Indiana Department of Transportation (INDOT) ProPEL U.S. 30 and 31 study teams have identified potential improvement packages at primary and secondary intersections along the two northern Indiana highways.
Those packages are detailed in each study’s “Draft Level 3 Screening Report,” which became available Tuesday at propelus30.com and propelus31.com
INDOT also held a virtual briefing with media Tuesday about those potential concepts from the U.S. 30 and 31 studies.
Natalie Garrett, strategic communications director with INDOT, said the ProPEL studies include 180 miles of U.S. 30 and 31. The studies include U.S. 30 from Valparaiso to the Indiana/Ohio state line, excluding I-69 and I-469 around Fort Wayne; as well as U.S. 31 between Hamilton County and Plymouth, excluding the Kokomo bypass. The 180 miles is divided into four distinct study areas, each with their own dedicated study team. Kosciusko County is part of the U.S. 30 East study team.
“The ProPEL study process is likely different than what many are used to from past INDOT projects. Our study teams are engaging the public and other study stakeholders early before project scopes are known. Public feedback is vital to the success of this study and will help inform future potential solutions that will guide the next 20-plus years of transportation investments,” she said. “With that in mind, the studies are evaluating a planning horizon of year 2045.”
In-person public information meetings on the report are planned, with the one in Kosciusko County set for 5 to 7 p.m. Wednesday, Nov. 20 at Lincoln Elementary School, 203 N. Lincoln St., Warsaw. The presentation will begin at 5:30 p.m. A virtual meeting is available Nov. 20 at ProPELUS30.com
In addition, physical copies of the report will be available to view 1 to 3 p.m. Dec. 3 at Pierceton Public Library, 101 W. Catholic St., Pierceton.
Garrett said INDOT does not anticipate that the ProPEL studies will identify or recommend a single-build alternative. The studies will result in a set of alternatives that could move forward as part of INDOT’s regular call for projects, which is typically a five-year planning timeline.
The ProPEL studies are now in the level 3 phase of alternatives development and screening, with the draft level 3 screening report released Tuesday for public review and comment.
“Given the size and complexity of the study areas, there were three levels of screening potential improvements. There are a smaller number of potential solutions at the end of each screening step, with increasing levels of detail,” Garrett said.
There were three levels of screening. During level 1, the study teams identified 55 improvement concepts to address issues and desired outcomes within each study area. Although the study areas are different, each of them use the same starting list, she said. The starting list included a variety of things, including location specific improvements, as well as larger scale improvements.
The level 2 screening considered 86 primary intersections over the four study areas. The purpose of the level 2 screening was to evaluate location specific improvements for reasonability and potential impacts. The potential solutions were qualitatively evaluated at primary intersections in each study area.
The level 3 screening analyzed improvement packages for smaller areas, or planning segments in the studies. Planning segments include improvements at the primary intersections, secondary intersections as well as the roadway sections in between.
“The level 3 screening includes both qualitative and quantitative factors to enable an assessment of costs, benefits and impacts,” Garrett said. “In general, the level 3 screening process for each study area includes seven steps.”
Step 1 was to define planning segments, which are sections that function as a system to provide access and mobility within a geographic area. Garrett said this approach also helps to avoid potential negative impacts from focusing only on a single intersection with analyzing the impacts that they could have upstream and downstream within the segment.
Planning segments were defined on several criteria, including which intersections function together to provide access to adjacent land, which intersections would influence adjacent intersections if improved, which intersections should be reviewed together to ensure continuity along U.S. 30 and U.S. 31, where do traffic volumes substantially change and where does land use context change.
Once planning segments were defined, step two was to determine the improvement packages within each planning segment. Multiple improvement packages were developed for each planning segment, using determined criteria.
“We recognize there are differences in the communities along the corridor, and we try to consider these differences in the analysis,” Garrett said. “As one example, INDOT prefers to have a minimum of 3 miles between interchanges on non-interstate routes in rural areas. However, this was examined for the context of each section in location.”
Driveway improvements and recommendations on the spacing of median openings also were considered.
On improvements at secondary intersections, she said access management principles were considered in the level 3 screening to align the improvements at intersections along the corridor with the appropriate access management strategies.
Step 3 was to conduct comprehensive analysis of the improvement packages’ ability to meet purpose and need. In Step 4, INDOT redefined the conceptual designs and estimated cost. In Step 5, each package was evaluated against known environmental constraints within each planning segment to determine the potential impacts of each improvement package. Step 6, the study team evaluated how the improvement packages addressed the study goals that were defined as part of the study area purpose and need. Finally, in Step 7, the study team comprehensively evaluated the improvement packages based on all factors.
After completing the Level 3 analysis, each improvement package was rated as either “eliminated,” meaning the package meets the purpose and need established with this study, however it is considered unreasonable due to limited benefits compared to its impacts and/or costs; “carried forward,” meaning the improvement package meets the purpose and need to establish with this study, however, in comparison to others has marginal benefits; and “recommended,” meaning that the package was recommended as meeting the purpose and need established with the study and are considered reasonable and feasible.
Garrett said, “At this time, no decision has been made about the future of the corridors and no projects related to the PEL study have been funded by INDOT. A stated goal of the PEL process is the identification of a range of reasonable alternatives. Given the needs identified within the study area, a reasonable alternative could consist of improvements at a single intersection. It could also consist of improvements at multiple intersections and/or the roadway sections between them.”
She continued, “Depending on multiple factors, including statewide priorities and funding availability, improvements considered as part of this PEL study could be combined in different ways in the future to address the identified transportation needs and support the goals of the study area.”
At 10:30 a.m. Wednesday, Nov. 13 at Steel Dynamics Inc. administration building, Indiana Gov. Eric Holcomb and INDOT are scheduled to announce future U.S. 30 improvements in Columbia City.