IL-53 Richmond extension (FAP 420)

[I-39]

Did they ever officially cancel the Richmond leg of the IL-53 extension? I still see it in some long range planning documents, but nothing concrete.

It's frankly an atrocity that this (along with the regular IL-53 extension) was never built.

[kurumi]

That number is going to peg everyone's prank detector

[Brandon]

That number is going to peg everyone's prank detector

Yet, that's the actual IDOT number for it.  Unfortunately, it is FAP (double entendre) and 420 (does this really need explanation?).

[sipes23]

And if you keep an eagle eye out for it, there are even signs indicating FAP 420 on the area roads.

[I-39]

And if you keep an eagle eye out for it, there are even signs indicating FAP 420 on the area roads.

Where?

[sipes23]

<iframe src="https://www.google.com/maps/embed?pb=!1m0!3m2!1sen!2sus!4v1428710991251!6m8!1m7!1saeucBpxpoe-9c7Mu-w07WQ!2m2!1d42.169564!2d-88.023708!3f269.167369826505!4f-7.0800188589990825!5f1.9587109090973311" width="600" height="450" frameborder="0" style="border:0"></iframe>

Oops. I think it says FAP 342 ROW, so it's Long Grove and not Richmond. My bad.

[I-39]

<iframe src="https://www.google.com/maps/embed?pb=!1m0!3m2!1sen!2sus!4v1428710991251!6m8!1m7!1saeucBpxpoe-9c7Mu-w07WQ!2m2!1d42.169564!2d-88.023708!3f269.167369826505!4f-7.0800188589990825!5f1.9587109090973311" width="600" height="450" frameborder="0" style="border:0"></iframe>

Oops. I think it says FAP 342 ROW, so it's Long Grove and not Richmond. My bad.

Yeah, I'm talking about the Richmond leg of the IL-53 extension that was to connect to the US 12 freeway in Genoa City, WI. It has been largely dormant since the early 90s, but it still continues to appear in some planning documents.

[3467]

http://www.richmondbypass.com/default.aspx

There has been nothing on this site since 2013 The ROW is still owned by IDOT but a recall there was some surprise issue that cancelled it . The legislature has given the tollway authority permission to build it maybe our person who knows them can tell us what happened? I know its not in Mc Henrys or Lakes 2040 plans

[Stratuscaster]

In looking at both the Richmond Bypass project and the IL-53/IL-120 Project, there's a big chunk missing between Volo and Richmond that isn't really addressed by either.

The Richmond Bypass ends around US-12 and Solon Rd in SE Richmond. The IL-120 Project would end near Fish Lake Rd, east of US-12/IL-59 in Volo.

There's about 12-13 miles of US-12 running through the Chain O' Lakes area between those two points.

[I-39]

http://www.richmondbypass.com/default.aspx

There has been nothing on this site since 2013 The ROW is still owned by IDOT but a recall there was some surprise issue that cancelled it . The legislature has given the tollway authority permission to build it maybe our person who knows them can tell us what happened? I know its not in Mc Henrys or Lakes 2040 plans

They are not allowing IDOT to build north of IL-173, there are some wetlands just south of the partial interchange in Genoa City. So in other words, it's not really a bypass.

[I-39]

The ENTIRE FAP 420 corridor should have been built regardless of whether it impacts a lot of wetlands or not. This is the suburbs of Chicago, not a national park or anything. We need to move people, not be protecting every single wetland. Congestion in Lake County is gosh awful, and this corridor would have provided a major relief route for I-90 and I-94.

I don't understand how Wisconsin can build their portion of the US 12 freeway (and are willing to continue it to Madison) as well as the Rock Freeway (I-43) and yet, Illinois cannot build a six lane highway between Lake Cook and the state line. Surely just across the border in Wisconsin, it has similar terrain to Lake County?

This whole thing about protecting wetlands............ so what if it impacts them? Again, it's not like they are all going to be destroyed. They can either be replaced or bypassed via an elevated freeway or something like that. I didn't see anyone complaining about impacting wetlands when all the housing developments in Lake County were built. For the environmentalists to deny IDOT a permit to build the portion of the Richmond bypass north of IL-173 is stupid. This is where the state legislature or Congress needs to step in and grant a waiver to this project (waive some of the strict environmental restrictions) so it can be built.

It's a flat out atrocity that FAP 420 (and the IL-53 extension) was never built and likely won't ever be. 

[GCrites]

I hope a user here changes their username to FAP420.

[Stratuscaster]

The ENTIRE FAP 420 corridor should have been built regardless of whether it impacts a lot of wetlands or not. This is the suburbs of Chicago, not a national park or anything. We need to move people, not be protecting every single wetland. Congestion in Lake County is gosh awful, and this corridor would have provided a major relief route for I-90 and I-94.

I don't understand how Wisconsin can build their portion of the US 12 freeway (and are willing to continue it to Madison) as well as the Rock Freeway (I-43) and yet, Illinois cannot build a six lane highway between Lake Cook and the state line. Surely just across the border in Wisconsin, it has similar terrain to Lake County?

This whole thing about protecting wetlands............ so what if it impacts them? Again, it's not like they are all going to be destroyed. They can either be replaced or bypassed via an elevated freeway or something like that. I didn't see anyone complaining about impacting wetlands when all the housing developments in Lake County were built. For the environmentalists to deny IDOT a permit to build the portion of the Richmond bypass north of IL-173 is stupid. This is where the state legislature or Congress needs to step in and grant a waiver to this project (waive some of the strict environmental restrictions) so it can be built.

It's a flat out atrocity that FAP 420 (and the IL-53 extension) was never built and likely won't ever be. 

When everyone decides that "we can destroy this one wetland; it's not like we are destroying them all", then all the wetlands will be destroyed.

I get your frustration. My take is simply this - if the traffic needs aren't there to support it, then the need to build it really isn't there.

This from someone that has made frequent trips through that area. As much as I'd like to get to Lake Geneva or Madison or the Dells just a few more minutes faster, it's not just about me.

Put yourself in the path of your highway. Are you cool with the state buying your land? Are you cool with the state TAKING your land when you opt not to sell?

Between that and the environment, it's a wonder we built any roads at all.

[I-39]

The ENTIRE FAP 420 corridor should have been built regardless of whether it impacts a lot of wetlands or not. This is the suburbs of Chicago, not a national park or anything. We need to move people, not be protecting every single wetland. Congestion in Lake County is gosh awful, and this corridor would have provided a major relief route for I-90 and I-94.

I don't understand how Wisconsin can build their portion of the US 12 freeway (and are willing to continue it to Madison) as well as the Rock Freeway (I-43) and yet, Illinois cannot build a six lane highway between Lake Cook and the state line. Surely just across the border in Wisconsin, it has similar terrain to Lake County?

This whole thing about protecting wetlands............ so what if it impacts them? Again, it's not like they are all going to be destroyed. They can either be replaced or bypassed via an elevated freeway or something like that. I didn't see anyone complaining about impacting wetlands when all the housing developments in Lake County were built. For the environmentalists to deny IDOT a permit to build the portion of the Richmond bypass north of IL-173 is stupid. This is where the state legislature or Congress needs to step in and grant a waiver to this project (waive some of the strict environmental restrictions) so it can be built.

It's a flat out atrocity that FAP 420 (and the IL-53 extension) was never built and likely won't ever be. 

When everyone decides that "we can destroy this one wetland; it's not like we are destroying them all", then all the wetlands will be destroyed.

I get your frustration. My take is simply this - if the traffic needs aren't there to support it, then the need to build it really isn't there.

This from someone that has made frequent trips through that area. As much as I'd like to get to Lake Geneva or Madison or the Dells just a few more minutes faster, it's not just about me.

Put yourself in the path of your highway. Are you cool with the state buying your land? Are you cool with the state TAKING your land when you opt not to sell?

Between that and the environment, it's a wonder we built any roads at all.

1. First of all, this is the only major highway that would likely be built, so it's not like all the wetlands will be destroyed because 3-4 highways will be built. A lot of Lake County has been developed, you can't tell me that they built a lot of it over wetlands, so why would building a highway be any different?

2. The state already owns most of the ROW for the road

3. I can't believe you're saying it's not needed. Traffic in Lake County is horrendous (especially on US 12) and as I stated, this would be a reliever route for I-90 and I-94. It would not just be serving people getting to Lake Geneva, it would help move people throughout the suburbs and people trying to bypass I-90 and I-94 getting to Wisconsin.

[hobsini2]

At this point, I would settle for it being a super 2 just to get the ball rolling. US 12 is not fun especially from Fox Lake to Richmond.

[Stratuscaster]

1. First of all, this is the only major highway that would likely be built, so it's not like all the wetlands will be destroyed because 3-4 highways will be built. A lot of Lake County has been developed, you can't tell me that they built a lot of it over wetlands, so why would building a highway be any different?

I'm no transportation engineer or lawyer, but if things there that easy it would have been done by now. Don't shoot the messenger when you don't like the message.

Take a look at new subdivision developers - they also have to play the environmental game. If they are going to take xx acres of wetlands, they need to replace it with yy acres of replacement habitat.

How things were done in the past aren't always acceptable in the now.

2. The state already owns most of the ROW for the road

Except for the parts they don't - and that becomes a sticking point. Down in Dupage and Kane county, IDOT owned a large swatch of ROW from Wheaton west to Aurora along IL-56/Butterfield Road - and had owned it since the 70's at least. It was only last year when construction to multi-lane IL-56 was completed, and only 2-3 years before it was started - a project well over 40 years in the making.

Until they own all the required ROW - and at this point, they've not even made final decisions on anything that's not already owned - nothing's getting built. No need to build a multi-lane facility just to have it dump into a 2-lane local road.

3. I can't believe you're saying it's not needed. Traffic in Lake County is horrendous (especially on US 12) and as I stated, this would be a reliever route for I-90 and I-94. It would not just be serving people getting to Lake Geneva, it would help move people throughout the suburbs and people trying to bypass I-90 and I-94 getting to Wisconsin.

I'm not saying it's not needed - I'm questioning the need - particularly in the Richmond area. What are the traffic counts in the area? Do they meet required criteria?

Not sure the need to bypass I-90 and I-94 to get to Wisconsin - doesn't that all depend on WHERE in Wisconsin you are headed?

I'm looking at traffic as reported on Google Maps at 5:20pm CT...lots of green. Red and orange where I'd expect it - and hardly any in Richmond except for US-12 & IL-173. I'll check again in a bit - just trying to see what you are saying.

[I-39]

1. First of all, this is the only major highway that would likely be built, so it's not like all the wetlands will be destroyed because 3-4 highways will be built. A lot of Lake County has been developed, you can't tell me that they built a lot of it over wetlands, so why would building a highway be any different?

I'm no transportation engineer or lawyer, but if things there that easy it would have been done by now. Don't shoot the messenger when you don't like the message.

Take a look at new subdivision developers - they also have to play the environmental game. If they are going to take xx acres of wetlands, they need to replace it with yy acres of replacement habitat.

How things were done in the past aren't always acceptable in the now.

2. The state already owns most of the ROW for the road

Except for the parts they don't - and that becomes a sticking point. Down in Dupage and Kane county, IDOT owned a large swatch of ROW from Wheaton west to Aurora along IL-56/Butterfield Road - and had owned it since the 70's at least. It was only last year when construction to multi-lane IL-56 was completed, and only 2-3 years before it was started - a project well over 40 years in the making.

Until they own all the required ROW - and at this point, they've not even made final decisions on anything that's not already owned - nothing's getting built. No need to build a multi-lane facility just to have it dump into a 2-lane local road.

3. I can't believe you're saying it's not needed. Traffic in Lake County is horrendous (especially on US 12) and as I stated, this would be a reliever route for I-90 and I-94. It would not just be serving people getting to Lake Geneva, it would help move people throughout the suburbs and people trying to bypass I-90 and I-94 getting to Wisconsin.

I'm not saying it's not needed - I'm questioning the need - particularly in the Richmond area. What are the traffic counts in the area? Do they meet required criteria?

Not sure the need to bypass I-90 and I-94 to get to Wisconsin - doesn't that all depend on WHERE in Wisconsin you are headed?

I'm looking at traffic as reported on Google Maps at 5:20pm CT...lots of green. Red and orange where I'd expect it - and hardly any in Richmond except for US-12 & IL-173. I'll check again in a bit - just trying to see what you are saying.

I apologize if I came across as belligerent towards you, I was not intending that.

The point I'm trying to make is is that traffic in Lake County is horrendous (I am looking at Google Maps now and I see a lot of red in key areas along the proposed IL-53 extension as well as the Richmond-Waukegan Expressway: FAP 420). This entire project would have helped, and the fact that it has not been built absolutely baffles me (especially when other projects, such as I-355 were built even after major environmental concerns). Are there really that many wetlands along the corridor that are that sensitive? I mean, by this standard, I-94 should not have even been built. 

Richmond may be the only area along the corridor where traffic flows the smoothest (It's the last rural outpost before getting into the suburbs). Getting through Fox Lake on US 12 on the other hand? Oh geez, it's a nightmare (as I type this, I see on the Google Maps several "red zones" in downtown Fox Lake as well as to the north and south, and even some congestion at IL-31/US 12 in Richmond.

Since this corridor likely would have become an Interstate highway (had it been built), this would have taken some of the traffic off of I-90 for traffic getting to Wisconsin, and improve Chicagoland traffic flow in general, particularly for the north and south suburbs (All of Lake County, Schaumburg, Woodale, Bolingbrook, etc). For example, coming from Madison, if you are heading to, let's say, Arlington Heights or Schaumberg, I believe it would be faster to head down the US 12/IL-53 corridor (if it were built to Interstate standards) rather than heading on I-39/90 down to Rockford and turning east on I-90. You would avoid all the truck traffic trying to bypass Chicago on I-39.

If this had been built, maybe I-90 would not have needed widening west of IL-47.

[Joe The Dragon]

may funding? I-90 was build as toll and this free? now to built it Needs to be toll to pay for it.

[Stratuscaster]

I-39 - thanks for going in deeper on your point.

Again, the environmental concerns back in the day with I-90 and I-94 were originally built are not the same as those today. "Because we did it in the past" isn't a good enough excuse for many.

I did some "planning" some years back - and I wish I could find the graphic I made - but I actually had the Prairie Parkway heading north from I-90 and a bit NE to hook up with US-12 north of Richmond. (I also had it going south from I-80 and then SE to link up with the Illiana, and then E-NE to hook back up with the IN Toll Road - east of South Bend, if I recall.)

It's going to take some creative planning and thinking to pull some of these long dormant plans forward and make them happen. The more I look, the more I see than any Richmond bypass is going to have to happen well west of the city.

[I-39]

I-39 - thanks for going in deeper on your point.

Again, the environmental concerns back in the day with I-90 and I-94 were originally built are not the same as those today. "Because we did it in the past" isn't a good enough excuse for many.

I did some "planning" some years back - and I wish I could find the graphic I made - but I actually had the Prairie Parkway heading north from I-90 and a bit NE to hook up with US-12 north of Richmond. (I also had it going south from I-80 and then SE to link up with the Illiana, and then E-NE to hook back up with the IN Toll Road - east of South Bend, if I recall.)

It's going to take some creative planning and thinking to pull some of these long dormant plans forward and make them happen. The more I look, the more I see than any Richmond bypass is going to have to happen well west of the city.

The more I think about it now, the US 12 connector would have been better hook up point for the Fox Valley Freeway (which is also an atrocity that it was never built. Unlike the IL-53 and FAP 420 corridor, there are not as many environmental impacts, if built west of the Fox River). The IL-53 extension would serve better as a suburb to suburb connector rather than a regional connector (combined with I-355, it would connect the north and south suburbs from New Lenox to Grayslake). Route the regional traffic onto the Fox Valley Freeway as sort of an outer loop.

However, a better idea would have been to build an alignment that was just west of Randall Road (which I don't think was ever seriously considered), rather than along IL-59. Of course, it is too late to do this now, since the Randall Road corridor is too built up. The Prairie Parkway won't do, because it is too far west and does not connect to I-90 and ultimately US 12.

IMO, WisDOT should have either waited to build the US 12 freeway from Genoa City to Elkhorn until construction actually started in Illinois, or moved the southern end further west closer to IL-47.

I am surprised of the amount of freeways and divided highways that were built in southeastern Wisconsin (roughly the area from I-90 on the west to I-94 on the east and Madison-Milwaukee segment of I-94 to the north) despite having a similar terrain to Lake County.

[Stratuscaster]

Just goes to show that you can plan quite a bit, but sometimes things change.

IL-59's corridor was set to be a "Fox Valley Freeway" - there's no way you could even think about doing that today.

Randall is indeed built-up, but at least it's a decent multi-lane facility. It does back up as most major arterials do, but overall it moves pretty well.

IL-47 looks to be getting upgraded more than expected with the death of the Prairie Parkway.

Your next corridor west might be IL-23. Further than that and you're at I-39.

[Joe The Dragon]

Randall From I-90 to crystal lake seems to have room to upgrade even and if needed they can chop down some parking lot space.

Il-47 from I-90 to Huntley is about the same with room to push a bypass.

Randall from I-90 to I-88 maybe with some RIRO parts / some off line bypasses.

IL-53 TO IL-120 is needed with IL-120 upgrade from US-12 to I-94 US-41 O'Plaine Road needs go under or over IL-120.

or replace IL-53 with US-12 upgrade

[Quimby]

Did they ever officially cancel the Richmond leg of the IL-53 extension? I still see it in some long range planning documents, but nothing concrete.

It's frankly an atrocity that this (along with the regular IL-53 extension) was never built.

My understanding is that the highway (FAP 420) from Volo to US 12 at the WI border hasn't been cancelled, but it's on the back burner until the Rte 53/120 extension gets built to around Volo.  If/When Rte 53/120 gets built, then perhaps FAP 420 will get some serious consideration. 

I don't have any links for this, but I could have sworn I read this explanation on this website a while ago. 

[Quimby]

In looking at both the Richmond Bypass project and the IL-53/IL-120 Project, there's a big chunk missing between Volo and Richmond that isn't really addressed by either.

The Richmond Bypass ends around US-12 and Solon Rd in SE Richmond. The IL-120 Project would end near Fish Lake Rd, east of US-12/IL-59 in Volo.

There's about 12-13 miles of US-12 running through the Chain O' Lakes area between those two points.

From the IL-120 proposed bypass end point near Fish Lake Road, I believe FAP 420 would continue almost due west across US 12, across the Fox River, and just past Rte 31 in McHenry.  From there, the road would somewhat follow the Rte 31 path north to Richmond.

If you look on Google Maps, you can see vacant ROW land from the Fox River to just west of Rte 31 in McHenry.  I have no idea how much ROW exists east of the Fox River up to the proposed end of the Rte 120 bypass. 

[mgk920]

In looking at both the Richmond Bypass project and the IL-53/IL-120 Project, there's a big chunk missing between Volo and Richmond that isn't really addressed by either.

The Richmond Bypass ends around US-12 and Solon Rd in SE Richmond. The IL-120 Project would end near Fish Lake Rd, east of US-12/IL-59 in Volo.

There's about 12-13 miles of US-12 running through the Chain O' Lakes area between those two points.

From the IL-120 proposed bypass end point near Fish Lake Road, I believe FAP 420 would continue almost due west across US 12, across the Fox River, and just past Rte 31 in McHenry.  From there, the road would somewhat follow the Rte 31 path north to Richmond.

If you look on Google Maps, you can see vacant ROW land from the Fox River to just west of Rte 31 in McHenry.  I have no idea how much ROW exists east of the Fox River up to the proposed end of the Rte 120 bypass.

In the image https://goo.gl/maps/DUw6C there appears to me to be clear ROW along the south edge of that subdivision that is just east of US 12 and south of Sullivan Lake Rd.  It could also then continue west-northwestward to cross the Volo Marsh area along Sullivan Lake Rd with the least wetland impacts and any such impacts should be mitigatable.  At that point, it would be pointing directly towards the clear ROW for the McHenry bypass.

Mike