A Quad Cities replacement for the 55-year-old Interstate 80 bridge over the Mississippi River will stray from the span’s current site – but not far from the existing span formally named the Fred Schwengel Memorial Bridge. Officials revealed Thursday, Oct. 27, that three of the seven potential locations identified in May for the new bridge […]
Want to Read More?
Get immediate, unlimited access to all subscriber content and much more.
Learn more in our subscriber FAQ.
Subscribe Now
A Quad Cities replacement for the 55-year-old Interstate 80 bridge over the Mississippi River will stray from the span’s current site – but not far from the existing span formally named the Fred Schwengel Memorial Bridge.
Officials revealed Thursday, Oct. 27, that three of the seven potential locations identified in May for the new bridge have been ruled out. The announcement came during the latest online public meeting for the project.
Included was a consideration to replace the bridge on the existing alignment -- which would require demolition of the current structure before a new bridge could be built.
Also wiped off the list of proposals was alternatives to move the new parallel spans either 600 feet upriver – thus closer to the downtowns of LeClaire, Iowa, and Port Byron, Illinois, – or 2,100 feet downriver to affect surrounding residential areas.
Replacing the bridge on the existing alignment was eliminated, the virtual meeting panelists explained, because doing so would close that portion of the interstate for an estimated four years. That would force traffic to be re-routed to another crossing downriver – at the Interstate 74 or Interstate 280 bridges – as well as require neighboring residents to travel roughly 40 minutes roundtrip to go between the cross-river communities of LeClaire and Port Byron.
After reviewing an environmental study for the meeting’s participants, Tony Pakeltis, an engineer from national project consultant Parsons, Corp., explained the two farthest options also were removed because they were the “most impactful” by a wide margin – both in terms of the relocations necessary for residences or businesses, and the right of way required on prime farmlands.
Hosted by the Illinois Department of Transportation (DOT) – and in conjunction with their counterparts at the Iowa DOT -- the meeting included more than 400 registered participants. The webinar also featured nearly 80 minutes of questions and answers following a detailed 35-minute review of alternatives for both the new bridge and improvements to the I-88 interchange a few miles to the east.
Besides representatives from the DOTs of both states -- Becky Marruffo and Mike Kuehn from Illinois, and Phil Mescher from Iowa -- Thursday’s six panelists included Parsons engineers Pakeltis, Mark Peterson and Todd Ude.
New Bridge considerations
Of the four remaining alternatives for the new bridge, two are proposing to build the parallel spans 50 feet away from the current bridge – either to the east or west – so traffic can continue to flow across the existing bridge during construction.
“It does re-use the right of way as much as possible,” Peterson said, noting the west-side version holds more negative environmental impacts than the east-side version – though both are the most favorable in terms of constructability and traffic impact. Neither option requires demolition of the existing spans, either.
The alternative to those two options is building side-by-side companion bridges 20 feet to the east or west of the existing structure. Construction would be in two phases, Mr. Peterson said, with bridge traffic remaining on the existing spans while, for instance, a westbound companion is built. Once completed, traffic would be shifted to the new bridge while the existing bridge is demolished and replaced by the new eastbound side of the structure.
"It uses the right of way in a little better fashion,” Mr. Peterson said. “It does have the negative aspect associated with a shift in traffic – and a demolition of the bridge in between when the two bridges are constructed -- so there is an additional two years potentially of construction associated with this (plan) and probably some additional ramp closures. But we are trading off physical, environmental impacts with constructability.”
All of the options involve parallel spans dedicated to traffic in one direction – same as the current structure.
However, the new bridge spans each will feature three lanes of traffic – with an auxiliary lane to assist with safety between the two ramps – as well as full shoulders (12-foot inside, 6-foot outside). The current bridge does not have shoulders to allow vehicles in distress to safely pull to the side.
Each option also includes reconstructing the riverfront interchanges with U.S. Highway 67 in Iowa and Illinois Route 84 to meet new design and safety standards.
After further study and construction cost estimates, a fourth online public meeting is expected by next summer with a preferred alternative recommended by the end of 2023.
Once a plan is picked, the project transitions into Phase II engineering and planning. DOT officials said Phase II normally requires a two-year window and more public meetings, which makes Phase III construction of a new I-80 Bridge unlikely before 2026.
Built in 1967, the I-80 bridge continues to face “costly maintenance expenses,” the DOTs jointly said, after “significant repairs and rehabilitation in recent years.” The roadway design does not meet current standards, either -- and traffic continues to increase on the bridge, according to the project justification.
To become part of the official meeting record, the public has until Thursday, Nov. 10, to register a comment or question online at the project website.
The second meeting in May featured 327 questions and comments by the end of the two-week comment period, with questions received after the webinar answered via email.
I-88 interchange improvements
Jointly studied with the new bridge are possible improvements to the Interstate 88 interchange.
Of the four interchange alternatives identified at the May meeting, three remain after Thursday’s meeting announced the elimination of an option to take the I-80 East to I-88 East loop through the center of the interchange via a raised ramp over I-80.
“That creates weaving problems, so those folks couldn’t get off at Illinois 92,” Mr. Peterson said, while Mr. Pakeltis added that option also carried the highest number of environmental impacts.
Expanding the cloverleaf interchange to current standards remains a consideration – although that would take up more space.
The study also has three of the ramps remaining in an expanded cloverleaf with the most heavily trafficked -- I-80 East to I-88 East – transitioning to a direct outer ramp for improved safety.
A third remaining option removes all the cloverleaf loops and instead installs a more modern “freeway-to-freeway” layout -- a four-level interchange of elevated ramps.
This is the safest option – and requires less space, officials said. But Mr. Pakeltis noted it avoids impacting the nearby forest preserve being developed at the northwest corner of the interchange by Rock Island County. However, Mr. Peterson pointed out, it also is the costliest option and most time-consuming construction-wise.
All of the options also address access to the old Illinois 2.
DOT officials noted neither the bridge nor interchange project is dependent on the other, but federal funds are already budgeted for both projects. The interchange should take one to two years of work; the bridge project will last longer. A timeline to avoid conflicting work will come at a later date, Mr. Kuehn said.
The Illinois DOT bridge study includes approximately six miles from the interchange to I-80 overpass at Southwest 35th St. between Bettendorf and LeClaire.
Slightly behind that is the Iowa DOT’s sister study of the I-80 corridor in the Iowa Quad Cities, from the start of the bridge project to just west of the I-280 interchange between west Davenport and Walcott.
Part of the study is researching the feasibility of making I-80 six lanes – three in each direction -- from the I-88 interchange west to Iowa City. However, Mr. Mescher notes traffic volumes currently do not meet necessary thresholds.
“It was a little bit of a surprise to all of us,” Mr. Kuehn added.
“Through Iowa, there may be some spot locations to expand some lanes around the U.S. 61 and I-74 interchanges,” Mr. Mescher said. “But at this point, I think it will be awhile before we put six lanes through the whole Scott County corridor and definitely to the west based on the traffic we are seeing.”
Bison Bridge talk
The two bridge options not requiring demolition are the best hopes for proponents of the Bison Bridge proposal – which seek to repurpose the existing spans to become a national park with separate crossings for wildlife and pedestrian/bicycle traffic.
Part of the vision is to link the riverfront recreational paths in both states -- the Great River Trail in Illinois and a planned extension of Iowa’s Mississippi River Trail into LeClaire – much the same as the new I-74 Bridge does now between Bettendorf and Moline.
Led by Quad Cities native Chad Pregracke, the Living Lands & Waters founder and president, the repurposing project also seeks to maintain a small herd of bison on the bridge to help celebrate the prairie native to the region – as well as offer a tourist destination on the riverfront.
Bison Bridge received a $4 million donation in May.
To learn more about the project, visit the Bison Bridge website.
Mr. Mescher and Ms. Marruffo both explained Thursday that national transportation guidelines prevent the Bison Bridge – or any benefit from tourism -- from being a determining factor for the preferred alternative.
If demolition of the bridge is necessary, Ms. Marruffo said the Illinois DOT will consider integrating a recreation path into the new bridge design, same as the new I-74 Bridge.
“This is an interstate bridge, so that’s not a typical thing,” Mr. Kuehn added. “But we will look at it with the recognition we have multi-use (recreational) paths on both sides of the river and there is interest (there).”
Any demolition of the bridge is expected to cost between $2 million to $4 million. But if the Bison Bridge happens, there also are “significant costs” for upkeep of the aging bridge, which would shift to the private foundation behind the project.
“There would have to be a substantial amount of structural analysis, legal agreements – a variety of steps to ensure any undertaking of that nature was feasible,” Ms. Marruffo said.
The project also faces the additional hurdle of approval by the U.S. Coast Guard, which sets the standards and protects commercial navigation on the nation’s waterways.
“If (the old bridge) passes into private hands, they will have a long list of requirements,” Mr. Ude said.
“If you’re a pilot of a 1,000-foot-long (barge), and you’re lining up to come through the bridge and try to get over to the lock, you’d rather have fewer bridges than more bridges.”
Mr. Ude added the Coast Guard is already discussing the project with the commercial navigation industry – and they are already commenting about different alignments for the new bridge.
“They recognize and are on notice there may be this issue about whether the existing bridge stays or not, and they are factoring that into the advice they are giving the DOTs what the clearance requirements are going to be,” Mr. Ude said, noting the Coast Guard is requesting a foot higher and wider clearance. “They’re making sure we are not precluding navigation to make things more difficult.”