FEBRUARY 5, 2010
PROJECT REVIEW MEETING MINUTES
Attendees: Dan Ohman, Michael Kennerly, Tim Crouch, Tom Welch, Steve Gent, Scott Dockstader, Tony Gustafson, Marty Sankey, Max Grogg, Mark Swenson, Kent Nicholson, Mark Kerper, Jim Rost, Gary Hood, Gary Novey, Mitch Dillavou, John Adam, Jim Schnoebelen, Ken Yanna, Kathy Coulter, and LaDana Sogard
- J-turn Project at Springville on US 151
On January 12, 2010 the department held a Public Information Meeting in Springville to discuss the proposed intersection improvement project at the junction of US 151 and 6th St\Springville Road just south of Springville. The proposed improvement involves replacing the existing at-grade intersection with a J-Turn intersection to improve the operational characteristics and reduce the number of accidents.
The crash studies show that the majority of the crashes are right angle crashes involving vehicles crossing the median. The J-turn concept was designed to prevent/minimize these types of crashes and therefore staff believed it would be an appropriate solution to propose to the community.
The meeting was well attended and most of those in attendance expressed strong opposition to the proposed improvement. The primary concern was the out of distance travel associated with the J-Turn movements for northbound and southbound traffic and the perception that these movements could pose a significant problem for farm equipment hauling grain to the elevator in Springville.
The City Council and mayor of Springville were initially supportive of the proposal, but changes in the make-up of the council and a new mayor has resulted in a change in their position, and they have come out in opposition of the proposal as well. The comment period has closed and with mounting opposition the District was looking for input on how to respond, the future of J-Turns statewide, and how to proceed with development at this intersection.
The District suggested going back to the drawing board, reviewing the issues that have been raised and looking at various options to address those concerns. They suggested we would put further development of the J-turn option on hold while we reviewed other alternatives. Traffic and Safety agreed with the “go slow” approach to implementation of the use of J-turns and stressed that it was important to find the right location to build success and support for their use.
Traffic and Safety will work with the District Traffic Technicians to develop a “Tool Box” of alternatives to address similar expressway intersections in the future, and the Office of Design will review the possibility of lowering the crest vertical curve east of the intersection to improve sight distance at the intersection. Improving the sight distance would address some of the concerns raised about the northbound movement through the J-turn.
Another option that will be explored is the use of the Driving Simulator at the University of Iowa to model the movements through the J-turn at Springville; including the types of vehicles that would be used in farm operations to address the concern raised at the hearing (Traffic and Safety will take the lead on this task). The District will take a look at Drafting a “White Paper” on the various alternatives available at this intersection and their pro’s and con’s to use as the basis for their response to the public.
- Status of Proposed J-Turn Projects in District 1
District 1 had proposed J-turns at two locations to address operational issues they were having at two at-grade intersections in their area. They have one proposed for the intersection of IA 330\US 65 with IA 117 in Jasper County, and another at the intersection of IA 330\US 65 and County Road F17, which in Jasper County.
In light of the attention and opposition raised as a result of the proposal at Springville the question was how should we proceed with the proposed locations in District 1. It was decided to delay the projects at the intersection of IA 330\US 65 and IA 117, but proceed with the proposal at the intersection of IA 330\US 65 and F17 for 2011. The sentiment at the public hearing in Baxter, which is on F17 just east of IA 330\US 65 was generally favorable, and it was felt that the interim improvements at IA 117 had been effective and would buy us time to develop a permanent solution.
- I-35 Rest Area near Ankeny
The City of Ankeny has been given approval to construct an interchange where I-35 goes over 36th St. in Ankeny. Construction of the new interchange, which is approximately 2 miles north of the 1st St, will require the relocation of the two Rest Area’s along I-35 south of 36th St.
The agreement with the city calls for them to participate in the cost of relocating the two Rest Areas, however a study conducted by the Des Moines Metropolitan Planning Organization concluded their replacement was not necessary. The DOT Commission reviewed their study and reaffirmed their commitment to maintain 40 rest Areas in the state; therefore staff began looking at possible locations for the new rest Areas.
The decision by management was to keep the new Rest Area’s north of Des Moines so staff settled on a study corridor that went from the County Road F22 interchange near Elkhart north approximately 6 miles to the IA 210 interchange near Huxley. There were three possible sites in that corridor that staff reviewed, and they were a single Rest Area at the Elkhart interchange, a pair of Rest Areas located along mainline north of Elkhart, and a single Rest Area at the Huxley interchange.
Staff initially preferred the location at Elkhart, but concerns about the cost of right-of-way this close to Ankeny, and Polk counties proposal to begin construction of a beltway in 2035 that would connect US 65 and I-35 near this location resulted in it being dropped from further consideration. Although the concept of constructing a pair along I-35 is still a viable option staff felt a single Rest Area at the Huxley interchange would have fewer impacts and cost less to construct and maintain.
There is a plant in the northwest quadrant of the interchange, which left the other three quadrants as possible locations. District staff met with officials from the City of Huxley and at least one of the affected landowners to review the proposal, and the initial indication was that they were supportive of the proposal. A Public Information Meeting was held January 14, 2010 in Ankeny to review the interchange proposal and the proposed Rest Area location. Although the interchange was intended to be the focal point of the meeting, the Rest Area proposal received the most attention.
Those in attendance spent a lot of time around the two displays we had setup showing two possible layouts of the rest areas, and staff heard a number of concerns expressed about the proposals. Opposition continued to grow after the meeting with a petition drive that gathered several hundred signatures requesting the City send a letter to the department requesting we consider another location. The opposition has even got the attention of several legislators
In light of all that the question was how should we proceed? After much discussion it was decided that we would contact Motor Vehicle Enforcement about the possibility of converting the two Weigh Scales approximately 3 miles north of the Huxley interchange into Rest Area sites. Mark Masteller was tasked with meeting with representatives of MVE and reporting back on their response. If they were favorable we would also begin looking at the environmental issues in this area, because it is outside of the initial study corridor.
The hope was that we could add this to the list of possible locations along with a single facility at Elkhart, dual facilities along the interstate, and the single at Huxley.
- Scotch Ridge Road in District 1:
The District held a Public Information Meeting on January 12, 2010 to get input on the proposed safety improvement at the intersection of County Road G16 (Scotch Ridge Road) and US 69 approximately 2.5 miles south of the IA 5 interchange. This is essentially a T-intersection with Scotch Ridge Road coming in from the east with a slight skew, and an entrance to a frontage road coming in from the west.
The intersection ranks high on the expressway intersection crash listing, with differential grade, high speed, high volumes and sight distance issues complicating the task of motorists. The intersection is in a vertical and horizontal curve and the proposal is to close the existing intersection and relocate it approximately 2200 feet south. Relocating Scotch Ridge Road to the south would eliminate many of the issues, but it would limit those on the west side to a right-in, right-out situation.
The public had concerns with the proposal to relocate Scotch Ridge Road, but the fact that we are working with differential grades at this location eliminated several other options from consideration. We received comments suggesting signals at this location, or reducing the speed through the area. The District indicated they already have beacons and double yellow lights at this location, so the question was how should they proceed?
It was decided to continue development of the current proposal.