Illinois Tollway Notes

[Joe The Dragon]

I like their optimism.  390 and 490 should be interstates.

Not every limited/controlled access roadway needs to be an interstate.

I-190 has one and it ends??? very fast

Never said they should.  These two however, are worthy.

Too short of a span to be, in fact I don't even think 190, 290 etc should be interstates because of the short spans as well.

I-290 is 30 miles. How long do you think one should be for it to be given a blue shield?

[bobonabike]

Interesting video:  Interchange at I-90 and IL-23:  http://www.cityofmarengo.com/2017/08/23/video-of-interchange-design-at-i-90-and-route-23/

[Crash_It]

I like their optimism.  390 and 490 should be interstates.

Not every limited/controlled access roadway needs to be an interstate.

Never said they should.  These two however, are worthy.

Too short of a span to be, in fact I don't even think 190, 290 etc should be interstates because of the short spans as well.

I-290 is 30 miles. How long do you think one should be for it to be given a blue shield?

75 miles or more. That would also remove the interstate shields from 180, 294, 355 and whatever else is out there. 294 and 355 would effectively become two more tolled controlled access state routes that aren't an interstate. FL and TX already have this.

[SSOWorld]

I like their optimism.  390 and 490 should be interstates.

Not every limited/controlled access roadway needs to be an interstate.

Never said they should.  These two however, are worthy.

Too short of a span to be, in fact I don't even think 190, 290 etc should be interstates because of the short spans as well.

I-290 is 30 miles. How long do you think one should be for it to be given a blue shield?

75 miles or more. That would also remove the interstate shields from 180, 294, 355 and whatever else is out there. 294 and 355 would effectively become two more tolled controlled access state routes that aren't an interstate. FL and TX already have this.

Add this argument to the "who cares" list.  There are more compelling arguments for red-white and blue shields to be added - like eligibility for higher speed limits (like that means anything in Chicago anyway)

[Crash_It]

I like their optimism.  390 and 490 should be interstates.

Not every limited/controlled access roadway needs to be an interstate.

Never said they should.  These two however, are worthy.

Too short of a span to be, in fact I don't even think 190, 290 etc should be interstates because of the short spans as well.

I-290 is 30 miles. How long do you think one should be for it to be given a blue shield?

75 miles or more. That would also remove the interstate shields from 180, 294, 355 and whatever else is out there. 294 and 355 would effectively become two more tolled controlled access state routes that aren't an interstate. FL and TX already have this.

Add this argument to the "who cares" list.  There are more compelling arguments for red-white and blue shields to be added - like eligibility for higher speed limits (like that means anything in Chicago anyway)

Higher speed limits can happen regardless of being an interstate, all they have to do is rewrite that law.

[paulthemapguy]

Interesting video:  Interchange at I-90 and IL-23:  http://www.cityofmarengo.com/2017/08/23/video-of-interchange-design-at-i-90-and-route-23/

Thanks for the info!  I always wondered why I-90 and IL-23 crossed without an interchange.  I never thought it was REALLY needed because of the nearby US20 interchange, but I think the people of Marengo could really use it.

Also, for arguments on what generally gets an Interstate shield and what doesn't, you might want to go to the Fictional Highways section.

[edwaleni]

Interesting video:  Interchange at I-90 and IL-23:  http://www.cityofmarengo.com/2017/08/23/video-of-interchange-design-at-i-90-and-route-23/

I struggle to watch the 80' trucks going through that roundabout, even on the video.  I see lots of accidents of people either trying to beat the truck going around or turning in front of it.

Either way, no traffic lights, but no safety either.

[Revive 755]

Interesting video:  Interchange at I-90 and IL-23:  http://www.cityofmarengo.com/2017/08/23/video-of-interchange-design-at-i-90-and-route-23/

Based on the video, it appear the EB exit will be tolled, while both the WB exit and entrance will be tolled (may have the directions switched though).


As for I-490, has anyone heard anything on when construction would start on the connection to I-294?  IIRC the I-294 end was to be done first.  I am wondering if the fight with Canadian Pacific has put more priority on the I-90 end, or whether the I-294 end will be part of the Tri-State work.

[ET21]

I believe it's supposed to start next year. The timetable has that section being completed from 2018-2020. They've had a traffic shift in the area of the future interchange since early summer but not much has been done yet
https://www.illinoistollway.com/projects/tri-state/central-tri-state-reconstruction

[inkyatari]

I like their optimism.  390 and 490 should be interstates.

According the the 490 interchange project site, it IS I-490

https://www.illinoistollway.com/projects/490/interchange

[The Ghostbuster]

The link you put up says "Project Information Coming Soon." I guess that means we'll have to either wait for site updates, or go elsewhere for information on this project.

[SSOWorld]

The link you put up says "Project Information Coming Soon." I guess that means we'll have to either wait for site updates, or go elsewhere for information on this project.

[inkyatari]

The link you put up says "Project Information Coming Soon." I guess that means we'll have to either wait for site updates, or go elsewhere for information on this project.

I was going off the fact that it says I-490, plus has the interstate shield with the number on it.

[abefroman329]

I'm sure this has been asked and answered, but how is it that it can be a new toll highway with an interstate designation? I thought that wasn't allowed.

[Brandon]

I'm sure this has been asked and answered, but how is it that it can be a new toll highway with an interstate designation? I thought that wasn't allowed.

It is indeed allowed.  I-355 was created that way in 1989.

[paulthemapguy]

I'm sure this has been asked and answered, but how is it that it can be a new toll highway with an interstate designation? I thought that wasn't allowed.

IDOT and ISTHA will gladly set up a state route with a number on a toll road, that will match the Interstate convention maintained by AASHTO.  Then if people request that AASHTO approve that toll road for the Interstate system, well, we all know what number they're going to choose!  Choosing a route number that matches the Interstate numbering conventions is a really easy way to communicate to AASHTO that they would like their tollway or other freeway to be considered.

[ilpt4u]

I'm sure this has been asked and answered, but how is it that it can be a new toll highway with an interstate designation? I thought that wasn't allowed.

IDOT and ISTHA will gladly set up a state route with a number on a toll road, that will match the Interstate convention maintained by AASHTO.  Then if people request that AASHTO approve that toll road for the Interstate system, well, we all know what number they're going to choose!  Choosing a route number that matches the Interstate numbering conventions is a really easy way to communicate to AASHTO that they would like their tollway or other freeway to be considered.

My only thought there...was there not initial confusion as whether the North-South/Veterans Memorial Tollway should be numbered I-355 or I-455? I want to say there were even printed maps with the I-455 designation applied to the route

Don't know if the source of the confusion was IDOT, ISTHA, AASHTO, FHWA, etc

From the interstate-guide.com page on I-355:

[abefroman329]

I'm sure this has been asked and answered, but how is it that it can be a new toll highway with an interstate designation? I thought that wasn't allowed.

IDOT and ISTHA will gladly set up a state route with a number on a toll road, that will match the Interstate convention maintained by AASHTO.  Then if people request that AASHTO approve that toll road for the Interstate system, well, we all know what number they're going to choose!  Choosing a route number that matches the Interstate numbering conventions is a really easy way to communicate to AASHTO that they would like their tollway or other freeway to be considered.

My only thought there...was there not initial confusion as whether the North-South/Veterans Memorial Tollway should be numbered I-355 or I-455? I want to say there were even printed maps with the I-455 designation applied to the route

Don't know if the source of the confusion was IDOT, ISTHA, AASHTO, FHWA, etc

From the interstate-guide.com page on I-355:

I think it got 355 and not 455 because it didn't connect to 55 at both ends.

[3467]

It might be the same debate as 255. Is it a spur or a bypass. Both IDOT and tollway hoped it would be a bypass but in 1985 and even now it's not clear it will be a bypass. Also application of EIS to a privately funded tollway . They decided they did need to do so because IDOT  had acquired most of the ROW.

[abefroman329]

It might be the same debate as 255. Is it a spur or a bypass. Both IDOT and tollway hoped it would be a bypass but in 1985 and even now it's not clear it will be a bypass. Also application of EIS to a privately funded tollway . They decided they did need to do so because IDOT  had acquired most of the ROW.

As I look at the map, I think it should have been a 2di. Don't ask me what number should have been assigned, though.

[ilpt4u]

It might be the same debate as 255. Is it a spur or a bypass.

I-255 does connect twice to I-55...Once in IL and once in MO, where the STL Beltway changes designation from I-255 to I-270 on the MO side

[3467]

If 355 is extended north along with a spur to US 12 I would agree on a 2 do. It is in the 2050 plan. It could be 43.

[inkyatari]

If 355 is extended north along with a spur to US 12 I would agree on a 2 do. It is in the 2050 plan. It could be 43.

I wouldn't consider a 2DI unless it was also extended south to I-57 somewhere near Kankakee.  Given it's location , I'd probably consider  I-51 (- I was going to say I-53, but I forgot about the IL-53 around Schaumburg)

[SSOWorld]

If 355 is extended north along with a spur to US 12 I would agree on a 2 do. It is in the 2050 plan. It could be 43.

I wouldn't consider a 2DI unless it was also extended south to I-57 somewhere near Kankakee.  Given it's location , I'd probably consider  I-51 (- I was going to say I-53, but I forgot about the IL-53 around Schaumburg)

Well considering that IDOT doesn't worry about duplications that wouldn't matter.

[3467]

The extension to 57 or 65 was the plan but there was no place to put a north south connection . But if it goes to Wisconsin I still think I 53 would be appropriate.