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