A story in The Southern today discusses the possibility of extending Interstate 66 into Illinois and linking Paducah and Cape Girardeau.



Interstate 66 looks to be a go to cross east-west across Kentucky ending in Paducah. Apparently, there are plans for it to link up with a newly constructed road across the very southern part of West Virginia linking up with the existing I-64 where it turns south of Beckley, WV.



The original plan for I-66 was to cross the country, however that was modified and now the ideal, it appears, is to have it run from the east coast to Wichita. There is currently an I-66 near DC, but it seems that Interstate would be renumbered if this one were ever completed. Here is a wikipedia article on it.



Back on the Illinois portion, since I-66 will probably join up with I-24 near Paducah it could cross the river there. A new interstate would have to be built across the Shawnee from Metropolis to Cape, probably running through Ullin where it would cross I-57. After Ullin it would have to cross some hills, probably join up with part of Rt. 4, and then down a valley and across the levee where it would join up with Rt. 146, which they just built the new bridge for in Cape. I am not sure whether this bridge could serve the Interstate or not. If not, you could just end it at Rt. 3 where it would then follow the existing 146 across the bridge while we wait for Missouri to get its act together. Eventually then Missouri may want to join Cape and Springfield, MO after which Springfield could be connected with Wichita.



Anyway, I know the usefulness of this connection can be debated, but I think it is a project worth pursuing for Illinois. First, I don't think this would cost all that much. Assuming you can use the existing bridges in Paducah and Cape, all that is left to construct is the road, much of which would be through bottom land which shouldn't be that expensive to purchase. It wouldn't actually touch that much of the Shawnee as most of the Shawnee is north of where this Interstate would run.



Second, this area of Illinois is basically third world. I hate saying that about my own state, but we are talking really, really poor. Not only would it bring the jobs, but more importantly, people who live in this area could continue to live there but now work in Cape or Paducah instead. Providing these folks access to jobs would be really helpful. Also, Ullin, at the intersection of 2 interstates, would see a good deal of new development providing more jobs in that area.



Third, both Cape and Paducah could use the help. Since they are economic centers which also benefit Illinois anything to help them should be good for us also.



Anyway, I think this is a decent idea.

How would I-66 enter Illinois? I assume it would link up with I-24 in Kentucky and then split off to the west at Metropolis. Or would it require a separate crossing of the Ohio River near Hamletsburg, IL? I find it hard to imagine that a new bridge over the Ohio would be part of the plans.



Unfortunately, I'm not completely sold on the idea that a new interstate would give S. Illinois much of an economic boost. It would probably result in a few more truck stops, fast food places, and roadside inns. Most towns located along I-24 and the southern part of I-57 haven't benefitted much from their proximity to the interstates.



True, building the interstate provides jobs for the short term. But long-term economic growth can't occur until a major employer or two locates in Southern Illinois and puts people back to work.



Now, I'm not saying the new I-66 wouldn't bring benefits to Illinois. The interstate would bring a few more tourists to the area. Like you pointed out, it would give the local people a faster route to jobs and other destinations. And as a crossroads, Ullin may experience growth. But all the other towns which the highway would bypass stand nothing to gain.



I think the new bridge at Cape could definately serve the interstate. It already carries a limited-access highway (the Shawnee Parkway) through Cape to I-55. The new interstate could just terminate right at I-55.



There's a better path for an interstate to Springfield, MO. That being, I-57, which currently ends at I-55 near Sikeston. I think MO state Rte 60-- which already goes through Poplar Bluff to Springfield-- could be upgraded to interstate standards and renamed I-57. It would then link to I-44 at Springfield.



In sum, I really do support this project and hope it happens.

Yeah, you got it right on the Interstate's path, but nothing is proposed yet, just conjecture.



They would run it through Southern Illinois for a couple reasons.



#1: Cape. Cape is a more important town than Sikeston and it would be great for Cape to get more interstate access and be a crossroads.



#2: Get Illinois involved. The other states working on this project are Kentucky and Missouri ... it wouldn't hurt to bring on a state with money to help fund part of this road. It would certainly save money for Kentucky. Plus, it gets another set of Senators, Congressmen, etc. involved in the project at the Federal level.



#3: It saves you the cost of a bridge if you can use the I-24 Bridge in Paducah and the new bridge in Cape. It would be really complicated to build a bridge in Wycliff, Kentucky where the Mississippi and the Ohio join. There is a pretty large floodplain there and I bet the river gets pretty rowdy at that point.



I know the most obvious thing is just to make it cross the river and join up with Sikeston, but I think it makes just as much sense to run it through Cape and then put in a new road from Cape to Popular Bluff where it can join up with 60 to Springfield.

I know this isn't exactly on topic, but...what do you think about the idea of extending I-24 northwest from I-57 to I-255 in Columbia? Southern Illinois would have much quicker access to the St Louis area.

One possible route could go just south of Carbondale and Murphysboro, link up with an upgraded Rte 3 with bypasses at Chester and Red Bud, and then swing west of Waterloo and Columbia, intersecting with I-255.

This route would serve SIU, plus the Chester Mental Health facility, and it could have a connector spur to the bridge at Chester.

Another possible route could run northwest from I-57 and pass through the easternmost end of Carbondale near SIU and University Mall, run parallel to Rte 51 to DuQuoin, swing to the northwest at Pinckneyville and roughly follow Rte 13 to New Athens, then continue northwest to intersect with I-255 at Columbia. This route would again serve SIU, plus the Duquoin State Fair and the Pinckneyville area theme park (if ever built).

Just a thought-- I know there are no funds for such an extension.

citysoul wrote:I know this isn't exactly on topic, but...what do you think about the idea of extending I-24 northwest from I-57 to I-255 in Columbia? Southern Illinois would have much quicker access to the St Louis area.

One possible route could go just south of Carbondale and Murphysboro, link up with an upgraded Rte 3 with bypasses at Chester and Red Bud, and then swing west of Waterloo and Columbia, intersecting with I-255.

This route would serve SIU, plus the Chester Mental Health facility, and it could have a connector spur to the bridge at Chester.

Another possible route could run northwest from I-57 and pass through the easternmost end of Carbondale near SIU and University Mall, run parallel to Rte 51 to DuQuoin, swing to the northwest at Pinckneyville and roughly follow Rte 13 to New Athens, then continue northwest to intersect with I-255 at Columbia. This route would again serve SIU, plus the Duquoin State Fair and the Pinckneyville area theme park (if ever built).

Just a thought-- I know there are no funds for such an extension.

Most people would like that to happen, but know it is not going to happen in the short term.



If it ever does, the most likely route that I have heard time and again, which makes sense, would be to go between Carbondale and Murphysboro and then join up with Rt. 127 north of Murphy to Pinckneyville (there are already plans in place to make that stretch of 127 4 lanes). Then west of Pinckneyville (near the new proposed theme park) I-24 would roughly run along the route of Rt. 13, have a major exit for Sparta where Rt. 4 will be 4 lanes, cross the Kaskaskia by New Athens, then join up with Rt. 15 by Freeburg where I-24 would follow the existing path of Rt. 15 to 255.



Then, the 20 miles stretch of 127 from Nashville to Pinckneyville would be widened to 4 lanes limited access to join the two interstates. Everyone going to between Saint Louis and Carbondale pretty much takes 127 now anyway, so this might be the first thing that gets done because it currently has the traffic to justify it - but Nashville/Washington County is pretty against it and has been holding that project up for a while even though I think the State would like to do it.



What is most likely is that the State of Illinois will just basically build one segment at a time over time (one of the longer stretches from Murphy to Pinkneyville is planned now) and at some point there will be a 4 lane road from Saint Louis to Carbondale ... whether it is ever restricted access and called Rt. 24, who knows, but the point is to have direct 4 lane access to Saint Louis and the State of Illinois is slowly but surely moving in that direction. I would say we are probably about 15-20 years away from seeing it happen. The one thing that could move it faster is if by some miracle the developers of the planned Branson-style theme park west of Pinckneyville ever come through. I am sure as part of the bargain, Illinois would have to go 4 lanes from Pinckneyville to Belleville.

Of course, the biggest "if" about these projects is money. Especially with the current state of the economy, the U.S. govenment is probably not going to chip in much for new interstates. To make it happen, it seems that the individual states would have to flit most of the bill and get their portion of the highway built to interstate standards. Is this line of thinking incorrect?

citysoul wrote:Of course, the biggest "if" about these projects is money. Especially with the current state of the economy, the U.S. govenment is probably not going to chip in much for new interstates. To make it happen, it seems that the individual states would have to flit most of the bill and get their portion of the highway built to interstate standards. Is this line of thinking incorrect?

I would say that is probably correct, although some presidents choose to build out of a recession thinking the government jobs will help spur the economy. Lots of times in a downturn the federal government will actually spend more, it is the states and local governments that really tighten their belts in tough times.



But, your thinking is right on this I-24 deal. It is not going to be I-24 possibly ever. I think the plan is for limited access, not restricted access (if I got those right). Meaning, Pinckneyville and all the small towns (like Vergennes, IL who threw a fit over the current proposed section) want stoplights on the 4 lane road instead of an interstate style exchange because the easier access to the small town will spur more development and keep local businesses pacified (local businesses hate new interstates because it takes the business away from downtown). Thus, I doubt it is built to restricted access standards so its name can't be just changed to I-24.



I will try and get an update on the current 4 lane development between Murphy and Pinckneyville in the next couple weeks as I have a wedding to go to in Pinckneyville coming up.

^Maybe saving 20-minutes isn't much to get excited about. But there are other benefits that a I-24 extension could provide-- which IDOT should have taken into account.

Some examples: The fewer stops that motorists make, the less overall fuel consumption, and the less automotive pollutants added to the air. With an alternative route, the existing state roads would not deteriorate from wear as quickly. A reduction in accidents on the state roads may even occur; the current mixture of traffic moving along at 50 mph and slow-moving farm equipment creates a real hazard. And just having a lane available for passing (without crossing over into the oncoming lane) is a benefit for all motorists.

I travel between St Louis and Carbondale frequently and would love a speedier alternative route.

Is it just me or does anyone else think 20 min. is a little shy? I have driven both ways and I really don't believe that to get from the I-24 interchange south of Marion to Saint Louis taking I-57 and then I-64 would only be 20 min. on top of a new I-24. Just Google mapping it, building in a new interstate directly from the I-24 intersection to Saint Louis should save at least 30 miles of distance.



But, so what if it is 20 minutes? That is a long time, frankly. That 20 min. determines whether the trip from Carbondale takes more or less than 2 hours and that is an important mental determinate.



"How far away is Carbondale?"



A1: A little over two hours.



A2: About an hour and a half.



Seems like a pretty big difference to me.

I agree: A savings of 20 minutes doesn't sound right.



Out of curiosity, I used Google Maps to check the distance and driving time between St Louis and Carbondale using two common routes. The first route utilizes mostly interstate, the second one uses mostly state routes. They are:



1. I-64 east to I-57; I-57 south to Rte 13; Rte 13 to Carbondale.

2. I-55 south to I-255: I-255 east to Rte 3; Rte 3 south to Rte 149; Rte 149 east to Murphysboro and Rte 13; Rte 13 to Carbondale.



Google maps says the first route is 132 miles and takes 2 hours and 15 minutes. The second route is said to be 110 miles and takes 2 hours and 34 minutes.

So the distance saved by taking state routes is 21 miles.

But... even though taking state routes means fewer miles driven, the time saved by taking the interstates is still 19 minutes.



What this means is this: A direct route interstate between St Louis and Carbondale would save far more than 19 minutes. In fact, your estimate of it saving 30 minutes is conservative. I'd say either IDOT miscalculated, or they were just playing down the idea in favor of other highway projects.

Mill204 wrote:^ IDOT's calculations are correct, you just framed the question incorrectly. The time savings isn't for St. Louis to Carbondale—which you've shown could potentially be greater than 20 min—it's for St. Louis to Paducah or Nashville or Chattanooga.

Thanks for pointing this out. I assumed everyone knew that was the context.