Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar

IDOT considering adding toll lanes to I-55

Posted in:

Illinois

* According to Greg Hinz, IDOT is looking at adding one toll lane in each direction on the Stevenson...

The Illinois Department of Transportation [yesterday] took the first formal step toward potentially adding tolled “managed lanes” in the median strip of Interstate 55 (the Stevenson Expressway) between Interstate 355 in Bolingbrook and Interstates 90/94 (the Dan Ryan Expressway) in Chicago.

The proposal—to be the subject of a public hearing at 4 p.m. Dec. 9 at the Holiday Inn at 6201 Joliet Road in Countryside—would not directly impact existing, free lanes. But with the Stevenson and other highways more clogged every year and money short for expansion, motorists eventually may have to chose between creeping along in heavy traffic or paying up and accessing faster toll lanes.

“We can’t go on moving traffic in the same way we have in the past,” said IDOT Secretary Randy Blankenhorn. “This approach works in more than 50 cities now,” such as Dallas/Ft. Worth, where tolled roads and lanes often adjoin existing free expressways. And, from my experience, vehicles on the toll roads move more quickly.

I, for one, would probably use the toll lanes if traffic was bad, and it’s often pretty bad in that area. But I’m not exactly poor. Your own thoughts? Would you use the lanes? Do you think adding toll lanes is fair to those who can’t afford them?

posted by Rich Miller
Tuesday, Dec 8, 15 @ 10:28 am

Comments

I would use them to save time. This is the best example of a user fee, and more of our services should be set up this way. As to your other question “Do you think adding toll lanes is fair to those who can’t afford them?” Consider this. A working mom has her kids in day care. They charge another $20 if she’s late picking them up. Or a lower income worker is facing termination if he or she is late for work. Seems they’re ahead of the game for a extra few bucks for a toll.

Comment by phocion Tuesday, Dec 8, 15 @ 10:33 am
I would absolutely pay for the convenience. So once again we’ll separate the haves from the have nots. For me, it will be great. But I’m not so sure it’s actually a good thing for our society.

Comment by Chicago Cynic Tuesday, Dec 8, 15 @ 10:34 am
==I would absolutely pay for the convenience. So once again we’ll separate the haves from the have nots. For me, it will be great. But I’m not so sure it’s actually a good thing for our society.==

Failing to see how it’s unfair. Every person paying to use the toll lane is one less person clogging up the free lanes, meaning everyone moves faster.

Comment by so... Tuesday, Dec 8, 15 @ 10:37 am
The problem with Tolling is that it costs money to collect the tolls not to mention the cost to construct the separated lanes. Gas is cheap, raise the gas tax significantly. The new Electric cars should pay the equivalent for license plates.

Comment by What's in a Name Tuesday, Dec 8, 15 @ 10:38 am
It probably isn’t “fair” but neither is the world. There are lots of people who can afford things I can’t but that doesn’t mean those things shouldn’t be available. If I want those things badly enough I will take steps necessary to obtain them. Our society has too much of an entitlement mentality as it is.

Comment by Cubs in '16 Tuesday, Dec 8, 15 @ 10:38 am
Toll lanes are an idea worth considering. Why doesn’t Illinois utilize HOV (High Occupancy Vehicle) lanes that have been implemented in so many states?

Comment by Stones Tuesday, Dec 8, 15 @ 10:40 am
Taking what is free and taxing it.
That is why people hate government.
I have a great idea. Start taxing the air we breath. Makes sense. Every one has to use it. Unlimited income potential.

Comment by William Jennings Bryan Tuesday, Dec 8, 15 @ 10:41 am
After nearly forty years of environmentalism, gas crisis and auto technologies - ride sharing has PLUMMETED. We all know what to say, but when it comes to reality, we are hypocrites in our actions.

We are driving bigger vehicles, sadly often not even American brands or built with American union jobs. So there goes all of us who amazingly think a Honda, Subaru or a Toyota is American, or pro-union. Hypocrites.

We all have excuses why we are driving our kids to school every day, standing in long drop off lines and doing it in a BMW, a Hyundai or a Nissan. We won’t admit we do this, yet we have a new generation of children expecting to be chauffeured to school like royalty.

Reality has trumped ideology. No one lives like Global Warming really exists. No one is trying to conserve. We vote for ideologues exposing lower sea levels, yet put their bumper stickers on $50,000 SUVs.

So put a toll on it. Considering how much they spend on American Girl dolls, Pookie’s soccer camp in San Diego and Quentin’s “Call of Duty - Jihad Jungle 8″ games that he plays in the leather backseat of the new Infiniti Chrome-Cruiser, they can afford it.

Comment by VanillaMan Tuesday, Dec 8, 15 @ 10:41 am
I would not mind if every interstate in the state were toll. I-PASS makes it convenient and it puts the cost of the roads on the users of those roads, including all the out-of-state drivers who currently only contribute via gas tax if they fill up while passing through.

Ideally, the full road maintenance costs would come from the toll so that gas, registration, and other road-related taxes/fees could be rolled back such that the net cost would be roughly the same for most people. And the low income could be assisted with more funding for mass transit, a transportation tax credit for the low-income, etc.

Comment by thechampaignlife Tuesday, Dec 8, 15 @ 10:42 am
“raise the gas tax significantly. The new Electric cars should pay the equivalent for license plates.”
Why not just enact a personal property tax on all vehicles like they do in MO? Half goes to the state, half to the local government (roughly). IL needs this.

Comment by Robert the 1st Tuesday, Dec 8, 15 @ 10:44 am
Why not tax the Edens?

Comment by From the 'Dale to HP Tuesday, Dec 8, 15 @ 10:45 am
I would probably use it from time to time especially if I’m running late. It depends on what the toll is though.

Comment by RoPo Ranger Tuesday, Dec 8, 15 @ 10:45 am
toll road

Comment by steve schnorf Tuesday, Dec 8, 15 @ 10:46 am
WJB: roads aren’t free…

Comment by From the 'Dale to HP Tuesday, Dec 8, 15 @ 10:46 am
To William Jennings Bryan: Read the text above, where it says would not directly impact existing, free lanes.

This would keep all lanes the exact same and then add an optional lane. I do not get the debate about fairness. Nothing changes except there is an option added. This seems like something worth looking at.

Comment by Lane Tuesday, Dec 8, 15 @ 10:47 am
My question is that the Illinois Tollway manages the current system of tolled highways. I-55 is under IDOT’s jurisdiction. Does IDOT want to get into the toll highway business, and have a separate group of staff oversee the toll collection equipment? Or, will the Tollway have jurisdiction on the managed lane? Can I use my I-Pass? Will trucks be using this lane or is it just for commuters?……There’s a lot to be answered. As to the social engineering issue, there is currently 3 lanes in each direction EVERYONE can use. The point is do you want to pay an additional fee to (hopefully) save some time?

Comment by Bogey Golfer Tuesday, Dec 8, 15 @ 10:48 am
Anyone ever driven in California? Their far left lanes are for “two or more passengers only,” which is meant to encourage carpooling. If you’re caught in the carpool lane driving by yourself you get smacked with a fine. I’d be interested to see how many people choose to carpool because of faster traffic lanes.

Comment by The Muse Tuesday, Dec 8, 15 @ 10:48 am
As WJB stated, where does it end? The managed lanes eventually have to merge back into traffic, causing more delays. This is no different than CLEAR, the fastpass version of getting through TSA.

Comment by Jocko Tuesday, Dec 8, 15 @ 10:50 am
I was about to be enraged but, never mind, this sounds smart. Optional toll lanes for when the road is backed up? I’m totally on board. We take 55 coming up from downstate when we go to Chicago (fairly frequently) and I would definitely use a toll lane to speed up the process on some occasions. (During the construction on 55, we actually would take 39 most of the way the Rockford and then come over into Chicago on state highways, taking the “a” and “b” legs of the Pythagorean triangle rather than the hypoteneuse because 55 was just so painful and slow and God knows 39 is completely empty.)

I think it’d be even better if they were reversible lanes, but I assume the traffic engineers have their reasons.

Comment by Educated in the Suburbs Tuesday, Dec 8, 15 @ 10:53 am
===Taking what is free and taxing it.
That is why people hate government.===

Yep, roads are totally free. Nevermind the taxes paid to build and maintain them.

And, yep, toll roads are why people hate the government. Not the bribe-taking (for CDLs, senate appointments, campaign dollars). Certainly not for holding rape crisis services hostage. Couldn’t be a myriad of other reasons. Nope, it’s charging people who choose to drive on a toll road to save time as opposed to the “free” parallel lanes.

Move along.

Comment by thechampaignlife Tuesday, Dec 8, 15 @ 10:54 am
HOV lanes simply don’t work. They sit empty while traffic crawls in regular lanes, costing time, productivity and increasing air emissions.

As to the fairness issue, what could be more fair than a fee for the use of an enhanced public service? The consumer has a choice. They can set financial priorities accordingly.

Of course, progressives believe everyone deserves everything for free and no one should be advantaged by way of wealth.

The biggest problem facing IDOT/ISTHA is whether or not they can effectively manage such a project, (avoid a Chicago parking meter-style deal), and achieve the stated goals.

I would use it in a heartbeat.

Comment by Adam Smith Tuesday, Dec 8, 15 @ 10:54 am
“Taking what is free and taxing it.”

… what gives you the impression that roads are free? They’re not magic, they don’t just appear out of nowhere.

Comment by Educated in the Suburbs Tuesday, Dec 8, 15 @ 10:55 am
Amtrak and/or Metra still the way to go.

Comment by Dirty Red Tuesday, Dec 8, 15 @ 10:55 am
Amtrak and/or Metra still the way to go.

Yes, when the train goes where I want it to go, I prefer it. Just as we can’t add enough highway lanes to completely eliminate congestion, we can’t build railroad tracks to every possible destination. I think the option of adding a tolled lane is a good one, gives the consumer more choices. Low income people seem to come up with transit fare, and will come up with toll $ if it makes sense to them; I don’t object to a toll subsidy to get to a job. Lots of employers will pay extra to get their workers to work.

Comment by Six Degrees of Separation Tuesday, Dec 8, 15 @ 11:02 am
Some states have either/or; free for HOV, but toll for solo. Should work for additional lanes on 55.

Comment by Northwest but North Tuesday, Dec 8, 15 @ 11:07 am
= Yes, when the train goes where I want it to go, I prefer it. =

A parking spot in Joliet and a fare card will get you anywhere you want to go that requires that stretch of 55, and for less than gas and parking in the city.

I’m going to shut up now before I giveaway too much more and ruin a good thing.

To the post, I am open to the idea. My question is how this could go into effect without “directly impact existing, free lanes.” Do they have enough room to expand the highway in that corridor? Aren’t there bridges and overpasses?

(I cannot get around the Crain’s paywall, so excuse me if my question is already answered.)

Comment by Dirty Red Tuesday, Dec 8, 15 @ 11:13 am
This isn’t a toll lane in the strict sense, this is congestion pricing. They should adjust the cost as the congestion changes to keep one lane free and clear at all times. This is not a new concept, it is only new to Illinois.

Comment by Not it Tuesday, Dec 8, 15 @ 11:19 am
My question is how this could go into effect without “directly impact existing, free lanes.” Do they have enough room to expand the highway in that corridor? Aren’t there bridges and overpasses?

DR, I agree the wide open parking spaces in the Metra lot at Joliet are a well-kept secret (shhhhhh!) The Heritage Corridor only runs 3 times a day, though, and there are plenty of destinations along the 55 corridor that require something extra than the train, or even the Pace routes. There is ample room to widen the I-55 corridor to add a toll lane without having to buy nearby homes and businesses, but it will come at a price of having to widen bridges and overpasses.

Comment by Six Degrees of Separation Tuesday, Dec 8, 15 @ 11:21 am
I would use them and it makes sense. The user pays directly for a government service.

Comment by Downstate Hack Tuesday, Dec 8, 15 @ 11:21 am
About time they provide special lanes for us in the 1%. We deserve to zip past the peasants.

Comment by one percent Tuesday, Dec 8, 15 @ 11:22 am
“Gas is cheap, raise the gas tax significantly.”

Sure take disposable income out of the consumers hand and let the government waste it, that will get the economy going. What the?????????????

Comment by Dan S Tuesday, Dec 8, 15 @ 11:22 am
I believe many would choose to pay for the utility of convenience by using toll lanes on busier sections of I-55. Funds collected need to be applied to maintenance. I agree with a prior post regarding application of a toll lanes to the Edens to both raise funds and improve traffic flow. It shouldn’t take 60 minutes to travel between Half Day Road and Dempster during morning commutes, but it often does.

Comment by kitty Tuesday, Dec 8, 15 @ 11:30 am
That’s glossing over things, Dirty Red.

I live in Romeoville. Driving to Joliet and taking the RI line in takes 20 minutes of drive/parking, 90 minutes on the train (no true express from there), and another 20-30 to get from the station downtown to my workplace. And back again, of course.

I could take Heritage Corridor out of Lockport. That’s only a 10 minute drive and an hour on the train. But there are only 3 trains each way per day and the latest one leaves Lockport is 7:11, so if I have to work even 9:30-5:30, that’s not a useful option either.

I used to drive to Downers and take BNSF from there. But that’s at least a 30 minute drive each way, sometimes 40, and you have to deal with 55 to 355 or Lemont, and that’s a jam as early as 6AM. Plus the 35 minute train ride (express), and the 20 minute walk to work.

Or, I drive Weber to 55 and deal with that all the way in. It’s not guaranteed to be slower or faster but it is more comfortable and less of a hassle than jamming in to a standing room only train car. And since Metra costs at least 15 bucks a day now ($11 for a round trip ticket, plus a few bucks to park) and I have to burn some gas anyway, the cost savings isn’t that great.

Of course, I don’t expect public transit to cater to my needs alone. What I want are options. Toll lanes on 55 are one, and a welcome one at that.

Comment by Concerned Observer Tuesday, Dec 8, 15 @ 11:31 am
If the Toll road has significant benefit, that would be great, and I’m not one to say “no” to an idea like this if it can help the transportation issues and the congestion too.

When I head into the Loop, I occasionally go through Plainfield to hit 55 instead of making my way to 88, so I may see the benefits firsthand.

Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Dec 8, 15 @ 11:38 am
It’s a good idea whose time has come. We are going to have to rely more and more on innovative ways to fund transportation improvements — the gas tax is not keeping up. These lanes have worked well in many locations and I’m sure IDOT is up to the task of constructing and managing them, unless of course Blago and now Rauner have managed to run off their most experienced engineers.

Comment by kimocat Tuesday, Dec 8, 15 @ 11:44 am
If you don’t add a lane it will impact the free lanes: they will be busier.

This could be a great money maker. If we are initiating user fees than we should have equal access to gain and pain, based on our willingness to gain time versus give up $. Therefore, make the toll an “automatic fee” based on a given percent of our registered income. Snark… but not really.

Comment by Up North Tuesday, Dec 8, 15 @ 11:48 am
I support it. I would use it. Pay extra to avoid some congestion? Yes, every single time I would.

It’s a way to fund maintenance of our transportation infrastructure. Many of our highways need to remain open and toll-free, but I like this hybrid approach. There isn’t enough money to support our needs. But if users like me will pay more - why not.

Comment by siriusly Tuesday, Dec 8, 15 @ 11:51 am
Cubs: ==It probably isn’t “fair” but neither is the world.==
The world is not fair, but we each have an obligation to make it fairer if we can.

Comment by UIC Guy Tuesday, Dec 8, 15 @ 11:52 am
The world is not fair, but we each have an obligation to make it fairer if we can. I agree with this comment, especially for “government works” where there is an increased expectation of fairness. I would submit that adding a tolled lane does not take away from the lanes everyone already has, and there are ways to make the toll lane more accessible for low income users, as I mentioned at 11:02, or they could also allow car poolers to ride free.

Comment by Six Degrees of Separation Tuesday, Dec 8, 15 @ 12:03 pm
Thank you, Vanilla Man.

Climate change is here. Now.

Like it or not — we all must cut auto use.
Draconically.

Unfortunately, the driving mindset is so ingrained in many of us that any governmental pleas for voluntary cutbacks in automobile and truck usage won’t do squat.

The only way to curb driving effectively is to tax gasoline and diesel out the wazoo.

Zero political appetite for that, of course. (The sham federal transportation bill that just passed by Congress leaves gasoline taxes at 1993 levels.)

Maybe it’ll all start to change once air quality in metro areas across the country comes to resemble that of Beijing this week.

New toll roads? Ha! Moot point.

When — not if — driving is curtailed due to climate change, we won’t need no stinkin’ new toll roads. Anywhere.

Comment by Anonymousse Tuesday, Dec 8, 15 @ 12:04 pm
I would take this even a step further and have the toll price adjust based on the amount of cars using it at a particular time. Have rush hours cost way more than off peak times.

Comment by Person 8 Tuesday, Dec 8, 15 @ 12:06 pm
Maybe it’ll all start to change once air quality in metro areas across the country comes to resemble that of Beijing this week.

Sorry to spoil the narrative, but in this country, air quality is improving and is on a projected downward swing through the foreseeable future, just because we’re doing what we’re doing now. CAFE mpg limits, coal fired power plants closing in the city, more renewables and nat gas being used in power generation. Cars aren’t going away unless the earth is nuked or some other catastrophe. Hopefully their trend in being less onerous on the environment will continue.

Comment by Six Degrees of Separation Tuesday, Dec 8, 15 @ 12:13 pm
I’d be up for straight up congestion pricing in Chicago *if* that money was used to improve CTA/Metra options.

Comment by ChicagoVinny Tuesday, Dec 8, 15 @ 12:21 pm
I don’t use the Stevenson so it would not impact me directly, however, I am concerned that this will simply encourage more people to drive. Metra service from the burbs surrounding I55 is excellent, but I’m not sure what their ridership is like.

And, there is the issue of the “have’s” being able to drive at the speed limit (assuming traffic in the toll lanes won’t be as congested) while the “have not’s” stay stuck in traffic.

Comment by Former Hoosier Tuesday, Dec 8, 15 @ 12:34 pm
HOV lanes’ days have passed. If two share a car, each gets a 50% discount on the toll. 4 in a car? Each is paying 25% of the toll. No need for the cost and difficulty of HOV enforcement.

Comment by NoGifts Tuesday, Dec 8, 15 @ 12:43 pm
I am concerned that this will simply encourage more people to drive.

Believe me, most people in the I-55 area who are going to the Loop are taking the train if at all possible. I do not see hordes of traffic using their cars to drive to the Loop to park in a $40 a day garage, although there are a few. There are lots of destinations along 55 with all the logistics and service industries that are not being served by a Metra trip, and these are the people who the toll lane would help the most. If you want to discourage people from driving to the Loop, just put an extra $20 parking tax on anyone downtown. The $40 parking fee is enough to keep me from driving already, unless it’s unavoidable for some reason.

Comment by Six Degrees of Separation Tuesday, Dec 8, 15 @ 12:44 pm
I drive that strip of 55 regularly. If 5,000 cars an hour go under the 355 overchange in each direction, how is this going to significantly change that volume. Same volume, same snow, same accidents. Every one of those tolled cars still have to cross through traffic to use the exits/entrances. Make it 6 lanes each way maybe, but that is a huge redo.

Comment by zatoichi Tuesday, Dec 8, 15 @ 12:53 pm
Yes, but only if we hire Smokin’ Jay Cutler to be the spokesman for the effort and PR pushes.

Comment by Team Sleep Tuesday, Dec 8, 15 @ 1:05 pm
Sure it’s fair. We don’t need welfare for everything.

Comment by Fair Tuesday, Dec 8, 15 @ 1:40 pm
Gas tax and federal excise tax on tires help pay for the roads. If
You feel the are not free then how about a toll on the street in front of your house. Where does it end.
The shovel ready programs of potus
Paid for the roads . The point is
The more you tax the more you tax.

Comment by William Jennings Bryan Tuesday, Dec 8, 15 @ 1:47 pm
Sprawl is part of the problem. More people live further and further away from jobs. While the population of the Chicago metro area grew some, the developed are has grown dramatically. Hence contested highways. Laws and regulations that slow growth, versus create incentives for it would help.

Comment by Sir Reel Tuesday, Dec 8, 15 @ 1:51 pm
I do not use 55 and would pay something for a breezy lane on the Kennedy.
This may be a solution wedded to the 20th century. Google predicts the self driving car will be in the mass market in five years. I have to think that computers will be able to manage a smoother flow than human drivers and self driving cars will use less road resources.

Comment by Peters Post Tuesday, Dec 8, 15 @ 1:59 pm
Google predicts the self driving car will be in the mass market in five years. I have to think that computers will be able to manage a smoother flow than human drivers and self driving cars will use less road resources.

This too is true, but it will take a generation or 2 to turn the fleet over if every new car in 2025 were so equipped. For maximum utilization of the space, every car would need the technology, and no car could have a mechanical breakdown. One benefit is that driverless cars would not be “looky-lou’s” that would slow down to gape at every wreck or disabled vehicle on the side of the road.

Comment by Six Degrees of Separation Tuesday, Dec 8, 15 @ 2:19 pm
Don’t feed the trolls!

Comment by Jack Stephens Tuesday, Dec 8, 15 @ 2:32 pm
Did they mention if construction costs would include some sort of federal matching funds?

Comment by DuPage Tuesday, Dec 8, 15 @ 2:37 pm
I second Peters Post. I think self driving cars and buses will change the transportation network. I would not expect this tollway to pay for itself.

Comment by Last Bull Moose Tuesday, Dec 8, 15 @ 3:20 pm
This is what happens when Illinois has not raised the Gas Tax in decades, trying to maintain a system with 1980’s money and you end up with the tollway building out your highway capacity.
Yes transportation policy is not easy and takes work compromise and trust.
That’s why we hired the Gov to move Illinois forward and keep it competitive. I am sure this is on the turnaround agenda.

Comment by Annon3 Tuesday, Dec 8, 15 @ 3:23 pm
How about not texting and driving? So many people still do it and it slows down traffic, it makes me wanna scream!

Comment by Union Leader Tuesday, Dec 8, 15 @ 3:31 pm
= Why not just enact a personal property tax on all vehicles like they do in MO? =

Why not read the state Constitution before commenting?

Comment by cover Tuesday, Dec 8, 15 @ 3:53 pm
/end of rant

To the post:

While I don’t have a personal stake in this proposal, as I have only been on the Stevenson once in the last 14 years, I believe this is an innovative concept that should at least be examined. But I would encourage IDOT and the Tollway to take a measured approach to the project, not rush headlong. Changing demographics and the pending arrival of those self-driving cars should reduce the demand on these congested commuter highways in 15-25 years. That time horizon might cut off the revenue needed to maintain the new toll lanes, which would leave the state adding to its substantial existing infrastructure deficit.

Comment by cover Tuesday, Dec 8, 15 @ 4:07 pm
I’m all for it. User fees are a great source of revenue.

Comment by Tone Tuesday, Dec 8, 15 @ 4:35 pm
=My question is how this could go into effect without “directly impact existing, free lanes.” Do they have enough room to expand the highway in that corridor? Aren’t there bridges and overpasses?=

Back in 1998 or so when the Stevenson was reconstructed, many of the bridges had piers built to accommodate a future widening. Basically just need to add some beams and pour additional deck at many locations. Keep in mind the reconstruction did not replace all bridges.

Many structures still would need to be rehabbed/replaced for this to be completed. Cicero Avenue is one that definitely comes to mind.

Comment by CrazyHorse Tuesday, Dec 8, 15 @ 11:09 pm
Adding from previous post.

Cicero is an extremely busy exit/entrance with a high volume of truck traffic. That structure would likely need to be widened to accomodate an interior/toll lane. The one thing that the Stevenson has going for it is that the roads and bridges have been well maintained by IDOT and are in excellent condition.

Comment by CrazyHorse Tuesday, Dec 8, 15 @ 11:19 pm