A Look at the Illiana Tollway Boondoggle From Indiana’s Perspective

The Illiana Tollway would run mostly through areas that the Northwestern Indiana Regional Planning Commission classified as having the lowest development priority.
The Illiana Tollway (shown in black) would run mostly through areas that the Northwestern Indiana Regional Planning Commission classified as having the lowest development priority (in light green and tan).

The Illinois Department of Transportation is pushing forward with the risky and unnecessary Illiana Tollway by announcing its “short list” of four finance and construction groups that can build the 35-mile Illinois portion. Streetsblog has reported abundantly from the Illinois perspective — including a look at IDOT’s own analysis showing a net decrease in Illinois jobs as a result of the project. But it’s also worth taking a look at how the process — and the opposition — have played out in Indiana.

Like IDOT, the Indiana Department of Transportation had to convince the regional planning agency to accept the tollway in its Comprehensive Regional Plan. This plan is very similar to Chicagoland’s GO TO 2040. The northwestern Indiana plan “embraces constrained, planned growth, and encourages sustainable development within existing communities whose population centers will be livable and vibrant.”

And again like IDOT, InDOT succeeded in getting the plan amended to include Indiana’s 12-mile portion of the Illiana Tollway. In December, the amendment was approved by the Northwestern Indiana Regional Planning Commission in a 29-8 vote, a much wider margin than the 11-8 vote at the CMAP MPO Policy Committee.

Opposition to the tollway in Indiana, it seems, was based more on the effect on land use and sprawl than the allocation of taxpayer dollars. Hammond Mayor Thomas McDermott Jr. said the tollway doesn’t conform to the regional plan, which “focuses on revitalization of Lake County’s urban core,” and that it “would contribute to urban sprawl in the south of Lake County.”

NIRPC’s staff gauged the impact of the highway on the regional plan’s goals and identified only 15 objectives out of 72 in which it would be consistent with the plan [PDF]. A majority of the effects were found to be uncertain because of insufficient data, or because the planning staff couldn’t make a determination “until certain events unfold or clearer relationships have been identified.”

The NIRPC report had a lot to say about sprawl. In the detailed section on land use and population growth, their analysis found many ways in which the Illiana Tollway does not align with the comprehensive regional plan.

The report notes that land use in northwestern Indiana has followed a pattern of “outward expansion.” Newer, cheaper housing draws development in unincorporated areas. The lower initial costs, it says, attracts “people out to the urban fringe and unincorporated areas, and once‐thriving communities are left with vacant lots and a dwindling tax base, which are causing major issues in the inner cities.”

The new highway, meanwhile, would run atop greenfield land in undeveloped areas, likely exacerbating these problems. The NIRPC report found the Illiana Tollway will have “uncertain” conformity with the goals of developing around existing infrastructure and building affordable housing.

In essence, the report called for stronger policies and protections to “guarantee proper implementation” of growth strategies, like limiting residential development on farmland. That’s the kind of development that can’t support transit, and leads to longer driving distances, increased pollution, and high household transportation costs.

There are also concerns that natural resources won’t be able to support the sprawl. Julie Roesler, a nurse and member of the Indiana Sierra Club Dunelands group, emailed Streetsblog several months ago to alert us to the conservation perspective in Indiana. “[Building the Illiana] would seem likely to initiate sprawl, and at the very least, would pave over important agricultural and natural areas. Water in the Kankakee watershed is limited and would not be able to support a large increased need if population, industrial, or even agricultural needs grow.”

The NIRPC staff report concurs, finding that land near the highway would be classified as a combination of “unsuitable for urban development,” “very low priority,” and “least priority development” on the basis of conserving natural resources.

Right now, it looks like the one way the expensive Illiana Tollway boondoggle can be avoided is if the state DOTs fail to secure good financing.

Still, the Federal Highway Administration has to approve the Tier 2 Environmental Impact Statement, released today, before IDOT and InDOT can proceed with construction. The 45-day public comment period for the Tier 2 EIS begins today. Stay tuned for a review of the Tier 2 EIS.

  • Anne A

    Right now, it looks like the one way the expensive Illiana Tollway boondoggle can be avoided is if the state DOTs fail to secure good financing.

    We can always hope.

  • Anna Schibrowsky

    The other day I found myself conversing about the proposed Illiana Road-To-Somewhere-That-Already-Has-Roads-To-It with a gentleman from Joliet who said he hopes they build it because “there are too many trucks in Joliet.” This was a polite conversation so I didn’t pursue it, but it seems to me if you build more roads you’ll attract more trucks. BNSF and Walmart will just try to push more trucks out of their logistics warehouses, and while some of those will take the Illiana RTSTAHRTI, many need to go north, south, and west and will still wind up in Joliet. Whereas pursuing rail or boat transport could actually get freight off the roads, building a RTSTAHRTI is just going to encourage more of the same.

  • Joseph Musco

    It should be easy to find financing for Illiana using availability payments — because the risk isn’t transferred to the private partner. The risk is future DOTs will have to pay the private partner out of their operating budgets.

    No bonding authority wants any part of a project that can’t generate revenue in excess of expenses (Illinois Tollway politely refused to be involved in this project). Availability payments deals are made to circumvent the oversight required of bond issues. Enthusiastic politicians and appointees with no bonding authority came up with this availability payment format so they could make promises today using the operating budgets of tomorrow.

    If IDOT and InDOT choose availability payments as a finance mechanism, all the risk lies with their respective operating budgets. It should be easy to find a partner. All the private partner in an availability payments arrangement needs to do is to keep the piece of infrastructure “available” — keep it open and in good repair — under the terms of the arrangement.

  • The staff report from NIRPC had similar concerns about freight-oriented land use as residential land use. They were concerned that the new tollway would lead to more driving and warehousing and intermodal facilities AWAY from existing warehouses and freight operations.

  • PedestrianError

    MPOs: when they get something wrong, they have a million excuses not to change. When they have something right, they roll over and capitulate to their state DOT.

  • Zach

    I always thought this was to divert truck traffic from the Chicago-area roads and highways. Rich Miller and Capitolfax commenters offer some good additional insights on the issue: http://capitolfax.com/2013/10/17/big-vote-today-on-illiana-expressway/

  • BeeKaaay

    They’ll get the financing. The cronies must get their money.


Metra and Pace Vote For Transit-Crushing Illiana Tollway in Advisory Meeting

Chicago-area transportation organizations are poised to shoot themselves in the foot and harm the region by allowing the Illinois Department of Transportation Department to squander limited transportation infrastructure funds on the $2.75 billion Illiana Tollway. On Friday the Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning’s transportation committee voted to recommend moving forward with this wasteful, destructive project, […]

Preckwinkle, Environmental Groups Want CMAP to Drop Illiana

The Sierra Club and other organizations intend to petition the Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning to remove the Illiana Tollway from its regional plan, effectively disallowing the state from building the new highway. The deletion is possible because CMAP, the federally-designated Metropolitan Planning Organization for this region, is finalizing a mandatory update of its GO […]

The Illiana’s Latest Death Blow: Feds Dropping Their Appeal of Court Ruling

A new legal development may represent the final nail in the coffin for the wasteful, destructive Illiana Tollway project. Yesterday, the Federal Highway Administration dropped its appeal of the court ruling that invalidated the Illiana’s key supporting document. Back in June, U.S. District Court Judge Jorge Alonso invalidated the tollway’s Environmental Impact Statement, calling it “arbitrary and capricious.” […]

Could Rauner Stop the Illiana Boondoggle? Sure. But Will He?

The Illiana Tollway, a joint proposal by the Illinois and Indiana departments of transportation to build a 47-mile highway through thinly populated farmland about 40 miles south of Chicago, rolled over another hurdle yesterday when the Federal Highway Administration approved the project’s environmental impact study. FHWA’s approval allows IDOT and InDOT to proceed with soliciting bids for […]