View
216
Download
0
Category
Tags:
Preview:
Citation preview
New I-65 Interchange at Worthsville Road
April 11, 2013
Welcome!
Welcome
• Rickie Clark, INDOT Office of Public Involvement• Purpose/Explanation of Public Hearing• Public Hearing Format• Visit our sign-in table• Informational Handouts• Submitting public comments • Informal Q & A following formal presentation and
comment session
Welcome• Purpose of this Public Hearing • Provide project update since last meeting • Present the Preferred Alternative • Receive public comments • Public comment session • Audio recording • Written comment forms • E-mail, call, or fax project staff (see
handout) • Allow for comments on the finding of “no
historic properties affected”
Public Notice
• Sign-in at attendance table to be added to project mailing list
• A notice of public hearing was mailed to known property owners within project area
• Announcement of this hearing was posted to INDOT website at: http://www.in.gov/indot.htm
• Electronic notification via e-mail • Legal notice was published in several newspapers on
multiple dates
STUDY AREA
Where is the Study Area?
Study Process: What is IJR?
The Interchange Justification Report (IJR) is a stand-alone document which constitutes a request from INDOT for FHWA approval of new or revised access to the existing Interstate System. The document will demonstrate that reasonable care has been taken in addressing the criteria described in the Federal Register of February 11, 1998, confirming that future traffic operations along the affected Interstate corridor will not be adversely affected by the proposed action.
IJR = Interchange Justification Report
Study Process: What is NEPA?
The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires federal agencies to integrate environmental values into their decision making processes by considering the environmental impacts of their proposed actions and reasonable alternatives to those actions.
Project Timeline
DataCollection
Interchange Justification
Environmental Documentation
Alternative Selection Detailed Design Right of Way Acquisition
BeginConstruction
Summer 2012
Project Development Process 2013 2014
Community Advisory Committee Meeting December 2012
We are here
Public MeetingWinter 2012
Public Hearing Spring 2013
Community Advisory Committee MeetingSpring 2013
What Have Stakeholders Said?
Improve East-West connectivityRelieve traffic congestion in the areaCoordinate with future land use plansCoordinate with local land owners regarding the Right of Way Acquisition processEnhance economic growth potential in the area
Purpose and Need – What Is It?An important factor in selecting the best alternative is the ability to address the Purpose and Need for improvements. Therefore, it is important to have a good understanding of those needs as we identify possible alternatives. Based on the technical analysis and public involvement findings, five transportation needs have been initially identified.
Stakeholder Input
Technical Analysis
Purpose & Need
A concise statement of the transportation problems to be addressed.
1. Improve Roadway Connectivity
2. Enhance Safety in the Corridor
3. Reduce Congestion at Existing Interchanges
4. Foster Economic Growth5. Maintain Consistency
with Local & Regional Planning
Alternatives Identification &
Screening
Alternatives Evaluation
Stakeholder Input >Refine >Evaluate
Best Blend of: Improved Travel
Performance Avoid, minimize and
mitigate Environmental Impacts
Compatibility with Community Goals
Refine
Stakeholder InputEvaluate
National Environmental Policy ActConsideration of Alternatives
Evaluation of Impacts to Human and Natural Environment
Documentation of Impacts in an Environmental Assessment at: http://www.in.gov/indot/3121.htm
Interagency Coordination
Public Involvement
Environmental ResourcesFeatures Evaluated in EA
Historic Properties
Noise Land Use
Farmlands Air Quality Relocations
Water Quality Construction Demographics
Floodplains Archaeology Hazardous Waste
Wetlands and Streams
Federally Protected Species
Parks, Preserves, etc.
Public Involvement/Outreach• Notice of Survey Letters
• Community Advisory Committee
• Public Information Meeting – December 12, 2012
• Information on the Project Website – http://www.in.gov/indot/3121.htm
• Section 106 Consulting Party Coordination
• Media
• Public Hearing and Comment Period for EA
Cons
Reduces traffic congestion in the study area
Improves safety in the study area Least conflict points Provides free east to north movement
onto the interstate Simple bridge structure
Highest overall project cost Most right of way required Greatest impact to farmlands Pond impact in southeast quadrant
Parclo A4
Pros
Cons
Reduces traffic congestion in the study area
Improves safety in the study area Fewest parcels impacted Minimize impact to property in southwest
quadrant Heavy east to north movement provided
by right turn loop
Lowest traffic capacity Highest crash risk Most excess right of way required Largest footprint Pond impact in southeast quadrant
Pros
Parclo A2
Diverging Diamond Interchange
Cons
Reduces traffic congestion in the study area. Most efficient
Improves safety in the study area. Least crash risk
Provides free movements onto the interstate
Least right of way required Lowest overall project cost Avoids pond in southeast quadrant Fewest impact to farmlands
• Most parcels impacted• Counter intuitive for drivers• Lower speed for through movements
Pros
What Are the Technical Findings?
Improve operations of Main Street interchange by reducing traffic by 30%Improve travel speeds and Level of Service on I-65Reduce expected crashes on I-65 and surface streets in the areaOperate at reasonably free flow with forecasted traffic demands
Potential Impacts – Preferred AlternativeDisplacements 3
Right of Way Acquisition
48 acres
Floodplains 4.4 acres
Wetlands and Streams
• 310 linear feet of streams • no wetland impacts
Noise1 impacted receptor
(no abatement)
Federal and State Protected Species
Not Likely to Adversely Affect
Hazardous Waste Sites
None
Community Impacts None
Historic Properties• One Previously Recorded Home:
– Determined Eligible for NRHP in 2009
– Further evaluation (2012) determined to be Ineligible
• No other historic properties found Eligible for listing on NRHP
• SHPO Concurrence on INDOT Finding of No Historic Properties Affected for Project
• Public Input Sought on Historic Properties Determination (Section 106 Finding)
Real Estate Acquisition Process
Real Estate Acquisition Process
INDOT priority is to work with the property owners to
minimize impacts of all projects
Process may begin after a Finding of No Significant
Impact (FONSI)
Process would include a plat of highway, independent
appraisal, an offer, and a period of negotiations
Must propose fair market compensation for needed
property
Eminent Domain or Condemnation are always considered
to be last resorts
What is the Land Acquisition Process?
EA Document ReviewThe Environmental Assessment is available for review at: • The project website • Greenwood Public Library • Greenwood City Office • INDOT Seymour District Office• INDOT Central Office
Ways to comment: • Public comment session • Audio recording • Written comment forms • E-mail, call, or fax project staff (see handout)
Express Your Opinion
Comment FormsWritten and online comment formsComments received by April 26, 2013 will be reviewed for future consideration and incorporation.
Comment Session
• Please be considerate of others
• Please wait on microphone before speaking
• Questions? Please see Project Staff in open house area
• Comments must be submitted by April 26, 2013
• More info: www.in.gov/indot/3121.htm
Thank youPublic Forum will begin now.
Please fill out a participation form and hand to a Study Team member
Recommended