http://www.news-gazette.com/news/local/2014-02-19/updated-start-i-5774-work-least-6-years-away.html
There's a pdf file linked to the article showing the five build alternatives, which are:
1) Full stack
2) Cloverstack with flyovers for the I-74 to I-57 left turns, and large loops that pass under the EB I-74 to SB I-57 and WB I-74 to SB I-57 ramps.
3) Same as #2 but using turbine type ramps for the EB I-74 to NB I-57 and WB I-74 to SB I-57 ramps
4) Full turbine with the right turn ramps passing under the left turn ramps
5) Stack/Turbine hybrid - kind of resembles I-81 at US 22/US 322 in Harrisburg, PA
(Edited due to difficulties with posting)
Knowing IDOT, they'll rule out the full stack. There are zero in the entire state. I think IDOT is somewhat allergic to them.
I don't see where there'd be a need for a full stack at this location. Just not the traffic volume to justify it.
I'd think #2 or #3 would be appropriate (I'd lean towards #2 personally). Though 40mph loop ramps seems like overkill. Should be fine with 30 or 35, which would furthe reduce the footprint (and ROW needs/cost). Easier and cheaper (due to ROW costs) to add appropriate acceleration lane on the loop merge than it is to build a wider loop.
I don't recall what the classification of interchange it is for the Northwest Tollway at the Tri State Tollway but I could see that working at that interchange.
^ I-90 at I-294 is a modified cloverstack since WB I-90 to SB I-294 and NB I-294 to EB I-90 are handled via I-190.
I've never liked that entire I-57/72/74 layout, especially with how I-72 dumps directly onto those Champaign city streets that were never originally laid out as major streets. It may have made more sense back when it was built, but local area growth since then has rendered it obsolete - that layout creates too much of an unnatural 'break' in the fabric of the local street system at the interstates.
I would rethink that entire area, perhaps ending I-72 at a directional 'T' with I-57, removing that street feed, or at least losing the cloverleaf loops for those interstate-to-interstate turns.
I also like the idea for flyovers for the I-74 to I-57 left turns, leaving the other two left turns as loops. A full stack is overkill there.
Mike
MGK, 72 was to supplant Ill 10 between Centerville and Champaign. The ramps going in and out of Champaign is the only legit exit for I-57 to Downtown and the U of I campus. And the reason that Ill 10 does not have an exit is because of the railroad along the south and not enough room on the north for a folded diamond because of I-72. That's why it is how it is.
I don't think anyone has done a redo of this series of interchanges in the fictional section. I will work on it.
I think there should be an Option 6: Do Nothing. Option 6 is what IDOT should do.
Quote from: US 41 on February 22, 2014, 05:14:49 PM
I think there should be an Option 6: Do Nothing. Option 6 is what IDOT should do.
and move the funds up to the Chicago area that needs road upgrades
Just slap some C/D lanes on 74 and 57 and call it good.
I agree with the CD lanes on 57 starting just north of Kirby Ave and ending north of Olympian Dr. BTW, one change I absolutely would make is the SB entrance ramp from Olympian on to 57. I would make the SB side a folded diamond to give more room for merging traffic fighting traffic that wants 74 or 72.
They tend to stay away from bridges as much as practicable in the north - the only reason I can think of is they are a bit hard to plow and salt in the winter
Quote from: Brandon on February 19, 2014, 10:29:43 PM
Knowing IDOT, they'll rule out the full stack. There are zero in the entire state. I think IDOT is somewhat allergic to them.
Quote from: DevalDragon on March 29, 2014, 02:44:43 AM
They tend to stay away from bridges as much as practicable in the north - the only reason I can think of is they are a bit hard to plow and salt in the winter
Quote from: Brandon on February 19, 2014, 10:29:43 PM
Knowing IDOT, they'll rule out the full stack. There are zero in the entire state. I think IDOT is somewhat allergic to them.
No, it's an IDOT thing. MDOT uses full 4-level stacks in Detroit.
Dusting off this thread . . .
From the updated report(13 MB pdf), (http://www.idot.illinois.gov/Assets/uploads/IDOT-Projects/District-5/Interstate-57-&-Interstate-74/Approved%20Interchange%20Type%20Study.pdf) IDOT has decided on the cloverstack alternative with flyovers for the I-74 to I-57 movements.
Quote from: Revive 755 on April 27, 2015, 09:21:16 PM
Dusting off this thread . . .
From the updated report(13 MB pdf), (http://www.idot.illinois.gov/Assets/uploads/IDOT-Projects/District-5/Interstate-57-&-Interstate-74/Approved%20Interchange%20Type%20Study.pdf) IDOT has decided on the cloverstack alternative with flyovers for the I-74 to I-57 movements.
Engineering firm CMT of Springfield was just selected to do the contract plans for the interchange.
Quote from: hobsini2 on February 22, 2014, 03:49:59 PM
MGK, 72 was to supplant Ill 10 between Centerville and Champaign. The ramps going in and out of Champaign is the only legit exit for I-57 to Downtown and the U of I campus. And the reason that Ill 10 does not have an exit is because of the railroad along the south and not enough room on the north for a folded diamond because of I-72. That's why it is how it is.
Given that 72 ends just east of 57, was there ever any intent to extend it further east?
Quote from: golden eagle on December 24, 2015, 02:09:51 PM
Quote from: hobsini2 on February 22, 2014, 03:49:59 PM
MGK, 72 was to supplant Ill 10 between Centerville and Champaign. The ramps going in and out of Champaign is the only legit exit for I-57 to Downtown and the U of I campus. And the reason that Ill 10 does not have an exit is because of the railroad along the south and not enough room on the north for a folded diamond because of I-72. That's why it is how it is.
Given that 72 ends just east of 57, was there ever any intent to extend it further east?
It's a pretty quiet highway, not a whole lot of traffic on the run to Springfield from Champaign. You rarely ever hear a thing on the CB. Going east you'd have to tear up a lot of real estate from the Schnucks through town to make it impossible to justify for such a low traffic highway. Hypothetically with funding it could start up again at Danville and run to Toledo through Lafayette and Ft Wayne. Traffic headed from Central Illinois to the Northeast has absolutely no diagonal highway options in Indiana. I went from Champaign to that Crane Sanctuary north of Rensellear and it was an ungodly slow process of 90 degree turns on two lane highways going nearly double the distance as the crow flies. Getting to Lafayette is horrendous from Champaign, also no direct route and all two lane highways where some old geezer driving 53 mph holds a whole column of cars waiting to get around it when the rare opportunity to pass occurs due to heavy traffic in the other direction as well.
I do hope they get around to getting that new interchange done as it is a recipe for disaster where the slow heavy traffic coming together where SB I57 gets off to go to Urbana on I74 merging with all the EB I74 traffic to I57 SB. The area up on the bridge with NB I57 merging with EB 74 can also be heavy as well. Those vehicles come around a very narrow 25mph turn and have almost no space to pick up speed to merge with 70mph traffic while also contenting with traffic jumping right in front of them to get off at 25mph. The put up a bunch of electronic text signs on both interstates about 5 miles out that will probably be used to advice of the situation when construction finally starts.
Bumping this up, it looks like construction will commence sometime in the 2017-2023 time frame, IDOT added it to their multi year program.
http://www.news-gazette.com/news/local/2016-05-30/idot-planning-upgrade-i-57i-74-interchange.html (http://www.news-gazette.com/news/local/2016-05-30/idot-planning-upgrade-i-57i-74-interchange.html)
It looks like they decided on a semi-directional with some flyover ramps (per the IDOT website), but they putting the flyovers on non-essential movements (such as EB I-74 to NB I-57 and WB I-74 to SB I-57, etc)
Quote from: I-39 on May 31, 2016, 05:31:01 PM
Bumping this up, it looks like construction will commence sometime in the 2017-2023 time frame, IDOT added it to their multi year program.
http://www.news-gazette.com/news/local/2016-05-30/idot-planning-upgrade-i-57i-74-interchange.html (http://www.news-gazette.com/news/local/2016-05-30/idot-planning-upgrade-i-57i-74-interchange.html)
It looks like they decided on a semi-directional with some flyover ramps (per the IDOT website), but they putting the flyovers on non-essential movements (such as EB I-74 to NB I-57 and WB I-74 to SB I-57, etc)
I'm assuming that's a typo in the last paragraph? Did they mean 2023?
QuoteIDOT said more funding is needed, however. Today, 79 percent of highways and 92 percent of bridges maintained by the agency are in acceptable condition. After 2013, just 61 percent of highways and 86 percent of bridges will be considered acceptable, it said.
I used this interchange to drive to/from college for 4 years so, here's the anecdotal/in-situ knowledge I have. First, I-74 east of 57 gets a lot of traffic coming from I-57 because people use 74 as a spur route to the Champaign-Urbana exits farther east (mainly Cunningham, Lincoln, Neil and Prospect). So in my opinion, attempts to increase efficiency should be focused on ramps connecting to the east leg of I-74. Think of I-74 east of I-57 to US45 as a "I-157" of sorts.
Second, priority may be taken away from ramps connecting the north and west legs of the interchange, because I don't see many drivers utilizing those two ramps.
Third, the US150 overpass and the Mattis Ave overpasses may create constraints on what we can design. That's a nice triangle of land to the east, though.
I wonder if anyone has envisioned designs of their own for this? Anyone have any of their own ideas of what they should do here? I'm hoping these 5 suggestions in the OP aren't the only designs considered--they're pretty short-sighted as of that article's inception, IMO.
I always saw WB 74 to SB 57 (and the reciprocal) as the primary movements at that interchange, so I'm not sure where "I-39" goes calling it a non-essential movement. That one's very essential.
For designs such as this, having flyovers in "opposite corners" works better operationally because the two remaining loop ramps don't have weave conflicts. They probably went with this design because, as I noted above, WB-SB *IS* the big movement, so EB-NB gets a flyover by association in order to eliminate the weaves.
Quote from: froggie on June 03, 2016, 07:54:50 AM
I always saw WB 74 to SB 57 (and the reciprocal) as the primary movements at that interchange, so I'm not sure where "I-39" goes calling it a non-essential movement. That one's very essential.
For designs such as this, having flyovers in "opposite corners" works better operationally because the two remaining loop ramps don't have weave conflicts. They probably went with this design because, as I noted above, WB-SB *IS* the big movement, so EB-NB gets a flyover by association in order to eliminate the weaves.
This is absolutely correct. W74 to S57 is the primary movement for two big reasons. The big one being that local Champaign / Urbana traffic uses the interstates to navigate around the cities. The second one being that traffic from Danville, IL and Indiana wanting to go to Decatur and Springfield have to go south on I-57 to get to I-72.
Quote from: paulthemapguy on June 02, 2016, 09:46:07 PM
Quote from: I-39 on May 31, 2016, 05:31:01 PM
Bumping this up, it looks like construction will commence sometime in the 2017-2023 time frame, IDOT added it to their multi year program.
http://www.news-gazette.com/news/local/2016-05-30/idot-planning-upgrade-i-57i-74-interchange.html (http://www.news-gazette.com/news/local/2016-05-30/idot-planning-upgrade-i-57i-74-interchange.html)
It looks like they decided on a semi-directional with some flyover ramps (per the IDOT website), but they putting the flyovers on non-essential movements (such as EB I-74 to NB I-57 and WB I-74 to SB I-57, etc)
I'm assuming that's a typo in the last paragraph? Did they mean 2023?
QuoteIDOT said more funding is needed, however. Today, 79 percent of highways and 92 percent of bridges maintained by the agency are in acceptable condition. After 2013, just 61 percent of highways and 86 percent of bridges will be considered acceptable, it said.
I used this interchange to drive to/from college for 4 years so, here's the anecdotal/in-situ knowledge I have. First, I-74 east of 57 gets a lot of traffic coming from I-57 because people use 74 as a spur route to the Champaign-Urbana exits farther east (mainly Cunningham, Lincoln, Neil and Prospect). So in my opinion, attempts to increase efficiency should be focused on ramps connecting to the east leg of I-74. Think of I-74 east of I-57 to US45 as a "I-157" of sorts.
Second, priority may be taken away from ramps connecting the north and west legs of the interchange, because I don't see many drivers utilizing those two ramps.
Third, the US150 overpass and the Mattis Ave overpasses may create constraints on what we can design. That's a nice triangle of land to the east, though.
I wonder if anyone has envisioned designs of their own for this? Anyone have any of their own ideas of what they should do here? I'm hoping these 5 suggestions in the OP aren't the only designs considered--they're pretty short-sighted as of that article's inception, IMO.
Read the Idot link, they spent months with machines tabulating traffic and the EB74 to SB57 by a large margin was the heaviest used of the bunch. Lots of people shop at the retail district on 74 and go around that bend to head out to the west part of the town on 57. Prospect Ave is hellish traffic and dangerously narrow between Bradley and Kirby, too narrow in my opinion to be safe, 4 lanes crammed into a narrow right of way that is more typical of two lane highways with a 3rd left turn lane in the middle. People avoid these roads by taking 57 to the SW part of town. This heavy traffic conflicts with the SB57 to EB74 traffic on that short 25mph merge lane. The non flyovers are also to be changed quite a bit, in the engineering design the old small 25mph loop is to have it's radius dramatically enhanced to a much larger, higher speed circle where they emerge onto 74 without any exiting traffic to contend with anymore. If you look at the official report, the bridges on Mattis crossing both 57 and 74, highway 150, and Staley Rd are to be completely redone and lengthened for the wider right of ways as one of the first phases of the project.
^ Assuming you meant WB 74 to SB 57, not EB 74 to SB 57.
Quote from: froggie on June 03, 2016, 07:54:50 AM
I always saw WB 74 to SB 57 (and the reciprocal) as the primary movements at that interchange, so I'm not sure where "I-39" goes calling it a non-essential movement. That one's very essential.
For designs such as this, having flyovers in "opposite corners" works better operationally because the two remaining loop ramps don't have weave conflicts. They probably went with this design because, as I noted above, WB-SB *IS* the big movement, so EB-NB gets a flyover by association in order to eliminate the weaves.
When I was saying non-essential movements, I was primarily referring to EB I-74 to NB I-57. That one is not needed.
They really should be constructing a flyover from NB I-57 to WB I-74. I'm shocked they are not.
With the design they chose, one isn't really necessary.
Quote from: US 41 on June 03, 2016, 08:08:13 AM
Quote from: froggie on June 03, 2016, 07:54:50 AM
I always saw WB 74 to SB 57 (and the reciprocal) as the primary movements at that interchange, so I'm not sure where "I-39" goes calling it a non-essential movement. That one's very essential.
For designs such as this, having flyovers in "opposite corners" works better operationally because the two remaining loop ramps don't have weave conflicts. They probably went with this design because, as I noted above, WB-SB *IS* the big movement, so EB-NB gets a flyover by association in order to eliminate the weaves.
This is absolutely correct. W74 to S57 is the primary movement for two big reasons. The big one being that local Champaign / Urbana traffic uses the interstates to navigate around the cities. The second one being that traffic from Danville, IL and Indiana wanting to go to Decatur and Springfield have to go south on I-57 to get to I-72.
Actually it sounds like you're talking about E74 and S57??
Quote from: I-39 on June 03, 2016, 12:19:54 PM
Quote from: froggie on June 03, 2016, 07:54:50 AM
I always saw WB 74 to SB 57 (and the reciprocal) as the primary movements at that interchange, so I'm not sure where "I-39" goes calling it a non-essential movement. That one's very essential.
For designs such as this, having flyovers in "opposite corners" works better operationally because the two remaining loop ramps don't have weave conflicts. They probably went with this design because, as I noted above, WB-SB *IS* the big movement, so EB-NB gets a flyover by association in order to eliminate the weaves.
When I was saying non-essential movements, I was primarily referring to EB I-74 to NB I-57. That one is not needed.
They really should be constructing a flyover from NB I-57 to WB I-74. I'm shocked they are not.
They have to by default since the WB 74 from the shopping district to SB 57 is the most used and will get a high speed flyover ramp. With growth in Mahomet and Lake of the Woods due to families fleeing the dreadful CU public school system that EB 74 to NB 57 ramp may see much more traffic in the future as well as I always take that route myself when coming from Mahomet to get off at Olympian Ave as a shortcut to Meijer and the Prospect shopping district which is much faster to access from the north. SB 57 to EB 74 may seem to be heavy due to the university, but that traffic is really only on specific days at specific times, also much of it uses the EB remnant of I 72 rather than head into Urbana, especially Football traffic.
I'm amazed at the 40 mph loop ramps. :wow:
Construction has finally begun on this project. Cones for a couple miles along 57 and sometimes a state trooper checking speed as you approach. They have Bloomington Rd all diked up and appear to be building half the bridge at a time with traffic constricted to one lane across. Once all the bridges of the secondary routes are lengthened to accommodate the new traffic flow work on the new ramps and flyovers will begin.
Thread bump!
WCIA-CBS 3 Meteorologist Kevin Lighty posted some aerial imagery of the Champaign I-57/74 interchange upgrade project on facebook. 67 second video
Plenty of work remaining but the flyovers are beginning to take shape
https://fb.watch/oDGLIeqFv7/
Quote from: ilpt4u on November 29, 2023, 10:05:54 PM
Thread bump!
WCIA-CBS 3 Meteorologist Kevin Lighty posted some aerial imagery of the Champaign I-57/74 interchange upgrade project on facebook. 67 second video
Plenty of work remaining but the flyovers are beginning to take shape
https://fb.watch/oDGLIeqFv7/
Ah! You beat me to it. I saw this yesterday.
The flyover from W 74 to S 57 has all its girders placed along with the two bridges from W 74 to N 57 They finished a couple weeks ago, but no work seems to have begun yet on placing the steel girders on the pylons on E 74 to N 57? Maybe they will need to reposition all those cranes and are waiting to finish the two new halves of the mainline 74 bridge over 57 so they can tear down and place the beams for the other half where the old highway now carries traffic? All I know is it sure took a lot of time, in China I know each of the two flyovers would probably have two teams starting from each end and the whole thing would have been laid out in a few weeks. Erosion is also really starting to carve these furrows into the sides of the raised earthworks for all the ramps and grass definitely needs to be planted ASAP to stabilize the things. I haven't seen the photo radar camera speed trap van since late 2022 so it seems to have been a reaction to the accident that happened on NB 57 in the fall of 2022. I do see ordinary State Police writing tickets on the NB and SB 57 fairly often as I pass through here daily yet somehow still see semis blazing through in the 45 speed zone at nearly 70 in the left lanes.
Quote from: captkirk_4 on May 09, 2024, 09:04:59 AMAll I know is it sure took a lot of time, in China I know each of the two flyovers would probably have two teams starting from each end and the whole thing would have been laid out in a few weeks.
Yeah but who the hell would rather live in China than Illinois?
Don't praise dictatorships that use slave labor, man.
I hate IDiOT for constructing those damn cloverleafs at all-Interstate junctions. Here's hoping more replacements will come in the future.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on May 09, 2024, 10:20:02 AMQuote from: captkirk_4 on May 09, 2024, 09:04:59 AMAll I know is it sure took a lot of time, in China I know each of the two flyovers would probably have two teams starting from each end and the whole thing would have been laid out in a few weeks.
Yeah but who the hell would rather live in China than Illinois?
Don't praise dictatorships that use slave labor, man.
OK, well I could also say the Eisenhower would also have gotten in done a lot faster. It's not "slave labor" but the legalism with endless "studies" and "permits" needed to get the thing going and just the economic malaise that deems it better for one crew to get 5 years of work out of it by going slow rather than a bunch of teams getting it done quickly then off the the unemployment office because Illinois is largely dead economically. We are supposed to be getting a new H-Mart in the old County Market building in downtown Urbana. However it is taking absolutely forever and the excuse given is that the "permitting" is the hold up. One thing for sure, H-Mart's have nice, inexpensive food courts in them where you can get restaurant quality food cooked without dealing with all that sit down table and menu, tip, waiting, etc. that caused an entire fast food industry to spring up in the mid 20th century to bypass that had the drawback however of offering little more than junk food until the next wave of Chipotle type business models have begun to replace the fried potatoes and burgers with something a bit more fulfilling.
Well then praise mid-20th Century America's capacity to get things done from the first word. Why bring up China at all? You were asking for that kind of response.
https://illinois-department-of-transportation.prezly.com/i-5774-interchange-ramps-reopen-tonight
IDOT announced the new NB 57 to EB 74 ramp is open. Not one of the new Flyovers but it is progress
Quote from: triplemultiplex on May 13, 2024, 11:48:10 AMWell then praise mid-20th Century America's capacity to get things done from the first word. Why bring up China at all? You were asking for that kind of response.
When I was a young man, I had the privilege of talking to many of the people who built the interstates (mainly I-80 and I-55) in the 1950's in northern IL. There weren't nearly as many permits to obtain, and the NEPA environmental process was unheard of. Since there wasn't anything resembling a computer (a mechanical adding machine with a print-out was about as sophisticated a machine as they had), alignments had to be worked out on paper and quantities calculated by hand. Surveys and measurements were done manually with optical instruments and steel measuring tapes. It was a very labor-intensive effort to design and build highways, usually in a hazy cloud of cigarette smoke. It was a male-dominated business (I don't think we had a female engineer until sometime in the late 60s), but there were a substantial amount of people who came from other countries to America who wound up in the effort.
"Well then praise mid-20th Century America's capacity to get things done..."
That led to "NIMBY's" and "freeway revolts", later on. Also, lots of "highways to nowhere", i.e. I-180.
The 1956 cloverleaf interchanges were meant for lower population and traffic counts. Champaign added population since 2023, now up to over 90k. Growing, while other central IL cities are shrinking. Be glad getting something.
Did the cities really grow, or did they simply lose population slower than other Illinois cities?
https://wgntv.com/news/illinois/these-are-the-fastest-growing-cities-in-illinois-according-to-new-report/
Below is a list of the seven Illinois cities to see one-year population increases:
Elgin: 8.36%
Arlington Heights: 4.71%
Peoria: 3.86%
Waukegan: 3.04%
Naperville: 1.83%
Rockford: 0.26%
Joliet: 0.17%
Waukegan saw the largest population increase at 7.43%, followed closely by Elgin.
The 11 other cities analyzed by SmartAsset were not as lucky.
Narrowly missing the growth group was Chicago, which saw a population decline of 0.02% between 2022 and 2023. Over the last five years, the drop was much larger at 1.53%.
Chicago sits atop a list of seven Illinois cities that experienced a population reduction of less than 1%. Others include:
Champaign: -0.06%
Bloomington: -0.36%
Palatine: -0.39%
Bolingbrook: -0.43%
Evanston: -0.62%
Springfield: -0.89%
Despite the one-year declines, four of those cities — Champaign, Bloomington, Bolingbrook, and Evanston — actually saw population growth over the past five years.
Decatur experienced the largest decline in population year-over-year at 5.4%, the ninth-largest of the 610 cities SmartAsset reviewed. Other Illinois cities that experienced drops include Cicero (-1.11%), Aurora (-1.63%), and Schaumburg (-2.76%). Among Illinois cities, Aurora saw the largest five-year population decline at 13.1%, the sixth-largest on SmartAsset's list.
These reported results are so far off what the US Census estimates, I am having trouble believing them. Yes, the west side of Elgin is showing good growth, but 8% a year is more than Kendall County at its "fastest growing county in the US" peak.
In Comparison, these are the 2023-2024 Census estimates recently released.
2023 2024 % growth
Elgin: 113,922 114,701 +0.68%
Arlington Heights: 75,066 75,596 +0.71%
Peoria: 111,195 111,696 +0.45%
Waukegan: 88,321 88,570 +0.28
Naperville: 151,166 153,124 +1.29%
Rockford: 146,799 147,486 +0.47%
Joliet: 151,081 151,837 +0.50%
I also looked at Decatur, and the census estimates are
68,824 68,763 -0.09%
A dip, but nowhere in the 5% a year range. It did fall 3.12% in the 4-year period from 2020 to 2024.
Looking at Elgin again, the US Census says it lost a little population before it gained it back and then some, so that the growth from 2020-2024 was actually on the order of +0.05%.
Source: https://www.census.gov/data/tables/time-series/demo/popest/2020s-total-cities-and-towns.html
The data reported by WGN-TV was compiled by SmartAsset.
Per Wikipedia:
SmartAsset is a financial technology company, founded in July 2012 by Michael Carvin and Phillip Camilleri and headquartered in New York, New York.The company publishes articles, guides, reviews, calculators and tools to help people make decisions about personal finance. However, as their "Advertiser Disclosure" denotes, "The offers that appear are from companies from which SmartAsset.com receives compensation. This compensation may impact how and where products appear (including, for example, the order in which they appear). SmartAsset.com does not include all providers or product offers available in the marketplace."