Illinois 53 Extension

[hobsini2]

I read it as ISTHA will toll it so it doesnt become congested. It will be expensive but not so expenive that traffic is moving at 70....more like 55-60( ten miles over the posted).
I really think the 45 is to pacify Long Grove like Lake Shore Drives 45 in Chicago.
I will admit its just hunches but ISTHA is not stupid

Yeah but we all know that other than the Oak St curve and the section between Monroe and Roosevelt, traffic on Lake Shore Dr usually is going about 55-60 mph in the 45. Hell I have even seen some of those crotch rockets whiz by at like 80.

[3467]

Yep and it will be on Route 53 especially if volume is kept low with too high a toll. I see it as PR just like LSD is PR ,though i did get caught there late one night many years ago...

[hobsini2]

PR?

[3467]

Public realtions. We are going to build a 4 lane 15 mile long road with no traffic lights high tolls and no 35mph curves........and everyone is going to drive 45 MPH

[3467]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/suburbs/grayslake_gurnee_round_lake/chi-highway-53-120-extension-contract-20130220,0,6757713.story

[Jordanah1]

omg, they're still talking about building a stupid parkway? SMH...

[Revive 755]

^ I think there will be talk about a parkway design until there is a change in power in Springfield that also purges the toll authority of its current leadership.

IMHO, there should be a comparison of the parkway design versus upgrading IL 83 to a six lane superstreet - though getting the superstreet park as unlikely as getting the parkway back to a full 65 mph tolled freeway design.

[3467]

http://www.lakecountyil.gov/Transportation/Pages/default.aspx
2020 plan under plans,studies on left did just that It required more road widenings that IDOT and Lake County cant afford . Springfield needs an enema but that wont change this

[Revive 755]

^ Those maps need to be remade; it seems half the projects have fallen off/decided against (the I-94 interchange at Washington Street, widening IL 83 to four lanes from IL 132 into Antioch for example) or are so dormant they won't be done until 2035.

[3467]

Yes Lake count has never updated its plan. I think Will and Kane did   and maybe Mchenry. I have never seen one for Cook or Dupage

[Brandon]

^ Those maps need to be remade; it seems half the projects have fallen off/decided against (the I-94 interchange at Washington Street, widening IL 83 to four lanes from IL 132 into Antioch for example) or are so dormant they won't be done until 2035.

Yeah, that happens when the state is broker than Greece.  I have a feeling a lot of IDOT projects will be much delayed in the coming years. 

[Revive 755]

Dusting off this topic . . .

To partly pay for the IL 53 extension, the Toll Authority is considering bringing back the Deerfield Toll Plaza.  See http://www.illinoistollway.com/documents/10157/6270345/2014+09++03_IL53_120-TollingMFTWorkingGroup_APPROVEDMeetingMinutes

[Joe The Dragon]

and where will they fit in a new Deerfield Toll Plaza + maybe Deerfield road on ramp fly over to I-94.

4 inner lanes for I-94 (free pass) + 1 Deerfield road on ramp flyover? and 3-4 each way for I-294 high speed toll + cash lanes there?

Maybe split toll?

what about some kind of ticket system for that part of I-94 / I-294?

[CtrlAltDel]

and where will they fit in a new Deerfield Toll Plaza + maybe Deerfield road on ramp fly over to I-94.

Almost certainly it will be electronic tolling only.

[Joe The Dragon]

ETC only on mainline? why just do a full ETR 407 then for the full IL toll way system?

[CtrlAltDel]

ETC only on mainline? why just do a full ETR 407 then for the full IL toll way system?

I daresay that something like that is in the cards sooner or later.

[Brandon]

ETC only on mainline? why just do a full ETR 407 then for the full IL toll way system?

I daresay that something like that is in the cards sooner or later.

It's coming closer with the new I-57/I-294 interchange.  As 85-90% of tollway users use I-Pass (aka E-Z Pass), it's pretty much easy to do.  At least ISTHA allows non-I-Pass users to pay online unlike the 407-ETR.

[dietermoreno]

ETC only on mainline? why just do a full ETR 407 then for the full IL toll way system?

I daresay that something like that is in the cards sooner or later.

It's coming closer with the new I-57/I-294 interchange.  As 85-90% of tollway users use I-Pass (aka E-Z Pass), it's pretty much easy to do.  At least ISTHA allows non-I-Pass users to pay online unlike the 407-ETR.

The Elgin O'hare will be an ETR starting in 2016.  Perhaps this will help us get used to the IL 53 extension being an ETR.
http://www.dailyherald.com/article/20141120/news/141129807/

Though, I wouldn't pay to go 35 mph with stop lights and tolls on the 120 bypass when I can go 55 mph on "old Rt 120" and Peterson Rd for free.  That seems to be the option chosen by the Blue Ribbon Advisory Council, they chose option B.

Edit: It appears as of April 2012, a hybrid of option B and option E has been selected.
Hybrid alternative on page 16
http://www.illinoistollway.com/documents/10157/48743/2012-04-13_Council-Resolution-Apr13.pdf




Starts on page 30.
http://www.illinoistollway.com/documents/10157/48743/2012-02-09_FINAL_Route+53+Workshop_all-polling-results_compressed.pdf

Option A:

              IL 53 -  four lane undivided artery, outer paved shoulder, speed limit 35 mph, stop lights, stop signs, round abouts, and interchanges, no tolls.  Replace Lake Cook Rd interchange with a stop light.
Interchange at Lake Cook Rd: No.  Replaced with a stop light.
Intersection at Hicks Rd: Undetermined.  Could be stop sign or round about.
Intersection at Long Grove Rd: Stop light.
Intersection at Cuba Rd: Undetermined.  Could be stop sign or round about.
Intersection at IL 22: Stop light.
Intersection at Old McHenry Rd: Stop light.
Intersection at Gilmer Rd: Stop light.
Intersection with CN line: At grade.
Intersection at Midlothian Rd: Stop light.
Intersection at IL 83 / IL 60: Stop light.
Intersection at Hawley St: Stop light.
Intersection at IL 176: Stop light.
Intersection at Winchester Rd: Undetermined.  Could be stop sign or round about.
Interchange at IL 120: Yes.

               IL 120 - four lane undivided artery, outer paved shoulder, speed limit 35 mph, stop lights, stop signs, round abouts, and interchanges, no tolls.  Replace IL 21 interchange with a stop light.
Interchange at IL 53: Yes.
Interchange at Allegheny Rd: Yes.
Interchange at I-94: Yes.
Intersection at IL 21: Stop light.
Intersection at Hunt Club Rd.: Stop light.
Intersection at Almond Rd: Undetermined.  Stop sign or round about.
Intersection at U.S. 45: Stop light.
Intersection at CN line: At grade.
Intersection at Metra line: At grade.
Intersection at "Old Rt 120": Stop light.
Intersection at Fairfield Rd: Stop light.
Intersection at Wilson Rd: Stop light.
Intersection at Fish Lake Rd: Undetermined.  Currently a stop light.  Could become a round about.
Intersection at IL 60: Undetermined.  Currently a stop light.  Could become a round about.
Intersection at Gilmer Rd: Undetermined.  Currently a stop light.  Could become a round about.
Intersection at U.S. 12: Stop light.


Option B:

IL 53 -  four lane divided parkway, speed limit 45 mph, access at interchanges only, tolled.
Same interchanges and grade separations as option E.

                IL 120 from west of Hainesville Rd to west of  U.S. 45 - four lane divided parkway, outer paved shoulder, no inner shoulder, speed limit 45 mph, access at interchanges only, tolled.
Interchange with Allegheny Rd: Yes.
Intersection with CN line: Grade separated.
Intersection with Metra line: Grade separated.

                IL 120 from west of Hainesville Rd to U.S. Rt. 12 and west of Almond Rd to I-94 - widen existing artery to four lanes undivided, construct new artery section east of U.S. 45  to connect to existing IL 120 artery, outer paved shoulder, no inner shoulder, speed limit 35 mph, undivide existing divided highway, replace IL 21 interchange with a stop light, stop lights, stop lights, round abouts, unlimited access, untolled.
Interchange with U.S. 45: No.  Stop light instead.
Intersection with Almond Rd: Undetermined.  Stop sign or round about.
Interchange with Huntclub Rd: No.  Stop light instead.
Interchange with IL 21: No.  Stop light instead.
Interchange with I-94: Yes.


Option C:

                IL 53 -  four lane divided parkway, outer paved shoulder, no inner shoulder, speed limit 45 mph, access at interchanges only, tolled.
Same interchanges and grade separations as option E.

                IL 120 - four lane divided parkway, outer paved shoulder, no inner shoulder, speed limit 45 mph, access at interchanges only, tolled.
Same interchanges and grade separations as option E.


Option D:

                IL 53 - four lane expressway, paved inner and outer shoulders, speed limit 60 mph, access at interchanges only, tolled.
Same interchanges and grade separations as option E.


                IL 120 - four lane expressway, paved inner and outer shoulders, speed limit 60 mph, access at interchanges only, tolled.
Same interchanges and grade separations as option E.

Option E:

             IL 53 - six lane expressway with the inner lane in each direction being managed for Pace bus service and or HOV lane, paved inner and outer shoulders, speed limit 60 mph, access at interchanges only, tolled.
Interchange with Lake Cook Rd: Yes
Interchange with IL 22: Yes
Interchange with Midlothian Rd: Yes
Interchange with Peterson Rd: Yes
Interchange with IL 53 - IL 120 junction: Yes
All rail roads grade separated: Yes.
All other cross roads grade separated: Yes.

               IL 120 - six lane expressway with the inner lane in each direction being managed for Pace bus service and or HOV lane, paved inner and outer shoulders, speed limit 60 mph, access at interchanges only, tolled.
Interchange with U.S. 45: Yes
Interchange with Huntclub Rd: Yes
Interchange with IL 21: Yes
Interchange with I-94: Yes
Interchange with Allegheny Rd: Yes
Interchange with Fairfield Rd: Yes
Interchange with Wilson Rd: Yes
Interchange with U.S. 12: Yes
All rail roads grade separated: Yes
All cross roads grade separated: Yes


I think lowering the speed limit from what is currently 55 mph to 35 mph is idiotic, as well as replacing the interchange with IL 21 with a stop light and undividing the divided section of IL 120.  The most idiotic suggestion of all is replacing the Lake Cook Rd interchange with a stop light, an intersection that handles over 100,000 vehicles a day,about the volume handled by the 8 lane Tri State tollway.  Putting stop lights on a road that carries over 100,000 vehicles a day would be like putting stop lights on the Tri State tollway.





I'd rather see it not get built if option B is what gets built.

I think the hybrid alternative is better to build then nothing and perhaps can be upgraded to full 6 lane expressway in the future.  I suppose you could bulldoze round abouts and build an expressway at a later time, but it would have been cheaper to just build it as a 6 lane expressway in the first place.



The hybrid alternative (B and E):

IL 53: Tolled 4 lane parkway with a speed limit of 45 mph with right of way reserved to add a managed transit lane in the future for PACE bus service and or HOV lane.  Access at interchanges only.  All interchanges and grade separations of option E.  Will have a wide grassy median in rural areas and will have a narrow concrete median going through Mundelein.  Unknown if the section through Mundelein will have shoulders.

IL 120 from west of Alleghenny Rd to east of U.S. 45: Same design as IL 53 above.

Limited bypass option for IL 120 west of Alleghenny Rd:
               IL 120 tollway parallels and then joins with "old Rt 120" without crossing squaw creek.  Split couplet at grade roadway has a speed limit of 45 mph and only 4 lanes as it winds through the oak savanah to the south of "old Rt 120" in Hainesville.  Crossing Squaw creek is avoided.  Existing artery is converted to an at grade 4 lane divided parkway with a speed limit of 45 mph, with undetermined at grade intersections that could be stop lights, stop signs, or round abouts, until west of Wilson Rd.  No modifications to existing 4 lane divided artery west of Wilson Rd.
Interchange with U.S. 12: No.  Stop light.
Grade separation with Gilmer Rd: No. Stop light.
Grade separation with IL 60:  No.  Stop light.
Grade separation with Fish Lake Rd: No.  Stop light.
Interchange with Wilson Rd: No. Undetermined at grade intersection.
Interchange with Fairfield Rd: No. Undetermined at grade intersection.
Cedar Lake Rd: Undetermined at grade intersection.
Bacon Rd: Undetermined at grade intersection.
Interchange with "old Rt 120": Undetermined.
Interchange with Alleghenny Rd: Yes.


West bypass option for IL 120 west of Alleghenny Rd:
         Divided tolled 4 lane parkway crosses Squaw Creek wetlands on causeways.  Involves aquiring ROW from a subdivision next to Campbell Airport.  The road goes right through the middle of that subdivision paralleling Campbell Airport.  Section parallel to Campbell Airport is divided tolled 4 lane parkway below grade with a wide grassy median.  Joins existing artery west of Fairfield Rd.  West of Fairfield Rd, existing 2 lane artery is converted into a divided tolled 4 lane parkway below grade with a wide grassy median, until west of Wilson Rd.  No modifications to existing 4 lane divided artery west of Wilson Rd.
Interchange with U.S. 12: No.  Stop light.
Grade separation with Gilmer Rd: No.  Stop light.
Grade separation with IL 60: No.  Stop light.
Grade separation with Fish Lake Rd: No.  Stop light.
Interchange with "old Rt 120": Undetermined.
Interchange with Wilson Rd: Undetermined.
Interchange with Fairfield Rd: Undetermined.
Cedar Lake Rd: No access. Undetermined if will be grade separated or cul-desacked.
Bacon Rd: No access.  Undetermined if will be grade separated or cul-desacked.
Interchange with Alleghenny Rd: Yes.

[Joe The Dragon]

just build Option D if a 6 lane ROW costs to much / ect.

Also 60? should be 70. But 45 for Option C?? when us 12 has 50-55 parts with lights and drive ways?

[dietermoreno]

just build Option D if a 6 lane ROW costs to much / ect.

Edited my post.  It looks like the plan is to build a 4 lane with ROW for 6 lanes, at least for the IL 53 section.  The IL 120 section is still a mess with the hybrid of B and E.

[Joe The Dragon]

Still looking at 45 MPH?? will the cops give a damn? let you do 55-60? 60-65? 70? (like how they let you do 70 on the other 55 toll ways and Interstates)

What about I-94 and IL-120 will that be changed?

[mgk920]

Wasn't I-355 (I-80 to I-290) built as 'Option D' and upgraded to six lanes after only a couple of years?

If so, that's the way that I'd go and it is a *huge* improvement on those dippy 'Parkway' options.



And even with interstate-compatibility, it certainly can be designed to compliment its surroundings.

Mike

[ET21]

Wasn't I-355 (I-80 to I-290) built as 'Option D' and upgraded to six lanes after only a couple of years?

Mike

Sections are up to 8 lanes now, mainly by the Army Trail toll plaza and between I-88 and I-55

[mgk920]

Wasn't I-355 (I-80 to I-290) built as 'Option D' and upgraded to six lanes after only a couple of years?

Mike

Sections are up to 8 lanes now, mainly by the Army Trail toll plaza and between I-88 and I-55

It was late when I posted that, I meant 'I-55 to I-290'.  OTOH, I do see that you replied based on that assumption.



Mike

[Brandon]

Wasn't I-355 (I-80 to I-290) built as 'Option D' and upgraded to six lanes after only a couple of years?

Mike

Sections are up to 8 lanes now, mainly by the Army Trail toll plaza and between I-88 and I-55

It was late when I posted that, I meant 'I-55 to I-290'.  OTOH, I do see that you replied based on that assumption.



Mike

It's why the I-80 to I-55 section was built as 6 lanes to begin with.  ISTHA learned their lesson on the other part of I-355.  It's also why Option E is the only really acceptable option.  Until Long Grove gets a reality check, I favor boycotting any business there.