I’ve been thinking about this article from the Journal Star — specifically, this information:
Numbers released last week to the Journal Star indicate that in several cases, there is less traffic on I-74 since the Upgrade 74 project was completed in 2006.
East of Adams Street, just off the Murray Baker Bridge, the Illinois Department of Transportation counted an average 56,600 vehicles each day in 2008. Comparably, there were 62,100 vehicles daily crossing the Murray Baker Bridge in 2003, around the time the upgrade project began.
West of Adams Street’s exit, the state counted 51,000 vehicles each day in 2008, compared to 59,100 on average each day in 2003.
In East Peoria, west of the Main Street exit, the 2008 count shows 56,800 vehicles daily, down 3,000 vehicles on average each day from 2003, when the count was 59,800.
My criticism of the Upgrade 74 plan has always been that it was too much. In fact, one of the first posts I wrote (because, like all bloggers, there’s an obligatory post early in our careers complaining about something traffic-related) — on April 18, 2005 — was about the I-74 overhaul:
I’m not denying that the expressway needed some improvements. Some of those exit ramps were very dangerous and needed to be reconstructed.
But isn’t this overhaul a bit excessive? I mean, do we really need six to eight lanes of traffic through Peoria?
It’s almost like they said, “hey, what needs to be done to improve I-74 through Peoria?”
And someone answered, “well, we need to fix those short ramps — especially that dangerous one by the bridge.”
“Yeah, yeah, good! Anything else?”
“Well, it would really help traffic flow to put in a new interchange at Sterling by the mall.”
“Excellent, yes, that would be a good idea. Anything else?”
“Hmmm…. no, not really….”
“Okay, well, what do we estimate that will cost?”
“We figure about $200 million.”
[Furrowed brow] “Well, we’ve got $460 million appropriated… we’re going to have to come up with some more upgrades. What else can we do?”
“Well… uh…. we could add more lanes — and a tunnel — and, and, let’s see how many roads and ramps we can get to intersect at Knoxville — that would be fun!”
And away it went!
Indeed. The Journal Star reported on May 18, 1999, that “The new road will be able to carry up to 100,000 cars a day. Right now, from 30,000 to 65,000 cars use the road daily.” In other words, they doubled the capacity of I-74 through Peoria. Why? There’s no evidence that we needed additional capacity. And now we find out there are fewer cars on the interstate than before the upgrade! More capacity means more maintenance of more infrastructure in a state that can’t pay its bills or maintain its existing infrastructure as it is.
But I guess that’s water under the bridge now. Except I’d like to point out this: As we’re trying to decide what needs to be done with Main Street, let’s remember that traffic engineers are not always accurate in gauging capacity needs. This I-74 overhaul is a very expensive case in point.
On a positive, I guess the roadway operates on an “A” LOS now.
It couldn’t have been worse than a “B” before.
During the original HOP charettes, Duany warned that the roadway was going to become an even more significant dividing feature in the city and should be considered to be integrated with the city as an urban boulevard. It’s in the plan.
Ever drive on I-55 up in the Chicago burbs area? It’s a mess. It’s a broken down old 4 lane interstate. And we’re talking Chicago traffic here, probably 10 times the amount of traffic going thru I-74 at any given time. You’re right, I-74 was a colossal waste of money. That money could have been better served elsewhere, but I guess that’s the way it works. Just ask Palin. Her town of 10,000 has seen more money granted to it that cities 10 times that size.
Exactly what we need in the Executive office… someone that can get things done.
These highway projects aren’t about need, they’re about “pork”. The contractors and their unions make big political contributions and expect pay-back. And they get it.
Not only was it a lot of pork then… it is a guaranteed larger stream of pork in the future when maintenance needs to be done. You almost never see an interstate roadway reduced in size or removed entirely.
“almost never”? like when have you ever seen an interstate removed?? They’re the closest thing to eternal life on this planet.
Mahkno ande Mouse,
Visit the website Removing Freeways-Restoring Cities
Here is the link: http://www.preservenet.com/freeways/
BBBB, I agree with you that heeding Duany’s advice about the freeway would have been smart.
The Heart of Peoria Plan is an amazing document and following Duany’s recommendations in general would serve Peoria well.
Last November I asked an IDOT engineer what projected population figures they used during the design phase of the I-74 project. I asked the question because I wanted to learn more about what led to the decision to add capacity to this stretch of I-74. He responded:
“We don’t forecast the size or population of the city but try to forecast the traffic growth for the interstate through Peoria based on long and short range plans for the Peoria area to determine local users as well as different factors for the “through” users. I have attached the chapter from the 1992 Feasibility study the goes over those numbers. Hopefully this will assist with what you’re looking for.”
When you read through the study you see they expected a downtown shopping mall to have been built by the time of I-74 project’s completion and if not they expected something of equal draw to have been built.
I wish they had
• reviewed the population trend which was/is trending down-not up
• recognized that high gas prices were inevitable based on information available at the time
• factored in alternative modes of transportation as an option rather than adding more capacity
Once they get the museum built, you’ll be glad they added those extra lanes!!! 😉 😉
Some features of the reconstructed I-74 through East Peoria and Peoria may be elaborate but safety was one of the big reasons for the project. The hairpin ramps and criss-crossing paths caused many an accident over the years. Now that the project is finished, it will probably be good for a century.
Regarding removal of freeways, all but I-64 are state routes and are not part of the Interstate Highway System. An alteration in the Interstate Highway System would require Federal approval.
Since I-74 handles a large number of cars daily (despite a slight decline), replacing it with a street would cause enormous congestion. The exisitng highway passes through Peoria in a trench with major thoroughfares spanning it via overpasses.
CJ- You should apply for a job at IDOT since you had/have all the answers.
Here’s an idea: this post mentions that I-74 is operating well under capacity, and at lower volumes than pre-Upgrade. Seems to me that now through traffic on Interstate 74 shouldn’t be an issue.
However, entering Peoria from either direction on I-74, the signs route through traffic (to Bloomington or the Quad Cities) via I-474. Now that the hairpins have been removed and you can drive at highway speeds through Peoria, is the I-474 bypass still needed? Granted, I’m not saying we should rip out 474 (I’m sure Bartonville and all the commuters who use the Shade-Lohman Bridge would just love that), but why can’t we replace the existing signage to route through traffic through Peoria? We have the capacity, and just about anyone who has driven into Peoria from Bloomington knows about that beautiful vista of downtown you see as you make that curve after Pinecrest.
Easy way to make use of what we already have and to boost Peoria’s opinion to the through-traveler. Who knows? It might even boost commerce downtown and give people a higher opinion of Peoria than it would if they just bypassed on 474.
They are making their money back on speeding tickets caused by people going too fast on a relatively empty road.
“because, like all bloggers, there’s an obligatory post early in our careers complaining about something traffic-related”
You know, some of us still do that 😉
Concerning Main St, I’d like so see barricades reducing it down to one lane in both direction for about a month. That would show where the traffic will go. Doubtful that will happen.
As to I74, it’s a huge safety improvement. To the reduced numbers, I got used to using the Bob Michel, and still use it extensively. I wonder how much that plays into it.
peoriafan — Thanks for the input.
Sterling,
The original concept for the Interstate system called for the roadways to go around metropolitan centers not through their centers. Somehow in the early days local politicians managed to change the plan to force many of these roads through the hearts of cities. Almost universally these roads destabilized the neighborhoods they passed through. I-474 is more consistent with the original concept.
Indeed. The story I hear was that I-74 was supposed to take the route now used by I-474, but there were rich and powerful people who owned property along Knoxville where it now intersects the interstate. By re-routing it to its existing route, some folks got rich.
Legalize and tax FIREWORKS!
How about evacuation needs? Isn’t that the reason expressways were constructed in the first place? We saw what happened in Houston during Hurricane whats-her-name. Traffic is Houston sucks on a good day and never lets up. They need another 10 lanes or better, let me tell you. Suppose there were a chemical or bio attack in central Illinois and the word went out to evacuate? I sure wouldn’t mind the extra lanes and all.
The I-74 project wasn’t really designed for present day traffic, it (like all interstate projects) was designed for anticipated traffic at the END of it’s expected service life… which is 50 years. It’s kinda like buying shoes for a 10-year-old. You don’t buy new shoes that fit perfectly, because by next week they will be too small.
Yes, the daily traffic is lower than expected (I’m sure gas prices play a part), but even if traffic met IDOTs initial estimates the road would still look empty.
As they say, you can’t unring the bell.
My point was that, despite whatever the initial intent of the Interstate Highway System was (and officially it was for military movements in time of war, hence why it’s symbolized as a shield, and yes, originally the Interstates were not supposed to come into the urban areas but rather skirt around them), here we are stuck with a band of concrete through Downtown. If it’s under capacity, we might as well route through traffic down I-74 instead of I-474, or rather sign I-474 as a truck bypass and not a total bypass. A lot of people throughout the state who have never been to Peoria probably don’t think we’re much different than Champaign, or Bloomington, or Springfield because they don’t see our downtown. I can tell you that when someone from the north takes 74 into town (as my friend from Joliet did several months ago), they are pleasantly surprised by our skyline and our pretty little downtown on the banks of the Illinois.
thanks for the link George, needs to get more publicity.
Billy Dennis wrote: Indeed. The story I hear was that I-74 was supposed to take the route now used by I-474, but there were rich and powerful people who owned property along Knoxville where it now intersects the interstate. By re-routing it to its existing route, some folks got rich.
Interesting you mention that Billy…I’ve been going through 1957 editions of the Peoria Journal Star on microfilm and last night came across in either late-April/early-May of that year an article which mentioned the construction of I-74 using the present-day I-474 alignment.