I-90 Exit 406 Interchange Modification Study and Environmental Assessment. Public Involvement #1

Transcription

1 I-90 Exit 406 Interchange Modification Study and Environmental Assessment Public Involvement #1 August 9, 2016 Holiday Inn Express Convention Center Brandon, SD Public Comments Summary Public Meeting 6 p.m. 7:30 p.m. -Sign-in Sheets -Meeting Handout -Boards -Presentation -Meeting Comment Forms - /Website Comments -Meeting Notes Stakeholder Meetings 1 p.m. and 3:30 p.m. -Sign-in Sheets -Agenda -HRG Notes/Discussion Summary Report Date: August 30, 2016

2 I-90 Exit 406 Interchange Modification Study and Environmental Assessment Public Involvement #1 Summary Meeting Date: August 9, 2016 Issue Interchange Traffic Operations and Speed SDDOT Brandon, SD I-90 Exit 406 Interchange Modification Study & Environmental Assessment Public Comments Summary Comment (# of comments) Several general comments related to interchange congestion and operations Long queues during peak periods that backup through ramp terminal intersections, local intersections (to Redwood Blvd), or onto I-90 (5) Intersection control (signalization); long-term and/or interim solution (8) Speed limit (45 mph) and related sight distance concerns (9) Westbound off-ramp, right-turn and U-turn to head back south (3) Eastbound to southbound ramp terminal lane add conflict (3) Geometrics and Design Trucks/Large Vehicles General concern for truck turning movements Jebro concerned with turning radius on/off the interstate; asphalt doubles (one semi with two trailers) CHS: Over 7,000 trucks/year in/out between two facilities Marmen Energy: /year; navigating turns and traffic impacts; head west from SD 11 (3) Sight Angles from Off-Ramp Approaches Traffic and bridge railing; WB to SB LT, EB to SB RT (9) Other Comments Adequately sign interchange Stakeholder discussion on whether the 5-lane will go through. Stakeholder discussion regarding ramp improvements and existing grades Stakeholder discussion about the steep grades coming up to SD 11. Short on ramps (2) Eastbound off-ramp 1 or 2 lanes at approach? Bicycles & Pedestrians Lack of sidewalk/bike lane through interchange (3) Provide concrete wall between vehicles and pedestrians on bridge Connection between residential and industrial/places of employment south/north of interchange Construction Other Safety (Anecdotal Examples) Since traffic will be detouring to Valley Springs Exit 410, could 'No Dynamic Braking' signs be posted on highway 262 into Brandon? Discussion/question on whether/how access would be maintained at all times during construction (2). Marmen trucks use both lanes when crossing WB I-90 bridge, at slow speeds SW quadrant drainage Cars from Brandon waiting to turn left to get on I-90, cars backed up from east waiting to turn left to go into Brandon, trucks hauling turbine blades stopping traffic as it tries to turn onto the ramp to I-90. Have almost got broadsided many times as cars race over the bridge into Brandon, and I'm sitting at the exit to turn right into Brandon trying to

3 I-90 Exit 406 Interchange Modification Study and Environmental Assessment Public Involvement #1 Summary Meeting Date: August 9, 2016 SDDOT Brandon, SD I-90 Exit 406 Interchange Modification Study & Environmental Assessment Public Comments Summary Issue Comment (# of comments) see if anyone is coming over the bridge, but my view is blocked by SUVs and trucks. Plus cars coming over the bridge into Brandon don't realize there's another lane there for the ramp exiters. many near misses on bridge, especially involving left-hand turns Have had cars speed past me in the east land and dive in front of me to cross the bridge. Sideswiped from cars when turning left going north onto SD 11. Once had a semi tractor trailer combo pull in front of me from the east off ramp and turn north almost causing an accident. Once a month, I am forced to stop on the shoulder of I-90 because the east bound off ramp traffic is backed up onto the Interstate. Have had several close calls at night, so as I proceed north across the bridge, I watch for cars coming off I-90 west. Leaving work in SF at night headed to Corson, I carefully watch for low vehicles that are hard to see when making the left-turn. I-90 EB off ramp, trying to make a north bound left is difficult due to the sight distance to the north. To improve sight distance vehicles creep to the right and then a second vehicle turning left will come along side of them to turn left. Bridge and rail add to the sight distance issue. (2) Close encounters with vehicles traveling south on Hwy 11 as they come over the bridge. Immediately after the bridge Hwy 11 has 2 lanes and about half of the vehicles want to switch to the outside lane and enter one of the first few businesses on the west side of Hwy 11. This means people are speeding up to 45 mph and someone is slowing down in front of them to immediately turn. SD Hwy 11 Access Traffic Operations and Speed Safety (Anecdotal Examples) Ash Street Intersection Accommodation of/issues with EB to NB trucks; will pull into traffic (3) Alternate route to NB SD 11 via Redwood Blvd instead of trying to turn left from Ash Street (2) Truck queues create congestion/blocking of access to gas station and The Warehouse Birch Street Intersections East Birch Street has only one entrance/exit which is onto Hwy 11. SD 11 queue extends through intersection and blocks exit/entrance. (2) Offset intersection conflict Other Comments Important to keep access to the east of Ash Street into commercial field that is currently on market. Stakeholder discussion regarding access control and U-turns Lack of NB LT lane into Tailgators and hotels (3) Reduce SD 11 speed (outside of interchange area) Hemlock Blvd/SD 11 intersection improvements for Marmen trucks Traffic growth (including trucks) on SD 11 north of I-90 (3) Planned/future industrial development north of I-90 (5) Crash at Ash Street and SD 11 While going NB a truck was turning right onto Ash, but couldn t make the turn due to an EB vehicle turning

4 I-90 Exit 406 Interchange Modification Study and Environmental Assessment Public Involvement #1 Summary Meeting Date: August 9, 2016 SDDOT Brandon, SD I-90 Exit 406 Interchange Modification Study & Environmental Assessment Public Comments Summary Issue Comment (# of comments) left off of Ash. The vehicle on Ash made the left turn and collided with the NB vehicle on SD11 in the second lane. Bicycles & Pedestrians Lack of sidewalks/bicycle facilities along SD 11 (3) Recommendations Make bridge & exits similar to E. 10 th Street exit off I-229 Utilize a frontage road for traffic coming out of BP Would like to see DOT step up Action Plan Consider limiting amount of business entrances Consider noise control and adding more evergreens along the Interstate to lessen the noise Additional thru lanes and/or northbound left-turn lane (5) Traffic signals at ramp terminals (long-term and interim) (8) Direct I-90 access for Marmen trucks (2) Possibly widen rail bridge to west and river bridge to the east Do not install center medians Keep access east of Ash Street open (related to developable land) (2) Free right-turn from off-ramp approaches New interchange 2 miles east Quieter road surfaces for the housing developments close to the highway Marmen should have time restrictions on transport releases to avoid rush hour. Reconstruct sooner than (2) Single point interchange Adequately sign (out of town drivers) Construct concrete wall between pedestrians/traffic All-way stop at ramp terminals Expand Holly Blvd to 4 lanes to Sioux Falls Concern expressed regarding roundabouts from businesses with trucks

5 I-90 Exit 406 Interchange Modification Study and Environmental Assessment Public Involvement #1 Summary Meeting Date: August 9, 2016 Public Meeting August 9, 2016, 6 p.m. 7:30 p.m. -Sign-in Sheets -Meeting Handout -Boards -Presentation -Meeting Comment Forms - /Website Comments -Meeting Notes

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14 I-90 Exit 406 (SD 11/Splitrock Blvd) Interchange Modification Study and Environmental Assessment Brandon, SD The Project and Today s Meeting Objectives The South Dakota Department of Transportation (SDDOT) has determined that a study of the I-90 Exit 406 Interchange and the SD 11/Splitrock Boulevard corridor is needed in order to plan for long-term growth and transportation needs in this project area. We are looking for your input on transportation issues in this onemile corridor between Hemlock Boulevard and Redwood Boulevard. This information will help us establish project needs to be addressed through the conceptual design process and environmental assessment. These needs will also help to identify a Preferred Alternative for detailed design. SDDOT currently has this project programmed for letting between 2022 and Please leave your comment form by the entryway before leaving or /mail comments to Jon Wiegand or Steve Gramm by August 23, Interchange Modification Study Schedule Gather information and perform existing conditions analyses May - August 2016 Public involvement to assist in identifying issues and needs. Develop interchange and cross-road concepts; initial concept screening August - September 2016 Develop and refine Build Options for analysis from screened concepts & conduct initial environmental impact analysis October December 2016 Public involvement to help evaluate interchange and crossroad Build Options. Develop IMJR and EA documents; identify proposed Preferred Alternative October May 2017 Public involvement to comment on Preferred Alternative. Study Completion June 2017 Study Area I-90 Exit 406 Interchange SD 11 / Splitrock Boulevard from Hemlock Boulevard to Redwood Boulevard Study Contacts: Study Team South Dakota Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration Sioux Falls Metropolitan Planning Organization City of Brandon Additional Information: Jon Wiegand, PE, PTOE Consultant Project Manager HR Green, Inc jwiegand@hrgreen.com Steve Gramm, PE SDDOT Project Manager South Dakota Department of Transportation steve.gramm@state.sd.us Project Website:

15 I-90 Exit 406 (SD 11/Splitrock Blvd) Interchange Modification Study and Environmental Assessment Public Information Meeting & Open House Welcome Presentation at 6:15 pm Please Sign-in at the Registration Table

16 Study Team Study Components South Dakota Department of Transportation Interchange Modification Justification Report (IMJR) Federal Highway Administration Environmental Assessment (EA) Sioux Falls Metropolitan Planning Public Involvement Organization City of Brandon Consultant Team: HR Green, Inc. (HR Green) Short Elliott Hendrickson, Inc. (SEH) 106 Group

17 IMJR MAY JUNE JULY AUGUST SEPTEMBER OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER JANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE Data Collection Traffic Counts Crash History Existing Conditions Analysis Analyze Existing Conditions Develop and Analyze Future Traffic Volumes We Are Here Develop Conceptual Interchange and SD 11 Scenarios Review Traffic Operations and Constructability Determine and Refine Interchange and SD 11 Build Options Analyze Traffic Operations and Safety of Build Options Review Constructability Draft IMJR Study Advisory Review of DRAFT IMJR Refine IMJR FHWA Review of IMJR Prepare Final IMJR Approved IMJR Identify Study Area Agency Scoping and Coordination Draft Purpose ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT and Need Conduct Field Studies Refine Purpose and Need Initial Impact Analysis Draft EA Study Advisory Review of DRAFT EA Refine EA FHWA Review of EA Prepare and Release EA for Public Availability Address Comments & Prepare Final EA FONSI PUBLIC OUTREACH PUBLIC MEETING #1 Stakeholder and Property Owner Meeting #1 Issues and Needs Existing Conditions Purpose and Need MPO Meeting PUBLIC MEETING #2 Stakeholder and Property Owner Meeting #2 Interchange Concepts Recommend Build Options MPO Meeting PUBLIC MEETING #3 Present EA Recommendations and Obtain Public Comments MPO Meeting PROJECT WEBSITE:

18 Study Area Issues, Needs, Segmented Bicycle/Pedestrian Facilities and Design Considerations Ramp Terminal Intersections - Traffic Operations - Safety - Traffic Growth - Sight Issues - Commuter Traffic Route

19 Study Area Issues, Needs, Large Vehicle Mobility and Design Considerations Lane Change/Turn Conflicts Bridge Width and Type; Maintenance of Traffic during Construction Left-turn from Thru Lane Transmission Towers

20 Interchange Modification Justification Study (Analysis) Area and Alternatives Development Process IMJR Alternatives Development Process Gather information and establish issues and needs Includes public involvement opportunity Develop Conceptual Alternatives Evaluation Refine Screened Alternatives Evaluation Includes public involvement opportunity Select Build Option Includes public involvement opportunity

21 Environmental Assessment Study Area and Process Summary The EA Process can be defined by three distinct steps: 1) Assess project needs and research the existing environment; 2) Identify potential project alternatives and evaluate their impacts on the environment; 3) Prepare EA document with recommended alternative. At the end of this process, the EA is made available to the public for comment.

22 Environmental Assessment DRAFT Purpose and Need Purpose of the Project The I-90 Exit 406 Interchange was constructed in The bridge is not considered structurally deficient at this time. However, the bridge has been determined by the SDDOT Office of Bridge Design to be at the end of its service life and replacement of the bridge is being pursued before any major rehabilitation work is necessary. The purpose of the Project is to reconstruct the I-90 Exit 406 Interchange to meet current design standards, improve safety, and increase the efficiency of the transportation system along the I-90 interstate corridor and Splitrock Boulevard.

23 Crash History SD 11 / Splitrock Boulevard Intersections ( ) I-90 WB Ramp Terminal Intersection I-90 EB Ramp Terminal Intersection Ash Street Hemlock, Birch, and Redwood Intersections 9 Total Crashes 21 Total Crashes 8 Total Crashes 7 Total Crashes 6 Rear-end 3 Angle 10 Angle 9 Rear-end 2 Single Vehicle 4 Angle 3 Rear-end 1 Single Vehicle 5 Angle 2 Rear-end SD 11 / Splitrock Boulevard Segments ( ) Hemlock Boulevard to I-90 Eastbound Ramp Terminal Intersection 2 Total Crashes 2 Single Vehicle I-90 Eastbound Ramp Terminal Intersection to Ash Street 14 Total Crashes 6 Angle 5 Rear-end 3 Sideswipe Ash Street to Redwood Boulevard 4 Total Crashes 3 Angle 1 Rear-end I-90 Freeway Segments ( ) I-90 Freeway Segment West of Exit Total Crashes 8 Single Vehicle 2 Other 1 Angle I-90 Exit 406 Interchange 19 Total Crashes 13 Single Vehicle 2 Rear-end 2 Sideswipe Same Direction 2 Other I-90 Freeway Segment East of Exit Total Crashes 11 Single Vehicle 3 Other 1 Rear-end 1 Sideswipe Same Direction

24

25

26

27

28 Level of Service (LOS) Definitions Highway Capacity Manual 2010 Signalized Intersections Basic Freeway Segment LOS A B C D Description Very minimal queuing; excellent corridor progression Some queuing; good corridor progression Regular queuing; not all demand may be serviced on some cycles (cycle failure) Queue lengths increased; routine cycle failures Intersection Control Delay (seconds/vehicle) 10 > > > E Majority of cycles fail > F Volume to capacity ratio near 1.0; very long queues, almost all cycles fail > 80 All-Way Stop-Controlled and Two-Way Stop-Controlled Intersections LOS Description Density (passenger cars/mile/lane) A Free-flow operation 11 B C D E Reasonably free-flow operation; Minimal restriction on lane changes & maneuvers Near free-flow operation; noticeable restriction on lane changes & other maneuvers Speed decline with increasing flows; Significant restriction on lane changes & other maneuvers Facility operates at capacity; Very few gaps for lane changes & other maneuvers; Frequent disruptions & queues > > > > F Unstable flow; operational breakdown > 45 LOS Description Control Delay (seconds/vehicle) Freeway Merge and Diverge Segments A Queuing is rare 10 B Occasional queueing > C Regular queueing > D Queue lengths increased > E Significant queuing > F Volume to capacity ratio near 1.0; very long queues All-way stop-controlled intersections reports intersection control delay. Two-way stop-controlled intersections reports worst-case stop-controlled approach. No intersection control delay is calculated. > 50 LOS Description Density (passenger cars/mile/lane) A Unrestricted operations 10 B Merging and diverging maneuvers noticeable to drivers > C Influence area speeds begin to decline > D Influence area turbulence becomes intrusive > E Turbulence felt by virtually all drivers > 35 F Ramp and freeway queues form Demand Exceeds Capacity

29 Thank You! Stay Connected Throughout the study, materials will be posted on the project website to keep the public informed on the progress of the study. Contact Us Jon Wiegand, PE, PTOE Mark Your Calendar Next Public Information Meeting: November/December 2016 You will have the opportunity to review various interchange and corridor concepts developed for further evaluation, provide feedback on each concept, and be a part of the screening process. Final Public Information Meeting: Spring 2017 This will be an opportunity for you to review and comment on a proposed interchange and crossroad Preferred Alternative. Consultant Project Manager HR Green, Inc jwiegand@hrgreen.com Steve Gramm, PE SDDOT Project Manager South Dakota Department of Transportation steve.gramm@state.sd.us Leave a Comment Today, please provide feedback on issues you experience at the I-90 Exit 406 interchange and along the SD 11 / Splitrock Boulevard corridor. Comment forms are available at the registration table. Completed forms may be placed by the entryway or mailed/ ed to Jon Wiegand or Steve Gramm by August 23,

30 MARKET I-90 EXIT 406 INTERCHANGE MODIFICATION STUDY AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AUGUST 9, 2016 Public Meeting & Open House

31 STUDY TEAM Study Advisory Team South Dakota Department of Transportation (SDDOT) Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Sioux Falls Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) City of Brandon Study Consultant HR Green Short Elliott Hendrickson (SEH) 106 Group I-90 Exit 406 IMJR and EA

32 INTERCHANGE IMPROVEMENTS TIMELINE Study Design Construction programmed for letting in FY I-90 Exit 406 IMJR and EA

33 I-90 EXIT 406 HISTORY 2010 Decennial Study Alt. 1: SD 11 and Bridge Improvements Alt. 2: Single Point Urban Interchange I-90 Exit 406 IMJR and EA

34 STUDY AREA I-90 Exit 406 Interchange SD 11 / Splitrock Blvd I-90 Exit 406 IMJR and EA

35 STUDY COMPONENTS A. Interchange Modification Justification Report (IMJR) A. Development of alternatives B. Traffic operations C. Safety D. Multi-modal mobility E. Access F. Constructability I-90 Exit 406 IMJR and EA

36 STUDY COMPONENTS B. Environmental Assessment (EA) Environmental considerations, such as Wetlands and waterways Archeological resources Historical structures Noise Regulated materials Parkland Threatened and Endangered Species Air water quality I-90 Exit 406 IMJR and EA

37 STUDY OVERVIEW AND SCHEDULE A. Establish issues and needs B. Concept development and initial screening C. Refine Build Options and analysis D. IMJR and EA development; identify Recommended Alternative May August 2016 August September 2016 October December 2016 October 2016 May 2017 I-90 Exit 406 IMJR and EA

38 ISSUES AND NEEDS: TRAFFIC DEMAND Average Daily Traffic Segment 2016 ADT 2045 ADT % Increase I-90, West of Exit 406 SD 11, South of I-90 25,000 47,000 88% 13,000 23,000 77% I-90 Exit 406 IMJR and EA

39 ISSUES AND NEEDS: TRAFFIC OPERATIONS Level of Service (AM/PM) Intersection Existing Future-Year WB Ramp Intersection EB Ramp Intersection F/F C*/F F/F F/F I-90 Exit 406 IMJR and EA

40 ISSUES AND NEEDS: CRASH HISTORY SD 11 Intersections SD 11 Roadway Segments Freeway Segments I-90 Exit 406 IMJR and EA

41 ISSUES AND NEEDS: 4-LANE SECTION Speed, interchange congestion Southbound lane addition Northbound left-turn I-90 Exit 406 IMJR and EA

42 ISSUES AND NEEDS: SD 11 BRIDGE OVER I-90 Functionally obsolete Width Vehicular Multi-modal Bridge type I-90 Exit 406 IMJR and EA

43 DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS Maintaining Traffic Transmission Towers Vehicle Size Access Multi-modal Connectivity I-90 Exit 406 IMJR and EA

44 TODAY S INVOLVEMENT OPPORTUNITIES Identify Study Area Issues and Needs Concept development and evaluation Purpose and Need Comments Leave comment form at entryway Mail/ comment form to project contact Discuss with project representatives Submit comment via project website Due by August 23 I-90 Exit 406 IMJR and EA

45 THANK YOU! Project Website Next Public Meeting: November/December 2016 Project Contacts Jon Wiegand, PE, PTOE Consultant Project Manager HR Green, Inc Steve Gramm, PE SDDOT Project Manager South Dakota Department of Transportation I-90 Exit 406 IMJR and EA

46

47

48

49

50

51

52

53

54

55

56

57

58 I-90 Exit 406 Interchange Modification Study and Environmental Assessment Public Involvement #1 Summary Meeting Date: August 9, /Website Comments 8/19/16 1) Hwy 11 is our only outlet. East Birch Street in Brandon has only one entrance/exit which is onto Hwy 11. We have a newly developed area and have an estimated 80+ families which use that exit. This includes 40+ houses and several apartment buildings. The project study mentioned that traffic gets backed up past McDonald's on Hwy 11. I mentioned that this was incorrect and that traffic can get backed up to the Redwood stoplight, one intersection south of Birch. When traffic is backed up this far we are blocked from exiting Birch. This is especially an issue when kids and school buses are trying to take a left turn and get to school in the winter. 2) Many close calls entering Hwy 11 South from I-90 E I have had some close encounters with vehicles traveling south on Hwy 11 as they come over the bridge. Immediately after the bridge Hwy 11 has 2 lanes and about half of the vehicles want to switch to the outside lane and enter one of the first few businesses on the west side of Hwy 11. This means people are speeding up to 45 mph and someone is slowing down in front of them to immediately turn. 3) Additional traffic on Hwy 11 is causing larger backups. There seems to me an increased number of vehicles traveling south from the Corson side on Hwy 11. This includes several large wind turbine pieces being piloted onto I-90. This is causing more vehicles traveling north to backup traffic on Hwy 11 north and all traffic on the bridge as most are waiting to enter I-90 West. 4) 2 vehicles on Birch Street both taking left Because of the way that Birch Street crosses Hwy 11, if two vehicles are on opposite sides and both taking a left they will be in each other's way. This has caused several near wrecks as neither side is unaware that the other will be in their path. 5) Hwy 11 is not bike friendly We live in a area that has to take Hwy 11 to get anywhere else in Brandon. This makes it unsafe to allow kids to bike outside our area. Hwy 11 is 45 mph, 5 lanes across, and busy. This doesn't make it easy to use the roads on bikes and limits bikes to usually ride on the sidewalks.

59 I-90 Exit 406 Interchange Modification Study and Environmental Assessment Public Involvement #1 Summary Meeting Date: August 9, /19/16 Thank you for the public information meeting. You touched on all of my concerns about the present interchange. I wanted to give my input though. I come from work in Sioux Falls around 10:15 pm, and I live in Corson. I have a Mercury Grand Marquis in which I sit kind of low. While making the left turn, I watch for the glow of headlights that I don't directly see if the oncoming vehicle is a lower car. Then, I still proceed cautiously. As I proceed north across the bridge, I am very watchful of cars coming off of I-90 west. I have had three close calls in the past couple years where a car would pull out right in front of me. I don't know if they didn't see me or what. For a while, the street lamp at the north end of the bridge was burned out, so that didn't help. If I see a car waiting to come onto Highway 11, I turn on the dome light in my car, hoping it will help them see me better. I like the idea of some sort of turning lane, and a pedestrian / bicycle area. I prefer a single curve ramp going on and off, like what is there now. I don't like the double curve? ramp like the one going onto I-90 west at Luverne, MN, because I can't use the full length of the ramp to get my speed up. Also, stop lights may help presently at the bridge. Thank you again for your presentation, and for allowing us to give our input. 8/9/16 I commute through the I-90 and Hwy 11 interchange a minimum of twice daily, typically at 7:30 to 8:00 AM (north and west bound) and 5:00 to 5:30 PM (east and south bound). I have experienced many long wait times in backed up traffic. I have also been lucky enough not to have had an accident in my travels but have had numerous close calls. These begin with north bound cars stopped in traffic trying to enter the BP station or the hotels in the absence of a turning lane. I have had north bound cars speed past me in the east lane and dive in front of me to cross the bridge. A semi tractor trailer combo once pulled out in front of me from the east off ramp and turned north. I left 30 feet of skid marks to avoid a collision. At least once a month I am forced to stop on the shoulder of I-90 because the east bound off ramp traffic is backed up on to the interstate. Once at Hwy 11 the danger continues when trying to turn south. I always stay in the west lane but have had many near misses with south bound cars wanting to access the hotels or Tailgaters. The bridge railing blocks sight of most vehicles turn signals if and when they are used. Other unsafe observations are a number of cars on the west bound off ramp turning north and then making an immediate U turn on Hwy 11 to go south. I really love it when the Marmen lead and chase vehicles block traffic at 7:45 AM to allow a tower section on to the west bound on ramp. That is one problem that could be avoided by placing time restrictions on Marmen s transport releases. If I could make other suggestions, a short term solution would be traffic signals installed as soon as possible on both ends of the bridge. Long term would be a new bridge a minimum of five lanes (if the interchange is to remain in the current configuration) with the turning lane to extend south far enough to allow access to the BP station, Tailgaters and the hotels. I know this is a very complicated issue and there will be more than enough opinions to go around. I just want to thank you for allowing us this opportunity to supply some input. Good luck and please keep me informed of future meetings.

60 I-90 Exit 406 Interchange Modification Study and Environmental Assessment Public Involvement #1 Summary Meeting Date: August 9, /3/16 a) First off, THANK YOU for initiating this. It is long needed and it seems we do not get very far with our state representatives. b) My daughter almost lost her life in car crash south of the bridge in December We attribute this, as did the deputy sheriff and our insurance agent, to the bridge and conditions around it. In fact, the insurance agent, when notified by deputy sheriff, said let me guess where it was. c) there seems to be a growing problem, even if limited to 1 small portion of day, to cars exiting into Brandon around 5pm. Traffic can back up onto the interstate. d) Finally, there is heavy truck traffic in 2 areas- 1) CHS trucks coming from the factory by Corson, 2) Coming from the South on Splitrock. According to daughter's accident report, this truck traffic was directly responsible for her accident. I have thought long about this. To me, my suggestion is change speed limits. As one leaves Brandon, the limit goes from 30 to 45 as you approach the bridge. This is way too fast for such a narrow bridge with such heavy traffic. Many commuters in the am, turning west onto I 90, are backed up past the gas stations. Additionally, traffic is thus slowed down quickly to make that left turn. More dangerous in winter too. I would also suggest such a speed limit change coming south from Corson. In terms of lights, that may not be a bad idea. In terms of bridge itself, I am not an expert, but widening seems good or at least adding a left hand- turning lane going northbound. In terms of the exit, maybe 2 lanes, or widening. Maybe a left turn lane as you take exit ramps and go north. In sum, thanks for a long needed discussion. It is a very busy interchange, especially during commuting times. My take is for sure change the speed limits!!!

61 I-90 Exit 406 Interchange Modification Study and Environmental Assessment Public Involvement #1 Summary Meeting Date: August 9, 2016 Website Comment: 8/23/16 Perhaps there are some short term things that can be done to help the situation. Maybe all way stops on both side of the bridge to force traffic to be metered hopefully reducing the long waits at the off-ramps a peak traffic times in the morning and evening. Making Holly Blvd 4 lane with a turn lane all the way to Sioux Falls would also help. Ask Marman Energy to avoid intersection between 7-8AM and 5-6PM might also help. Also, please add my name to the list of people notified for future meetings and notifications about the project. Thank you Website Comment: 8/19/16 Add lights at the North and South intersection off & on ramps on Split Rock, for peak time (7:15 to 8:15am/ 4:15 to 5:45pm) use. During off peak, the oncoming traffic to SR, would have flashing red, those getting off SR onto I-90 would have flashing yellow. Keep it simple. If this doesn't work, then do major lane redesign down the road. Website Comment: 8/11/16 Since traffic will be detouring to Valley Springs Exit 410, could 'No Dynamic Braking' signs be posted on highway 262 into Brandon? It is a problem now and I can't imagine what it would be like with the increased flow. Website Comment: 8/10/16 WE NEED STOPLIGHTS TO HELP CONTROL TRAFFIC AT THIS EXIT!!!! There have been times we have side swiped from cars when turnining left going north onto hwy 11. Part 2: I want to add to my previous statement, that I am not the only person that turns right on the north exit ramp in order to turn around to go south. I would say that I have observed more than half the people exiting on that exit doing the exact same thing.

62 I-90 Exit 406 Interchange Modification Study and Environmental Assessment Public Involvement #1 Summary Meeting Date: August 9, 2016 Website Comment: 8/8/16 To be perfectly honest, this study should have been done years ago. The interchange at exit 406 is a disaster. In the morning, I come to Brandon from the east on the interstate. I get off the interstate, turn RIGHT/NORTH when I should be turning left/south and then do a turn-around in the co-op driveway. If I did not do this, I would never get anywhere on time, as the stream of traffic is constant from the south and frequent from the north. The rare person that can actually turn left from the ramp is likely waved through by some nice driver. And even at times when it is not heavy traffic, the visibility over the concrete barrier to see cars coming is extremely poor. In the evening, when I'm coming to the same intersection from the west, it's again a disaster. People start slowing down for the exit at least three-quarters of a mile before the exit, causing a traffic hazard. Often the traffic is so backed up on the southbound exit, that the line extends out onto the interstate itself. This is unacceptable and extremely dangerous. Something needs to be done NOW. Even if we could hang a temporary stoplight above the north ramp entrance/exit, it would help a lot. Website Comment: 8/7/16 This seems like a good interchange for a single point interchange. I know you'll look at everything and decide what is feasible. My only gripe is that SDDOT under-signs SPUIs. To assume that local motorists know how to navigate those interchanges is fine, but people from out of town, often times, do not. The worst offender of this under-signage is the 12th Street/I-29 interchange. You have over 6 lanes of traffic on 12th at the interchange and no overhead signage directing traffic. Funny, since that interchange has a relatively high accident rate since it was reconstructed. And that is a popular exit for out of town traffic. My advice is if this is not going to be reconstructed to a standard diamond, to make sure it's adequately signed. Brandon has plenty of out of town traffic as well. Website Comment: 8/2/16 My only concern and I wouldn't expect it to be a big challenge is getting our asphalt trucks on/off the interstate. We have doubles (one semi with two trailers) coming in and out of the terminal. Just want to making sure there is enough turning radius at the intersections or ramps to access the interstate from our asphalt terminal. Thanks for the opportunity to send comments.

63 I-90 Exit 406 Interchange Modification Study and Environmental Assessment Public Involvement #1 Summary Meeting Date: August 9, 2016 Website Comment: 7/26/16 I have seen and experienced long wait times and many "near misses" with accidents on the bridge, especially involving left hand turns. As the growth of the industrial area continues to develop north of the interstate, it would be ideal to have a pedestrian area with a cement buffer to allow safe passage of pedestrians walking to and from work from the south side of I-90. Website Comment: 7/26/16 The interchange is backed up pretty bad in the morning with cars from Brandon waiting to turn left to get on I90, cars backed up from East waiting to turn left to go into Brandon, trucks hauling turbine blades stopping traffic as it tries to turn onto the ramp to I90. It's a complete mess. So many times I've almost got broadsided as cars race over the bridge into Brandon and I'm sitting at the exit to turn right into Brandon trying to see if anyone is coming over the bridge. I have a car and my view is blocked by SUVs and trucks. Plus cars coming over the bridge into Brandon don't realize there's another lane there for the ramp exiters. So many near misses. Plus the entrances to the hotel/tailgators is also a nightmare. They stop in the one lane going north, right before the bridge, and wait for southbound traffic coming off the bridge to clear so they can turn into the hotel/tailgators. Again, many wrecks there or near misses. That whole section is just a nightmare. Website Comment: 7/26/16 How will you maintain traffic across I-90 while the construction is going?

64 I-90 Exit 406 Interchange Modification Study and Environmental Assessment Public Involvement #1 Summary Meeting Date: August 9, 2016 Project Team Meeting Notes Craig Smith, SDDOT Improvements are needed for Marmon trucks to turn onto SD11, they block SD11 to make the movement. A company that manufactures steel plates is developing near Marmon, this will add traffic to the already congested area. Waiting until is too long, need to look at interim improvements to deal with the interchange ramp congestion. Consider traffic signals at interchange as an interim improvement. I90 EB off ramp, trying to make a north bound left is difficult due to the sight distance to the north. To improve sight distance vehicles creep to the right and then a second vehicle turning left will come along side of them to turn left. Bridge and rail add to the sight distance issue. Ash Street They were in a crash along SD11 at the Ash Street intersection. While going NB a truck was turning right onto Ash, but couldn t make the turn due to a EB vehicle turning left off of Ash. The vehicle on Ash made the left turn and collided with the NB vehicle on SD11 in the second lane. Trucks don t use Ash to get onto SD11, many are avoiding this intersection and going to the signalized Redwood Blvd intersection With the sight distance issues at the interchange and congestion, is 45 mph too fast? Need to consider lowering the speed limit through this area. Steve Gramm, SDDOT In the SW quadrant, land owner claims the ditch is higher than his lot. Water pools and then drains through his property during the spring melt and when there is a heavy (3-4 inch) rain. The interchange should be rebuilt sooner. Birch is the only access to an entire subdivision. Some mornings the queue from the interchange backs up beyond McDonalds and goes into the Birch intersection. Locals treat the EB off ramp as a two lane ramp, but it s not striped so when a non-local uses it as a single lane ramp it hoses everything up. Some of those folks that take a right turn from the WB off-ramp to then do a U-turn flip the U-turn within 10 feet of the intersection. Marmen always has a truck leaving during the AM rush on Thursdays. Is there a way to make them not haul during the rush? There are a lot of trucks that make left turns from Ash. Rice Street / Holly Boulevard should be 5 lanes from SD11 to I-229. If that were done, the interchange would return to normal.

65 I-90 Exit 406 Interchange Modification Study and Environmental Assessment Public Involvement #1 Summary Meeting Date: August 9, 2016 Jon Wiegand, HR Green Continued development of industrial area west of SD 11, north of Hemlock, in near future. Location provides BNSF rail access. Evaluate possibility of traffic signals as interim measure at ramp terminal intersections. Trucks: delay and congestion on Ash Street trying to turn left onto SD 11. Alternate route is 9 th Avenue to Redwood Boulevard to SD 11. Trucks on Ash Street can make it difficult to access gas station and The Warehouse. Difficulty seeing cars over bridge rail from ramp approach. 2 people noted high speeds over the bridge, one of which noted the high speeds along SD 11 to the south as well. One attendee wanted to clarify that we will indeed be looking at a variety of interchange types. Indicated that the study would look at a variety and not just those presented in the 2010 Decennial Study. Discussed the Ole Christopherson homestead history with an attendee.

66 I-90 Exit 406 Interchange Modification Study and Environmental Assessment Public Involvement #1 Summary Meeting Date: August 9, 2016 Stakeholder Meetings August 9, 2016, 6 p.m. 7:30 p.m. -Sign-in Sheets -Agenda -HRG Notes/Discussion Summary

67

68

69

70 I-90 Exit 406 Interchange Modification Study and Environmental Assessment Stakeholder Meeting Agenda August 9, 2016 Introductory Information A. Introductions B. Study Overview & History C. Study Area a. I-90 from BNSF railroad tracks to Split Rock Creek bridges b. SD 11 from Hemlock Boulevard to Redwood Boulevard D. Improvements Timeline a. Interchange Improvements programmed for letting in FY E. Study Timeline a. May 2016 June 2017 F. Purpose of today s meeting a. Identify issues and needs within study area to assist in: i. Development and evaluation of interchange improvements ii. Development of Purpose and Need for Environmental Assessment Group Discussion G. Issues and Needs within Study Area (Examples) a. Traffic Growth and Operations b. Safety c. SD 11 bridge crossing of I-90 d. Access and connectivity e. Multi-modal facilities f. Design Considerations i. Vehicle size ii. Transmission towers iii. Maintenance of traffic during construction iv. Multi-modal facilities

71 Meeting Notes Project: Project #: Date: I-90 Exit 406 Interchange Modification Study & Environmental Assessment August 9, 2016 Representatives Present: FHWA Mark Hoines DOT City Paul Sanow, Bryan, Larry HR Green SEH Coffee Cup Nick Fosheim City Council Barb Fish CHS Jebro - Noel Alliance Communication Antique Mall David Billion Midwest Railcar School Marmon Energy Questions 1. How do you alleviate the traffic that is backed up through the intersections? Left turn lane, signals, phased timing, creates issues; bridge is an umbrella bridge and cannot be widened a. Alliance has DOT looked at Hwy 100 and those affects? i. Steve Gramm Hwy 100 won t alleviate anything; roundabouts at ramp terminals may be a temporary option 2. Will sidewalks be put along Hwy 11? a. Barb Fish yes, this will be looked at and planned for. Sidewalks will be planned in all options 3. Do we anticipate ROW restrictions? a. Noel Schultz concept will look at those potential needs b. Steve Gramm would a new bridge be built off alignment transmission towers will be a constraint access through and across interchange during project 4. What are the different types of interchanges that we are looking at? a. Paul Sanow not to that point yet; diamond, diverging diamond, modified single point 5. Any discussions on changing the on and off ramps? a. Midwest Rail yes, ramps do not meet current standards --- bridges over Split Rock Creek scheduled for next year 6. How much would ROW, transmission lines and ramps affect option types? a. Paul Sanow definitely they will all play into the selection \\hrgsfdc\data\ \design\meeting\public_meeting_1\public_meeting_summary_info\comments_meetingnotes\min StakeholderNotes-CL.doc

72 Meeting Notes b. Steve Gramm will come down to cost/benefit ratio 7. Do we look at the business type? a. Barb Fish yes, design vehicles and traffic for businesses looked at 8. What are traffic counts and what was design traffic numbers? a. Nick Fosheim i. I-90 25K W. 47K Hwy 11 S. 13K-22 ii. I-90 18K E. b. SEH did numbers while school was in (May) c. AM peak; 515 vehicles & 130 left d. PM; 700 N. & 500 left 9. Can I-90 be run over the road a. Coffee Cup Steve Gramm - it would be very expensive, would need ½ mile in each direction to adjust grade 10. Will I-90 handle traffic through 2045 a. Midwest Railcar yes, volumes support this 11. How long will bridge construction take a. Dave Billion Steve Gramm it depends; 1.5 years in halves; 1 year if off lane 12. Will bridge be planned for 3 lanes or more? a. Dave Billion Steve Gramm yes, would be built for increased volumes and also to be able to be widened 13. Jon prompt for safety a. Crash history at intersections of interchange i. Hemlock to Redwood 14. Industrial Park will continue to grow need to plan for (Neal Schultz) 15. Marmon towers each year (200 ft long) a. MNDOT requires a Hypo will always go west 16. Big tandems don t go to MN (Noel) 17. CHS a trucks/year inbound/out grain b trucks/year inbound/out feed 18. Jennica/Jon truck info will help determine what is needed a. CHS roundabout will not work with their trucks 19. Midwest Railcar has speed limit reduction been looked at a. Steve Gramm type of interchange will help dictate speed 20. Marmon can they get a WB on ramp at their facility a. Mark Hoines - No \\hrgsfdc\data\ \design\meeting\public_meeting_1\public_meeting_summary_info\comments_meetingnotes\min StakeholderNotes-CL.doc

73 Meeting Notes 21. Pau Sanow there are some steep grades coming up to Hwy 11 a. Jon yes, grades will be looked at (interchange will dictate but is not the only factor) 22. Dave Billion 5 lane section will this go through? a. Will look at that but also access control with median 23. Jon prompt Redwood Blvd Intersection a. Paul Sanow with access control would you look at U-turn etc. or traffic pattern at signal b. N. of interchange c. Steve Gramm do they have pilot to block NB & SB traffic? i. Marmon sometimes will have a highway patrol block in front; rear steer trucks help only do towers, no blades 24. I think we definitely need truck info from Marmon a. Marmon instructs drivers to avoid rush hour 25. Marmon will we look at changing the ramp configurations? a. Yes b. Sgt Bluff interchange gate etc. to accommodate large trucks 26. Marmon railroad improvements a. Steve Gramm talk to county \\hrgsfdc\data\ \design\meeting\public_meeting_1\public_meeting_summary_info\comments_meetingnotes\min StakeholderNotes-CL.doc

74 Meeting Notes 3:30 Stakeholder Meeting Notes Representatives Present: FHWA DOT City Paul Sanow, Bryan HR Green SEH Stockwell Jon B. Concrete Materials Billy Bollema Celebrate Church Harr Lemme Brad & Joel Questions 1. Billy Pollema so study will be complete by this time next year? a. Yes, June Church build out (no school etc. at this point) YES 3. Brad are numbers reflected of new model? a. Yes updated traffic demand model 4. Church I-90 volume? Current 25K W. and 17K E. 5. Joel at what point during study do you determine the access needs/limitations a. During concept development 6. Billy future plans for growth at sand plant/quarry will need to be discussed in next month or so discuss rail vs. truck access 7. Billy Sand plant 700 acres; quarry 185 acres; finalizing quarry design. Designing 1000 tph crusher (current 700 tph crusher) will rail to old site at Madison retail site 8. Crash info a. Jon B. would access be maintained at all times during construction YES 9. Church locations both Pastors are 6 months in very new 10. Multi-model pedestrian and bicycle usage/access \\hrgsfdc\data\ \design\meeting\public_meeting_1\public_meeting_summary_info\comments_meetingnotes\min StakeholderNotes-CL.doc