Talk:Interstate 57/Archive 1

Archive 1

Merge?

Out of curiosity, couldn't an exit list be built and the merge tag then be removed? (edit: this comment refers to Interstate 57 in Illinois) —Rob (talk) 22:15, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Corrections

I made a couple of corrections: I-57 does not go to Jackson, Mississippi (I-55 does); I-57 ends at Miner, MO at I-55(as stated in the article). The road west of here to Poplar Bluff (a divided highway) is US 60, but not I-57. Rt66lt 21:13, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

I think it may not be accurate to talk of the intersection with I-24 happenning in Pulleys Mill, IL, as I do not beleive Pulleys Mill is legally a seperate village/town, any more. (USPS says it is NOT ACCEPTABLE, use Goreville ZIP 62939.)
I grew up in southern Illinois (Union County) and have family in Goreville and some of the smaller towns in Johnson and Williamson counties. I will be contacting my family who still live in the area for confirmation.
At the present time, I beleive Pulleys Mill is basically just a wide spot in the road on IL Route 37, north of Goreville. I beleive the only building of note is a livestock auction house.
Depending on how you want it phrased, I think it would be better to say the juntion happens south of Marion, IL (which I-57 runs through) or north of Goreville, IL (which lies between I-24 and I-57. You can get to it from either one, but you have to take local roads.) (I am also putting this in the Talk:Interstate_24 page.) VikÞor [[User talk:Vik-Thor|Talk]] 18:47, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

• I wouldn't particularly mind that. That said, if Pulley's Mill is (was) a historically important location, it would be more sensical to write up an article about Pulley's Mill. While doing Wikipedia:WikiProject Illinois State Routes, I've found that about 20% of the time I have to refer to termini that aren't incorporated, and therefore not in Wikipedia, but still technically exist. —Rob (talk) 18:56, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm not really sure how historically important it was... I'm going to contact my family, but the main one I want to write doesn't have a computer. Snail Mail time. VikÞor [[User talk:Vik-Thor|Talk]] 19:50, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

I've deleted the sentence and associated footnote saying that the Illinois General Assembly named I-57 as the Thurgood Marshall Memorial Freeway but that the name hasn't achieved popular use. A joint resolution, H.J.R. 1, was introduced in 2001, but it died in 2003 without being passed. See http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/legisnet92/status/920HJR0001.html. The previously cited H.J.R. 71 passed the House but not the Senate. See http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/legisnet91/status/910HJR0071.html. A Senate joint resolution also died without being passed. See http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/legisnet91/status/910SJR0024.html. If someone can cite a later measure that actually passed, the sentence can be restored. Wbkelley (talk) 17:46, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

I've added the new exit in Coles county x192 County Rd 1000. I couldn't find an example of a county road sign to cut & paste, so i left that blank. Can someone fill that in? I also added the exit numbers for the I-64/I-57 junctions (x92 and x96) at Mt Vernon. I'm still very new at this, so please forgive me if I've goofed. JWHamilton 07:35 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Blatant Vandalism

Many of the exits in the exit list are completely bogus, obviously vandalism. There are two exits in Effingham, exit 159 signed Effingham, and exit 160 signed IL-22/IL-23. North of Effingham, the list is missing Teutopolis, Charleston/Mattoon, Tuscola, Pesotum, Monticello, the many exits for US 45, and all of the other cities that actually exist in the area. Jcjordan (talk) 02:45, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. I reverted it to the last known good version. Unfortunately, there were some good changes that I had to revert as well. --Rschen7754 (T C) 04:38, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Exit list

This was originally posted on the article itself! –Fredddie™ 02:04, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

the 167th exit in country club hills is actually in oak forest, il can some one fix that i tried and it was removed — Preceding unsigned comment added by COOTER228 (talk • contribs)

 Done. Please have a look at WP:CHEAT which gives you a basic summary of editing codes. We realise that the codes for tables can be even more daunting. – Fayenatic L (talk) 14:13, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

widening

the primary reason why IDOT wants to widen 57 from Mt. Vernon to 24 is due to the insane amount of traffic that highway gets (ADT approximately 35,000 vehicles per day at last count, which rivals a lot of the suburan st louis interstates on the illinois side of the river). 57 is the main route for st louisians to get to those large lakes every weekend during the warm weather months (usually to rend lake or kentucky late). Don't forget the fact the majority of the chicagoland students that can't afford UofI-Chambana end up attending SIU-Carbondale (which is just a few miles from 57). Back in 2004 in Mt. Vernon when IDOT did bridge construction on 57 they had to maintain 2 lanes of traffic in each direction, which is very unusal for a similar construction project on a rural interstate in Illinois (it also gave the agency a dry run of how the 64 widening project near Fairview Heights could run like).

for a time in the 1980s to early 1990s there was talks of a St. Louis to Carbondale toll road, apparently following the IL 13 corridor. that idea was scrapped in the late 1990s. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kimmy78 (talk • contribs) 02:25, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Wow, didn't realize that 35k on a four lane freeway was insane, try 20,000 and rising on a two-lane surface street, or over 125,000 on a four-lane freeway. That's when you start going insane. --Holderca1 ^talk 20:33, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Concur. I think this shows the insular nature of those who live in rural areas. Traffic counts are relative to one's world view. Thinking that 35k a day is heavy traffic, is comical. Southern Illinoisians will misinterpret data to the extreme if it makes them feel more relevant. Highway articles aren't the only topic on Wikipedia where this is apparent. The problem is that there is not enough interest or knowledge of the region, among 3rd party outsiders, to challenge many of these entries. It's like when I had an account error, with a small southern Illinois bank. The representative said they had 25,000 accounts, and with that many, some errors were likely. The natives are completely out-of-touch with the 21st century. Sadly, most Wikipedia articles concerning the area, are written and edited by the natives.Eelb53 (talk) 01:02, 1 August 2015 (UTC)

Future

Interstate 57 will eventually be extended west along U.S Route 60 to Poplar Bluff, Missouri and then south along the U.S Route 67 corridor to North Little Rock, Arkansas, ending at Interstate 40. Arkansas had previously proposed extending the I-30 designation along the US 67 corridor.

In April of 2016, a provision designating US 67 from North Little Rock, Arkansas to Walnut Ridge, Arkansas as “Future I-57" was added into the federal Fiscal Year 2017 Transportation, Housing and Urban Development funding bill. The provision would also give Arkansas the ability to request any segment of the road built to interstate standards be officially added to the federal interstate system as I-57. A news release by U.S. Senator John Boozman (R - Arkansas) noted "this road is naturally oriented to eventually connect with the existing I-57 in southeast Missouri".

Missouri has already upgraded the 50 miles of US 60 between Sikeston and Poplar Bluff, and 12 miles of US 67 from Poplar Bluff to US 160 near Harviell, Missouri (12 miles north of the Arkansas State Line) to four lanes with at-grade crossings, which would have to be eliminated before the Interstate designation could be applied.

In Arkansas, 102 miles of interstate-grade US 67 runs from Interstate 40 to Arkansas Highway 226 west of Jonesboro. Another 16 miles, from Arkansas 226 to US 412 at Walnut Ridge, is to open in 2016.

The issue of where to locate the remaining 50 miles of highway, from Walnut Ridge to the Missouri State Line, had been a point of contention for decades. In 2013, members of the Highway 67 Coalition, a regional group of political and business leaders, reached a compromise to build the new multi-lane highway along the existing two-lane US 67, with bypasses around the towns of Pocahontas and Corning. The proposal acknowledged highway improvements in Missouri would not be to interstate standards and suggested Arkansas adopt the same incremental approach -- build two additional lanes and worry about meeting interstate standards later if and when traffic demanded it -- in order to finish the project more quickly.

~

Jeffherzer (talk) 02:10, 27 April 2016 (UTC) jeffherzer

References

I've integrated the above text into the body of the article, fixing various formatting items to fit with the Manual of Style and better citation practices. Imzadi 1979 → 06:09, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Interstate 57. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110106033331/http://www.gettingaroundillinois.com/mapviewer.aspx?mt=aadt to http://www.gettingaroundillinois.com/mapviewer.aspx?mt=aadt
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110911023528/http://www.highwayexplorer.com/il_EndsPage.php?id=3057&section=1 to http://highwayexplorer.com/il_EndsPage.php?id=3057&section=1

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:34, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

Splitting

Could the article be split the article for I-57 for Illinois, Missouri, and Arkansas at some point? Cwater1 (talk) 01:40, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

You might get a better response bringing this up at WP:USRD. The project guidelines here would indicate a split is unlikely. -- Calidum 01:43, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

Maybe, but honestly, we'd have to see what happens if the extension into Arkansas actually happens. Imzadi 1979 → 01:58, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

Potential issue with I-57 extension into Arkansas

I have discovered what could be a potential issue if I-57 is extended into Arkansas. If one looks at the I-49 article, one will see that it is not named I-29 due to Interstate naming rules dictating that north-south interstates be odd numbered and named in increasing order from west to east. If one examines the interstate system closely, you'll see that I-55 would be to the east of the new I-57 expansion from Missouri and onto wherever they decide to end it. This would mean that the DOT would be breaking their own rules, and thus the only way to solve this would be to "swap" I-57 and I-55, but that would then create a problem for both the interstates in Illinois as their naming in that state would be breaking the rules. From looking at things, the I-57 expansion into Missouri and Arkansas and anywhere else they chose to extend this to cannot be called I-57 without running afoul of the rules described in the lead of the I-49 article. This means a new interstate would have to be "created" altogether (E.G. Interstate 51) in order to not run afoul of the rules. Moline1 (talk) 04:09, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

@Moline1: the rules are not that hard and fast. I've removed the commentary from the the lead of the I-49 article as it is not support in the source given. Other Interstates cross and run out of the alignment of a perfect grid: I-69 in Texas, I-75 in Florida, I-11 in Nevada. So, they aren't going to swap I-57 and I-55. Imzadi 1979 → 04:33, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Ah, ok. Good idea! While this may have been a rule at some point, it appears to not be. If it were, then a swap would not even be possible as the northern half would then be the portion with the issue. Moline1 (talk) 05:24, 16 April 2021 (UTC)