What corridors in the Midwest do NOT need upgrades?

[I-39]

Now we discuss corridors that do NOT need upgrades. This also includes some corridors that were built, but weren't really necessary.

Illinois:

U.S 20 from Freeport to Galena (except the Galena bypass)

Illinois 336 from Macomb to Peoria (not at all necessary)

Illinois 336 from Quincy to Macomb (huge waste of money)

Illinois 29 from I-180 to IL-6 (not at all necessary)

Interstate 180 (barely any traffic, huge waste of money)

Interstate 155 (could have worked fine as an expressway with an interchange at IL-98)

Wisconsin:

U.S 10 from Stevens Point to Marshfield (passing lanes would have been fine here)

U.S 14 from the Beltline to Oregon and the proposed freeway extension (Could have been fine with an expressway or four lane arterial)

WIS 26 from north of Janesville to Watertown (didn't really need to be a full freeway, just an expressway or four lane surface arterial)

U.S 51 from I-39/90/94 to Deforest (the new freeway just built)

Pretty much any freeway outside of the existing Interstates and "backbone" routes in the 2030 connections plan (with the possible exception of the U.S 12 corridor between the Illinois state line and Wisconsin Dells, but even that is a stretch)

Missouri:

U.S 67 expressway between Poplar Bluff and St. Louis (already have I-55 just east of there)

Indiana:

U.S 31 between South Bend and Indianapolis (not so much that this is not needed, but rather, InDOT ought to focus on finishing the I-69 corridor before continuing further work on this. It can wait, they have already finished the freeway in the major areas).


Truthfully, I am not as familiar with states and corridors outside of Illinois and Wisconsin, so please chime in with other states (Iowa, Indiana, Michigan, Ohio, Minnesota, etc)

[ajlynch91]

I would disagree with three on your list, I-155 I think is important given the Peoria to Lincoln/Springfield connection, otherwise the nearest interstate connection between the two would be via Bloomington. US-67 South of St. Louis is about forty miles from I-55 in the Poplar Bluff area, and is just fine as an expressway in my opinion, and US-31 between South Bend and Indianapolis is needed, and I hope it actually becomes I-67 all the way to Grand Rapids via the existing US-31 and I-196.

[NE2]

The Kentucky parkways that are becoming I-69.

[I-39]

I would disagree with three on your list, I-155 I think is important given the Peoria to Lincoln/Springfield connection, otherwise the nearest interstate connection between the two would be via Bloomington. US-67 South of St. Louis is about forty miles from I-55 in the Poplar Bluff area, and is just fine as an expressway in my opinion, and US-31 between South Bend and Indianapolis is needed, and I hope it actually becomes I-67 all the way to Grand Rapids via the existing US-31 and I-196.

Notice what I said about U.S 31, it is not needed right this second, it can wait. I agree it should be fully upgraded to freeway and signed as I-67 eventually, but Indiana needs to focus on building the I-69 corridor first before finishing this.

I-155 would have been fine as a four lane divided expressway (upgrading the existing route), with an interchange at IL-98. There is not a whole lot of traffic that would really warrant a full freeway.

[Brandon]

I would disagree with three on your list, I-155 I think is important given the Peoria to Lincoln/Springfield connection, otherwise the nearest interstate connection between the two would be via Bloomington. US-67 South of St. Louis is about forty miles from I-55 in the Poplar Bluff area, and is just fine as an expressway in my opinion, and US-31 between South Bend and Indianapolis is needed, and I hope it actually becomes I-67 all the way to Grand Rapids via the existing US-31 and I-196.

Notice what I said about U.S 31, it is not needed right this second, it can wait. I agree it should be fully upgraded to freeway and signed as I-67 eventually, but Indiana needs to focus on building the I-69 corridor first before finishing this.

I-155 would have been fine as a four lane divided expressway (upgrading the existing route), with an interchange at IL-98. There is not a whole lot of traffic that would really warrant a full freeway.

I so love politics in this state.    Someone with a bit of pull got it made into a full freeway.  I don't know who, but someone did.

[I-39]

I would disagree with three on your list, I-155 I think is important given the Peoria to Lincoln/Springfield connection, otherwise the nearest interstate connection between the two would be via Bloomington. US-67 South of St. Louis is about forty miles from I-55 in the Poplar Bluff area, and is just fine as an expressway in my opinion, and US-31 between South Bend and Indianapolis is needed, and I hope it actually becomes I-67 all the way to Grand Rapids via the existing US-31 and I-196.

Notice what I said about U.S 31, it is not needed right this second, it can wait. I agree it should be fully upgraded to freeway and signed as I-67 eventually, but Indiana needs to focus on building the I-69 corridor first before finishing this.

I-155 would have been fine as a four lane divided expressway (upgrading the existing route), with an interchange at IL-98. There is not a whole lot of traffic that would really warrant a full freeway.

I so love politics in this state.    Someone with a bit of pull got it made into a full freeway.  I don't know who, but someone did.

I know, it's pathetic. The main reason I-155 was built was because of the dangerous intersection at IL-98. They could have just built an interchange there and built the rest as an expressway, saving a lot of farmland. You would think after 10 years of legal battles, they'd scrap it in favor of an expressway, but no.

The money saved on this route could have gone towards building U.S 51 between Bloomington and Decatur to Interstate standards (which was/is needed more than this)

[hbelkins]

The Kentucky parkways that are becoming I-69.

He said midwest.

[Lyon Wonder]

If anything, I-180 in IL should be downgraded into an expressway with the stack interchange replaced by a simple diamond interchange since the low traffic amount doesn't justify full limited access. And the stub of I-180 that crosses the Illinois River to IL-71 at Hennepin could even be downgraded into a 2 lane with the interchange with IL-26 near the site of the now-closed steel plant replaced with an at-grade intersection.

US 67 in MO from Crystal City to Popular Bluff can remain as an expressway, while US 67 south of Popular to the existing US 67 freeway to Little Rock should be upgraded to limited-access and become a southern extension of I-57 via US 60 from I-55 at Sikeston to Poplar Bluff.

Though this isn't in the midwest, the proposed alignment of I-69 south of Memphis through Mississippi and Arkansas isn't necessary since traffic can easily take I-40 to Little Rock and I-30 to Texarkana to I-369 and I-69 in Texas.  I-369 and I-69 in Texas can be given a different interstate number.

[3467]

I am not going to advocate getting rid of anything that has been built . I would add there was a fight over 336 over 67 and the Owner of the Quincy Herald Whig won Ironically he is now the biggest supporter of ..67

I Checked the EIS for 155 and it really didn't cost more to make it a freeway over an expressway in this case a few million The upgraded 2 lane would not have been cheap because of the work needed in the north and south@55. Also the middle section was built.
Based on Traffic I-72 would have worked fine as US 36 expressway from Jacksonville to MO

[Revive 755]

Missouri:

U.S 67 expressway between Poplar Bluff and St. Louis (already have I-55 just east of there)

The section of US 67 between I-55 and Farmington carries about the same to somewhat more daily traffic than I-55 between US 67 and MO 32, and will probably require future upgrades to avoid becoming another stoplight infested corridor.

Regarding the distance between US 67 and I-55, it is not that much different than the distance between the US 51 corridor in Illinois and existing I-55 and I-57.  Yet US 67 would not be worthy of upgrades while US 51 would be?

[skluth]

I disagree with those stating US 67 from Festus/Crystal City to Poplar Bluff is fine. The first few miles from when it leaves 55 get quite busy. After the 55 exit, you immediately meet a stoplight. The next few miles include a number of dangerous intersections. Once you get beyond about MO 110 traffic thins considerably. But that stretch needs improvement or eventually will have a stoplight every mile or so.

[I-39]

Missouri:

U.S 67 expressway between Poplar Bluff and St. Louis (already have I-55 just east of there)

The section of US 67 between I-55 and Farmington carries about the same to somewhat more daily traffic than I-55 between US 67 and MO 32, and will probably require future upgrades to avoid becoming another stoplight infested corridor.

Regarding the distance between US 67 and I-55, it is not that much different than the distance between the US 51 corridor in Illinois and existing I-55 and I-57.  Yet US 67 would not be worthy of upgrades while US 51 would be?

I disagree with those stating US 67 from Festus/Crystal City to Poplar Bluff is fine. The first few miles from when it leaves 55 get quite busy. After the 55 exit, you immediately meet a stoplight. The next few miles include a number of dangerous intersections. Once you get beyond about MO 110 traffic thins considerably. But that stretch needs improvement or eventually will have a stoplight every mile or so.

So are you saying the U.S 67 between I-55 and and Poplar Bluff will need to be upgraded to freeway?

The difference between upgrading U.S 51 and 67 is upgrading U.S 51 to interstate standards would serve as a full bypass of St. Louis and serve as a major commerce corridor for the central part of the state, cutting off time considerably for traffic heading both north and south. What would an Interstate along U.S 67 in Missouri serve? There's no right or wrong answer, I'm just curious to know what your opinion. Other than adding a few interchanges here and there, I think it's fine the way it is. With MoDOT money woes, it won't be upgraded for a long time.

Now, I DO believe U.S 67 should be upgraded to freeway from between the state line and Poplar Bluff (as well as U.S 60 between Poplar Bluff and Sikeston) in preparation for an extension of I-57, but again, with MoDOT money woes, that likely won't happen anytime soon.

[I-39]

I am not going to advocate getting rid of anything that has been built . I would add there was a fight over 336 over 67 and the Owner of the Quincy Herald Whig won Ironically he is now the biggest supporter of ..67

I Checked the EIS for 155 and it really didn't cost more to make it a freeway over an expressway in this case a few million The upgraded 2 lane would not have been cheap because of the work needed in the north and south@55. Also the middle section was built.
Based on Traffic I-72 would have worked fine as US 36 expressway from Jacksonville to MO

Of course, if it is already built, I wouldn't get rid of it. I am just saying, in my opinion, what projects were a waste of money, and if they aren't already built, will be a waste of money.

I don't understand I-155, they could not have made a high speed connection at I-74, built an interchange at IL-98 and 4-laned the existing IL-121 as an expressway? It wouldn't need an elaborate connection at I-55, just a standard interchange. I mean, after all, the project was delayed because of a lawsuit by that one guy over how much farmland was being taken out of production near Delavan, they never thought to drop the freeway proposal? How much money would they have saved 4-laning the existing IL-121?

[Rick Powell]

If anything, I-180 in IL should be downgraded into an expressway with the stack interchange replaced by a simple diamond interchange since the low traffic amount doesn't justify full limited access. And the stub of I-180 that crosses the Illinois River to IL-71 at Hennepin could even be downgraded into a 2 lane with the interchange with IL-26 near the site of the now-closed steel plant replaced with an at-grade intersection.

All that removal and reconstructing intersections would cost money.  I would say the next "real" opportunity to save $ on I-180 would be when the river crossing over the Illinois River needs to be replaced...it would probably save $15 million or more in today's money to just replace one side and remove the other, it that's the way they want to go with it then....I'd guess we are a few decades off until that call would be made; the bridges are in pretty good shape.

[3467]

Expressway would have only saved 5 million on a 110 million project
I had in mind the comment that suggested spending money to downgrade 180. It only makes sense as Rick Powell stated when something big needs replacing . That flyover interchange is really something. I drove it a couple of months ago to look at 29 . As stated 29 has had some good upgrades. There are just a couple of stops north of Chillocothe and its ROW and grading is plenty to add a third lane at not much cost and that would really solve any problems that exist AND PREVENT  more wasteful 4 lane construction . I had one IDOT engineer tell me that at a public hearing not on 29,but he said id we had reconstructed right years ago there would never have been a 4 lane push

[I-39]

Expressway would have only saved 5 million on a 110 million project
I had in mind the comment that suggested spending money to downgrade 180. It only makes sense as Rick Powell stated when something big needs replacing . That flyover interchange is really something. I drove it a couple of months ago to look at 29 . As stated 29 has had some good upgrades. There are just a couple of stops north of Chillocothe and its ROW and grading is plenty to add a third lane at not much cost and that would really solve any problems that exist AND PREVENT  more wasteful 4 lane construction . I had one IDOT engineer tell me that at a public hearing not on 29,but he said id we had reconstructed right years ago there would never have been a 4 lane push

Yes, when things start falling apart, then simply remove them and replace it with at-grade intersections/scaled back interchanges. Just construct passing lanes on 29 and remove the stub ramps to continue the IL-6 freeway north. In fact, directly tie the IL-6 freeway into the East Peoria bypass and get rid of the interchange in Mossville (i.e make it one big loop).

Maybe I was wrong about I-155, I just think it's ironic that corridor was built to Interstate standards when there was a lot of heavy opposition, yet there was more support for building U.S 51 to Interstate standards between Bloomington and Decatur and that got shelved.

[3467]

Like the Mossville idea. It is ironic but as I recall that opposition was to pretty much anything on 155 ...correct me if I am wrong. Once again a lot depends on Capital Bills funding cycles in Illinois . I sure don't see one coming
Downtown Peoria will have Traffic CAT is consolidating ion  new downtown palace. Now it remains to be seen if their factories will need anybody with their rapidly declining revs and profits so Mossville might not be as busy( for those who don't know Peoria Mossville is the largest manufacturing plant in Illinois about 4000. Downtown will have 3000 I for one own a Komatsu

[I-39]

Like the Mossville idea. It is ironic but as I recall that opposition was to pretty much anything on 155 ...correct me if I am wrong. Once again a lot depends on Capital Bills funding cycles in Illinois . I sure don't see one coming
Downtown Peoria will have Traffic CAT is consolidating ion  new downtown palace. Now it remains to be seen if their factories will need anybody with their rapidly declining revs and profits so Mossville might not be as busy( for those who don't know Peoria Mossville is the largest manufacturing plant in Illinois about 4000. Downtown will have 3000 I for one own a Komatsu

I read in old Pantagraph articles that their was heavy opposition to a IL-121 freeway between Lincoln and Peoria, it was being studied at the same time as the North-South Freeway (I-39 corridor) and both were causing controversy. The general consensus (at least how it appeared in the articles) was that the public favored IL-121 being converted to an expressway, while the public was split over how to upgrade the U.S 51 corridor. Bloomington-Normal (at least most citizens) favored the expressway while Decatur wanted full interstate standards. I find it hard to believe only 5 million would have been saved by constructing IL-121 to an expressway. They saved around 40-50 million by building U.S 51 as an expressway south of Bloomington.

[3467]

Its because the expensive parts would have had to be freeway From 74 to 9 and 55 to 136 on a new alignment. With the existing freeway segment there was only one more interchange and IDOT may have claimed that was needed in the expressway design so it was just the cost of land and some overpasses

[JREwing78]

Now we discuss corridors that do NOT need upgrades. This also includes some corridors that were built, but weren't really necessary.

<snip>

Wisconsin:
U.S 10 from Stevens Point to Marshfield (passing lanes would have been fine here)

Compared to WisDOT's other recent projects, this is probably the least needed. However, it's justified by the fact that there's very few crossings of the Wisconsin River in this area, and there's considerable seasonal traffic traveling this stretch. Also, aside from the Wisconsin River crossing, this was a relatively inexpensive-to-build highway; a fresh-built Super-2 with an occasional third passing lane would have been less safe and not substantially cheaper.

U.S 14 from the Beltline to Oregon and the proposed freeway extension (Could have been fine with an expressway or four lane arterial

The stretch from the Beltline to County MM was already a freeway when built in the '70's, and a Super-2 to bypass Oregon. Commuter traffic from Evansville, Stoughton, and points south is more than enough to justify a freeway.

North of the Rock County line to Oregon, US-14 is relatively narrow, curvy, and has lots of side road and driveway access points. Upgrading the existing 2-lane to include passing lanes and other safety enhancements would not be much cheaper than a bypass, and would be considerably less safe. Also, given how quickly the Evansville area is growing, anything less than 4 lanes will be overwhelmed quickly.

US-14 between Madison and Janesville is also an important commuter route, moreso during I-39/90 reconstruction. It's often as fast or faster to get to Madison from Janesville via US-14 v.s. via I-39/90, due to Beltline and Milton Ave (Hwy 26) congestion.

WIS 26 from north of Janesville to Watertown (didn't really need to be a full freeway, just an expressway or four lane surface arterial)

It's not a full freeway, though the cities are fairly close together, so (particularly between Janesville and Johnson Creek) it seems like one. It's cuts travel time significantly to the Fox Cities, and will pull its share of traffic during I-39/90 construction.

U.S 51 from I-39/90/94 to Deforest (the new freeway just built)

Traffic counts say otherwise. You have a case for an expressway north of DeForest all the way to Hwy 60.

Around DeForest? The volume of cars looking to access US-51 dictates full interchanges.

[I-39]

Now we discuss corridors that do NOT need upgrades. This also includes some corridors that were built, but weren't really necessary.

<snip>

Wisconsin:
U.S 10 from Stevens Point to Marshfield (passing lanes would have been fine here)

Compared to WisDOT's other recent projects, this is probably the least needed. However, it's justified by the fact that there's very few crossings of the Wisconsin River in this area, and there's considerable seasonal traffic traveling this stretch. Also, aside from the Wisconsin River crossing, this was a relatively inexpensive-to-build highway; a fresh-built Super-2 with an occasional third passing lane would have been less safe and not substantially cheaper.

U.S 14 from the Beltline to Oregon and the proposed freeway extension (Could have been fine with an expressway or four lane arterial

The stretch from the Beltline to County MM was already a freeway when built in the '70's, and a Super-2 to bypass Oregon. Commuter traffic from Evansville, Stoughton, and points south is more than enough to justify a freeway.

North of the Rock County line to Oregon, US-14 is relatively narrow, curvy, and has lots of side road and driveway access points. Upgrading the existing 2-lane to include passing lanes and other safety enhancements would not be much cheaper than a bypass, and would be considerably less safe. Also, given how quickly the Evansville area is growing, anything less than 4 lanes will be overwhelmed quickly.

US-14 between Madison and Janesville is also an important commuter route, moreso during I-39/90 reconstruction. It's often as fast or faster to get to Madison from Janesville via US-14 v.s. via I-39/90, due to Beltline and Milton Ave (Hwy 26) congestion.

WIS 26 from north of Janesville to Watertown (didn't really need to be a full freeway, just an expressway or four lane surface arterial)

It's not a full freeway, though the cities are fairly close together, so (particularly between Janesville and Johnson Creek) it seems like one. It's cuts travel time significantly to the Fox Cities, and will pull its share of traffic during I-39/90 construction.

U.S 51 from I-39/90/94 to Deforest (the new freeway just built)

Traffic counts say otherwise. You have a case for an expressway north of DeForest all the way to Hwy 60.

Around DeForest? The volume of cars looking to access US-51 dictates full interchanges.

U.S 10: "there's considerable seasonal traffic" so you build a highway just for that? That money would have been better spent expediting the freeway upgrades on WIS 29.

U.S 14: You have a point here, although this wouldn't be necessary if Wisconsin had built the full U.S 12 freeway between Genoa City and Madison (and Illinois made a connection, it would have relieved significant traffic off of I-39/90). Since that will never be built, I could maybe see this needing four lanes all the way to Janesville at some point

WIS 26: You already have U.S 151, why do you need another four lane? Focus on upgrading and converting U.S 151 to full freeway rather than building a new (almost full freeway) along WIS 26. 

U.S 51: An expressway with minimal grade crossings (and MAYBE a stop light) would have been fine. Not a major corridor. Interchanges are expensive.

The point with all this is WisDOT has more pressing needs than the corridors mentioned above. Build too many freeways and WisDOT dollars will be stretched big time when it comes time to repair/rebuild these corridors.

[triplemultiplex]

I'm not a fan of Wisconsin spending a lot of money on these potential upgrades to US 8 in the western part of the state.
http://www.dot.wisconsin.gov/projects/nwregion/8/index.htm

They've had some proposed bypasses of Turtle Lake & Barron that are hugely expensive and not going to be needed for decades, if ever.

[mrose]

As mentioned, the US 14 freeway goes back to the mid-70s.

I'm not aware of any plans to extend it south from Oregon, but as someone who lived on the far northwest side of Janesville for many years, that was the route to Madison. We never messed with I-90 (39) unless we were headed to the east side of Madison, and even then we often took 51 through Edgerton and hooked up with 90 that way. To get to I-90 from the west side of Janesville to head north was a tedious effort that required a lot of lights.

I'd always felt that portions of 14 on both sides of Janesville (heading towards Delavan as well) were expressway worthy, as we frequently used it to get to I-43 to go to Milwaukee.

[I-39]

I'm not a fan of Wisconsin spending a lot of money on these potential upgrades to US 8 in the western part of the state.
http://www.dot.wisconsin.gov/projects/nwregion/8/index.htm

They've had some proposed bypasses of Turtle Lake & Barron that are hugely expensive and not going to be needed for decades, if ever.

^^^^^^^
These are the kind of projects that I am talking about. These are not necessary.

As I said, the only corridors that truly need full freeway/interstate status are the backbone routes in the 2030 plan. The rest could function as expressways (with the possible exception of U.S 12 and maybe U.S 14, those are borderline full freeway corridors).

[I-39]

As mentioned, the US 14 freeway goes back to the mid-70s.

I'm not aware of any plans to extend it south from Oregon, but as someone who lived on the far northwest side of Janesville for many years, that was the route to Madison. We never messed with I-90 (39) unless we were headed to the east side of Madison, and even then we often took 51 through Edgerton and hooked up with 90 that way. To get to I-90 from the west side of Janesville to head north was a tedious effort that required a lot of lights.

I'd always felt that portions of 14 on both sides of Janesville (heading towards Delavan as well) were expressway worthy, as we frequently used it to get to I-43 to go to Milwaukee.

Starting in 2018, the plan is to continue the U.S 14 freeway south of Oregon on a new alignment to slightly south of Brooklyn. Not sure if it will go further south eventually, but who knows?

http://www.dot.state.wi.us/projects/swregion/14recon/index.htm