the I-57 designation effort in AR was partially based upon much of the MO corridor mileage being either built (Poplar Bluff bypass) or upgradeable without significant ROW aquisition (US 60 between Poplar Bluff and I-55).  It would be naive for anyone to think than MODOT is unaware of the longer-range plans for that corridor -- although given their current fiscal situation it's not difficult to picture them dodging the issue in the near term.

Ah ok. I misunderstood your first post. My mistake.

I don't think the Missouri part of the I-57 corridor will be too bad. The issue will be with the funding like you said.

If they do anything with the US61 corridor, the first thing built will be the Hannibal Bypass (regardless of whether or not it will be part of an interstate). The city and Marion county have it as part of their wish list: http://www.whig.com/20180305/marion-county-commission-again-lists-hannibal-bypass-as-top-transportation-priority#
Counties: Counties visited
Travel Mapping: Summary

J N Winkler

I am afraid I-70 has become the project that is "too big to start."
"It is necessary to spend a hundred lire now to save a thousand lire later."--Piero Puricelli, explaining the need for a first-class road system to Benito Mussolini

mvak36

Quote from: J N Winkler on April 30, 2018, 12:07:04 PM
I am afraid I-70 has become the project that is "too big to start."

I think they could do it piecemeal and widen certain sections here and there like other states do with their interstates. I don't know why they want to do the whole thing at once.
Counties: Counties visited
Travel Mapping: Summary

hbelkins

Quote from: mvak36 on April 30, 2018, 12:11:53 PM
Quote from: J N Winkler on April 30, 2018, 12:07:04 PM
I am afraid I-70 has become the project that is "too big to start."

I think they could do it piecemeal and widen certain sections here and there like other states do with their interstates. I don't know why they want to do the whole thing at once.

Kentucky has done the same thing with I-65 and is taking this approach to I-75 as well.


Government would be tolerable if not for politicians and bureaucrats.

mvak36

Quote from: hbelkins on April 30, 2018, 12:23:10 PM
Quote from: mvak36 on April 30, 2018, 12:11:53 PM
Quote from: J N Winkler on April 30, 2018, 12:07:04 PM
I am afraid I-70 has become the project that is "too big to start."

I think they could do it piecemeal and widen certain sections here and there like other states do with their interstates. I don't know why they want to do the whole thing at once.

Kentucky has done the same thing with I-65 and is taking this approach to I-75 as well.

You meant that they did it piecemeal right?
Counties: Counties visited
Travel Mapping: Summary



Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.