To avoid fiction please limit to routes that the state DOT has under some sort of study and then let us know if you think it is worthwhile.
I will start Wisconsin as an example
http://www.dot.state.wi.us/business/econdev/corridors.htm
I think Wisconsin has done a great job of planning its corridors and I have nothing to add.
Maybe you do or have something to say about Wisconsin or plans in MI MN OH IN PA NY?
Wisconsin kicks Illinois's butt when it comes to corridor planning, it build their major routes the right way.
However, I do think Wisconsin is starting to get a little over ambitious with upgrading their routes to freeways/expressways. Other than upgrading U.S 151 to freeway between Fond Du Lac and Dubuque and finishing the U.S 12 corridor between Madison and the Dells, I think they should leave their system as it is. Focus on rebuilding and widening corridors such as I-39/90 between the state line and Madison, I-39/90/94 between Madison and the Dells, I-94 in the Milwaukee area, etc.
Some of the corridors WisDOT upgraded are not really necessary (such as U.S 10, WIS 29, etc)
Quote from: adamlanfort on February 19, 2015, 03:07:09 PM
Wisconsin kicks Illinois's butt when it comes to corridor planning, it build their major routes the right way.
That's because Wisconsin has money and does not have the inmates running the asylum.
I wrote it to avoid fictional highways . It comments ONLY on roads under study by a DOT .
Rauner wont be around as long as your buddy Rick Scott
I'm not going to get political here, but I will say this one thing. Give Rauner some time, Illinois is in terrible shape because of reckless spending by BOTH sides, and frankly, it's alarming how bad the state is. I don't necessarily agree with everything he stands for, but drastic times call for drastic measures.
The real problem in Illinois is Speaker Mike Madigan, he is a corrupt scumbag running the state into the ground.
True on Madigan ........and hes been here for 40 years ...and Illinois lived of skipping its pension payments .....Its actually not that bad we have to extend the income tax and Teir 2 will eventually pay off part of the pension debt . We are far from Greece our total debt is less than a fifth of GSP Greece is 4 times its GDP A small gax tax could fund the road program certainly one the size Adam and I are talking about right now both Rauner and Madigan are talking unconstitutional fantasies Madigan on his millionaire tax which needs another vote in 2016 and Rauner on pensions. His cut of one third to the state universities wont go over in the suburbs
Looking at the state list here it is possible none of these other states have any corridors under study. I am pretty sure there are not any more ex the Illiana in northern Indiana . I know they pulled their 2030 plan. I know Ohio doesn't plan any more interstates.
Ok, so if I had to make a final road plan, here are the corridors that are ABSOLUTELY necessary for 4-laning (downstate only)
Freeways:
U.S 20: Galena bypass only
U.S 51 between Bloomington and Decatur (upgrade it into a southern leg of I-39 to both correct current expressway deficiencies and to give Decatur better access to points north, this would be a better use than a full U.S 20 freeway between Freeport and Galena)
Expressways:
U.S 51 from Assumption to Pana (Pana bypass will be freeway, I think)
U.S 67 between Monmouth and IL-255 (may have some freeway segments such as Jerseyville to IL-255 and Macomb bypass)
Passing lanes:
IL-13 and 29 corridors
U.S 20 between Galena and Freeport
U.S 24 between I-55 to Peoria and from Peoria to Rushville
U.S 30 between Monmouth and Iowa border (I'm torn over expressway or passing lanes for this one)
U.S 50 in southern Illinois
U.S 51 between Pana bypass and Centralia
Everything else is fine. Scrap the remaining four lane expressway projects
Quote from: 3467 on February 19, 2015, 11:21:16 PM
Both sides have been very bad in Illinois Former Dem State Rep Derrik Smith just got his sentence today The Illinois dem party is not progressive Obama is about as left as it gets and he isn't very liberal and he was a backbencher in the State Senate...
I am basically with you on that list
I looked at that MN I-37 thread I guess MN is looking at that I know they are looking at US 14 too Any other projects in the region
So you agree with the I-39 to Decatur? I'm surprised. I do think that would be a better use than U.S 20, and I'm not really sure why IDOT is not studying that.
And speaking of politics, it was because of it that I-39 didn't go to Decatur in the first place, Big Jim Thompson made a backroom deal to not let it happen.
I just don't think it will happen just like I don't think the Monmouth Bypass will be upgraded
On Illinois its a nonidealogical state but a corrupt one Rauner is in trouble because he is very ideological. The irony is he made his fortune off the state pension fund. The money of the state workers he despises. He rants about the unions but would Illinois be better if all the state workers were Madigans patronage workers
Quote from: 3467 on February 19, 2015, 11:30:11 PM
I just don't think it will happen just like I don't think the Monmouth Bypass will be upgraded
On Illinois its a nonidealogical state but a corrupt one Rauner is in trouble because he is very ideological. The irony is he made his fortune off the state pension fund. The money of the state workers he despises. He rants about the unions but would Illinois be better if all the state workers were Madigans patronage workers
The problem is, the can has been kicked down the road for so long, now that Illinois has a governor that wants to do something, everyone is up in arms. I do like what he is doing with reviewing IDOT projects for cost-benefit, maybe that will lead to scaling back or eliminating unnecessary projects such as U.S 20 or IL-336.
The problem with Illinois is, IMO, the public employee unions. They have gotten too friendly with politicians (on both sides) and they are costing the state a lot of money with pensions and other benefits. I have no problems with unions in the private sector, we don't need to pass right to work laws, but I have a huge problem with public employee unions raiding taxpayers like they are an endless ATM machine. Even FDR didn't believe in public employee collective bargaining, it really is a conflict of interest when you think about it.
I believe in paying state employees a reasonable living wage and benefits, but not letting them hold the taxpayers hostage with their unions.
Anyway, back to roads.
Please cut the political attacks and stay on topic
Quote from: SSOWorld on February 19, 2015, 11:48:14 PM
Please cut the political attacks and stay on topic
I apologize, it's just seems unavoidable when talking about highway funding and what needs to be done.
Getting back to roads, in your opinion 3467, IN the Chicagoland area, what needs to be done (upgrade wise)?
Quote from: Brandon on February 19, 2015, 03:58:55 PM
That's because Wisconsin has money and does not have the inmates running the asylum.
Quote from: SSOWorld on February 19, 2015, 11:48:14 PM
Please cut the political attacks and stay on topic
Wisconsin:
US-12 between Elkhorn and Madison is going to need to be upgraded. The stretch between Cambridge and Madison is already jam packed during rush hour with very few places to pass. I would start by four laning this stretch and continuing plans for the rest.
US-51 between US-8 and Minoqua. That stretch should be four lanes as well. North of Minoqua it is fine at this point.
WI-26 from north of the Watertown bypass to US-151 needs to be figured out too.
Really outside of that Wisconsin's system is just fine and should focus on expansion of existing corridors. 1. I-39/90 from Madison to the Illinois line is one. (Getting done.) 2. I-94 between Waukesha and Madison. 3. I-94 just east of the Minnesota line.
Quote from: SEWIGuy on February 20, 2015, 09:53:12 AM
Wisconsin:
US-12 between Elkhorn and Madison is going to need to be upgraded. The stretch between Cambridge and Madison is already jam packed during rush hour with very few places to pass. I would start by four laning this stretch and continuing plans for the rest.
US-51 between US-8 and Minoqua. That stretch should be four lanes as well. North of Minoqua it is fine at this point.
WI-26 from north of the Watertown bypass to US-151 needs to be figured out too.
Really outside of that Wisconsin's system is just fine and should focus on expansion of existing corridors. 1. I-39/90 from Madison to the Illinois line is one. (Getting done.) 2. I-94 between Waukesha and Madison. 3. I-94 just east of the Minnesota line.
U.S 12 is only worth upgrading if Illinois continues it south to the IL-53 extension, but since we know that will never happen, you can forget about that. Plus, the Whitewater to Fort Atkinson segment was killed by local residents, and has been delayed indefinitely.
On U.S 51, they are going to reconstruct and add passing lanes to that segment, there really isn't enough room for four lanes without significant environmental impacts. But first, they need to covert the expressway segment between Merrill and Tomahawk to freeway.
I think U.S 12 between Madison and Wisconsin Dells is more important than WIS 26, but that is just my opinion.
But first, they need to finish the I-39/90 and I-94 expansion projects before doing anything else.
Based on what they are actually studying for Chicago of course. Well pretty much the arterials that are on the IDOT list . These are not exactly big projects -mostly adding a lane -Some are 4 lane expressway design in the outer area . The SRA plans -IDOT used to have a link for those plans but they seem gone -those were in many cases 6 lane arterials and lots of overpasses and other improvements. considering the nature of the Chicago area with the density few of those were practical Also they overestimated growth just like the supplemental freeway plan did. IL 23 was an SRA ...So I guess I will go with the routes IDOT is working on with some passing lanes in the outer areas like US 34 and IL 64
Mc Henry and Lake and Kane have their own local plans which are mostly the same as the IDOT routes. plus their local plans. I will look for those tonight
For the Mega Projects we are down to the 53 extension and the Elgin Ohare and the Illiana . The Tollway will get the first 2 done I hope ROW or corridor protection is kept for the Illinana Prarie Parkway corridor just in case
One thing I will add about Chicagoland is Randall Road needs to be widened to six lanes from Algonquin down to Batavia, and the interchange with I-90 needs to be reconstructed/reconfigured into something like an SPUI.
Randall is in the Kane plan. I will look for that tonight if you don't find it first
Quote from: adamlanfort on February 20, 2015, 10:17:25 AM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on February 20, 2015, 09:53:12 AM
Wisconsin:
US-12 between Elkhorn and Madison is going to need to be upgraded. The stretch between Cambridge and Madison is already jam packed during rush hour with very few places to pass. I would start by four laning this stretch and continuing plans for the rest.
US-51 between US-8 and Minoqua. That stretch should be four lanes as well. North of Minoqua it is fine at this point.
WI-26 from north of the Watertown bypass to US-151 needs to be figured out too.
Really outside of that Wisconsin's system is just fine and should focus on expansion of existing corridors. 1. I-39/90 from Madison to the Illinois line is one. (Getting done.) 2. I-94 between Waukesha and Madison. 3. I-94 just east of the Minnesota line.
U.S 12 is only worth upgrading if Illinois continues it south to the IL-53 extension, but since we know that will never happen, you can forget about that. Plus, the Whitewater to Fort Atkinson segment was killed by local residents, and has been delayed indefinitely.
On U.S 51, they are going to reconstruct and add passing lanes to that segment, there really isn't enough room for four lanes without significant environmental impacts. But first, they need to covert the expressway segment between Merrill and Tomahawk to freeway.
I think U.S 12 between Madison and Wisconsin Dells is more important than WIS 26, but that is just my opinion.
But first, they need to finish the I-39/90 and I-94 expansion projects before doing anything else.
I agree with the above statements.
I've been surprised how well US 51 functions between Heafford Jct and Hazelhurst, but some more passing lanes would be nice.
I keep hoping that the Lake County Parkway/IL 53 extension will make it beyond the planning stage, however, even with a Richmond bypass, it will not provide a continuous 4-lane corridor north of the IL 120 corridor for US 12. In spite of that, I still think US 12 from Elkhorn to County Trunk N near Cottage Grove merits upgrading regardless.
No one mentions WI 21 between Oshkosh and Tomah? I'm surprised at the traffic it carries on the weekends, for going through some of the most unpopulated portions of the state. Some passing lanes would be nice as would a Wautoma/Silver Lake bypass to the south.
Lastly, into the future, six-laning I-90/94 to Tomah would be helpful, as would six-laning I-94 from Hudson to US 12/WI 312 at Eau Claire. Traffic counts may not warrant expansion now, but it most likely will be warranted at some point.
Quote from: midwesternroadguy on February 20, 2015, 12:52:37 PM
Quote from: adamlanfort on February 20, 2015, 10:17:25 AM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on February 20, 2015, 09:53:12 AM
Wisconsin:
US-12 between Elkhorn and Madison is going to need to be upgraded. The stretch between Cambridge and Madison is already jam packed during rush hour with very few places to pass. I would start by four laning this stretch and continuing plans for the rest.
US-51 between US-8 and Minoqua. That stretch should be four lanes as well. North of Minoqua it is fine at this point.
WI-26 from north of the Watertown bypass to US-151 needs to be figured out too.
Really outside of that Wisconsin's system is just fine and should focus on expansion of existing corridors. 1. I-39/90 from Madison to the Illinois line is one. (Getting done.) 2. I-94 between Waukesha and Madison. 3. I-94 just east of the Minnesota line.
U.S 12 is only worth upgrading if Illinois continues it south to the IL-53 extension, but since we know that will never happen, you can forget about that. Plus, the Whitewater to Fort Atkinson segment was killed by local residents, and has been delayed indefinitely.
On U.S 51, they are going to reconstruct and add passing lanes to that segment, there really isn't enough room for four lanes without significant environmental impacts. But first, they need to covert the expressway segment between Merrill and Tomahawk to freeway.
I think U.S 12 between Madison and Wisconsin Dells is more important than WIS 26, but that is just my opinion.
But first, they need to finish the I-39/90 and I-94 expansion projects before doing anything else.
I agree with the above statements.
I've been surprised how well US 51 functions between Heafford Jct and Hazelhurst, but some more passing lanes would be nice.
I keep hoping that the Lake County Parkway/IL 53 extension will make it beyond the planning stage, however, even with a Richmond bypass, it will not provide a continuous 4-lane corridor north of the IL 120 corridor for US 12. In spite of that, I still think US 12 from Elkhorn to County Trunk N near Cottage Grove merits upgrading regardless.
No one mentions WI 21 between Oshkosh and Tomah? I'm surprised at the traffic it carries on the weekends, for going through some of the most unpopulated portions of the state. Some passing lanes would be nice as would a Wautoma/Silver Lake bypass to the south.
Lastly, into the future, six-laning I-90/94 to Tomah would be helpful, as would six-laning I-94 from Hudson to US 12/WI 312 at Eau Claire. Traffic counts may not warrant expansion now, but it most likely will be warranted at some point.
As I said, I do think Wisconsin is getting a little over ambitious with building freeways/expressways and they ought to scale back a little and focus on priority routes, like the backbone routes in the Corridors 2030.
Quote from: SEWIGuy on February 20, 2015, 09:53:12 AM
Wisconsin:
US-12 between Elkhorn and Madison is going to need to be upgraded. The stretch between Cambridge and Madison is already jam packed during rush hour with very few places to pass. I would start by four laning this stretch and continuing plans for the rest.
Honestly 12 is crowded from Madison to Cambridge with commuters, but often that stretch from Ft. Atkinson to WI 67 is pretty barren during the week (I often go from Mukwonago to my Middleton office via CTH J -> WI 20 -> US 12 -> CTH N -> WI 59 -> I 90, or I'll stay on 12 all the way to the Beltline). I see the potential of a 39/90 upgrade (and a 70MPH limit) fixing some of the issues on 12 - I think that should be the priority. I just don't see it as the "pressure cooker" that others see it as.
Quote from: 3467 on February 20, 2015, 12:20:50 PMThe SRA plans -IDOT used to have a link for those plans but they seem gone -those were in many cases 6 lane arterials and lots of overpasses and other improvements. considering the nature of the Chicago area with the density few of those were practical Also they overestimated growth just like the supplemental freeway plan did. IL 23 was an SRA ...So I guess I will go with the routes IDOT is working on with some passing lanes in the outer areas like US 34 and IL 64
Hard to find but they are still there.
http://www.idot.illinois.gov/transportation-system/Network-Overview/highway-system/sra-reports-and-resources
Quote from: Rick Powell on February 20, 2015, 07:45:14 PM
Quote from: 3467 on February 20, 2015, 12:20:50 PMThe SRA plans -IDOT used to have a link for those plans but they seem gone -those were in many cases 6 lane arterials and lots of overpasses and other improvements. considering the nature of the Chicago area with the density few of those were practical Also they overestimated growth just like the supplemental freeway plan did. IL 23 was an SRA ...So I guess I will go with the routes IDOT is working on with some passing lanes in the outer areas like US 34 and IL 64
Hard to find but they are still there.
http://www.idot.illinois.gov/transportation-system/Network-Overview/highway-system/sra-reports-and-resources
Rick, I'm curious, do you know if IDOT owns any ROW just to the north of the ghost ramps (for the FAP 412/I-39 connection) in Decatur? I see some faint grading in the land right between I-72 and W Hickory Point Road outlining the ramps.
Quote from: adamlanfort on February 19, 2015, 03:07:09 PM
Wisconsin kicks Illinois's butt when it comes to corridor planning, it build their major routes the right way.
However, I do think Wisconsin is starting to get a little over ambitious with upgrading their routes to freeways/expressways. Other than upgrading U.S 151 to freeway between Fond Du Lac and Dubuque and finishing the U.S 12 corridor between Madison and the Dells, I think they should leave their system as it is. Focus on rebuilding and widening corridors such as I-39/90 between the state line and Madison, I-39/90/94 between Madison and the Dells, I-94 in the Milwaukee area, etc.
Some of the corridors WisDOT upgraded are not really necessary (such as U.S 10, WIS 29, etc)
Have you ever
driven US 10 between Appleton and Stevens Point? Yes, it was needed!
That said, I do agree with completing WI 26 between WI 16/60 and Oshkosh. It is a major access route between NE Wisconsin and points south and southwest and carries a healthy amount of big-rig truck traffic.
I would also complete the four lanes on WI 23 between Fond du Lac and Sheboygan and seriously study US 10 between Appleton and Manitowoc.
WI 21 is generally OK as it sits, but I do agree with a bypass of the Wautoma area and I would add four lanes from Oshkosh westward to and around Omro.
Mike
Quote from: mgk920 on February 21, 2015, 10:03:46 AM
Quote from: adamlanfort on February 19, 2015, 03:07:09 PM
Wisconsin kicks Illinois's butt when it comes to corridor planning, it build their major routes the right way.
However, I do think Wisconsin is starting to get a little over ambitious with upgrading their routes to freeways/expressways. Other than upgrading U.S 151 to freeway between Fond Du Lac and Dubuque and finishing the U.S 12 corridor between Madison and the Dells, I think they should leave their system as it is. Focus on rebuilding and widening corridors such as I-39/90 between the state line and Madison, I-39/90/94 between Madison and the Dells, I-94 in the Milwaukee area, etc.
Some of the corridors WisDOT upgraded are not really necessary (such as U.S 10, WIS 29, etc)
Have you ever driven US 10 between Appleton and Stevens Point? Yes, it was needed!
That said, I do agree with completing WI 26 between WI 16/60 and Oshkosh. It is a major access route between NE Wisconsin and points south and southwest and carries a healthy amount of big-rig truck traffic.
I would also complete the four lanes on WI 23 between Fond du Lac and Sheboygan and seriously study US 10 between Appleton and Manitowoc.
WI 21 is generally OK as it sits, but I do agree with a bypass of the Wautoma area and I would add four lanes from Oshkosh westward to and around Omro.
Mike
Yeah, your right about U.S 10, but I don't think it necessarily needs to become a full freeway. West of Stevens Point, I think that was a huge stretch building that expressway. Frankly, the only routes that really need to be freeways are the backbone routes. Everything else would be fine as an expressway or less.
Does anyone here know if Wisconsin plans on designating WIS 29 an Interstate highway when it is converted to full freeway between Green Bay and Eau Claire? I have heard rumors, but nothing concrete.
Quote from: adamlanfort on February 21, 2015, 02:15:06 PM
Does anyone here know if Wisconsin plans on designating WIS 29 an Interstate highway when it is converted to full freeway between Green Bay and Eau Claire? I have heard rumors, but nothing concrete.
That's going to be so far off in the future it's not even worth discussing, for WisDOT. The full freeway conversion is already a fictional enterprise for the intermediate-term. Yeah, they've done the initial studies, but that's more for corridor management so local communities can plan ahead and not crowd WI 29 with development and driveways.
Traffic counts say it's going to be a long time before it's really needed.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on February 21, 2015, 07:52:26 PM
Quote from: adamlanfort on February 21, 2015, 02:15:06 PM
Does anyone here know if Wisconsin plans on designating WIS 29 an Interstate highway when it is converted to full freeway between Green Bay and Eau Claire? I have heard rumors, but nothing concrete.
That's going to be so far off in the future it's not even worth discussing, for WisDOT. The full freeway conversion is already a fictional enterprise for the intermediate-term. Yeah, they've done the initial studies, but that's more for corridor management so local communities can plan ahead and not crowd WI 29 with development and driveways.
Traffic counts say it's going to be a long time before it's really needed.
We'll see about that. WisDOT loves to upgrade their corridors, and they'll find someway to justify the upgrade to freeway sooner. There are a lot of corridors that don't need upgrading (at least not to elaborate freeways) that WisDOT does anyway, like WIS 26, U.S 10 west of Stevens Point, the new U.S 51 freeway just north of Madison, etc.
http://www.co.kane.il.us/dot/planning.aspx
http://www.lakecountyil.gov/Transportation/ProgramsPlansStudies/Pages/2040TransportationPlan.aspx
https://www.co.mchenry.il.us/county-government/departments-j-z/transportation/transportation-plans/long-range-transportation-plan
Here are the County plans
I know that there are plans for this, but I-90/39 between Rockford and Madison is just terrible. It needs to be at least 6 lanes, if not 8 in some spots. I'd add in the US 12 corridor from northern IL to Madison and (a pipe dream).
There are already plans in the works to connect IL 53 as a "parkway" with IL 120 and thus I-94. This is a badly needed improvement; however, the current plan of a 4 lane parkway with a limited speed limit is a joke that will be obsolete on the day it opens to traffic. Whether politicians like it or not, the traffic patterns are what they are and there's a lot of demand for a more direct connection from the far north suburbs to the western suburbs.
Quote from: StogieGuy7 on February 22, 2015, 01:48:32 PM
I know that there are plans for this, but I-90/39 between Rockford and Madison is just terrible. It needs to be at least 6 lanes, if not 8 in some spots. I'd add in the US 12 corridor from northern IL to Madison and (a pipe dream).
There are already plans in the works to connect IL 53 as a "parkway" with IL 120 and thus I-94. This is a badly needed improvement; however, the current plan of a 4 lane parkway with a limited speed limit is a joke that will be obsolete on the day it opens to traffic. Whether politicians like it or not, the traffic patterns are what they are and there's a lot of demand for a more direct connection from the far north suburbs to the western suburbs.
I agree about the IL-53 extension. It should have been built in it's entirety to Interstate standards from Lake Cook Road to Grayslake and then up to Richmond, I don't care if it had significant environmental impacts, it needed to be built. Unfortunately, the environmental wackos won the fight and now it is only going to run to Grayslake.............. as a 45 mph parkway. I agree 100000% it will be obsolete from Day 1. If the IL-53 extension cannot be built as a six lane (minimum) Interstate standard freeway/tollway, then it is not worth building at all. But remember, it is all about the environment.
As for the I-39/90 corridor between Rockford and Madison, I agree. It needs to be rebuilt and widened to six lanes. Illinois has finished their side (wow, that's shocking) and Wisconsin will begin their side this year, but Wisconsin will do theirs more elaborate (rebuild the roadway AND all the crossroad bridges and interchanges).
Frankly, the Illinois Tollway did a mediocre job on I-39/90 between the Cherry Valley Interchange and Rockton Road. Unlike the rest of the system where they did rebuilding and widening, they used hot mix asphalt and it is already coming undone (particularly in the Northbound/Westbound lanes). Why they didn't use concrete on that segment is a mystery. They didn't put lights in the median the entire way, and they didn't rebuild all the crossroad bridges (so the shoulders squeeze under the existing bridges, to the point where it is virtually non-existent. They did the same thing on the Tri-State.) At least they learned their lesson from that and they are rebuilding the section between I-39 and the Kennedy the correct way (rebuild with concrete, rebuild ALL the crossroad bridges, put lights in the median)
The reason for blacktop I39/I90 is the local Rockford road contractors really only do blacktop. It was suburban contractors who built 90 east to Elgin. Only black tops roads by these contractors. If a road is concrete most likely an out of town contractor did it.
For example Plote from Elgin did route 2 between Byron and Oregon.
Quote from: cwm1276 on February 22, 2015, 04:26:38 PM
The reason for blacktop I39/I90 is the local Rockford road contractors really only do blacktop. It was suburban contractors who built 90 east to Elgin. Only black tops roads by these contractors. If a road is concrete most likely an out of town contractor did it.
For example Plote from Elgin did route 2 between Byron and Oregon.
It is concrete east of the Kishwaukee River bridge and hot mix asphalt west of there. Is William Charles Construction not capable of building concrete roads?
The lighted road all the way from Cherry Valley to Elgin (O'Hare later?) is unnecessary. Break's the rural feel.
Quote from: SSOWorld on February 22, 2015, 07:12:33 PM
The lighted road all the way from Cherry Valley to Elgin (O'Hare later?) is unnecessary. Break's the rural feel.
I originally thought that too, I thought the farmers/property owners in the rural areas would not be happy with lighting the corridor, so I thought the median lights would end at the IL-47 interchange. But after I drove on the corridor at night, and saw how well lit it was (those LED lights are bright!), I felt safer driving.
Yes, there will be lights in the median from Elgin to O'Hare when the construction is finished in 2016.
I-94 between St. Cloud and the I-494/694 junction in Maple Grove. They're in the process of widening the road to six lanes from the current end of the six lane segment to MN 241 at St. Michael, but that's only two miles worth of expansion. Under the governor's proposed transportation funding plan money is included to extend the six lane segment to Albertville (five miles from St. Michael), but the road really needs to be six lanes at least to MN 24 at Clearwater, if not all the way to MN 15 at St. Cloud.
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on February 22, 2015, 08:28:34 PM
I-94 between St. Cloud and the I-494/694 junction in Maple Grove. They're in the process of widening the road to six lanes from the current end of the six lane segment to MN 241 at St. Michael, but that's only two miles worth of expansion. Under the governor's proposed transportation funding plan money is included to extend the six lane segment to Albertville (five miles from St. Michael), but the road really needs to be six lanes at least to MN 24 at Clearwater, if not all the way to MN 15 at St. Cloud.
Are they going to utilize the "test road" portion at all? ;)
Most two lane roads in NJ do need to be four lanes.
Florida could use many roads in Orlando upgraded like Taft- Vineland Road from OBT to Orange Avenue.
Kissimmee, needs Carroll Street/ Hoagland Boulevard needs to be six lanes from the current two, three years ago, thanks to the Osceola Parkway shunpikers. And now with new houses going up in the Kissimmee cattle fields along Carroll Street in addition with the traffic already we are looking at total chaos soon!
I-30 in Texas from Dallas to Texarkana needs upgrading.
I-10 from Houston to Baton Rouge needs widening.
Quote from: roadman65 on February 22, 2015, 10:15:25 PM
Most two lane roads in NJ do need to be four lanes.
Florida could use many roads in Orlando upgraded like Taft- Vineland Road from OBT to Orange Avenue.
Kissimmee, needs Carroll Street/ Hoagland Boulevard needs to be six lanes from the current two, three years ago, thanks to the Osceola Parkway shunpikers. And now with new houses going up in the Kissimmee cattle fields along Carroll Street in addition with the traffic already we are looking at total chaos soon!
I-30 in Texas from Dallas to Texarkana needs upgrading.
I-10 from Houston to Baton Rouge needs widening.
This topic is for the Midwest (IL, IA, WI, IN, OH, MI, MN, MO, etc). Let's focus on that area
And so its not fiction -It needs to be a project the state has funded in whole or part or in a corridor or EIS study
Iowa is debating a gas tax now so there may be a list there and of course MO has a wish list but they are flat broke so nothing there. Glad to see something on 94 in MN . Sure not much coming from outside IL and IA
If it stays this limited maybe we need to open it more! But they cant just be our wishes that is fictional
Down
Town
Columbus
!
Part of it has been finished (71/670, Mound St. Connector) but the 70/71 trench through downtown is a few years off, and the part stretching over the river to the west isn't funded yet. As it stands in its unfinished state it has a lot of the old, closely spaced exits remaining with new ramps and weaves introduced and blahhhhhh
Quote from: 3467 on February 19, 2015, 02:53:06 PM
To avoid fiction please limit to routes that the state DOT has under some sort of study and then let us know if you think it is worthwhile.
I will start Wisconsin as an example
http://www.dot.state.wi.us/business/econdev/corridors.htm
I think Wisconsin has done a great job of planning its corridors and I have nothing to add.
Maybe you do or have something to say about Wisconsin or plans in MI MN OH IN PA NY?
I was suprised visiting Necedah how busy WI-21 is. I'd love to see it hook up with the 90/94 interchange and be expanded across Wisconsin.
Quote from: Anthony_JK on February 23, 2015, 10:18:16 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on February 22, 2015, 10:15:25 PM
I-10 from Houston to Baton Rouge needs widening.
Actually, plenty of that segment of I-10 has been widened and improved over the past few years.
The Trinity River Bridge just east of Baytown/Mount Belview had recently been upgraded from a 4-lane truss structure to a wider 4-lane (wide enough to be restriped to 6 lanes with 10' outer shoulders) span. East of TX 61 to the TX 73 divergence at Winnie, I-10 is already 6 lanes. I wouldn't mind the segment from Winnie to Beaumont widened further to 6 lanes myself.
From Beaumont east to Vidor to Orange, there has also been a nice upgrade of I-10; the frontage roads are now continuous one-way rather than discontinuous 2-way; the interchange at TX 12 (which feeds into LA 12 and US 190 in LA) has been refined to eliminate that hazardous sharp turn for westbound traffic, and also that left exit for eastbound traffic (now, a right-exit flyover sends traffic from I-10E to TX 12, and an overpass handles most other traffic movements).
In Louisiana, the Pearl River Bridge was upgraded to accomodate 6 lanes (3 per direction), though it is currently striped for only 2-2 right now; I-10 was 6-laned from the I-210 West interchange west of Lake Charles to near Vinton, and from the I-210 East interchange to US 165. Planning and construction is now underway for widening I-10 in Lafayette from the I-49/US 167 interchange to the Henderson (LA 347??) interchange to 6 lanes (as well as rebuilding both the subsurface and the concrete. The latest state Transportation Plan update also has as a long term commitment widening of the rest of I-10 between the TX line and Baton Rouge, including the Atchafalaya Swamp elevated segment. And, there is also the Calcasieu River Bridge replacement which would also cover the rest of I-10 through Lake Charles.
So, if they ever get the funding sorted out, there is hope. Let's get I-49 finished first, though.
Again, this is a Midwest topic. Please limit this to Midwest roads.
Just saw that. Sorry. I've deleted the post.
Quote from: texaskdog on February 23, 2015, 09:33:17 AM
Quote from: 3467 on February 19, 2015, 02:53:06 PM
To avoid fiction please limit to routes that the state DOT has under some sort of study and then let us know if you think it is worthwhile.
I will start Wisconsin as an example
http://www.dot.state.wi.us/business/econdev/corridors.htm
I think Wisconsin has done a great job of planning its corridors and I have nothing to add.
Maybe you do or have something to say about Wisconsin or plans in MI MN OH IN PA NY?
I was suprised visiting Necedah how busy WI-21 is. I'd love to see it hook up with the 90/94 interchange and be expanded across Wisconsin.
I've thought about having a better connection at the I-90/94 split with WI 21.
Quote from: midwesternroadguy on February 24, 2015, 02:12:48 PM
Quote from: texaskdog on February 23, 2015, 09:33:17 AM
Quote from: 3467 on February 19, 2015, 02:53:06 PM
To avoid fiction please limit to routes that the state DOT has under some sort of study and then let us know if you think it is worthwhile.
I will start Wisconsin as an example
http://www.dot.state.wi.us/business/econdev/corridors.htm
I think Wisconsin has done a great job of planning its corridors and I have nothing to add.
Maybe you do or have something to say about Wisconsin or plans in MI MN OH IN PA NY?
I was suprised visiting Necedah how busy WI-21 is. I'd love to see it hook up with the 90/94 interchange and be expanded across Wisconsin.
I've thought about having a better connection at the I-90/94 split with WI 21.
Yes, it's wide and could easily have an extension right out of that intersection. It could be expanded much like 29 was across Wisconsin, piece by piece
Quote from: texaskdog on March 11, 2015, 06:00:40 PM
Quote from: midwesternroadguy on February 24, 2015, 02:12:48 PM
Quote from: texaskdog on February 23, 2015, 09:33:17 AM
Quote from: 3467 on February 19, 2015, 02:53:06 PM
To avoid fiction please limit to routes that the state DOT has under some sort of study and then let us know if you think it is worthwhile.
I will start Wisconsin as an example
http://www.dot.state.wi.us/business/econdev/corridors.htm
I think Wisconsin has done a great job of planning its corridors and I have nothing to add.
Maybe you do or have something to say about Wisconsin or plans in MI MN OH IN PA NY?
I was suprised visiting Necedah how busy WI-21 is. I'd love to see it hook up with the 90/94 interchange and be expanded across Wisconsin.
I've thought about having a better connection at the I-90/94 split with WI 21.
Yes, it's wide and could easily have an extension right out of that intersection. It could be expanded much like 29 was across Wisconsin, piece by piece
Keep in mind that there is a lot of low, swampy land in the WI 21 corridor east of I-94, including the Necedah National Wildlife Refuge (famous as the center of critically-endangered Whooping Crane recovery efforts). Finding a useable corridor in that area could be a real challenge, possibly requiring such a highway to connect with the interstate as far southeast as New Lisbon.
Mike
I-94 needs to be at least six lanes in all of Michigan
US-23 needs to be six lanes from Brighton to Toledo
Quote from: adamlanfort on February 20, 2015, 07:56:20 PM
Rick, I'm curious, do you know if IDOT owns any ROW just to the north of the ghost ramps (for the FAP 412/I-39 connection) in Decatur? I see some faint grading in the land right between I-72 and W Hickory Point Road outlining the ramps.
Don't know...there's two or 3 places you could look...some counties have a GIS based property tax map system online and if Macon County has it, you could root around to see if there are any state owned parcels north of the ghost ramps. There are private companies (like Rockford Maps) that have plat books by township mostly to identify who has the farmland, and state parcels would show up there...or you could inquire at IDOT District 5 in Paris, IL.
Just for fun, I went and looked at the Macon County GIS parcel map. I didn't investigate any of the parcels there, but there was nothing that looked like a highway "corridor" north of I-72...and IDOT historically has not bought block parcels of land, but just what was needed for a corridor. So I'd say it's a safe bet that they didn't acquire much if any over the minimum of what was needed to build the I-72 mainline.
IL Rt 59 through downtown Barrington, IL is still going to have no change in less congestion even if the Rt 53 extension is built.
I doubt the Fox Valley Freeway will be revived though. I guess Barrington residents like sitting in traffic. Mostly due to two at grade railroad crossings, rush hour traffic in a a snow storm can back up all the way from Lake Cook Rd (Main St.) to Roberts Rd.
Really only a bypass (probably would have to be tolled, only 45 mph, only 4 lane) of Barrington is needed, but that's not going to happen.
What if the C&NW line and CN line were both made elevated lines through Barrington. You would have to walk up stairs and ramps from the Metra station to the platform to allow the grade separation, like the Jefferson Park Metra station in the city that has the tracks grade separated from the Kennedy and residential streets.
I'm imagining that elevating two railroads would be cheaper (and more politically successful) than building the Fox Valley Freeway, or is it.
I can still imagine complaints from train noise from elevated lines, and complaints that the asthetics of the downtown and nearby neighborhoods is ruined by seeing the elevated lines.
Making the C&NW Metra line a subway underneath Barrington would be cost prohibitive most likely.
Building the Fox Valley Freeway as a tunnel underneath Barrington would be even more cost prohibitive.