Roll Call on Randall Road

Randall Convention Triple Left 9-3-14Below is the resolution that the McHenry County Board passed last Tuesday night with regard to Randall Road. It confirms previous reports in McHenry County Blog that the Continuous Flow Intersection (aka, CFI) is being dumped in lieu of three left turn lanes on both sides on Algonquin Road and two lefts each way on Randall.

WHEREAS, McHenry County has determined that there is a need to widen and reconstruct Randall Road in Algonquin Township as part of the approved FY 2014 to 2018 Transportation Program; and

Randall CFI Rollcall 9-16-14 namesRandall CFI Rollcall 9-16-14WHEREAS, the existing road is congested and traffic volumes are higher than the facility was designed to carry; and

WHEREAS, the existing road cannot accommodate the projected growth in traffic that sustains the economic viability and regional mobility in the Algonquin/Crystal Lake/Lake in the Hills area; and

WHEREAS, the Phase I Preliminary Engineering study developed a preferred alternative that was approved by the Illinois Department of Transportation and the Federal Highway Administration on December 23, 2013; and

WHEREAS, the McHenry County Board, as part of the Phase II Design Engineering, desired to reevaluate the preferred alternative at the Randall Road intersection with Algonquin Road; and

WHEREAS, the reevaluation process of the Randall Road intersection with Algonquin Road sought input from area stakeholders and used current socioeconomic data from the Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning (CMAP) to develop new alternatives for the intersection; and

Randall Traffic Counts 2003

Randall Road Traffic Counts in 2003.

WHEREAS, the Transportation Committee supports the Conventional Intersection as the Preferred Alternative with the parameters outlined in the presentation as it provides for the optimal solution addressing the needs for all users of Randall Road.

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the County Board of McHenry County that the Preferred Alternative for the Randall Road project at the Algonquin Road intersection is the Conventional Intersection as shown on Exhibit A attached hereto and hereby made a part hereof; and

Randall Road traffic counts in 2013.

Randall Road traffic counts in 2013.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, Randall Road from County Line Road north to Ackman Road shall proceed incorporating the Preferred Alternative as shown on Exhibit A for the intersection of Randall Road and Algonquin Road; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the County Clerk is hereby directed to transmit a certified copy of this resolution to the County Board; the County Administrator; the Village of Algonquin, the Village of Lake in the Hills, the City of Crystal Lake and the Director of Transportation/County Engineer.

Randall Road traffic counts in 2003 and 2013.

Randall Road traffic counts in 2003 and 2013.

As in all resolutions, the “be it resolved” paragraphs at the bottom are the guts of the decision.

A memo accompanying the resolution has the following relevant information:

Background: The Phase I was approved by IDOT/FHWA on December 23, 2013.  A preferred alternative was selected as part of the Phase I process for Randall Road.  Since that time, the Transportation Committee and the County Board desired to reevaluate the design of the Randall Road intersection with Algonquin Road.

 

Discussion:  The Phase II Design reevaluation process of the Randall Road intersection with Algonquin Road has actively re-engaged the stakeholders along the Randall Road corridor in particular those within proximity to the Randall Road/Algonquin Road intersection to aid in developing new alternatives.

 

The design team has also utilized current CMAP socioeconomic data as part of CMAP’s periodic update to its GO TO 2040 Plan for the Chicago Metropolitan region which includes McHenry County to ensure that the project is designed appropriately.

 

Through this process, alternatives have been developed for consideration by the Transportation Committee.

 

At the September 3, 2014 Transportation Committee meeting, the Conventional Intersection was selected by the Transportation Committee as the preferred alternative.

 


Comments

Roll Call on Randall Road — 12 Comments

  1. Be it resolved be damned.

    Why do we have to pay to fix something that isn’t broken?

    I shouldn’t have to pay for their stupidity.

    I have enough trouble paying for my own.

  2. Can anyone explain the difference between the majority on the County Board vs. Nancy Pelosi? (Pass it to find out what is in it.)

    Can anyone explain the difference between how the board voted vs the recent vote to send money to train Muslims in Syria?

    Can anyone explain the difference between how the board voted vs. the President’s opinion on amnesty relative to the majority of legal residents?

    The only difference I can come up with is that the County Board meets in Woodstock while the federal government meets in D.C.

    \Neither group represents their legal citizenry.

    Anyone who voted YES on this resolution must be replaced.

    Keep the voting record on this issue and compare it to the upcoming vote on the UDO. In all liklihood the vote will be a mirror copy.

    You voters in D-6 who failed to come out in support of Schuster will severely regret it when you observe what you have brought on to the Board.

  3. Note that McCann was the only Yes vote amongst the Board members who actually live in a rural type of atmosphere.

    There are actually some Board members who live in subdivisions who understand what highway expansion will do to the rural character that the County Board is always so eager to emphasize when describing our area.

    This Board also voted to support a tollway interchange south of Marengo in an agricultural area which consistently floods!!

  4. I could not support the conventional intersection configuration because I am concerned that the projected growth used to justify the Randall Rd project is questionable for any number of reasons, i.e. traffic going down because people & businesses are leaving the state, other transportation route development alleviating traffic on Randall Rd, telecommuting to work, on-line shopping, & because the growth justification is based on what is projected to happen in the next 35 years (which seems sort of insanely impossible to know).

    A far less costly dual left turn could have been an appropriate compromise v. what looks like an intersection with a total of 11 lanes on Randall (3 lanes are left turn lanes!).

    In addition, as pointed out by Mr. Provenzano during the County Board meeting, along with the intersection improvement, widening Randall Road has been included as part of this project.

    This includes the addition of one lane on the north side and one lane on the south side over a 3.5 mile distance (from Ackman Rd to the Kane County border) and we were informed at the Transportation Meeting this would result in a $66 Million capital cost for the road and the intersection.

    In addition, there is a right of way acquisition cost estimated to be $25 Million..or more!

    Thus, this project price tag of $91 Million+ is what many of us in the audience understood after the presentation was made at the Transportation meeting.

    For some reason the presenters did not bring up costs at the full County Board meeting and the Resolution we voted on at the County Board meeting focused only on the intersection, and not the road widening–though like a bad penny, that road widening and associated costs will rear its ugly expensive head at some point.

    A final sticking point with me is the looming financial disaster that hangs over the head of every taxpayer in Illinois.

    I just don’t feel comfortable when people tell me, “oh don’t worry–the Randall Road project will be paid from other tax funds, not your property taxes”.

    It just get me down when people want to spend a crazy amount of money like this at the same time our State is in such a precarious fiscal position, and when at both the Fed and State motor fuel tax revenues are declining because people are driving less and also using more fuel efficient cars.

    So, I just don’t think we know if the funding will be there.

    In closing, taxes come from taxpayers, and we could loose many of them forever, and their tax revenue, if we don’t start assessing these looming risks and the dire consequences they could have in the years ahead.

    Donna Kurtz
    County Board Member – District 2

  5. If some of the financing is coming from the RTA sales tax imposed on residents by the General Assembly, then that money could be used to cut property taxes used to finance the Sheriff’s Department.

  6. Thanks to all that voted no on the expansion!

    At least your voices have been heard by the voters.

    The others need to get on board with fiscal responsibility.

    I agree with Cindy, it’s not broken!

    I agree with Cal, our taxes need to be decreased.

    Quit spending because it’s there to spend.

  7. TO SUPPORT CAL’S COMMENT:

    SEE LAST SENTENCE OF SOURCE DOCUMENT:
    http://www.rtams.org/rtams/salesTaxHome.jsp

    “New RTA Sales Tax, New PTF, and New RETT
    In January 2008, Illinois Public Act 95-0708 increased the RTA sales tax rate throughout the region, increased the real estate transfer tax (RETT) in the City of Chicago, and raised the portion of RTA sales tax revenues matched by the State Public Transportation Fund (PTF). The RTA sales tax rate was increased by 0.25% in Cook County and by 0.50% in the Collar Counties effective April 1, 2008. Proceeds of the sales tax increase in the Collar Counties are divided evenly between the RTA and the county where the tax is collected. The proceeds awarded to Collar Counties can only be utilized for transportation (highways and transit) and/or public safety purposes.”

    SO, when the County Board Members state that “no property tax dollars are used” in the Randall Road $100 million project, it is sophistry.
    When they CHOOSE to spend property tax money on police budget, and NOT spend RTA tax money on that necessary budget, they are deciding to spend RTA tax money on their frivolous, personally desirable road project— which necessitates that ADDITIONAL tax money be billed to homeowners to pay for the police budget.
    Similar to saying that if the husband spends his paycheck on the gambling and boozing, but his wife’s paycheck goes to pay the rent: “none of the rent money has been spent on gambling or boozing”.

    FURTHERMORE:
    According to the County’s own long range transportation plan (https://www.co.mchenry.il.us/home/showdocument?id=30321 page 50),
    10% of transportation project funding DOES come from property taxes. The claim that “Randall Road $100 million spending will not increase your property taxes” is predicated on the ‘budgeted’ amounts they have been and will continue to take from property taxes of all county citizens.

  8. You don’t have to look too far (Lake Co. IL) for proactive building and widening of congested roadways.

    Four lanes through the cornfields, people commuting through there appreciate it.

    There are many McHenry Co. intersections that could use a little help.

  9. At what cost?

    My property taxes are 3.67% of an assessed value which has been cut in half in the past few years (while all of America was enjoying home value appreciation).

    Higher taxes, lower home value, and lower standard of living because I do not control the destiny of my tax payments, Nick Chirikos does.

    You good with that, Mrs.?

    Whose cornfields would you condemn for your own trivial convenience?

    Do you spare even a moment to research the consequences of such narcissistic sociopathic reasoning?

    I honestly feel like there are 17 County Board Members ((and you, Mrs.) who wouldn’t bother to stop and spit on me if I was on fire.

    Feeling like that beats any hope for the future right out of me.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.