Iowa Toll Road?
- Thread starter jdoggivjc
- Start date
Unfortunately, you can't tax stupid. It's unconstitutional.
Around here, the plan for widening interstates/major state highways seems to keeping two or three existing lanes (per direction) toll-free and making the remaining+new lanes toll with higher speed limit. So far, I like that approach.
Last edited:
You obviously haven't driven it lately as much of it has been resurfaced in the last 2 years.
No I haven't, this was 15+ years ago. Just saying the 4 years I drove it back and forth it was pretty bad.
Yeah it sucked while they were working on 88 but the road is MUCH better than before. Gotta loves 40 miles of single lane and cones for 3 miles of actual construction...
It's taken over 40 yrs and 20 as a four lane still isn't finished. If the DOT would finish it, it would get used. Anything that promotes growth to the rest of Iowa quickly gets shot down by the QC to DM corridor. The DOT did a whole redo of the loop around DM, in less time than was spent trying to finish 20.
17 between 20 to 18 is going to need a complete redo with the increase in traffic it's going to get with all the semi traffic it's going to get with the new hog plant being built outside of Eagle Grove. It's already a pretty busy road and going to get way busier with the increase for the plant, feed trucks, etc..
The gas tax pushed the program over the hump. If it wasn't for that I had heard that highway 20 from Early to Moville was going to remain 2 lanes for the foreseeable future.
Agree. Highway 17 between 18 and Eagle Grove is in very poor condition from all the grain semi's hauling. Now add the traffic for the new hog plant.
If they use the money to build all new bridges, than I'm for it. Maybe just put a booth in Davenport and a booth in Council Bluffs. Men who work in the booth must wear a name tag that says "Willie".
All I know is I-80 between QC and Iowa City has needed to be widened for decades. Even 20 years ago that part of my drive up to ISU was easily the worst.
There's no reason I-80 should not be 3 lanes in both directions by now, as well as the stretches mentioned in CR and Ankeny-Ames.
And as to the highway 20 discussion, yes, huge waste of money. People try to pretend it will ever be an alternative for I-80 traffic, but it is just way, way too far out of the way for most of those routes. Highway 30 would be a more likely alternative for that traffic. Highway 20 would only really be an alternative for I-90, but that road's empty most of the time anyway. The traffic counts in no way justified that project being jumped ahead of more needed projects, and honestly 20 probably could have gotten by with just periodic passing lanes like you see more often in some other states.
And as to the highway 20 discussion, yes, huge waste of money. People try to pretend it will ever be an alternative for I-80 traffic, but it is just way, way too far out of the way for most of those routes. Highway 30 would be a more likely alternative for that traffic. Highway 20 would only really be an alternative for I-90, but that road's empty most of the time anyway. The traffic counts in no way justified that project being jumped ahead of more needed projects, and honestly 20 probably could have gotten by with just periodic passing lanes like you see more often in some other states.
I think it is in the long range plan to make 30 4 lanes border to border. I know they're working on the bypass around Mt Vernon and Lisbon.
Last I saw our little stretch around Clarence was among the lowest priority. Like 2030 or something. Finishing 30 will definitely take some traffic off of 80.
Last I saw our little stretch around Clarence was among the lowest priority. Like 2030 or something. Finishing 30 will definitely take some traffic off of 80.
