|
|
Post by southsidesignmaker on Dec 12, 2008 19:11:35 GMT -6
I miss church lady
|
|
|
|
Post by steckdad on Dec 13, 2008 13:10:54 GMT -6
sorry but you add this to the issues already there and it is not good. Ask the insurance industry who says 1:2 16-17 year old has a traffic accident ( why we as parents pay thru the nose for insurance ) - and ask them what effect doubling or tripling a commute makes ( reason why car insurance rates have mileage cliplevels ) / what passing thru more railroad crossings and intersections proven dangerous already - and then add in traffic that will now increase significantly- especially heavy truck traffic. If you think this has no effect...you'd never make it as an underwriter. Yes, this increases odds of an accident - sorry. It was one reason Bruce Glawe worked to limit that the first time around - the second time nothing in Hell seems to matter, it just gets blown off, I really don't understand this view at all. guess I am just naive. I definately would never be an insurance underwriter or aspire to be. I am going to continue to stick my head in the sand I guess. unaware of all the lurking dangers in the world. Especially at the corner of diehl and Eola. |
|
|
|
Post by southsidesignmaker on Dec 13, 2008 13:27:08 GMT -6
Steckdad, I too am not an insurance underwriter, nor did I stay at a Holiday Inn last night. That said, the impact of ramps at Eola and 88 is a real concern that will have to be addressed. Truck traffic along with car traffic will increase.
|
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Dec 13, 2008 18:30:46 GMT -6
Steckdad, I too am not an insurance underwriter, nor did I stay at a Holiday Inn last night. That said, the impact of ramps at Eola and 88 is a real concern that will have to be addressed. Truck traffic along with car traffic will increase. Exactly--if you increase risk, you increase probability. No one needs to stay at a Holiday Inn Express to get that methodology. Really doesn't require pulling ones head out of the sand. As a Dad think back to how many times you either told your kids to avoid more dangerous situations - or at least wished they did. The site we chose continues to add risk to our children's lives. We would never do so, their 'friends' who might do so would be labeled those to stay away from, undesirables -- most adults who would do so we would call reckless -- yet this SB does so, 10 fold - and we choose to give them a pass. I continue to question why ? It makes no sense to me at all. |
|
|
|
Post by steckdad on Dec 14, 2008 10:26:35 GMT -6
Steckdad, I too am not an insurance underwriter, nor did I stay at a Holiday Inn last night. That said, the impact of ramps at Eola and 88 is a real concern that will have to be addressed. Truck traffic along with car traffic will increase. addressed like adding a third lane on each side??? WVHS and NVHS are on far more dangerous intersections than 88/eola will be for quite some time. maybe never... |
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Dec 17, 2008 13:01:05 GMT -6
Interesting coincidence in timing... speculated to be done and ready by late 2009 / early 2010... www.suburbanchicagonews.com/beaconnews/news/1335137,Aurora_OKs_Eola_interchange_au121708.article December 17, 2008 By ANDRE SALLES Staff Writer AURORA — After years of negotiations, agreements and plans, it looks like the Eola Road interchange off of Interstate 88 is actually going to happen next year. Aurora's City Council unanimously approved an agreement between the city, DuPage County and the Illinois Tollway Authority that would see construction on the interchange start in April. Aldermen also approved contracts to purchase the last six properties (out of 11) needed to make the interchange a reality. The land is Aurora's total investment in the $50 million project and will cost the city $7.9 million. It is hoped that the Eola Road interchange will relieve congestion on Route 59 as well as provide better access to the tollway. According to a recent study commissioned by the city, an interchange at Eola could bring nearly 11,000 jobs and $1.4 billion in economic impact to Aurora by 2018. At Tuesday's council meeting, the three far East Side aldermen — Rick Mervine, 8th Ward; Leroy Keith, 9th Ward; and Lynda Elmore, 10th Ward — pledged their support for the interchange, despite the agreement containing no guarantees that Eola Road would be widened between Montgomery and Keating roads. A previous version of that agreement included the widening project, but that one expired in 2004. Keith in particular has been vocal about not supporting the interchange without a widening of Eola Road, but he walked back from those statements Tuesday. He said meetings with DuPage County Board members convinced him the county would not fund the project and might scuttle the interchange entirely if pressed. "We can't take the chance of losing on both ends," he said. "I'm supporting the interchange. We need this to happen." Economic Development Director Sherman Jenkins said if the interchange project comes in under budget, any leftover money could go toward widening Eola. Alderman Stephanie Kifowit, 3rd Ward, cast the only dissenting vote against purchasing the last six parcels of land. She objected to financing deals with two of those property owners, which would see the city pay 5 percent interest over five years on those pieces of land. Kifowit suggested taking out bonds for the sale, which she said could net them lower interest rates. Finance Director Brian Caputo disagreed, however, noting that the private financing deals would not assess penalties for prepaying. If, he said, the city could secure a better interest rate in the future, refinancing would be an option. The tollway board is set to advertise the interchange project for bid on Thursday. The hope is to complete the interchange by late 2009 or early 2010, Jenkins said.===== You don't bring 11,000 jobs and over $1.4 billion in economic growth and not get an increase in traffic on Eola... |
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Dec 17, 2008 13:18:17 GMT -6
Interesting coincidence in timing... speculated to be done and ready by late 2009 / early 2010... www.suburbanchicagonews.com/beaconnews/news/1335137,Aurora_OKs_Eola_interchange_au121708.article December 17, 2008 By ANDRE SALLES Staff Writer AURORA — After years of negotiations, agreements and plans, it looks like the Eola Road interchange off of Interstate 88 is actually going to happen next year. Aurora's City Council unanimously approved an agreement between the city, DuPage County and the Illinois Tollway Authority that would see construction on the interchange start in April. Aldermen also approved contracts to purchase the last six properties (out of 11) needed to make the interchange a reality. The land is Aurora's total investment in the $50 million project and will cost the city $7.9 million. It is hoped that the Eola Road interchange will relieve congestion on Route 59 as well as provide better access to the tollway. According to a recent study commissioned by the city, an interchange at Eola could bring nearly 11,000 jobs and $1.4 billion in economic impact to Aurora by 2018. At Tuesday's council meeting, the three far East Side aldermen — Rick Mervine, 8th Ward; Leroy Keith, 9th Ward; and Lynda Elmore, 10th Ward — pledged their support for the interchange, despite the agreement containing no guarantees that Eola Road would be widened between Montgomery and Keating roads. A previous version of that agreement included the widening project, but that one expired in 2004. Keith in particular has been vocal about not supporting the interchange without a widening of Eola Road, but he walked back from those statements Tuesday. He said meetings with DuPage County Board members convinced him the county would not fund the project and might scuttle the interchange entirely if pressed. "We can't take the chance of losing on both ends," he said. "I'm supporting the interchange. We need this to happen." Economic Development Director Sherman Jenkins said if the interchange project comes in under budget, any leftover money could go toward widening Eola. Alderman Stephanie Kifowit, 3rd Ward, cast the only dissenting vote against purchasing the last six parcels of land. She objected to financing deals with two of those property owners, which would see the city pay 5 percent interest over five years on those pieces of land. Kifowit suggested taking out bonds for the sale, which she said could net them lower interest rates. Finance Director Brian Caputo disagreed, however, noting that the private financing deals would not assess penalties for prepaying. If, he said, the city could secure a better interest rate in the future, refinancing would be an option. The tollway board is set to advertise the interchange project for bid on Thursday. The hope is to complete the interchange by late 2009 or early 2010, Jenkins said.===== You don't bring 11,000 jobs and over $1.4 billion in economic growth and not get an increase in traffic on Eola... I guess Ald Keith would much rather have the revenue that 'new area' will bring into Auora than risk losing the deal by ensuring Eola is widened. More jam packed traffic for the kids at his new high school obviously not a priority and not worth the financial risk -- good to know. More things seem to be becoming clearer |
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Dec 17, 2008 13:21:54 GMT -6
Follow the money...  |
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Dec 18, 2008 10:01:33 GMT -6
Will be interesting to see who knew what and when about the new ' profit'area....  |
|
|
|
Post by steckdad on Dec 18, 2008 21:22:40 GMT -6
Interesting coincidence in timing... speculated to be done and ready by late 2009 / early 2010... www.suburbanchicagonews.com/beaconnews/news/1335137,Aurora_OKs_Eola_interchange_au121708.article December 17, 2008 By ANDRE SALLES Staff Writer AURORA — After years of negotiations, agreements and plans, it looks like the Eola Road interchange off of Interstate 88 is actually going to happen next year. Aurora's City Council unanimously approved an agreement between the city, DuPage County and the Illinois Tollway Authority that would see construction on the interchange start in April. Aldermen also approved contracts to purchase the last six properties (out of 11) needed to make the interchange a reality. The land is Aurora's total investment in the $50 million project and will cost the city $7.9 million. It is hoped that the Eola Road interchange will relieve congestion on Route 59 as well as provide better access to the tollway. According to a recent study commissioned by the city, an interchange at Eola could bring nearly 11,000 jobs and $1.4 billion in economic impact to Aurora by 2018. At Tuesday's council meeting, the three far East Side aldermen — Rick Mervine, 8th Ward; Leroy Keith, 9th Ward; and Lynda Elmore, 10th Ward — pledged their support for the interchange, despite the agreement containing no guarantees that Eola Road would be widened between Montgomery and Keating roads. A previous version of that agreement included the widening project, but that one expired in 2004. Keith in particular has been vocal about not supporting the interchange without a widening of Eola Road, but he walked back from those statements Tuesday. He said meetings with DuPage County Board members convinced him the county would not fund the project and might scuttle the interchange entirely if pressed. "We can't take the chance of losing on both ends," he said. "I'm supporting the interchange. We need this to happen." Economic Development Director Sherman Jenkins said if the interchange project comes in under budget, any leftover money could go toward widening Eola. Alderman Stephanie Kifowit, 3rd Ward, cast the only dissenting vote against purchasing the last six parcels of land. She objected to financing deals with two of those property owners, which would see the city pay 5 percent interest over five years on those pieces of land. Kifowit suggested taking out bonds for the sale, which she said could net them lower interest rates. Finance Director Brian Caputo disagreed, however, noting that the private financing deals would not assess penalties for prepaying. If, he said, the city could secure a better interest rate in the future, refinancing would be an option. The tollway board is set to advertise the interchange project for bid on Thursday. The hope is to complete the interchange by late 2009 or early 2010, Jenkins said.===== You don't bring 11,000 jobs and over $1.4 billion in economic growth and not get an increase in traffic on Eola... I guess Ald Keith would much rather have the revenue that 'new area' will bring into Auora than risk losing the deal by ensuring Eola is widened. More jam packed traffic for the kids at his new high school obviously not a priority and not worth the financial risk -- good to know. More things seem to be becoming clearer the widening mentioned was between montgomery and keating. far south of the new H.S. also, from looking at the plans for the interchange, the bulk of the extra traffic will be going away from the school and not near it. |
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Dec 18, 2008 22:51:55 GMT -6
I guess Ald Keith would much rather have the revenue that 'new area' will bring into Auora than risk losing the deal by ensuring Eola is widened. More jam packed traffic for the kids at his new high school obviously not a priority and not worth the financial risk -- good to know. More things seem to be becoming clearer the widening mentioned was between montgomery and keating. far south of the new H.S. also, from looking at the plans for the interchange, the bulk of the extra traffic will be going away from the school and not near it. Really? How would someone from... oh, let's say... Steck area get to I88? Before they went AWAY from the school, usually diverting to Farnsworth or Rt59 via Indian Trail, for instance... W/ the interchange, they will shoot right past the school to get to/from I88, wouldn't they? Same with anyone who lives in the Eola corridor I would imagine. |
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Dec 19, 2008 8:40:36 GMT -6
I guess Ald Keith would much rather have the revenue that 'new area' will bring into Auora than risk losing the deal by ensuring Eola is widened. More jam packed traffic for the kids at his new high school obviously not a priority and not worth the financial risk -- good to know. More things seem to be becoming clearer the widening mentioned was between montgomery and keating. far south of the new H.S. also, from looking at the plans for the interchange, the bulk of the extra traffic will be going away from the school and not near it. All of those trucking firms just east of the tracks - that are next to the school - where are they going to get off ? Trucks headed to Fox Valley Mall- as well as cars - where are they going to get off ? Anyone who lives west of 59 - where are they going to get off ? I know where the widening was - let me askyou this question - do you ever travel due south on Rt 59 heded towards Plainfield ? Because Rt 59 is limited to 2 lanes each side thru downtown Plainfield - what happens to the south bound traffic north of there ? I can tell you - it backs up tremendously. The same will happen here - when the end of the funnel is jammed- so will be the lead in roads. |
|
|
|
Post by steckdad on Dec 19, 2008 11:10:58 GMT -6
the widening mentioned was between montgomery and keating. far south of the new H.S. also, from looking at the plans for the interchange, the bulk of the extra traffic will be going away from the school and not near it. Really? How would someone from... oh, let's say... Steck area get to I88? Before they went AWAY from the school, usually diverting to Farnsworth or Rt59 via Indian Trail, for instance... W/ the interchange, they will shoot right past the school to get to/from I88, wouldn't they? Same with anyone who lives in the Eola corridor I would imagine. nope, the bulk take eola to diehl to 59/88....farnsworth is too far out of the way unless you live on the far west side of stonebridge... |
|
|
|
Post by steckdad on Dec 19, 2008 11:23:39 GMT -6
the widening mentioned was between montgomery and keating. far south of the new H.S. also, from looking at the plans for the interchange, the bulk of the extra traffic will be going away from the school and not near it. All of those trucking firms just east of the tracks - that are next to the school - where are they going to get off ? Trucks headed to Fox Valley Mall- as well as cars - where are they going to get off ? Anyone who lives west of 59 - where are they going to get off ? I know where the widening was - let me askyou this question - do you ever travel due south on Rt 59 heded towards Plainfield ? Because Rt 59 is limited to 2 lanes each side thru downtown Plainfield - what happens to the south bound traffic north of there ? I can tell you - it backs up tremendously. The same will happen here - when the end of the funnel is jammed- so will be the lead in roads. just look at the proposed plan if you get a chance...then look at the school entrance and the direction from where the bulk of the kids that attend MV come from. The trucking companies and semi traffic will not drive by the school, since their destinations are all west,north or east of the school. especially during "school traffic" hours. I agree with you on the south end of eola...it does need an eventual widening, but drivers have 3 or 4 options to get to their homes south of montgomery. |
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Dec 19, 2008 12:25:06 GMT -6
Really? How would someone from... oh, let's say... Steck area get to I88? Before they went AWAY from the school, usually diverting to Farnsworth or Rt59 via Indian Trail, for instance... W/ the interchange, they will shoot right past the school to get to/from I88, wouldn't they? Same with anyone who lives in the Eola corridor I would imagine. nope, the bulk take eola to diehl to 59/88....farnsworth is too far out of the way unless you live on the far west side of stonebridge... Last time this was discussed earlier this year, many users who performed a mass exodus from here who live in the eola corridor said they divert over at New York street or North Aurora. In fact, this diversion over south of the school site also came up when the google maps were flying around to find the 'quickest route' to the MV site. Obviously different people take different routes. I would suspect those who said they currently divert PRIOR to the school site would, in the future, drive BY the school site. |
|
