Certification of Public Involvement, Official Public Hearing Transcript

Transcription

Certification of Public Involvement, Official Public Hearing Transcript, and the
disposition of the comments received
LEGAL NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
Monroe County will hold a Public Hearing on Thursday, December 11, 2014, beginning at
6:00 p.m., at the Monroe County Courthouse, Nat U Hill Meeting Room located at 100 W.
Kirkwood Avenue, Bloomington, Indiana 47404 for the proposed Fullerton Pike Corridor
Improvements Project (DES. # 0801059) in Bloomington, Monroe County. An open house
session will take place from 6:00 p.m. until 6:45 p.m., with the formal presentation beginning at
6:45 p.m. The purpose of the public hearing is to offer all interested persons an opportunity to
comment on the environmental document and preliminary design plans for the proposed
transportation project.
The purpose of the proposed project is to complete the objectives of prior transportation planning
by providing a continuous east-west corridor on the south side of Bloomington, Indiana which
improves connectivity, reduces traffic congestion, reduces travel time, and improves motorist
and pedestrian safety. Moreover, the proposed project will provide enhanced access to essential
facilities including hospitals and schools, as well as enhance connectivity for local residents by
improving access to regional multi-use trails and other major transportation corridors.
The proposed project includes the development of a continuous 2-lane roadway from Rockport
Road to Sare Road, with approximately 0.7 miles of new roadway construction. The proposed
project would consist of one 16-foot wide travel lane in each direction, separated by a 16-foot
wide grass median bordered by curb and gutters from Rockport Road and continuing east to
Walnut Street. In areas of need, the raised median may be omitted in favor of a two-way leftturn lane. The proposed project also includes a continuous 5-foot wide sidewalk on the south
side of the roadway and a continuous 10-foot wide multi-use path on the north side of the
roadway. This project would correct existing geometric deficiencies along the existing roadway,
including sight distance and vertical alignment, and would improve intersections to provide
additional turn lanes, adjust grades, and provide signalization where warranted. The intersection
of Fullerton Pike and Sare Road would be re-designed as either a three-leg roundabout or a
signalized intersection. A new bridge would be constructed over an unnamed tributary to Clear
Creek and the Clear Creek Trail. The existing Monroe County Bridge No. 74 carrying Gordon
Pike over Clear Creek and Monroe County Bridge No. 75 carrying Rhorer Road over Jackson
Creek would be replaced to accommodate the expanded roadway width and to correct existing
hydraulic deficiencies. In addition, Monroe County Bridge No. 610 carrying Rhorer Road over
East Fork of Jackson Creek would be extended or replaced to accommodate the widened
roadway.
It is anticipated that the proposed project would require acquisition of 31.2 acres of new
permanent right-of-way and 2 acres of temporary right-of-way. One residential relocation is
anticipated. Based on 2013 costs, the estimated cost for this alternative is approximately
$27,100,000. The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and the Indiana Department of
Transportation have agreed this project falls within the guidelines of an Environmental
Assessment (EA) document.
The Public Hearing will consist of an informal Q&A session with the project management team
followed by a formal presentation. Statements will be taken for the public record after the
presentation. All comments collected before, during, and for a period of four (4) weeks after the
hearing will be evaluated and addressed in the Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) request
document submitted to the FHWA. Before and after the formal hearing, the environmental
document and preliminary plans will be available for review. Anyone interested in talking to the
engineers about the project may do so before or after the formal hearing. Conversations prior to
or after the formal hearing will not be part of the official record.
A copy of the Environmental Assessment is available for viewing at the following locations.
1. Monroe County Highway Department
(501 North Morton Street #216, Bloomington, Indiana)
2. Monroe County Public Library
(303 East Kirkwood Avenue, Bloomington, Indiana)
In accordance with the “Americans with Disabilities Act”, if you have a disability for which
Monroe County needs to provide accommodations, please call Ben Harvey at American
Structurepoint, Inc., at (317) 547-5580, by Tuesday, December 8, 2014.
A backup date has been set for the hearing in the event that hazardous winter weather conditions
arise. Please call (317) 547-5580 to find out whether the meeting will be held or postponed to
Wednesday, December 17, 2014.
This notice is published in compliance with: 1) Code of Federal Regulations, Title 23, Section
771 (CFR 771.111(h)(1) stating, “Each State must have procedures approved by the FHWA to
carry out a public involvement/public hearing program.”; 2) 23 CFR 450.210(a)(1)(ix) stating,
“Provide for the periodic review of the effectiveness of the public involvement process to ensure
that the process provides full and open access to all interested parties and revise the process, as
appropriate.”; and 3) The INDOT Public Involvement Policies and Procedures approved by the
Federal Highway Administration on August 16, 2012.
Please direct any questions or comments concerning this project to Ben Harvey, American
Structurepoint, Inc., 7260 Shadeland Station, Indianapolis, Indiana 46256, (317) 547-5580,
fullertonpike@structurepoint.com. Comments on the proposed project will be accepted for
four (4) weeks after the Public Hearing. Comments or concerns brought forth by the public
during this process will be evaluated and addressed in the FONSI request.
Projects
1 of 2
http://www.co.monroe.in.us/tsd/Government/Infrastructure/HighwayDep...
LOGIN
Home
»
GOVERNMENT
Government
Community
Justice
Calendar
News
REGISTER
|
|
Documents
> INFRASTRUCTURE > HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT > PROJECTS
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 04, 2014
County Road Construction Projects
Department - Quick Link
Airport
|
Go
I Want To...
Ask Question or Provide Feedback
FULLERTON PIKE CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS
FULLERTON PIKE CORRIDOR - The Monroe County Highway Department has initiated a study to extend Fullerton
Pike and improve adjacent local roadways on the south side of the City of Bloomington. The proposed Fullerton Pike
improvements will extend from SR 37 to the east to South Sare Road, and will utilize portions of the existing West
Fullerton Pike, West Gordon Pike, and East Rhorer Road.
Notice of Public Hearing December 11, 2014
Go
Draft Environmental Assessment
Highway Links
Highway Engineering
Highway Maintenance
Drainage Board
Section 1
Section 2
Section 3
Section 4
Masterthoroughfare Plan
News (Highway Archive)
Section 5
Notice to Bidders
Section 6
Permit Information
Projects
Section 7
Requests for Proposals
Road Work
Comments and questions can be sent to fullertonpike@structurepoint.com.
Stormwater Quality
Traffic Commission
Weight Limit Ordinance
Wheel Tax Ordinance
MCG Links
PUBLIC INFORMATION MEETING
Fullerton Pike Public Information Meeting - October 3, 2012
FULLERTON PIKE COMMUNITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETINGS
Wellness Central (New Link!)
June 20, 2012, 5:00 pm at Jackson Creek Middle School
Monroe County Alert Notification
Meeting Handouts
Job Openings and Application
Provide Feedback
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
CAC 1st Meeting Summary
CAC Meeting Agenda, July 23, 2012
Site Map
GIS Website
News
PAVEMENT STRIPING PROGRAM
Safety
2014 Holiday Closings
2015 Holiday Schedule
The striping program will begin in May of 2010. The condition of the pavement markings on various roads throughout
the County will be assessed for the need to improve the markings.
ANNUAL BRIDGE PROJECTS
2007 Cumulative Bridge Program
12/4/2014 3:00 PM
Projects
2 of 2
http://www.co.monroe.in.us/tsd/Government/Infrastructure/HighwayDep...
You will need to download Adobe Acrobat Reader to read or print these Reports
TRAIL PROJECTS
Karst Farm Greenway Environmental
Copyright 2012 by Monroe County Government | Privacy Statement | Terms Of Use
12/4/2014 3:00 PM
Des. 0801059 Fullerton Pike Corridor Impovements - Rockport Road to Sare Road
Legal Notice of Public Hearing
General Mailing List
Allan & Donna Dafoe
Alva D. Reszka
AMANDA DELIMAN
AMEER BEITVASHAHI
ANAHIT BEHJOU
Ann Elsner
ANWAR M & MARY KASIM
NADERPOOR
APRIL L BUSH
ASSET MANAGEMENT
CONTROL GROUP LLC
BADRUDDIN PIRANI
Barry & Brenda Galyan
BARRY K & TERRI R ELKINS
BATCHELOR HEIGHTS
HOMEOWNERS ASSN INC
BENNIE JR & DICQUES D
SELTZER
BILL C BROWN
Bill Cuttill
BLOOMINGTON COMMUNITY
PARK &
REC FOUNDATION INC
BENJAMIN H BORUFF
BRANDON D SHELBY
BRIAN E & CARLA S MOORE
811 W Gordon Pike
3260 E. Rhorer Rd.
3927 S BUSHMILL DR
521 W GORDON PIKE
1515 W SHAMROCK CT
4017 S. Crane Ct.
Bloomington, IN 47403
BLOOMINGTON, IN 47403
3313 FORRESTER
1202 W WREN CIRCLE
3930 S WALNUT ST
3931 S BUSHMILL DR
821 W. Gordon Pike
2010 W THAT ROAD
3939 S CRAMER CIR
4005 S DERBY DR
300 S ST RD 446
2812 S. Yonker
PO BOX 848
545 E RHORER RD
4001 S MAN-O-WAR CT
4001 S ROCKPORT RD
BLOOMINGTON, IN
BLOOMINGTON, IN
BLOOMINGTON, IN
BLOOMINGTON, IN
BRIDLEWOOD DEV GROUP LLC
BRUCE G FARRAND
BRUCE L & KATRINA R
WILLIAMS
Bryan Paine
C & W LLC
CARL H & LORAINE C
HOLMBERG
CHAD A & TONYA MOORE
CHARLES BYRON & CAROL A
TOW
CHARLES E JR & LEANNE R
LAKE
CHRISTOPHER GAAL &
BETH E FLORINI
2800 S OLCOTT
320 E RHORER RD
1335 E RHORER RD
2645 E. Ciana Ct.
PO BOX 209
1340 E RHORER RD
1401 W GORDON PIKE
4000 CLEARVIEW DR
1503 W SHAMROCK
2225 E RHORER RD
47402
47401
47401
47403
Christy Gillenwater
CITY OF BLOOMINGTON
DEPT OF PARKS & RECREATION
CLEAR CREEK CROSSING LLC
DANIEL E KENNEDY &
CAROL A ZWISSLER
DANYEL EMERICK
DAVID E SHERLOCK
DAVID E & ERIN R YOUNG
DAVID J & SHARON L
KENWORTHY
DAVID K & JENNIFER L CROFT
DAVID W & TARA D
HOLBROOK
Denise Wyatt
Dennis and Jackie Perez
DIAMOND PROPERTIES LLC
DOUGLAS M & ELLEN M
MCDANIEL
DOUGLAS W DYER
E & W REALTY LLC
EDWARD J & MARY ELLEN
GEORGE
EDWARDS FAMILY TRUST
ELVA RICHARDSON
FAWZIA NAWADI
Faye Jameson
GARY N & GINNIE R PHERO
GEORGE A & BARBARA S
QUALLS
Glen J. Langley
HARMON FARM II LLC
400 W. 7th St.
349 S WALNUT
PO BOX 209
777 E RHORER RD
3937 S BUSHMILL DR
2240 E RHORER RD
S77W16715 BRIDGEPORT
WAY
1414 E RHORER RD
650 E RHORER ROAD
795 E RHORER RD
4430 Silverthorne
4250 S. Falcon Dr.
PO BOX 1834
755 E RHORER RD
580 E RHORER RD
2120 S HARDING ST
INDIANAPOLIS , IN 46221
601 W GORDON PIKE
PO BOX 534
2110 E RHORER RD
3313 FORRESTER
4011 S. Monroe Medical
Park Blvd.
210 W GORDON PIKE
ELLETTSVILLE , IN 47429
721 W GORDON PIKE
5544 S. Rockport Rd.
MUSKEGO , WI 53150
3727 E CAMERON AVENUE BLOOMINGTON, IN 47401
HIDEKI & TAMMY KAWANISHI 4011 S CRANE CT
HILARY & CHRISTOPHER
ELLIOTT
1640 E RHORER RD
James & Harriet Kulis
1430 W. Estate Dr.
JAMES D & MELODY S WEVER
JAMES D JR & STACEY M
MITCHELL
James R. Tolen
Jason Shaevitz
611 W GORDON PIKE
3975 S BUSHMILL DR
717 S. Western Dr.
3623 S. Glsgow Circle
8435 STEMMONS
FREEWAY
3947 S BUSHMILL DR
3815 Fox Chase Run
4000 S DERBY DR
1302 W. Dove Circle
1423 W. Dove Dr.
1468 W. Eagleview Dr.
3913 S BUSHMILL DR
3927 S. Cramer Cir.
3993 S BUSHMILL DR
2470 E. Rhorer Rd.
801 W. Gordon Pike
2613 WINDEMERE WOODS
DR
JOHN S & MARTHA J NEWLIN
John Wronowicz
JOSEPH B JR & CICCI L KING
JOSEPH WILLIAM WRIGHT
Joy Jones
JUDITH R DUNN
Karen McGlynn
KATHLEEN OWENS ETAL
Keith Vogelsang
KENNETH D & KATHLEEN M
BRUHNKE
Kevin & Debbie Luers
KEVIN B MCWILLIAMS
420 W GORDON PIKE
1463 W. Eagleview Dr.
3927 NIMIT DR
5909 S FOXWOOD LN
3941 S. Bushmill Dr.
311 E RHORER RD
4223 S. Mallard Ct.
901 W GORDON PIKE
101 E. Glenwood
4013 S CRANE CT
4051 Jamie Lane
3959 S BUSHMILL DR
KEVIN E & DEHORAH A LUERS
KOUNS SANDRA R
4051 JAMIE LN
4001 S FALCON DR
L L CONURN ENTERPRISES INC
LANCE A & JAMIE R FURR
4000 S OLD ST RD 37
4023 S TWO CREEKS LN
JASON T & STACEY A NELSON
JASON W ROBBINS
Jeff Wiser
JEREMY E & ELIZABETH
WINCHESTER
Jerry Hays
Jill Rensink
Jimmie D. Johnson
JO ANN MOUBRAY
Joan Keeler
JOANNA L JONES
John Halluska
John Letner
JOHN P DYSON
KENNARD , TX 75847
Larry & Judy Clark
LAURA J MCCALLUM &
MICHAEL JAMES WALLEY
LAWRENCE D RINK &
BETH A BAXTER
Linda Ledbetter
4050 Jamie Lane
4000 S FALCON DR
501 S HAWTHORNE DR
3280 E. Rhorer Rd.
MARK & AMANDA PETERSON
MARK A GALL
MARK R MINETT
3923 S BUSHMILL DR
511 W GORDON PIKE
911 W GORDON PIKE
MARV L & LINDA D BLAUVELT
MARY ELIZABETH CAMOZZI
Matt Mullins
MATTHEW S RUSSELL
MAUREEN J ANDREAKIS
Melissa Lund
MICHAEL D & ANGELA R
COLLIVER
MONROE COUNTY
COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORP
4001 CLEARVIEW DR
3919 S BUSHMILL DR
1413 Dove
4000 S ROGERS ST
3989 S BUSHMILL DR
4251 S. Mallard Ct.
3901 S BUSHMILL DR
315 E NORTH DRIVE
MONTE & AMANDA SPEICHER
N. E. Quinn
Nelson Shaffer
NEW RICHLAND 2 INC
425 E RHORER RD
3930 S. Nimit Drive
530 Cabot Ct.
PO BOX 205
CLEAR CREEK, IN 47426
NOAH R & ANGELA E BROWN
Norman & Arllys Papke
4000 S MAN-O-WAR
805 W. Hedgewood Dr.
NORMAN E & JOYCE N QUINN
Pam Sego
PAMELA S GUESS
PAUL E JR & HEATHER H
JOHNSON
PERRY-CLEAR CREEK FIRE
PROTECTION DISTRICT
PPF COMPANY LLC
QUALITY REALTY &
DEVELOPMENT LLC
RICHARD L & DANIELLE C
SHIELDS
3930 NIMIT DR
315 Gordon Pike
3963 S BUSHMILL DR
1599 E RHORER RD
3953 S KENNEDY DR
2248 E CAPECODE DRIVE
PO BOX 3131
750 E RHORER RD
RICHARD W & COSETTE
SEBASTIAN
ROB & LEISA CRANDALL
Robert Courter
ROBERT M & PHYLLIS J
WALKER
Roberta Taylor
RODNEY D VAN PELT
ROGER D & COLLEEN M
NEWHART
Ron Brown
Rosalie White
S. Holly Barton
Samantha Brummett
Sandy Kouns
SARAH BOCK
SCOTT A SIEBOLDT
Scott Hannon
SHANNON R & RYAN
BLACKWELL
Sharon Walker
Shawn and Mary Laszlo
SOUTHCREST MOBILE HOME
MANOR INC
Stephen Burns
STEPHEN R SCHUSTER
Steve and Nan Brewer
Sue Allmon
1509 W SHAMROCK
1208 W WREN CIRCLE
2125 W. Fullerton Pike
1101 BENSON CT
3931 S. Cramer Cir.
4081 S ROCKPORT ROAD
1100 BENSON CT
3907 S. Baytree Lane
3853 S. Cramer Circle
4016 S. Crane Ct.
1561 W. Dove Dr.
4001 S. Falcon Dr.
4020 S ROCKPORT ROAD
711 W GORDON PIKE
3627 S. Sims Lane
3945 S BUSHMILL DR
4120 S. Purple Finch Dr.
718 W. Hedgewood Drive
315 W GORDON PIKE LOT
4
4017 S. Crane Ct.
2415 E RHORER RD
3636 S. Rogers St.
4430 Silverthorne
SUSAN M & CHERYL D TOWLE 621 W GORDON PIKE
TEDDY BEAR REAL ESTATE LLC
TERRI SUE HARDING &
DANA GALE AXSOM
THOMAS J & SHERRILL A
BELCHER
1398 E RHORER RD
3805 S ROGERS STREET
4910 E INVRNESS WOODS
RD
5200 S LEONARD SPRINGS
ROAD
4012 S. Crane Ct.
THREE R DEV LLC
Nick and Tiffany Smith
TIM J SR & DEBBIE A HUMMEL 702 S RAVENCREST ST
TODD & BETH BOLING
Travis Venzel
TWO CREEKS DEV LLC
362 TYEE ST
3425 S. Rogers St.
4024 S TWO CREEKS LN
SOLDOTNA, AK 99669
UNITY OF BLOOMINGTON INC
4001 S ROGERS ST
PO BOX 100
901 W. Gordon Pike
3907 S BUSHMILL DR
235 E RHORER RD
4011 S. Falcon Dr.
544 HORESHOE LN
BEDFORD , IN 47421
UTILITIES SERVICE BOARD OF
THE CITY OF BLOOMINGTON
Valerie Owens
VALLY BEHJOU & GUITY
AHMADI
VELMA C REIFINGER
Vickie Turner
WASHWORLD INC
WAYNE L & JODY A VAUGHT
WENDY BUCKLEY
WILLIAM G & GLORIA J
RAMSEY
WM PARKS LLC
Joe McWhorter Jr.
1402 S ROCKEAST ROAD
3967 S BUSHMILL DR
SPRINGVILLE , IN 47462
575 E RHORER RD
PO BOX 1289
3953 S. Kennedy Drive
David Miller
Keith Williamson
1224 South Barnes Drive
2603 Elm Leaf
Kevin Burk
Ameer Beitvashahi
Larry Wilkerson
Janet Ault
315 West Gordon Pike #4
521 West Gordon Pike
3260 Southern Oaks
41855 South Gran Haven
Drive
Steve and Kristen
3862 South Cramer Circle
Debbie Anderson
Paul and Gail Lavengood
Barney and Carol Tow
Richard Worsena
Carry Drake
3923 South Cramer Circle
3440 S McDougal St
4000 South Clearview
Drive
4313 West Moss Lane
2136 Fullerton Pike
Vincent and Betty Sanson
3805 South Rogers Street
Jennifer Miers
Roy Capio
3935 South Kennedy Drive Bloomington, IN 47401
Pam Harden
4035 South Rockport Road Bloomington, IN 47403
Dawn Hewitt
1900 South Walnut Street Bloomington, IN 47402
George and Maryann Cusack
James Shelton
Paul Ash
1506 West Leighton Lane
3312 South Rolling Oak
Drive
512 Allen Street
Philip Smith
Dan Rarey
703 West Baywood Drive
517 North Walnut
Clarence Dillon
Frieda Snoddy
7781 West Kirksville Road Bloomington, IN 47403
725 East Tracee Court
Judy McCammon
James Comerford
510 East Moss Creek Drive Bloomington, IN 47401
2040 South Lodge Road
Julie Thomas
Cassey Connelly
Mike Clark
3030 North Russell Road
4103 Hedgewood Ct.
505 East North Drive
Mr. Rickie Clark
Indiana State Senator
Indiana State
Representative
Indiana State
Representative
Commissioner
Commissioner
Commissioner
The Honorable
Matthew Ubelhor
The Honorable
Peggy Mayfield
Mr. Patrick Stoffers
Ms. Iris F. Kiesling
Ms. Julie Thomas
Company
Monroe County Council
Mr. Ryan J. Langley
Mr. Marty Hawk
Mr. Rick Dietz
Mr. Geoff McKim
Indiana House of
Represenatives District 60
Monroe County Board of
Commisioners
Commisioners
Commisioners
Indiana House of
Represenatives District 62
INDOT - Seymour District
INDOT - Public
Involvement
Attn
Ms. Shelli Yoder
United States Senator
United States
Congressman
United States Senator
Mr. David Dye
The Honorable
Joseph Donnelly
The Honorable Dan
Coats
The Honorable Todd
Young
The Honorable Mark
Stoops
Environmental Scoping
Manager
Title
Public Hearings Manager
Name
Suite 114
320 West 8th Street
200 West Washington
Street, Room 4D-N
200 West Washington
Street, Room 336/35
100 West Kirkwood
Avenue
100 West Kirkwood
Avenue
100 West Kirkwood
Avenue
100 West Kirkwood
Avenue
100 West Kirkwood
Avenue
100 West Kirkwood
Avenue
100 West Kirkwood
Avenue
100 West Kirkwood
Avenue
200 West Washington
Street, Room 336/35
10 West Market Street
Suite 100
Address 2
1650 Market Tower
185 Agrico Lane
115 N. Pennsylvania
Street
100 North Senate
Avenue, N642
Address 1
Public Officials Mailing List
Zip
Indiana 46204
Indiana 46204
Indiana 47274
Indiana 46204
State
Indiana 46204
Indiana 46204
Indiana 46204
Bloomington Indiana 47404
Indianapolis
Indianapolis
Indianapolis
Indianapolis
Indianapolis
Seymour
Indianapolis
City
Dr. Mitch Zoll
Ms. Michelle Allen
Mr. Rick Marquis
State Historic
Preservation Officer
Division Administrator
254 Federal Office
Building
254 Federal Office
Building
402 West Washington
Street, W264
Federal Highway US Department of
Administration
Transportation
Indiana Department of
Natural Resources
City Hall, Suite 130
2656 E. Second Street
100 West Kirkwood
Avenue
100 West Kirkwood
Avenue
Federal Highway US Department of
Administration
Transportation
Bloomington Planning &
Transportation Department
Ms. Cheryl Munson
Mr. Tom Micuda
Director
Ms. Joyce B. Poling Monroe County Historian
Ms. Elizabeth Lee
Jones
Indianapolis
575 North Pennsylvania
Street
Indianapolis
Indiana 46204
Indiana 46204
Indiana 46204
575 North Pennsylvania
Street
Indianapolis
401 North Morton
Street, PO Box 100
Public Officials Mailing List
Project Team
Monroe County
Fullerton Pike Corridor
Improvements
Rockport Road to Sare Road
INDOT Des# 0801059
Public Hearing
December 11, 2014
Public Hearing Purpose
» PresentationofProposedProject
•
•
•
•
Projectdescription
Rightofwayimpacts
Anticipatedprojectcostsandschedule
Landacquisitionprocess
» PresentEnvironmentalDocument
• ImpactstoNaturalandHumanEnvironment
» MonroeCounty
• BillWilliams,PublicWorksDirector/Highway
Engineer
» AmericanStructurepoint
• RichZielinski,ProjectDevelopmentDirector
• PatrickWooden,ProjectManager
• KenOlson,ProjectDesignEngineer
• BenHarvey,EnvironmentalSpecialist
• PaulJohnson,EnvironmentalServicesManager
• AmyMarlatt,EnvironmentalScientist
» Publicnoticeofhearingwasadvertised
intheBloomingtonHeraldTimeson
November26th andDecember 3rd,2014
» AcopyoftheLegalNoticewasmailedtoas
manyaffectedpropertyownersandinterested
partiesaspossible
» Mailinglistsigninsheet
» IndividualCommentPeriod
Documents Available for Review
» EnvironmentalDocument
• Viewinglocations:
MonroeCountyPublicLibrary
303EastKirkwoodAvenue
Bloomington,Indiana47408
MonroeCountyHighwayDepartment
501NorthMortonStreet(Room216)
Bloomington,Indiana47404
AvailableOnlineatMonroeCountyWebsite:
http://www.co.monroe.in.us/tsd/Government/Infrastructure/Highw
ayDepartment/Projects.aspx
Public Comment Process
» Formalpublicstatements tonight
• Speaker Sign-In Sheet
» Commentsheetininformationpacket
• Mail comments to American Structurepoint
• Give to project representatives after formal
hearing is complete
• Comment deadline – January 9, 2015
» Allcommentswillbeaddressedinwriting
1
Formal Public Statements
» Willberecordedandtranscribedforpublic
record
Project Location – Fullerton Pike,
Gordon Pike, and Rhorer Road
» PublicStatements/Commentswillnotbe
addressedtonightaspartofthishearingbut
willbeaddressedinwritingaspartofthe
environmentalprocess
» PublicNoticewilladvertiseavailabilityof
responsestopubliccomments
» Questions Talkwithprojectteamafter
formalhearing
Project Purpose and Need
» Provideacontinuouseastwestcorridoronthe
southsideofBloomington
• Improve connectivity
- Access to S.R. 37 to the west
Project Purpose and Need
» Address current roadway deficiencies
• Correct sight distance issues on corridor
• Drainage improvements
- Bridges, culverts, & storm sewers
• Reduce traffic congestion & travel times
» Improve motorist and pedestrian safety
• Enhance access to hospitals and schools
Alternative 1A – Preferred Alternative
• Address lack of pedestrian facilities along
corridor
• Improve residential access to regional multiuse trails
Typical Roadway Section
» ContinuousTwoLaneroadwayfromRockportRoadtoSare
Road
• Continuoussidewalks/multiusepath,separatingpedestriansand
vehicles
• Correctionstogeometricandsightdistancedeficiencies
• Encloseddrainagesystem
• Threebridgereplacementsalongcorridor&onenewbridgeover
UNTClearCreek
» AlternateMeetsPurposeandNeedofProject
•
•
•
•
Providescontinuouseastwestcorridor
ConnectivitytoS.R.37/proposedI69
IntersectionImprovementstohandleanticipatedtrafficvolumes
Continuouspedestrian&bicyclefacilities
- ConnectiontoSchools&Trailsnearcorridor
2
Other Alternates Studied
» Alternate 1B– Continuous4laneroadwayfromRockportRoad
toSouthWalnutStreetandwouldcontinuewithroadway
improvementstotheexisting2laneroadwayextendingeast
fromSouthWalnutStreettoSareRoad
» Alternate 1C– Improvesightdistanceatmajorintersectionsby
adjustingroadwaygradesandincludeadditionalturninglanes
wherewarranted
» Alternate 2– UpgradeTappRoadtoserveastheneweastwest
connectoronthesouthsideofBloomington
» Alternate 3– UpgradeRockportRoadtoTappRoad,with
improvementsonTappRoad(4lanes)toSouthWalnutSt.
» Alternate4– ThatRoadUpgrade
» Alternate5– DoNothing
3
Project Costs and Schedule
» EstimatedProjectCosts
•
•
•
•
Construction$24,100,000
RightofWay$1,900,000
PreliminaryEngineering$1,400,000
Bothfederalandlocalfunding
New Right-of-Way Requirements
» Approximately31.2acresrequiredfor90foot
widecorridor
» LandUse
• Residential– Approximately11.9acres
• Commercial– Approximately0.35acres
» ProjectSchedule
•
•
•
•
PhasedConstructioninSegments
RightofwayacquisitionanticipatedSpring2015
PhaseIConstructionanticipated2016
AdditionalPhasesthereafter
• Agriculture/forest– Approximately4.8acres
• School– Approximately4acres
• Other– Approximately10.2acres
» Relocations
• One(Residential)
Land Acquisition Process
» Howlandispurchasedbylocal
agencies
• Explains the process of buying property
needed for highway improvements
» LandAcquisitionProcessmustfollow
theUniformActof1970
» Amountofcompensationcannot
belessthanfairmarketvalue
» Partialacquisition
• Agencywillstateamounttobepaidofthe
partofthelandtobeacquired.
• Separateamountwillbestatedfordamages
totheportionretained.
• Ifremainderhaslittleornovalue,agency
willconsiderpurchasingremainder.
» “UniformAct”of1970
• Allfederal,state,andlocalgovernments
mustcomply
• Requiresjustcompensation
» Acquisitionprocess
• Appraisals
• Reviewappraisals
• Negotiations
» Agreement
• Whenagreementisreached,ownerwillbe
askedtosignanoptiontobuy,purchase
agreement,easement,ordeed.
» NoAgreement
• Mediation
• Condemnation
4
Environmental Impacts
ScopeofEnvironmentalStudy
» Evaluateimpactstonaturalandhuman
environment
• Waterways,wetlands,andendangeredspecies
• CulturalResources(e.g.,Historicproperties)
• Socialandeconomicfactors
Environmental Assessment
» An Environmental Assessment (EA) is
prepared for actions in which the
significance of the environmental impact is
not clearly established
» The EA examines potential social, economic,
and environmental factors
» The EA allows the FHWA and INDOT to
determine whether or not an Environmental
Impact Statement (EIS) is needed.
Environmental Assessment
» EA reviewed by INDOT and FHWA and
approved the release for public involvement
on November 19, 2014
» A Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) is
anticipated for the project
» A FONSI is issued for a project if the
undertaking is a major action but is
determined to not result in a significant
impact, based on the EA findings.
» CulturalResources
• Archaeologicalreconnaissanceconducted
- Portions of four archaeological sites are within project area
- Archaeological resource (abandoned railroad line) part of North
Clear Creek Historic Landscape District (NCCHLD)
• Two properties eligible for listing in the National
Register of Historic Places (NRHP) identified
- NCCHLD
- Winston Thomas Wastewater Treatment Plant (WTWTP)
• Project will have an Adverse Effect on NCCHLD; No
Adverse Effect on WTWTP
• Memorandum of Agreement developed to mitigate
adverse effects
CoordinationandCommunityInvolvement
» 40federal,state,andlocalagenciesaskedto
provideinput
» CommunityAdvisoryCommittee(CAC)Formed
• Threemeetingsheld(June20,2012,July23,2012
andFebruary11,2013)
• InputfromCACutilizedtodeveloppreferred
alternative
» PublicInformationMeeting(October3,2012)
» PublicHearing(December11,2014)
Memorandum of Agreement
» MOA Stipulations:
• Research, design, manufacture, and install three
interpretive signs to be placed along the multi-use trail
proposed as part of the Fullerton Pike Project
• Consider the use of limestone treatment at
appropriate locations in landscaping
• Remove and re-install the circa 1935 stone gateposts
at the WTWTP
5
Section 4(f)
“Waters of the US” Impacts
» Requirement to avoid use of parks, refuges,
recreation areas and historic properties
» Five Section 4(f) resources identified:
» No wetlands identified
in project limits
» Six streams
• 3 existing trails (Clear Creek, Bloomington Rail and
Sare Road) – de minimis;
• Winston Thomas Wastewater Treatment Plant – De
minimis
• North Clear Creek Historic District -- Individual
» Trails – Connections to Multi-use path and
design safe crossings
» WTWTP and NCCHLD mitigation included in
MOA
Karst Resources
» Areas of concern due to
potential impacts on
sensitive habitat
» Two karst features
(sinkholes) identified in
project limits – no caves
or springs affected
» Mitigation
• No drainage to the
sinkholes
• Appropriate erosion &
sediment control
Public Comments
• Clear Creek (near
Rogers)
• 2 Tributaries to Clear
Creek
• Jackson Creek (near
Sare)
• 2 Tributaries to Jackson
Creek
Environmental Requirements
Permits Expected to be Required
» Section 404 Regional General Permit – US Army Corps of
Engineers
» Section 401 Water Quality Certification – Indiana Department of
Environmental Management (IDEM)
» Construction in a Floodway Permit – Indiana Department of Natural
Resources (IDNR)
» Rule 5 Erosion Control – IDEM
Public Comments
AmericanStructurepoint,Inc.
CommentforPublicRecord
» 7260ShadelandStation
Indianapolis,Indiana46256
Attn:BenHarvey
» Stateyourname
Email
» Stateyourcomment
» fullertonpike@structurepoint.com
» Speakclearlyintomicrophoneforeaseoftranscribing
Respectfullyrequestcommentspostmarkedby
» January9,2015
» Responseswillbeansweredinsubsequentproject
documentation
Allsubstantialcommentswillbereviewed,evaluated,
andgivenfullconsiderationduringthedecisionmaking
process.
Pleaselimityourcommentsto23minutessoallpersons
haveanopportunitytospeakandtoberespectfulofother
people’stime
» Comeuptopodium
6
PUBLIC HEARING
Fullerton Pike Corridor Improvements
Bloomington, Monroe County, Indiana
Designation No. 0801059
INFORMATION PACKET
Thursday, December 11, 2014
Formal Presentation: 6:45 p.m.
Nat U Hall Meeting Room
Monroe County Courthouse
100 West Kirkwood Avenue
Bloomington, Indiana
Prepared By:
American Structurepoint, Inc.
7260 Shadeland Station
Indianapolis, Indiana 46256
(317) 547-5580
IN2008.0807
December 11, 2014
Dear Concerned Citizens, Local Residents, and Elected Public Officials:
Welcome to Monroe County’s public hearing regarding the proposed Fullerton Pike Corridor Improvements from
Rockport Road to Sare Road. The purpose of the public hearing is to explain the proposed project and receive
comments, concerns, and suggestions. We appreciate the opportunity to be here this evening and look forward to
listening to the concerns and issues that are important to this community. Comments can be presented in several
ways.
1.
You may verbally express your comments here tonight during the public statement session held after the
formal presentation. You may do this by signing the Speaker’s Sign-In Sheet located at the table with the
handout materials. All statements will be recorded and transcribed in order to be included in the
official public hearing transcript.
2.
You may complete one of the comment sheets (attached) and return utilizing one of the following methods
below.
a.
Hand deliver to one of the hearing representatives from American Structurepoint in attendance
this evening
b.
Mail to Benjamin Harvey at American Structurepoint, Inc., 7260 Shadeland Station, Indianapolis,
Indiana 46256
c.
Fax to Benjamin Harvey at (317) 543-0270
d.
Email to fullertonpike@structurepoint.com
Should you choose to submit comments by mail, please have them postmarked by January 9, 2015. All
comments submitted will become part of the transcript and be addressed in subsequent project documentation,
along with the verbal comments presented here tonight.
All substantial comments received will be evaluated and responded to in writing within subsequent project
documentation. The documentation will address all concerns raised during the public hearing process and describe
the final decisions reached following careful consideration of the views and concerns of the public.
The approved environmental document is available for public review and inspection on the Monroe County website
http://www.co.monroe.in.us/tsd/Government/Infrastructure/HighwayDepartment/Projects.aspx and at the following
locations.
Monroe County Highway
Department
501 North Morton Street #216
Monroe County Public
Library
303 East Kirkwood Avenue
This notice is published in compliance with: 1) Code of Federal Regulations, Title 23, Section 771 (CFR
771.111(h)(1) stating, “Each State must have procedures approved by the FHWA to carry out a public involvement/
public hearing program.”; 2) 23 CFR 450.210(a)(1)(ix) stating, “Provide for the periodic review of the effectiveness
of the public involvement process to ensure that the process provides full and open access to all interested parties
and revise the process, as appropriate.”; and 3) The INDOT Public Involvement Policies and Procedures approved
by the Federal Highway Administration on August 16, 2012.
2
IN2008.0807
Hearing Agenda
American Structurepoint Staff will be available in the display area to explain proposed project details
and environmental impacts before and after the official hearing.
1. Meeting Called to Order
Bill Williams
Monroe County Highway
2. Explanation of the Hearing Purpose and Process
Paul Johnson
American Structurepoint
3. Project Description
Patrick Wooden, PE
4. Environmental Document
Benjamin Harvey
5. Public Statement Session
Paul Johnson
6. Adjournment
Paul Johnson
7. Questions and Answers – Engineers and project representatives will be available in the display
area to answer questions.
IN2008.0807
3
Project Description
The Monroe County Commissioners are developing a Federal-aid project to improve the Fullerton Pike
corridor from Rockport Road to Sare Road. The purpose of the proposed project is to complete the
objectives of prior transportation planning by providing a continuous east-west corridor on the south
side of Bloomington, Indiana which improves connectivity, reduces traffic congestion, reduces travel
time, and improves motorist and pedestrian safety. Moreover, the proposed project will provide
enhanced access to essential facilities including hospitals and schools, as well as enhance connectivity
for local residents by improving access to regional multi-use trails and other major transportation
corridors.
The proposed project includes the development of a continuous 2-lane roadway from Rockport Road to
Sare Road, with approximately 0.7 miles of new roadway construction. The proposed project would
consist of one 16-foot wide travel lane in each direction, separated by a 16-foot wide grass median
bordered by curb and gutters from Rockport Road and continuing east to Sare Road. In areas of need,
the raised median may be omitted in favor of a two-way left-turn lane. The proposed project also
includes a continuous 5-foot wide sidewalk on the south side of the roadway and a continuous 10-foot
wide multi-use path on the north side of the roadway. This project would correct existing geometric
deficiencies along the existing roadway, including sight distance and vertical alignment, and would
improve intersections to provide additional turn lanes, adjust grades, and provide signalization where
warranted. The intersection of Fullerton Pike (Rhorer Road) and Sare Road would be re-designed as
either a three-leg roundabout or a signalized intersection. A new bridge would be constructed over an
unnamed tributary to Clear Creek and the Clear Creek Trail. The existing Monroe County Bridge No.
74 carrying Gordon Pike over Clear Creek and Monroe County Bridge No. 75 carrying Rhorer Road
over Jackson Creek would be replaced to accommodate the expanded roadway width and to correct
existing hydraulic deficiencies. In addition, Monroe County Bridge No. 610 carrying Rhorer Road over
East Fork of Jackson Creek would be extended or replaced to accommodate the widened roadway.
Construction would be completed in three phases and the proposed maintenance of traffic scheme would
vary for each individual phase. Traffic would be maintained by means of approved traffic control
devices in accordance with the current INDOT Design Manual and standard specifications. Coordination
with emergency response agencies and schools will occur prior to closure and detour setup of all phases
of construction.
x
Phase 1a – The segment surrounding the intersection of Gordon Pike/Rhorer Road and Walnut
Street is an intersection improvement project. Through traffic would be maintained during most
of project construction. Closure of this intersection is possible, but the length of time for any
closure would be minimized. Access to all businesses located at this intersection would be
maintained throughout construction.
x
Phase 1b - The segment from Rockport Road to Wickens Street is new road construction and
would therefore not require a specific maintenance of traffic scheme. Access would need to be
maintained at all times to the residential properties in the southeast quadrant of the intersection at
Rockport Road.
IN2008.0807
4
x
Phase 1c - From Wickens Street to Sare Road, one lane of traffic in each direction would be
maintained at all times where feasible to provide access to the many residences, schools, and
businesses along the project corridor. Short term temporary closures may be required during
certain phases of construction. Disruptions to major cross street traffic would be minimized
during construction.
Description of Right-of-Way
The project will require the purchase of right-of-way. Refer to the pamphlets distributed at this meeting:
ACQUISITION – “Acquiring Real Property for Federal and Federal-Aid Programs and Projects” and
RELOCATION – “Your Rights and Benefits as a Displaced Person Under the Federal Relocation
Assistance Program”. Acquisition and relocation information can also be viewed at
http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/real_estate/.
It is anticipated the project will require the acquisition of approximately 31.25 acres of new permanent
right-of-way from primarily residential properties. Approximately 2.00 acres of temporary right-of-way
acquisition will be required for driveway construction and tie-ins. One residential relocation is
anticipated because the roadway would need to be raised in this area to meet current vertical curve
design requirements, and the proposed raised roadway profile would not allow the reconstruction of the
residence driveway.
Project Schedule
Milestone
Expected Dates
Right-of-Way Appraising Begins
Phase I Construction Begins
Spring 2015
2016
Estimated Project Cost Summary
Based on 2013 costs, the estimated total cost associated with the project is $27,100,000. Both federal
and local funds sources will be used. The proposed project was incorporated into the Indiana
Department of Transportation Statewide Transportation Improvement Programs on December 4, 2013.
IN2008.0807
5
Environmental Documentation
The Indiana Department of Transportation (INDOT) and Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)
have reviewed the Environmental Assessment (EA) prepared by American Structurepoint for this project
and approved the document on November 19, 2014. The EA evaluates the impact of the project on the
natural and human environment. No areas of potentially significant impacts have been identified. A
Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) is anticipated for the project. A FONSI is issued for a
project if the undertaking is a major action but is determined to not result in a significant impact based
on the EA documentation.
The project has been coordinated with several state and local historic preservation organizations,
including the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO), in compliance with FHWA procedures for
Indiana projects. The proposed action impacts items listed on or eligible for inclusion on the National
Register of Historic Places (NRHP). The FHWA has issued an “Adverse Effect” finding for the project
due to impacts to the North Clear Creek Historic Landscape District (NCCHLD) and the Winston
Thomas Wastewater Treatment Plant (WTWTP). The State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO)
concurred with the finding on July 10, 2013.
If an undertaking is determined to cause an “Adverse Effect” to a historic resource, then the undertaking
must include measures to resolve and/or mitigate the “Adverse Effect.” The specific measures to
resolve and/or mitigate the “Adverse Effects” are stipulated in a “Memorandum of Agreement” (MOA).
The MOA is executed by FHWA, Indiana SHPO, INDOT, and Monroe County. A MOA was prepared
to outline the proposed “Adverse Effect” the project would have on the NCCHLD and WTWTP, and the
proposed mitigation for those adverse impacts. As mitigation for these impacts, three interpretive signs
will be placed along the proposed multi-use trail, the circa 1935 stone gateposts at the WTWTP will be
removed and re-installed, and the use of limestone will be considered for landscaping at appropriate
locations.
In addition to the historic resources related to this project, the EA also considered a broad range of
potential social, economic, and environmental factors. Forty federal, state, and local agencies were
contacted and asked to provide input regarding the project’s impacts on areas in which they have
jurisdiction or special expertise.
A wetland delineation and waters report was completed for the project corridor. No wetlands were
identified. There are six streams located within the project limits – Clear Creek, Jackson Creek, 2
unnamed tributaries to Clear Creek, and 2 unnamed tributaries to Jackson Creek. Minor impacts to all
six streams are anticipated as a result of stormwater outfalls, channel grading, bridge demolition, bridge
construction, and culvert replacement. It is expected the project will require a Section 404 permit issued
by the US Army Corps of Engineers and a Section 401 Water Quality Certification from the Indiana
Department of Environmental Management (IDEM) for potential impacts to streams. A Rule 5 Erosion
Control Notice of Intent from IDEM will be required. A Construction in a Floodway permit from the
Indiana Department of Natural Resources (IDNR) will also be required.
A Karst Report was completed for the proposed project in accordance with the 1993 Karst MOU. Two
sinkholes were identified within the project area. Drainage from the roadway will not be directed to the
IN2008.0807
6
sinkholes, and appropriate erosion and sediment control practices will be utilized during construction in
order to avoid impacts to the identified karst features.
Significant efforts were made to engage and involve the public in the project planning process. A
Community Advisory Committee (CAC) was formed to gather input from the community and assist in
developing the preferred alternative. Three CAC meetings were held - June 20, 2012, July 23, 2012, and
February 11, 2013. In addition, a public information meeting was held on October 3, 2012 to further
attempt to engage the public. Significant efforts were made to encourage public participation, including
public notices and press releases published in the Herald-Times.
IN2008.0807
7
IN2008.0807
8
Comment Sheet
Please provide your comments, concerns, and/or suggestions regarding the proposed Fullerton Pike
Corridor Improvements. Your comments are important to us, and we sincerely appreciate your time and
participation during the public involvement process. Please submit comments by Friday, January 9,
2015. Comments may be mailed, faxed, or submitted via email to the address/fax number below.
Benjamin Harvey
American Structurepoint, Inc.
7260 Shadeland Station
Indianapolis, Indiana 46256-3957
Fax: (317) 543-0270
Email: fullertonpike@structurepoint.com
Meeting Date:
Project:
Thursday, December 11, 2014
Fullerton Pike Corridor Improvements (Rockport Road to Sare Road)
Name: (Please print)
Address:
COMMENTS:
SIGNATURE:
IN2008.0807
9
1
Fullerton Pike Public Hearing
Fullerton Pike Corridor Improvements
INDOT DES#0801059
December 11, 2014 Monroe County Courthouse,
Nat Hill Conference Room.
Start: 6:45
****************************************************************************
BILL WILLIAMS: Good evening. My name is Bill Williams, Public Works
Director for the Monroe County Highway Department. We're looking forward to
hearing your comments tonight on this proposed project.
This is the Official Public Hearing for the Fullerton Pike Corridor Improvement
Project. The phase we will be concentrating on tonight begins at Rockport Road
and will end at Sare Road, a 2.7 mile segment of the overall 7 mile project. Later
phases of the road project are anticipated to be constructed in future years,
eventually tying into SR 45 on the west end and Snoddy Road on the east end.
This project has been in Monroe County's Thoroughfare Plan since the 1960s. It is
identified in the Bloomington / Monroe County MPO's Long Range Transportation
Plan and their Transportation Improvement Program or TIP. Having recently
completed a major, multi-year project on the west side of Bloomington, Curry and
Vernal Pikes in the industrial area of our community, we are now focusing our
efforts on the Fullerton Pike Corridor. In September of 2011, Monroe County
hired American Structurepoint, Inc., of Indianapolis, Indiana, to provide for us a
project scoping study that included;
x topographic survey of the corridor,
x traffic data collection which tells us how the roads are being used today,
x a traffic analysis that will break the use down further and make projections
of what we may see in 20 years,
x an Engineering Assessment Report which will take the traffic analysis and
apply current design standards to the road design to meet our existing and
future needs, inclusive of cost estimates and phasing scenarios that will
allow us to logically construct certain road segments as the project
develops, most importantly, within our budget constraints.
x and Environmental Services that will include a wetlands delineation,
historic properties review, archaeological investigations, karst
investigations and other environmental reviews and studies, all with the
goal of achieving an Environmental Assessment that is acceptable to the
community, the INDOT and FHWA. The EA also includes the public
involvement process which is why we are here today.
2
The estimated construction cost for this phase of the project is over $27 million.
Monroe County will be applying for Federal funds to assist with its construction.
The remaining funds to pay for the project are from a variety of local funding
sources, inclusive of the Local Road & Street Fund, Cumulative Bridge Fund, the
Fullerton Pike Economic Development Area, and Cumulative Capital
Development Fund. Because the project is receiving federal funds, design
standards as required by the FHWA and INDOT must be met and adequate public
involvement, like this public meeting, are necessary. The design engineer will
discuss costs further during the presentation.
At this time I'd like to introduce a few of the local government officials that are here
from County Government: County Commissioners - Julie Thomas. From the
County Council - Geoff McKim, Rick Dietz and Cheryl Munson. Counsel Elect –
Ryan Cobine is here with us tonight. Thank you all for coming.
Also from our Redevelopment Commission -Jim Shelton is with us tonight.
County Planning - Richard Martin and Jacqueline Scanlan is sitting back there.
Other distinguished guests that are with us tonight are Michelle Allen, FHWA,
Anna Dragonovich, MPO Staff, and Dave Williams, City Parks & Rec. Thanks
for coming everyone.
Also, I'd like to introduce our Design Team representatives from American
Structurepoint:
x Rich Zielinski, Project Development Director, Road Group
x Patrick Wooden, Project Manager, Road Group
x Ken Olson, Traffic Project Design Engineer Manager
x Paul Johnson, Manager, Environmental Services Group
x Ben Harvey, Environmental Specialist
x Amy Marlatt, Environmental Services Group
The purpose of this public hearing is to describe the proposed project, outline the
anticipated environmental impacts and to receive your comments on the proposed.
Project. Comments, recommendations and suggestions provided to date in
previous meetings have been incorporated into the project being presented. Tonight
we are presenting the results of the environmental assessment.
At this time, I'd like to turn the meeting over to Paul Johnson, who will provide an
overview of the public hearing and comment process.
PAUL JOHNSON: I just want to make one quick announcement, if you have
your cell phones if you would make sure they're off, at least on vibrate, if not turn
3
them off so we don't have distractions. I'm just going to take a brief couple minutes
to go over what a public hearing is and how the process will work and what the
overall process is to receive comments and how those will be addressed. As Bill
mentioned, the presentation, we're going to make a presentation. We're going to
talk about the project description. Patrick is going to go over that, talk about the
right-of-way impacts that are anticipated, the anticipated project costs and the
intended schedule. Then I'm also going to talk about the land acquisition process.
How that has to work. We're going to present the environmental assessment
document, the results of that study and look over the, look at the impacts to the
natural and human environment. And then we'll have a comment period.
We advertised the opportunity, or advertised this hearing twice in the Bloomington
Herald-Times on November 26th and again on the December 3rd of this year. A
copy of the legal notice was mailed to as many property owners as we have record
of, and also interested parties as much as we could. We had mailing lists that were
developed through various public meetings that we've had throughout the project
and those who have expressed interest in the project.
The Environmental document, the big binder that some of you have seen out there,
that has been made available in a couple locations. First of all it was available at
the public library, just down the road here on Kirkwood. And then also at the
Monroe County Highway Department offices in the Showers Plaza. And then also
Monroe County was also gracious enough to put that up on their website so you
were able to review it on line.
The comment process for tonight is we have, there are a bunch of different ways
that you can make comments on this project, one of which and part of this public
hearing is you can come up and make an oral statement on the project. We have a
speaker sign in sheet. I brought those up here. We'll go through that, just kind of
keep the order of that. And then if there's others that would like to come up and
speak we'll open the floor to that.
In the information packet that was out on the table there is a comment form that you
can use if you want to make written, if you'd rather make a written comment. If
you want to also make an oral comment and a written comment that is fine too. So
there's ways, you can mail it to American Structurepoint because we'll be putting
together those comments. You can give those to the folks that Bill introduced.
We have a box back in the back, white box, that you put them in and give them to
us. We're asking that any of those comments that are being sent in, written,
emailed, etc., that they be provided to us by January 9th so we can close the hearing
process, or the comment period. All of the comments will be addressed in writing.
Tonight's presentation and tonight's meeting, it will just be a statement. There
won't be questions and answers here at this hearing. After the meeting is over,
4
after the hearing is over, we can go back out in the foyer here and have questions
and answers as late as, until they kick us out of the building.
The comments that are made up here, they will all be recorded. We've got a couple
of recorders. We have a court reporter here too that's preparing a transcript,
verbatim transcript of the hearing. Like I said, all open statements and comments
won't be addressed here right in this forum. They will be addressed in writing as
part of the environmental process. We will public notice the availability of those
comments, the responses to those comments. Like I said, if there's more
questions, if you have additional questions during the presentation, something
come to mind and you want to ask a specific question, then we'll be available after
the meeting as well.
With that I'm going to turn it over to Patrick Wooden who is going to provide the
technical aspects of the project.
PATRICK WOODEN: Just so we all are familiar with what the project is, we're
going to start off with a brief project description. We are talking about the
Fullerton Pike corridor project for this environmental document.. We are looking
at Fullerton Pike beginning at the intersection on the western edge of the screen
about there with Rockport Road and then continuing on to the east. This includes
both Fullerton Pike and Rhorer Road. The project terminates at the intersection
with Sare Road at the far east end. When we call it the Fullerton Pike corridor,
please realize that we are talking about Gordon Pike, Rhorer Road as well. It's all
part of the same east/west corridor.
A little bit about the purpose and the need of the project. The purpose and the need
was developed very early on in the process and this is really what the County had
identified as the goals, when we're doing any evaluation of the alternates that are
being compared for a corridor like this, really what we're looking at is trying to
answer the question how does this solution fit the needs that have been identified.
So the purpose and need has been identified for your project is to provide a
continuous east-west corridor on or near the south side of the city of Bloomington.
The intent is to improve connectivity to State Road 37 to the west, the future I69.
Also to reduce traffic congestion and travel times, not just along this corridor, but
within the region as well. And also to enhance access to schools and hospitals by
providing that connectivity. That would be a need that we would look to identify a
solution for.
In addition, the goal for the project will be to address current deficiencies on the
existing road network. After investigation, the scoping assessment that has been
completed on the corridor, there were a number of deficiencies that were identified.
Some of you who live along the corridor are probably aware of that. There are
5
number of hills along the corridor where you might not be able to see the next
intersection ahead. So you might not be able to see a car in front of you that might
stop. Those are issues that we would correct so that adequate sight distance can be
provided. That will be a goal that any alternative route would have to address -we need to compare it against.
We're also looking to address drainage improvements along the corridor, which
could be through bridges, culverts and storm sewers. We want to address any
deficiency that might be present along the corridor. And then also are looking to
improve motorist and pedestrian safety. The primary need here that was identified
was the lack of pedestrian facilities, continuous pedestrian facilities along the
corridor where pedestrians might be forced to walk along the side roadway. A
goal of the project would be to address that by providing separated facilities for
pedestrians. And also to improve residential access to regional multi-use trails.
The north/south trails that are located along the corridor. So with that identified as
the goals of the project to be solved the environmental assessment has been done
and we looked at a bunch of alternates and the preferred alternate that has been
selected for the corridor is identified as Alternate 1A.
Alternate 1A is a continuous two-lane roadway throughout the project runs from
Rockport Road to Sare Road. Continuous sidewalks and a multi-use path, a
multi-use path on one side of the corridor and a sidewalk on the opposite side of the
corridor is proposed continuous through it and throughout to separate pedestrian
and vehicles. We are looking to make corrections to geometric and sight-distance
deficiencies along the corridor. That means we're going to be looking to fix
vertical issues, profiles, we'll try to smooth that out so everybody can see a lot
farther along the corridor than they might be able to under the present
circumstance.
Preferred Alternate recommends a enclosed drainage system. That's going to be a
curb and gutter up alongside the travel lanes. A storm sewer runs along that curb
line so any rainfall run off water will not run off the road, toward the roadside ditch,
instead will be captured by an enclosed drainage system along the curb line.
Three bridge replacements in addition are proposed along the corridor because their
existing bridges are being replaced as part of the corridor. And then a new bridge
spanning an unnamed tributary over Clear Creek - this is the creek that runs along
the side the Clear Creek Trail - is proposed for the corridor.
This alternate has been analyzed and has been determined that it does meet the
purpose and need of the project. It does provide a continuous east/west corridor, it
does provide connectivity to the west to State Road 37/I69.
6
Intersection improvements are being designed throughout the corridor to handle
anticipated traffic volumes. It might include a left turn lane or a right turn lane at a
specific location to deal with the traffic that has been collected and counted as well
as modeled for future traffic volumes. This alternate does provide continuous
pedestrian and multi-use path along the corridor. So we still have connection to
the schools and trails that are near and along the corridor.
So that's a lot of words. I thought a picture might help that a little bit. This is the
same picture you found out there on the board out there in the hallway. So if you
are having difficulty looking at this please stop by at the display on your way out.
We can go through it in a little bit more detail.
A typical section, this is kind of like a roadway crosscut. This is a slice out and
then you look at the roadway, kind of ending that view. The proposal for the
recommended alternate has a single travel lane headed in each direction. So it will
be one through travel lane in the east bound direction and another travel lane in the
west bound direction. The proposal includes a separation of the eastbound and the
west bound lanes, in the middle. That's kind of that green line that you see there in
the middle. That is going to be a raised curb grassed median, a buffer to separate
east bound and west bound traffic. What that buffer allows for is that when you
get to a situation like say something needs an entrance or at a signalized
intersection that grassed raised island could be eliminated and a left turn lane could
be introduced to allow for access across the lane. That allows for the space for that
to occur. As I mentioned, curb and gutters are going to be proposed on the outside
edges of the corridor because that's where the storm sewer, any run off drainage
would be collected in a storm drain system centered above that curb line. And
then on the north side of the corridor you see a little bit of a green strip there, there's
going to be a buffer, a grass buffer between the curb line and multi-use path on the
north side. That's a ten foot wide, likely an asphalt multi-use path. On the south
side of the corridor along the right of this screen again a buffer, a grass buffer
separating the curb line from the sidewalk. And then a sidewalk would be
proposed on the south side. So there would be a single multi-use path along the
corridor on the north side and a continuous sidewalk on the south side of the
corridor. The typical section on the top just shows the raised island if that's what's
going to occur in the median section at a specific location. The section that's on
the bottom is the same section only showing what it might look like if the raised
island was not there, instead of either a left turn lane or potentially a two way left
turn lane was needed at an individual location along the corridor. But regardless
there would only be a through, a single through lane - one lane in each direction for
the corridor. So this is considered a three lane section, could be considered a two
lane section because of that buffer median. But it's really a single lane in each
direction. That's just kind of like a cross cut slice of what the corridor would look
like.
7
The next couple of slides on here are just kind of some snapshot views of what it
might look like from a helicopter. This would be the proposed recommended
alternate kind of superimposed on an existing aerial map. The first image I have
on here is the western project limit. This is the intersection of Fullerton Pike and
Rockport Road. The project is proposed to abut next to an INDOT project so it is
not part of our proposed work and not part of our environmental analysis but it is
work proposed by others. The work that's included in this Fullerton Pike Corridor
includes the north leg of Rockport Road and then the east leg where we would take
off and start the corridor moving to the east. So just the north leg and the west leg.
The east leg, I apologize. The west leg and the south leg of this intersection are to
be done by others as part of a separate project.
The project that we're tying into does have more travel lanes than our proposed
typical section. So at the intersection of Rockport Road there is a short adjustment
to transition from multiple lanes that are occurring to the west of the intersection to
transition down. So if you see on the far right side of the screen, the very edge
where you have that green median buffer is where we're transitioning to a single
lane in each direction with that raised buffer. And then our corridor will continue
in the typical section after to be constructed from there on. But you can see in a
gray area, north of the roadway corridor, a darker gray, that will be the multi-use
path. That smaller kind yellowish strip on that south side will be the sidewalk on
that south side. So it would be as currently proposed as appropriate to Rockport
Road based on the traffic assessment.
So continuing on the corridor further to the east this is the new bridge. This will be
new road construction. There's not currently a road here. This is located at an
unnamed tributary to Clear Creek. You can also see on that eastern bank of the
unnamed tributary what is known as the Clear Creek Trail. So a new bridge is
proposed at this location to span over both the creek and the trail. This is not being
an at-grade crossing for the trail; however, we would make modifications to our
multi-use path to the sidewalk on either side of our east/west corridor to tie down,
to match in with the Clear Creek Trail so that we can access to the trail from the
east/west corridor. But any pedestrian or non-motorized on the trail itself, they
don't have to come to the roadway and stop. It's not an active crossing. You
would go underneath the bridge so there would not be an active crossing of the trail
as this location.
Further on the corridor. I've got two images here. The one that's on top shows the
intersection with Bachelor Middle School on the north side. Obviously the school
is not there but the intersection for there. This just kind of shows you the
possibilities that might exist with that median. You can see the green kind of
round off in the green middle section there. That would be a location where we
8
could propose any left turn lanes to have access for vehicles, buses, etcetera, that
might want to make a left turn through there into the subdivision on the south side
or into the middle school entrance on the north side. Once you get through the
intersection, even if it is kind of an off-set intersection as in this case, you could
then reintroduce the raised median curb at that point.
The other thing noted here is we have locations on the corridor where you might
have a bunch of residents on the south side of the corridor and have an open field
area on the north side of the corridor, the proposed roadway has taken into account
making adjustments horizontally, shifting the roadway a little bit to the north to
minimize impact to a bunch of property owners on the south side of the corridor in
favor of kind of open field on the north side. There's a number of locations on the
corridor where the roadway might shift up or down slightly to take advantage of
what's available for the current situation.
The image on the bottom the screen here is the intersection at Rogers. You can
kind of see the sag of the proposed roadway that's superimposed on the map there,
that we might be looking to shift the roadway down to again avoid impact the
homes on the southwest corner of the intersection, but also the homes on the
northeast corner. We are looking to make subtle shifts in that alignment to
minimize the impact to as many folks as possible along that corridor. Again, when
you get to an intersection, based on the traffic analysis, if it's warranted we might be
looking at a lot of turn lanes as appropriate. Even in some locations a right turn
lane might be warranted, again based on the traffic analysis. Once you get through
that intersection you then revert back to the same single section as we discussed
before, but just a single through east bound lane and a light opposite single west
bound lane separated again by that buffer. A couple more images kind of showing
the same thing.
The first image in the upper left is the waste water treatment plant to the west of
Walnut Street, Old 37 where the roadway would be shifted slightly to the north so
that the frontage road along the residential south side could be maintained so access
would not directly off the Fullerton Pike corridor like in this case. Access would
still be maintained off that frontage road. There are obviously variations that
would occur just based on the circumstances along the corridor. We are going to
make those adjustments on the corridor.
The intersection with Old 37 and Walnut Street shown kind of in the lower right
here. And in this case based on the traffic counts and the traffic projections some
turn lanes are going to be warranted there. The concept being it maintains then
through the intersection of just a single through lane. Turn lanes may be added at
the individual intersections as in this case here. Once you get through the
intersection those turn lanes will be tapered out, the grass median will be returned
9
and it's just again a single through each direction.
And the final image that I wanted to present is the eastern terminus of the corridor.
This is the intersection of Rhorer Road at Sare Road. And the recommended
alternate proposed is a roundabout at this intersection. The project limits which
terminate just to the east of the Sare Road intersection. So once we can taper the
road, tie back into the existing two lane roadway, that the terminus right after
Jackson Creek of this project limit. So that was covered by the current study. As
Bill mentioned an engineering scoping study was done for lighter project limit.
But as part of this environmental document as part of this meeting today this is the
terminus at Sare Road reaching the project limit.
There are a number of other alternates that were studied as part of the corridor. I'm
sure a lot of you who may have been involved in some of the earlier public
meetings were aware of the previous alternate for a continuous four lane roadway.
That is two lanes in each direction. Based on public feedback primarily this was
one of the alternates was rejected in favor of the preferred alternate for a two lane
corridor.
Other alternates that were considered included spot improvements at specific major
intersections, potential alternate corridors instead of the Fullerton Pike Corridor.
The Tapp Road Corridor for instance or That Road Corridor upgrade to the south.
An alternate to realign at Rockport Road to send up to Tapp Road. And a do
nothing alternate was also pursued. For various reasons each other alternates were
deemed not to meet the purpose and need as well as the preferred alternate with the
continuous two lane roadway was.
As Bill mentioned earlier, the estimated project costs for the corridor from
Rockport to Sare, the construction costs have been estimated at just over
$24,000,000. There are additional costs for right of way and preliminary
engineering and design. That would make the total cost closer to $27,000,000 for
the entire corridor. Both federal and local funding will be used to fund this overall
project. And the project is not intended to be built all at one time. We don't
intend to build the 2.7 mile corridor all at once. The project is expected to be built
in phases based on funding availability. I can say right now Phase 1 portion of the
project has been identified, kind of in the center of the corridor from Walnut Street
through to East Walnut Street Pike, a short half mile segment. That's been
identified as the Phase 1 portion of construction. We do anticipate right-of-way
acquisition for this Phase 1 portion of the corridor to occur in 2015. And
anticipate construction of the Phase 1 Corridor to begin in 2016. Beyond the
Phase 1 portion of the corridor, the identification of and the sequencing of future
phases has not been finalized. So I can't say today whether Phase 2 would continue
on to the east or whether it would continue on to the west. Really, those are
10
decisions that will be made at a future date as funding becomes available for the
project. But currently the project is funded for a portion of Phase 1 of the corridor.
Not the full $27,000,000 corridor.
Now I will turn the meeting over back to Paul who will talk a little bit about the
right-of-way impacts on the corridor and kind of the steps, the process of land
acquisition.
PAUL JOHNSON: Thank you, Patrick. If you've had a chance to look at the
environmental documents you've seen there's a fairly detailed list of land uses
that, right-of-ways that's estimated to be acquired from approximately, just over 31
acres of whole new permanent right-of-way to accommodate the 90 foot wide,
typical 90 foot wide corridor. Some of that is in residential, existing commercial,
agricultural and forests, schools and then others which includes a variety of
different things in mining, quarries, etcetera.
There is one residential relocation that is proposed as part of the project. And I
want to talk a little bit now about that process, the process of right-of-way
acquisition and relocation assistance. The first part of that is out in the entryway
when you came in there are two different pamphlets, one is a blue pamphlet that is
all about the right-of-way acquisition process. So it explains how if a public
agency is buying property utilizing federal funding. And then also the relocation
which describes the rights and benefits that are required for any relocations.
The land acquisition process must follow the Uniform Act of 1970, which is a
federal act. It stipulates how land is to be purchased and how that process is to
work. The Uniform Act is, all federal, state and local governments must comply
with that law. It requires, generally it requires just compensation for any property
purchased by the government entity. As part of that process there is appraisals of
the property values. There are review of appraisals and then there are negotiations
between the property owner and the local agency or the public agency that is
acquiring the property.
One of the biggest parts to that is that the amount of compensation cannot be less
than the fair market value. There are instances of partial acquisition, so if it's part
of the way up along the front of your property, or a property, the Agency will state
the amount that will be paid as part of the land to be acquired. It will also offer a
separate amount for damages to the remaining portion of the property. And then
if remaining portion of the property basically has little or no value, then agency can
consider purchasing the entire parcel.
In the, after the negotiations are concluded, when there's an agreement reached and
the owner will be asked to sign either an option to buy, purchase agreement, an
11
easement or an actual deed transferring the property. If there's no agreement
between the agency and the property owner then we go to mediation and/or
condemnation. I ran through that relatively quickly, but all of this is explained in
further detail and I think useable, readable language in those pamphlets. It's not
typical government speak, it's good government speak.
With that, I'm going to turn it over to another speaker, Ben Harvey, who's been
patiently waiting back here to talk all about the environmental impact.
BEN HARVEY: Because the County is proposing to use federal money and is
matching they are required to go into depth as a part of the environmental impact
the projects may have. There are a formalized set of things that they typically will
look at for this project. When we say the environmental impacts we do mean the
impacts to the natural environment and the human environment. The natural
environment typically wetlands and streams, and endangered species is what you
typically think of. Human environment are the things typically that have to deal
with cultural resources - historic property, how the project may impact
neighborhoods, how they impact the overall community as a whole. So all of
those are combined to complete the environmental study for the project. For this
particular project we prepared what is called an Environmental Assessment. That
is prepared into the higher level environmental document for projects which you
necessarily know if it is a significant impact to the environmental resources or not.
We prepared what's called an Environmental Assessment or EA. As I mentioned,
all the factors going into that. The County prepared this document and that then
goes to INDOT and Federal Highway so that they can review that and make sure it
is in line with what all the federal and state regulations may be for that particular
undertaking. At the end of that process they either make a determination that
there is not a significant environmental impact. And significant is defined by as
necessary and there are no impacts that not really a significant impact or it moves
on to what's called Environmental Impact Statement.
We submitted the EA for approval to INDOT and Federal Highway and it was
approved in November of this year. The finding of no significant impact is
anticipated for the project. Like I mentioned, it is considered a fairly high level
environmental document and a major undertaking, but it is not necessarily a
significant impact. One of the major components of the environmental study is
public outreach and public involvement in the process. At the outset we sent
letters to approximately 40 local and statewide stakeholders trying to get input on
the project. We formed what is called a Community Advisory Committee which
is local people, local stakeholders, members of the different neighborhood
associations who may have a direct input on the project. We held three of these
community advisory committee meetings. Two in June and July of last year and
one in February, sorry 2012 and one in February 2013. We did get a whole lot of
12
input from the community advisory committee and that did shape a lot of what of
we did, as Patrick mentioned, that was a direct result of that reduction from four
lanes to two.
We had a public information meeting on the project after two of the CAC meetings
occurred, similar format to what we have here just to get the word out, trying to
solicit as much information as we could on the project. And then the public
hearing, I guess, is one of the final steps in that public involvement process. That's
what we're here for tonight. With this project corridor one of the major identified
impacts with these cultural resources we did a full archeological study on the
corridor and identified that there were four potential sites that had been identified,
one of which is located in what they're calling the North Clear Creek Historic
Landscape District which is a limestone district towards the western end of the
project. That was determined to be a significant cultural resource for the ruins that
are there so it's technically an archeological resource. As it mentions, there are
two properties identified that historically indicate the district as well as the Winston
Thomas Wastewater Treatment Plant. When they say that they are a significant
cultural resource it means they're eligible for listing or for potential listing on the
National Register of Historic Places.
Just the proposed adverse effects on the North Clear Creek Historic Landscape
District and no adverse effects on the Wastewater Treatment Plant. As a result of
the process and discussing this with the state agencies in regard to this, they in order
to mitigate the impact of that historic resource they've come up with what's called a
Memorandum of Agreement which details what is going to occur as part of this
project because of those impacts with the historic resource. For this particular one
they're going to put up three signs, design and manufacture three signs related to the
North Clear Creek Historic Landscape District guiding those along the path on the
north side to bring awareness to the native landscaping stone is required
consideration to the design element. And at the wastewater treatment plant there
are two stone gate posts at the entrance and those will be relocated away from the
roadway.
Section 4(f) is another I guess federal regulation. It relates to, we're required to
avoid if at all possible impacts parks, natural wildlife refuges, recreation areas, as
well as historical properties. For this project the three existing trail resources are
all considered Section 4(f) resources. The wastewater treatment plant and the
other eligible for listing is the North Clear Creek Landscape District. The finding
on everything except for the historic landscape district is what's called a de minimis
finding, which means it does not substantially diminish the existing value of that
resource. But it's the existing trail and therefore wanted to make certain
improvements so you can still use the trail.
13
At the historic district, that process is fairly intermeshed with what I mentioned
before about the historic property procedures. So with the MOA, it was all 4(f) as
well. And that eventually would bid on that.
We looked at the natural environment along the project corridor. We did not
identify any wetlands within the corridor. Six streams were identified. So Clear
Creek which is near Rogers and two tributaries to Clear Creek and Jackson Creek
which is at Sare Road and two tributaries at that. As Patrick mentioned there are
bridges or certain work that may occur at those resources.
This area of the state, karst resources are another thing we did a study for. Karst is
a feature of the limestone bedrock that is here and there can be sensitive habitat
associated with that. Within our project area we identified two areas of potential
sinkholes. As a result of that there are certain design elements that need to ensure
that you don't drain storm water to that sinkhole and protect it during the course of
construction. As the project moves forward they will have to obtain
environmental permits, Section 404 from the Army Corp and Section 401 from the
Department of Environmental Management to bring back the water resources
anywhere that's in the flood plain or floodway the Department of Natural Resources
will have jurisdiction, another permit there. And then for any construction activity
there will be what's called Rule 5 for storm water runoff associated with that.
So I think I will turn it back over to Paul at this time.
PAUL JOHNSON: That concludes the presentation that we put together about
the project and the environmental assessment. What we'd like to do now is start
the public comment process, open the floor for public comments. As I said earlier,
we have a couple of different ways public comments can be provided. One of
which is here tonight at this meeting and so up here and give an oral comment. As
I said before, we also have the hearing packet, the information packet have a
comment form in it so you can provide written comments. You can give that to
one of us tonight, you can mail it in, you can email it in. We have a dedicated
email address for this project - FULLERTONPIKE@STRUCTUREPOINT.COM.
You can scan the form and send it in that way. If you just want to write an email
and send it to that as a comment, say this is my comments to the Fullerton Pike
Project that would be fine. Again, we're asking that all comments that are mailed,
e-mailed, faxed, hand delivered, whichever, be done by January 9, 2015. All
comments will be reviewed and evaluated and given full consideration during the
decision making process as part of the finalizing of the environmental document.
What we'll do now, I have a list of people who have asked to speak, asked to make
comments. You're asking you come up to the podium, state their name for the
record so we can get that on the transcript and then make your comment. And
14
we'd ask that you speak clearly into the microphone. It's really good acoustics
here in the room. So speak clearly so we can make sure that comments get
transcribed. We're going to ask that, because several people may want to speak on
this project, we're going to ask you to keep your comments at two to three minutes
and I'll be back here keeping time. I don't have a stop light but I will just kind of
give you a heads up that you've got one minute left or 30 seconds left. Just ask you
to be respectful of other's time so that they have the opportunity to speak as well.
So with that the first individual who has asked speak tonight is Nan Brewer.
NAN BREWER: Hello, I'm Nan Brewer. I just want to state that I'm tired of
hearing that this revised plan has mullified neighbor's concern about the Monroe
County Highway Department's plan for the Fullerton Pike/Gordon Pike/Rohr Road
expansion project and that it has to be built to serve the need for I69. Simply
deciding not to make these residential streets into a five lane mega road which
would have been wider than most of the state's highways passing through the
county does not address our real concern. Instead, a three lane road running past
two middle schools, several churches, two rails-to-trails path would bring a high
volume of traffic and trucks. By the county's own estimate an increase of at least
40% within five (5) years. As the first exit off I69 in to Bloomington this
estimate may be conservative. The plan essentially changes our neighborhood
streets into a commercial artery. I think there must have been an error in the report
identifying our area as "urban" when it is clearly 99% suburban. As you all know
there is only one commercially zoned intersection along the entire stretch from
Fullerton Pike to Snoddy Road at Walnut, Business 37. And no empty land for
further commercial development. INDOT’s directives recommended not placing
exits or access roads dumping traffic through primarily residential neighborhood,
i.e. having a low residential impact, and to follow established commercial traffic
patterns. This plan does neither. This is the first public comment meeting on this
proposal. Although it would drastically alter the quality of life, property values,
safety of our children, noise and light levels and residential character in many built
out established south side neighborhoods, including the Highlands, Eagle View,
Clear Creek Estates, Bachelor Heights and Southcrest. Just to name a few. Let's
not talk about an outdated irrelevant highway plan from the 1960s before these
neighborhoods were built and Highway 37 even existed. How about thinking
about what would best serve the people who live there now. This has become an
entirely different project once it was decided to make it an access road off of an
interstate highway. Rather than a connection to Highway 37 or to an I69 overpass.
The only reasonable option for this established residential area of mostly single
family homes is to go with an alternative that eliminates any connection to a
highway interchange. This alternative being proposed tonight has the highest
residential impact of any of the choices. I think that our neighborhoods deserve
the same right to traffic reducing measures that any other Bloomington
neighborhood as opposed to this which is the exact opposite. Thank you.
15
JIM SHELTON: Good evening, I'm Jim Shelton, I'm representing the Greater
Bloomington Chamber of Commerce. The Chamber's been engaged in the
process on this project for a long time representing the 900 businesses that are
Chamber members, as members of the CAC. It has been stated this need been
long recognized for improved east/west traffic throughout this entire community,
not just on the south side. In 2006 the Chamber did a survey of its members from
key points that needed improvement. And one of them that came back was
infrastructure plans from trying to improve the infrastructure in the community. A
team was put together and a report was produced in 2007 that identified the areas of
storm water, water and sewer, etc. and transportation. One of the things the plan
recognized was we need improved east/west traffic capability on the south side of
the community and it recognized that the Fullerton Pike Corridor expansion when
it's already in the Transportation Improvement Program. The taskforce also, at the
same time the county leadership created a TIF, Fullerton Pike TIF to produce the
funds to match the federal funding that would eventually be needed and it still
exists and it's got funds in it right now. In a recent survey that we did just this year
our certified membership again indicated that they think this road needs to be built,
or this capability needs to be created in the southern part of our community and this
is where our county's leadership has selected that it be. So we support the project.
We are glad to hear that there's flexibility as they get down to nitty-gritty exactly
where the roads are going to be, that they can move things a little bit further south to
try to save people's yards or make people able to turn left when they get out of their
driveway. We support the project and take the opportunity to say so.
LIZ IRWIN: Thank you very much. I'm Liz Irwin. I'm here today representing
the Bloomington Chamber of Commerce. I want to thank you for the opportunity
to share our insight today about this project. The Chamber does recognize that the
Fullerton Pike Expansion Project has been part of the TIF for many years. Jim
mentioned our 2007 Infrastructure Task Force report and this report also
recognized that a Fullerton Pike extension was an important project has been
identified been the county. And now we understand that the county is in a position
to move forward with this plan that it has long recognized a need for. One of the
other things that is recognized in that project was the 45/46 bypass project,
widening of that also which was somewhat of a controversy from some of the
citizens in town but I will just say when you see you people using that now for
needs other than just movement by vehicle. We also see the great multi paths
available alongside. I think that's been a great benefit to the citizens of the
community. It's nice to see at the Fullerton Pike expansion project also will have
sidewalks and multiuse paths. I think that will be an improvement to the residents.
Also important I think to recognize that Fullerton Pike is identified as one of the
first Bloomington exits on the south side of Monroe County and the construction of
interstate is now underway. But it is really a timely and be moving forward with
16
the project. We need to make sure that we plan accordingly and follow through
with those plans in the necessary time. We understand that the current plan has
scaled back some to address some of the concerns of the residents. At the
Chamber we just hope that the project can continue to be serving the interests of
both residents and the rest of the county in terms of increasing connectivity across
east and west side of town. And that it will also consider the transportation needs
of businesses and for the rest of the community. Thank you very much.
ANN ELSNER: My name is Ann Elsner. I am an IU faculty member and also a
business owner of 501 South Madison. So I have a business on the south side as
well as living in Eagle View and I'm very much against this road. My main
concern is the safety of the people who live within this neighborhood. That is
specifically dead children and smashed pets. So the four acres you're talking about
removing is where a lot of people I know walk their dogs and go jogging. And the
middle school kids work out there. That's not going to be there any more. Many
comments have been made that people support this road. No one in my
neighborhood has ever said within my hearing that this is a good idea. So the
people who live there are not complaining about long commute time and traffic
back up. At the present time they're concerned about future back up when the
traffic will be coming from Interstate 69 through the neighborhood that was never
there before. So one of the things that Nan Brewer has been trying to do is find out
the estimate of increased traffic coming from the connectivity or some miracle
where would you put a lot to make thousands more cars. There's a lot next door to
me but other than that there's almost no lots anywhere in our neighborhood. We're
full. We've been full for ten years. There's nowhere left to build if you stick with
single family homes. So you can't have more traffic. It's a dead end road and a lot
of cul-de-sacs. To expect people to have a road that's either going to be a high speed
road through the neighborhood because it's leveled off to have those line of sight
corrections, so they won't be able to pull out of their driveways in a safe manner or
pull out of their intersection in a safe manner or watch their children go to school or
to the play, the middle school or walk their dog. It really does impact on
neighborhood quality of life. I disagree with the environmental statement. The
section in the pages forty etc,, the methodology for the di minimis finding was not
given. The data in the back that have exception after exception from the CAC
members, from the residents, those statements are not addressed in the front. But
commute times we're talking about haven't been compared against a critical
alternative which is turning left or having to do U-turns because of the increase of
several thousand cars a day. So in terms of my commute, let me give you an
example from my life. I put in yet another longer than 12 hour day at the
university job and I knew I could get home safely because I didn't have to worry
about a lot of traffic. And I could just drive from the university to my home. If
you have a truck route there I will not be able to do that. I realize time is short so I
carefully read the first 50 pages of the environmental statement. I do not feel the
17
costs reported are accurate. The 27 million dollars does not include the several
million dollars required for the bridges. So the critically alternative of Tapp Road
is more than 37 million. But the 27 million doesn't include the bridges or the
connectivity to the bridges. That's going to be 10 millon at least, right? So those
two are actually similar in costs at the present. The engineering plans aren't
complete enough so we don't know how much it's going to cost to flatten the hill
top. I have no idea if anyone will be able to get into their driveways but that's
another point. The property values will be limited or impacted but they are saying
there will be no environmental impact or property values or community cohesion in
the statement I feel is incorrect. And I'll just leave it at that. Thanks.
ISABELLA BEITVASHAHI: It’s Isabella Beitvashahi. I just want to say, Mr.
Williams, it's so nice to meet you, I've heard your name so many times. There's
my husband and my little daughter Iris, she's five months. I have a spirited two year
old who is not here, which you're all probably all grateful for that because he's
bonkers right now. He's with his grandpa in Eagleview. I live at 521 West
Gordon Pike. You might have seen us with our two Irish setters. I landscaped the
front, take so much pride in our home. I mowed the lawn every day when I was
pregnant because I loved it. I remember our neighbor, Randy, and like no, I'll do
it. You make my feel bad. And I'm like but I love it. When I first heard this, my
husband bought the house when he was 25 and I was 26. Claire Perry who was our
real estate agent never told us that this was in the plan. That would have affected
our decision I'm sure. But we found out about this when I was nine months
pregnant with my first son. It was like a bomb dropped. And our community is
very quiet and that's what we love about it. The first time I seen everyone rally
together, like everybody scared us. And the dreams I had, having my son, he is
(inaudible). We are a traditional home, we follow a budget, have two babies, take
care of them. The only place I feel safe is the YMCA for his preschool and
(inaudible) when I can get some time. (crying) They take care of me as much as I
take care of my baby. And it's scary. I'm afraid of the traffic flow. And mostly
I'm heartbroken at the change of our quality of life, six years, our Irish setters were
puppies. (crying) My puppies now are getting old and I understand things change
but this happening to us was done to us, we didn't have a choice. I had Ameer, my
husband called a real estate agent because even Bob Saltzburg assaulted us like we
should have known. We were young, homeownership is important and it is
something to be very proud of. Apparently dying is something important. I felt
that this didn't take any of that into account. And she said, you know, should we
leave, trade it out, what can we do, you know, we have a family, personally I'm
afraid. I'm here at home alone with my babies. All I have is my dogs. She said,
stick it out. You're not going to get your money back. Who knows, it may be
better. You're locked in. You wait until it's there. You know, I felt so wronged,
like fools, and we're stuck there. And now I'm just, I appreciate people listening to
us. Me being a mom (crying). Thank you very much, Nannette Brewer I'm so
18
honored to have you as a beautiful advocate. Because every summer when I was out
there mowing the law (crying) I was thinking about (crying) I was so angry, why
are they doing this to me. My home is the only place I feel safe. And it feels like
such a (crying – inaudible) And I'm not going to have it any more. I really
appreciate your time. Thank you very much.
RANDALL STEPHENSON: Hi, everybody. Ms. Beitvashahi, it's going to be
okay. Yes, I did say I envied you because I remember (inaudible). Isabella, it's a
juggernaut. Get used to the juggernaut. The juggernaut comes through, it does
what it wants to do. Get used to it. And think of it as all good. Okay? Tapp
Road is there, they're going to build an interchange. But a juggernaut says well, if
you go through Gordon Pike it's not so much the residential areas that are worried
or they're concerned, it's all that very valuable undeveloped land on the west side of
Clear Creek Trail, think about that. So it's all good depending on who you are. If
you own that undeveloped land it's great. If you live on Gordon Pike it's not so
good. But, buck up, the juggernaut won't crush the people. And so I know better
than pretend it's going to stop because we're here today. But I think it's good for
people to see what's going on. Because the more we see what's going on maybe
the next time the juggernaut comes in our direction we'll be aware of it and we'll be
able to stop it ahead of time. And I'm guilty, I was not here when I should have
been earlier. But I hope not to make that mistake again. Thanks for your time.
CLARENCE DILLON: Clarence Dillon, I'm a geologist and a teacher. I've
lived in the area, I lived on South Rogers for five years and my two daughters went
to Bachelor. I worked at Bachelor and as part of my community involvement for
my one hour of my education degree I had to choose a community involvement in
the MCCSC and I chose to participate in the discussions about Bachelor Middle
School. It was not designed as a prison, if you want to know likewise. I can tell
you that clearly. And that was 1970-72 and it was told to us then that this was
going to be a connection over to what was then being constructed as Highway 37,
of which I worked summers there. And since that time the 1965 plan has been in
place and from that time on every subdivision, every issue of annexation, every
issue of locating the fire house, the discussion about this improvement has been
made. The subdivisions out there even had to contribute through bonding some
money to build a bridge over the unknown tributary. And every time these have to
be recorded in your abstracts. And anybody who purchased property has in their
abstract some place that this was going to occur. Getting back to some other
issues, when it was discussed about the school, school buses were discussed. And
the number of school buses that come from my area right now out on Kirksville
Road, I see five school buses out my window every morning leaving. All five of
those school buses have to take several miles, different routes, to get their students,
extra time to get their students from the west side of 37 because there's no route
from Rockport Road to Bachelor. In 1972 that was an objective of having a
19
connection there to 37 at that time. Not 69. 69 was planned at the very exact
same route from the time it was planned in the late 1950s. I actually sat out there
in 1975 with the state geologist, my boss, and he pointed off of Tramway Road and
said this is the exactly where the road's going to go. And that's exactly where the
road has been planned and exactly the impact that it was going to have on Monroe
County was conjectured from that time on. It's not new. So school buses,
Bachelor, fire house, impacts, there's some impacts that I see or suggestions - there
needs to be some mitigation done in the spring to each bridge crossing. I do river
watch, I wade the streams, I look at the under the bridges and things like that. I've
got a little farm, you know, part of that should not be plantings at the intersections
that gets in the line of sight. You know, I have to put up with. My one other
suggestion I had made, oh talk about the drainage and I would hope that all the
drainage coming off of the road way will be going to the sewage treatment plant
and not directly in the local streams. So thank you very much.
MARY ELLEN GEORGE: My name is Mary Ellen George and the reason I'm
against this proposition is the safety for the students. I'm been an educator for over
30 years and there are 500 students at Bachelor, 500 students at Jackson Creek.
That's over 1000 students , many, many buses. If you look at just the statistics we
have a thousand kids, you have trucks, you have cars coming from an interstate.
It's not if an accident is going to happen, it's a matter of when is when an accident is
going to happen. As you have said, you knew this was in the project since the
1960s. I've lived in a house for 30 years, no one told me that I69 was coming. I
understand perhaps a need for an east/west corridor - why Gordon Pike? Tapp
Road exists, it will not cost as much, it has less impact on people and soon if you
must have the east/west corridor you use Tapp Road. Highway Commissioner
Lynn said in the paper that you have listened to the people. You have and I thank
you for that. Listen to us now - we say no to the Fullerton Pike Corridor, yes to
Tapp Road. Also please take into consideration, many of you have said this is
going to be a good thing for the economy, a good thing for Bloomington, why let
me add some sarcasm please – if any of you would like to buy my house, I'll sell it
to you. Thank you.
SARAH RYTERBAND: I'm Sarah Ryterband. I sit on the Citizens Advisory
Committee for the MPO, I'm also, in the City of Bloomington I sit the Traffic
Commission. So I bring two different perspectives to this. First of all, I
encourage all of you to come join us on the Citizens Advisory Commission for the
MPO where you can weigh in on these issues. (bell ringing) And what is in and
not in on long range transportation plan. Unfortunately, this was planned 20 years
ago and like too many projects it simply gets pushed along but we can make a
difference. So I encourage you to. As I looked at this plan, first of all I opposed
the original proposal but I'm equally appalled by 16 foot travel lane. I encourage
all of you to think about a 16 foot travel lane. Now our average roadway has about
20
a ten foot travel lane. When you raise it to 16 foot you encourage much, much
faster traffic. You can see that reflected in the turning radii at all of those
entryways. It's meant for high speed traffic. So although this roadway may be
designated as 35 miles per hour, we would hope because it's neighborhood traffic.
I would guess, just off the top of my head in looking at something like West Third
Street, that you're going to have people traveling at 55 to 60 per hour through your
neighborhoods. And that's a reflection purely of a 16 foot travel lane – what are
people thinking – verses these neighborhood. As already pointed out, the only
commercial area is at Walnut. That is not, despite what the Chamber wants us to
believe, is not a commercial area. So why do we need people traveling at 60 miles
per hour and then we're talking about students at two middle schools. I'm appalled
and I don't live there and I'm appalled. So that's some, one piece of it. When I
read there's going to be minor impacts on all six streams I have to laugh because
when I think of an extra four times the amount of roadway that you have now is
going to have when you have a major water event. Some of the major rain events
we've had, think of what it's going to do to those streams. Just consider that for a
moment. Of course you'll have proper drainage. The other piece that kind of
makes me laugh is when I read that there is going to be appropriate erosion and
sediment control practices. We've been promised that before. All we have to do
is look at what happened with I69 and what's happened to our friends. I would
hope that this is true and that indeed we're going to see the appropriate practices but
we have not seen IDEM and its Rule #5 actually do anything for us so far. I'm
hoping that once again you will reconsider this project and scale it back even
further because what we're looking at is a way of turning this in to a four or five lane
highway. It's very clear from the dimensions that we're being given and that's just
not concrete once again. Thank you.
TRACEE LUTES: I wasn't sure if I was going to say anything or not until I got
here tonight and heard some of Liz, and was taking some notes. I've been very
involved with the Chamber and support. A lot of the activities that are good for
business and I know in the past that we've always, we always look for good ways
and I think everybody in here has to say that there's been times that you've wished
for better ways to get from the west side to the east side. I don't think anybody can
deny that. I don't think the Chamber really looked at this, and I may be wrong.
But I don't think any of us look at this as an opportunity for development of
commercial because there is no place to put the commercial. It's more of a way to
get traffic from 37, which will be the future 69, over to the east side. There's
definitely a need for that. Now I think it's unfortunate that at the time all this
happened we didn't have a Tapp Road interchange so the Fullerton Pike
interchange is there and it kind of was out this road would be a stub to nothing, or
Rockport Road or whatever. And we can already see people coming off Rockport.
There's a ton of traffic on that intersection now getting across Fullerton and cutting
all over with the construction happening it's kind of a dangerous intersection there
21
today. That will change when this is done. But I think now that we have Tapp
Road maybe it would be prudent to consider, not to longer traffic feeds, but also
preventing large trucks and truck traffic from traveling on this route. Maybe we
push them up to Tapp Road because I think that you're going to see them go that
way anyway. I think it will be much more convenient for trucks because I've given
this a lot of thought. I think that's the way they're going to go anyway because that
that road is easy, it's better, it dumps it right out on Winslow, they can go north on
Walnut. It's just an easier way for trucks to get there. And so I think that's been a
good, a good development with the 69 project. Now I want to also ask that you
consider the fact that where we drive past there every day and watch our kids try to
get to school, unlike many neighborhoods that have a road next to them, this…
Unlike other schools that have a road next to them, this school has two
neighborhoods and then a sort of urban area off Rogers where kids have to walk to
school and cross this road to get to the school. They have no choice. They have
to walk. So I want to make sure that you're thinking about a good safe way to get
those kids across the road. We're already seeing slip/slide and I've seen them slide
all the way out in the street in the icy weather even from the Highlands and walking
that way. So I'll hope you'll consider that. I hope you'll consider the fact that
there's a lot of cross country track meets held not just for Bachelor but other schools
have them there in that field. So there are many times that we as neighbors drive
along there and see cars parked all the way down Gordon Pike watching kids run
their cross country meets there. And I also would encourage you to consider
sidewalks on Rogers Street when you're doing this project because you're gonna get
a lot of people hit that intersection and head north on Rogers or south on Rogers.
There are no sidewalks now and you'll see kids walking through the grass and
trying to get across Rogers today. It's not always the safest so I think it's gonna be
getting even more dangerous. At the very least please consider sidewalks along
there for our kids that have to have to walk to school. Otherwise I do think you'll
have some accidents and I don't think that, that it will be very safe walking. And
so those of you who live along that corridor know, my family has been involved in
development along there and we're very active in Eagle View and we were very
active with seeing the platting through of the Highlands and Bachelor Heights.
We didn't finish that project but we were active. In all of our time there we always
knew that Gordon Pike would probably eventually go over that creek and connect
to 37. Maybe I'm too young, nothing was ever brought up that it was going to be
69. As a matter of fact I recall, it may have been an option for 69 as Mr. Dillon
mentioned. You all remember the debates on where 69 was going to go. So it
was not for certain that it was going to be there. There were a lot of controversy
about that. So it's there, we've got it but I don't think it was intended to be such a
highly trafficked road. We actually all envisioned it would be very much like
Gordon is today and would just continue out to 37. And didn't really expect it to
be this huge wide road. Nobody ever pictured that when we were doing those
projects. And I think for your realtors, if you know anybody looking out there and
22
they're looking in that area, make sure they ask their realtor to find out because a lot
of them don't know. It's not out there where it's easy to find. So there's been a lot
of them don't know. We're trying to get the word out and educate that community
but a lot of them are younger and haven't doing it long and they're just not aware.
Thank you.
PAUL JOHNSON: At this time I don't have any others, any others that signed up
to speak. If there are others that would like to come up to speak, I'd like them just
to do it. We'll try to keep to that two or three minutes. If you'd like to come up,
please again state your name.
STEVE BURNS: Steve Burns. I wasn't going to say anything but the comment
that "things change" view. Well, things do change. The world is different than in
1960 or '70 when they envisioned the road. One of the things that changed that
hasn't come up that I want to mention is we have all these walking trails and if you
look, it's not just the kids who have to cross the street. Some of these trails that are
getting a lot of traffic are going to be crossing these new interchanges. Well, not
interchanges, I'm sorry. New road. So at grade level. There will be a lot of
people, a lot of bikes, people out jogging with kids that will be going across these
16 foot roads. One is actually just past the circle in front of Jackson Creek there's
a crossing. One is down at Clear Creek and those are at-grade crossings. I think
ultimately things are going to have to be done to build bridges. The costs are not
realistic because they're gonna have to be cuts, there's gonna have to be a lot of
other changes because things change. So I will wrap it up in a minute but I think
the cost estimates are low ball considerably. I think the cost of maintaining 16 foot
roads, salting them, maintaining median strips which somebody said we can always
have gardens in them. Well, who's doing that? So I think this is a project that
wants to exist because people want projects. But I think the need are not well
expressed, especially now that there's a second interchange.
SCOTT WELLS: Thank you, my name is Scott Wells. You know, people who
are supporting this highway, I call it a big highway now because it's kind of like
morphed like it's on anabolic steroids. When it first started I remember having my
connect list I can definitely see this being a four lane all the way to at least Walnut
Street because that median there is probably going to be eventually taken out as the
traffic increases turning it into a four lane road there. For those people who say
this is great, I'm glad we have this, just imagine this is your property, your front
yard there and now how would you think if this happened to your property. That's
all I'm asking. Just think about if the shoe's on the other foot. The other thing is,
you know, I'm on the Monroe County Plan Commission by the way, and you know
I like to make good decisions based on facts. We have some projects right now
that relates to the neighborhood. We have a fairly big project that is just not that
far north of where Sare Road T's in with Rhorer Road. And you've got a nice tree
23
lined proposed round about or maybe a stop there in the report. The question is
what's the number of added daily trips. I see nothing in this report and if you want
to calculate stuff, I know I69 I remember when Section 4 was going through and
did have some erosion control problems with which we still have some of those. I
can verify with people sitting in the audience that can tell you about that. And
you're going across six different cuts of stream I hope finally we're going to do
something right if the job's done right so water is protected. I got off track but
what I'm trying to do, on the traffic, when you design the I69, if I recall, it's going to
be an increase of 24,000 trips of more vehicles going north and south, of which
one-third or 8,000 trips are trucks. If you've got those numbers figured out why
don't you have numbers objective when it's going to go east all the way to Sare
Road. I would like to see numbers so I can make good decision on we're going to
plan for the ten years our roads. I mean, it's all about traffic, right? We want to
move traffic. We wouldn't be in the problem right now if we had planned this road
way back and the road was already connected then people wouldn't come in and
develop the property and stuff. But the road is already there now. You've got
further set backs from the property. So all I'm asking is, if you're going to do this
presentation, next time I would like to know, I'm sure that number's somewhere, on
average daily trips for the next five years down the road, ten years down the road
because I69, I call it a highway until it's actually connects to the 69 highway. I
don't want to, you know, we need to know what traffic trip counts so when the Plan
Commission members start approving these developments we know pretty much
how much more traffic is going to be there. Thank you.
JENNIFER MIERS: I'm Jennifer Miers. I live at 3212 South Rogers Street, so
my property isn't directly affected by this project but I think I will be affected. I'm
against the project for many reasons people have already recited. But one thing I
want to point out, it doesn't make any sense to talk about this without the larger
context of I69. So we need to acknowledge what other people are doing with that
other project. And as it stands right now this has been a big discussion about how
the plans affect this neighborhood and it's unfortunate that the discussion hasn't
been larger because as I69 stands right now not only are the people in this
neighborhood or the people in Bloomington or the county affected by traffic
patterns and that kind of thing but we're going to be buying two interstate
interchanges in less than a mile. And to accomplish that second one at Fullerton
and Gordon we're going to have to tear up more than seven miles of nature. We're
paying for two interchanges in less than a mile and we're tearing up and creating a
new road which is an additional cost. And frankly this infuriates me that you
would use my tax money this way. Thank you.
SANDY KOUNS: Hi, I'm Sandy Kouns, I live at that corner of Gordon and
Falcon. And I'm a teacher at Bloomington South High School and I have two
sons. My oldest goes to a university in West Lafayette and my youngest son is at
24
South. Anyway, I have major concerns on the traffic and the type of traffic it will
have, the speeds. I would hope that we keep it very safe for the children. I really
felt compelled to speak tonight because in 2009 my son the one that lives in West
Lafeyette was walking to Bachelor and he was hit by a car. He's not like a darter.
If it were my younger child I would question it. But this is my safe guy. And if
there was a problem then in December of 2009 then once all this goes in I have
immense concerns about the children getting to Bachelor. And I am sure that
Jackson Creek area people would have the same kind of concerns. So I just felt
compelled kind of for the sake of my son, to come down and take action. Kids
already have problems. And I just wanted to put that on record and kind of put that
out there. Thank you very much.
HARRIETT KULLIS: Good evening, my name is Harriett Kullhis. I am a
member of the Eagleview subdivision and have been a long time opponent of this
particular roadway. I have no idea why it needs to be 90 feet in width. I have no
idea why the Better Business Bureau or Chamber of Commerce cares because there
are exactly eight or nine businesses at the corner of Walnut and Gordon Pike. So
what businesses are they representing? Are they financial businesses or are they
development businesses? Is it a business that is going to be used to take that area
that is now pristine land and have multifamily dwellings on it. What are they
proposing to … Why are "they" the only, some of the very few people who are in
favor of this. And yet the residents, the people who use that area, who travel in
that area, and who walk in that area because it was a suburban rural area are totally
opposed to it. It does not mean that we want to go back to the Dark Ages. It's not
mean that we're not involved in connectivity. But this is not the place for it.
There is an adequate and above us, Tapp Road, that would be a far superior area and
would allow for the traffic to go in. I can't imagine a truck coming in off of our
area, getting onto all of the north/south arterial lanes are one way in each direction,
making those corners and then winding their way down little roads at 30 miles an
hour with no curve, no lights, no sidewalks to go to IU or any other business located
in downtown Bloomington. So this is taxpayer money that is being wasted. We
do not need two exits within a mile. I lived in Chicago, I can tell you far far better
areas have greater distances than the amount of population than what's represented
by our little community. This is a boondoggle. It is some way just to spend the
money because it's available. They should take the money and use it to improve
the roads that are already there. Thank you very much.
AMEER BEITVASHAHI: Thank you. My name is Ameer Beitvashahi and I
live on Gordon Pike. I have a very brief comment. I heard several mentions of
Tapp Road. Two years ago we had a public hearing somewhere on this when the
lane was four lanes and everyone conveniently glossed over why Gordon Pike was
the better alternative than Tapp Road. I've never seen any numbers, just the,
someone quickly bumbling the affects plus revenue. Well, I'd love to know how
25
many residents and I'd love to know how much, you know, how much more we're
talking on Tapp Road because, you know, I'm not a super road designer but I can
drive from 37 all the way across Tapp Road and count way less houses than I do
when I cross Gordon Lane. Some facts to back it up would help maybe in the next
presentation. Thanks.
MIKE KRAMME: Hi, I'm Mike Kramme. I live on South Walnut Street Pike.
Everybody I've heard here has spoken on the west side of Old 37. I certainly can
understand that. In fact it's basically a dead end ever since I've moved here from
Washington, D.C. in 1989. But I live on the other side and I live just a block off of
Rhorer Road and South Walnut Street Pike on the north side. Many times in the
evening or morning I just sit in my driveway trying to get out because of all the
congestion there of people trying to cut through either going to the east side or
trying to cut down Henderson and down to IU and that area. It's a real choke point
from kind of a rural perspective. Like I said, I come from an area where this town
has no traffic compared to what I'm used to. But because it is rural and the roads
are smaller we do get these choke points. You know, we do need an east/west
connector. The improvements to Tapp Road have been good. I work on Second
Street on the west side by Liberty Drive and you know, what used to take me about
eight to ten minutes to get home from that area will now take me about 35 minutes,
especially if I leave at 5:00 o'clock in the afternoon. So we're getting a lot of
improvements, we're getting the highway through here. We need to consider these
type of improvements but I think there's been lots of good comments here about the
construction of the road and things that can be done even though you may have the
road through Gordon Pike there and you property there will be ways to, you know,
secure the shoulders and the animals and things that are going on in there. I think
there can be mitigations done for that. I think you guys are thinking about that too.
So I appreciate that. Thank you.
SANDRATAKARSKY: I'm SandraTakarsky. I've lived in Monroe County
since 1975. I'm not directly affected by this project. My heart goes out to those
of you who are dealing with this and my praise to all of you who are working so
hard on it. One of the points in the presentation was about the karst. I live on land
impacted by I69. The water pollution continues every time it rains. Rule 5 which
is supposed to make sure that sediment from construction sites does not leave
construction, water is not supposed to leave construction site. But in Indian Creek
Township it's going off the construction site into the karst system and has
contaminated springs and wells. Unfortunately, in the state of Indiana the
highway construction lobby has a stranglehold. I urge you to speak up clearly,
precisely and firmly to all your elected officials.
PAUL JOHNSON: Is there anyone else that wishes to make a public statement
or make a public comment? Okay. If there's no others that want to speak we will
26
stop this public hearing portion of this meeting. If you have questions, if you have
questions we'll be available out in the foyer area for a little while longer.
End 8:30
cf/12/27/14
pj/cf-1/16/2015
Email Comment 12/11/2014
Lloyd Hawkins
Highlands subdivision
Matthew Russell
4000 S. Rogers St.
Rodney Friend
No address given
Geoff McKim
No address given
Name / Address / Method /
Date
John Carter
560 E. Miller Dr.
Page 1 of 40
It seems to me that by completing the new project with a divided roadway, whether it be two lanes or four lanes, will make it safer
for all residents in the area. The median will provide pedestrians an area to avoid trying to cross both east and west bound traffic
at the same time. The road will keep through-traffic out of the sub divisions and the traffic will be on a road that is designed to
Right now, The Highlands subdivision is used as a cut-through to connect Gordon Pike to Rockport Road. Cars cut through the
subdivision in order to gain access to State Road 37. They speed through on roads that are not designed to handle heavy traffic.
These cars drive down Wickens Street to McDougal Street or Hennessey Street and they often ignore stop signs and are well
over the 20 mph speed limit. The Fire Department and Ambulance Service also use the neighborhood to get to calls and avoid
the long drive by using either Tap Road or That Road to get to State Road 37 or Rockport Road.
My name is Lloyd Hawkins and I live in The Highlands subdivision between Gordon Pike and Rockport Road. I am a supporter of
the new project to connect Fullerton Pike and Gordon Pike with access to I69. I would like to see a four lane project that would be
able to handle traffic for many years to come as Bloomington continues to grow, but I understand concerns and I am supportive
of the scaled down version of the project as well.
There was mention of raising the road by about 2 feet from the intersection west. My driveway is on Rogers just south of the
intersection. I currently have drainage issues in my drive due to road resurfacing of Rogers that raised the road above my drive.
How will drainage on my property be addressed to prevent flooding of my property due to an increased road level?
Will the sidewalk on the south of the road be at road level or at my property level? It concerns me to have sidewalk at the same
level as my home considering the proposed proximity of it to my home.
Will the south side of Gordon Pike west of Rogers be regraded to a more gradual slope or will be a retaining wall be erected?
I own property at 4000 S Rogers St that will be significantly effected by the proposed road project. I went to the library to review
the Environmental Assessment and was disappointed that it did not match what was stated in the letter i received. The letter
stated that the entire corridor would consist of a single lane in each direction with a center median. All the maps in the EA
showed 2 lanes in each direction at the Rogers St intersection. Can you please supply me with the updated routing maps
indicated the proposed right of way? I also have a few questions.
Please send a map of the purposed project. Your written description in this notice is poor and extremely hard to visualize.
Your Legal notice of hearing describes in one paragraph an intersection of Fullerton Pike and Sare Road. There is no intersecting
of these streets as they exist not unless some current streets get renamed.
Greetings -- is a copy of the EA for the Fullerton Pike Project available in electronic form?
Any light you could shed on these questions would be appreciated.
Looking over the Final Engineering Assessment for the Fullerton Pike Project I was unable to determine exactly how the
intersection of Fullerton/Gordon Pike and Batchelor Drive was to be treated. We do have students walking from Clear Creek
Estates across Fullerton/Gordon Pike. Will there still be a 3 way stop there? Will it be signalized? We also have more than 20
buses entering/exiting twice per day.
Comment
Des 0801059 Fullerton Pike Corridor Improvements Public Hearing Comments
Roberta L. Taylor
3931 S. Cramer Cir.
Joel Fosha
Clear Creek Estates
subdivision
Terrill Cosgray
3700 S Mae Ct.
Tammy Kawanishi
4011 S. Crane Ct.
Page 2 of 40
This exit should be at Tapp Road for very obvious reasons!!!!
I vehemently disagree with putting an exit off 69 onto Fullerton Pike, a residential district!!! You've heard a lot of people against
this - LISTEN TO THE PEOPLE!!!
I urge the powers that be to reconsider this project This is simply not a good idea. Once the flood gates are opened, the
unforeseen costs of infrastructure updates with no commercial benefits, and most importantly, a greatly diminished quality of life
for the residents, will be the outcome! It’s not too late to drop this project and bury it! I strongly urge you to do so on behalf of my
family and all the family that will be adversely affected.
I am a home owner in Clear Creek Estates and will be affected by the Fullerton Pike road project. I am writing to you as an
opponent of the project. This project was conceived many years ago when there was little or no development in the area. The
plan is simply outdated given the neighborhood development that was allowed to be established in the area. The project, even in
it’s scaled-down form, will adversely affect the quality of life for residents of the three surrounding neighborhoods in terms of
traffic density, noise pollution, lowered property values, the health and safety of residents, and those who will attend school at
Batchelor Middle School. Additionally, there is no infrastructure to handle the increased traffic as it pushes east. The early
morning and five o’clock evening traffic bottlenecks as it is. That Road is, and will continue to be, a not-so-perfect solution to this
problem if an east-west artery needs to be introduced in the area. The negative impact on people, neighborhoods, and costs
would be much less if this were an option.
I'm writing to support the current Fullerton Pike plan as described in today's Bloomington Herald Times newspaper article. I
reside in a neighborhood off of Rhorer Road and am very familiar with the traffic patterns in Bloomington's Southeast side of
town. There is very high need for a major East-West corridor. However road enhancements are also needed beyond Sare Road
to Snoddy Road as well to move traffic further East and North to Rogers Road and then on to Smith Road. Also, Rhorer Road
going East from Sare Road to Snoddy is very popular with bicyclists but the road is very narrow which can be dangerous for
drivers and cyclists; a bike path and sidewalk are needed.
Easy access to the trail is also important to help combat the rise in obesity and inactivity as highlighted on the front page of
today’s paper (We’re Fat, We Smoke and We Refuse to Exercise – The Herald Times – Thursday December 11, 2014). It is
important to point out that Bloomington has been given the honor of being awarded a gold level bicycle friendly community (one
of only 55 in the country). What does it say about our community when we’re willing to damage/destroy a portion of the trail that
makes this community unique. I ask that the committee seriously consider making the exit at Tapp Road to minimize the impact
on healthy activity and living that makes Bloomington a unique place.
A better alternative exsists with Tapp Road. Tapp road with its recent upgrades have allowed for bridges to already be built over
the trail. Tapp Road has many businesses that would love the increased exposure that the increase in traffic would bring. Tapp
Road also has ample room for the number of lanes needed to accommodate the corridor. The Fullerton Pike proposal will impact
2 large middle schools that have a good deal of walkers as well as a number of houses that have been built in the area where the
corridor is proposed to run.
When we moved to Bloomington over 10 years ago, we looked at a number of housing developments. We chose Eagleview
because it was close to everything we needed, but away from the hussle and bussle of the eastside of town. We also loved the
fact that our backyard was adjacent to a “feeder” to the trail. We love to ride our bikes, walk and run the trail. We use the trail
several times a week (even during the winter) and have met some wonderful people on the trail. My husband has spent
numerous hours (day and night) on the trail as he has trained for obstacle course races including World’s Toughest Mudder three
times – which was highlighted in InStride in October of 2012.
Please voice my opinion for me that I am a supporter of the project.
handle it.
Jimmy Ratcliff
No address given
Melinda Johnson
The Highlands subdivision
Jolene Bettencourt
No address given
Page 3 of 40
I support the construction of the Fullerton Pike Corridor. I think the Eagle View neighborhood won an ill advised concession
regarding the number of traffic lanes being proposed for the area. This corridor to Sare Road should be four lanes all the way.
That is what planning for the future is all about. I live on the southwest side of S.R. 37 (soon to be I- 69). Like many others, who
use Rockport Rd. to access S.R. 37 from the southwest, I-69 is going to cause an inconvenience since we no longer will be able
to get onto it without taking That Rd. to Fullerton Pike. The bottom line is one person's inconvenience is another person's
convenience. Being able to drive across I-69 on Rockport Rd. and then take Fullerton Pike all the way to Sare Rd. will be a
convenience for us who have to travel Rockport Rd. to get to the eastside of Bloomington. At some point Sare Rd. all the way to
I am unable to attend the public meeting but I did want to comment on the project. I live in the Highlands subdivision and I think a
new road is very needed. The current way to get to Ind 37 from my neighbourhood is extremely hazardous. The roadway is way
too narrow with no shoulders. The tree overhang on Rockport road keeps the roadway wet and slick most of the time. There are
several deer in the area and no place to go when you see one because of no shoulders. The intersection of Rockport and
Fullerton is also extremely dangerous. The sight line to the west is very limited and when cars are coming from the highway and
you are turning onto Rockport from Fullerton you cannot see if a car is in the dip in the road or not. There have been accidents
resulting in death on this stretch of Rockport because of pedestrians walking at night with no shoulder for them to get on. There is
no lighting on this dark hilly road making it a hazard for both drivers and pedestrians. With the new interchange we are going to
have more traffic on this county road and we need a safe road for the extra traffic. Not only is the road unsafe but what a way for
people to view Bloomington for the first time if they choose to use this interchange and end up on unsafe roads. The ambulances
to Monroe hospital must also use this interchange from the city side because of no Tapp road interchange. If you were to meet an
ambulance on the road there would be no place to get out of the way. There are many safety issues far more important than the
size of someone’s front yard. They could also put a stop light at the crossing for the few students who do need to walk to school.
This would also alleviate cars who live in the neighbourhood from having to stop at a 4 way stop several times a day and night
and all summer when school is not in session. The busses could file out more quickly with a light instead of the stop and wait we
have now. The traffic flow could be greatly improved for all with a stop light.
Please take a very close look at other possibilities other than adding yet another road through dense residential development,
which could prove to be fatal mistake for our young people traversing this direction every day.
I'm afraid I do not see the benefit to adding a connection from Fullerton to I69 when Tapp Road has recently been upgraded,
enlarged, widened, etc. The upgrades already given to Tapp along with its current mix of business/industrial/residential makes a
much better thoroughfare than a non-existent road through untouched growth, a trail system, very close frontage neighborhoods
and a middle school.
The Clear Creek trail is also an major issue for this road. Some type of overpass or underpass would need to be constructed in
order to keep all the patrons of the trail safe from the flow of fast moving traffic. It makes much more sense to use Tapp Road,
which already has a nice underpass for the trail. Tapp Road already has business/commercial offerings, much less residential
frontage and the same access to major roads, and does not cross in front of a public school.
I cannot attend the meeting this evening, but would like to offer my perspective. It is with great concern that I write about the
proposed Fullerton Pike corridor. Since my family lives in close proximity to this road I think the safety concerns are great. I have
a current student at Batchelor Middle School and two younger children who will also walk to this school daily within the coming
years. With the current school schedule my student walks to school in complete darkness for a large portion of the school year.
He must cross multiple intersections, including the main one to the school as it crosses Fullerton. There is already a decent
amount of traffic as all the residential traffic takes it's course on the way to work at this time of day. To take this closed road and
then connect it to not only a highway, but a soon to be Interstate, would substantially increase traffic, much to the large number of
walking students detriment. And it would not simply be an increase in the volume of traffic, but also include larger vehicles,
delivery trucks and such. The Batchelor Middle School cross country team also uses the surrounding neighborhoods and Clear
Creek trail for training runs. They intentionally keep the kids from high traffic areas now, but this would become almost impossible
if Fullerton is an Interstate exit and "beltway around the city."
Verbal Comment
12/11/2014
Page 4 of 40
Good evening, I'm Jim Shelton, I'm representing the Greater Bloomington Chamber of Commerce. The Chamber's been
engaged in the process on this project for a long time representing the 900 businesses that are Chamber members, as members
of the CAC. It has been stated this need been long recognized for improved east/west traffic throughout this entire community,
not just on the south side. In 2006 the Chamber did a survey of its members from key points that needed improvement. And one
of them that came back was infrastructure plans from trying to improve the infrastructure in the community. A team was put
together and a report was produced in 2007 that identified the areas of storm water, water and sewer, etc. and transportation.
One of the things the plan recognized was we need improved east/west traffic capability on the south side of the community and
it recognized that the Fullerton Pike Corridor expansion when it's already in the Transportation Improvement Program. The
taskforce also, at the same time the county leadership created a TIF, Fullerton Pike TIF to produce the funds to match the federal
funding that would eventually be needed and it still exists and it's got funds in it right now. In a recent survey that we did just this
year our certified membership again indicated that they think this road needs to be built, or this capability needs to be created in
Jim Shelton
1716 S. Springhouse
Verbal Comment
12/11/2014
I just want to state that I'm tired of hearing that this revised plan has mullified neighbor's concern about the Monroe County
Highway Department's plan for the Fullerton Pike/Gordon Pike/Rohr Road expansion project and that it has to be built to serve
the need for I69. Simply deciding not to make these residential streets into a five lane mega road which would have been wider
than most of the state's highways passing through the county does not address our real concern. Instead, a three lane road
running past two middle schools, several churches, two rails-to-trails path would bring a high volume of traffic and trucks. By the
county's own estimate an increase of at least 40% within five (5) years. As the first exit off I69 in to Bloomington this estimate
may be conservative. The plan essentially changes our neighborhood streets into a commercial artery. I think there must have
been an error in the report identifying our area as "urban" when it is clearly 99% suburban. As you all know there is only one
commercially zoned intersection along the entire stretch from Fullerton Pike to Snoddy Road at Walnut, Business 37. And no
empty land for further commercial development. INDOT’s directives recommended not placing exits or access roads dumping
traffic through primarily residential neighborhood, i.e. having a low residential impact, and to follow established commercial traffic
patterns. This plan does neither. This is the first public comment meeting on this proposal. Although it would drastically alter the
quality of life, property values, safety of our children, noise and light levels and residential character in many built out established
south side neighborhoods, including the Highlands, Eagle View, Clear Creek Estates, Bachelor Heights and Southcrest. Just to
name a few. Let's not talk about an outdated irrelevant highway plan from the 1960s before these neighborhoods were built and
Highway 37 even existed. How about thinking about what would best serve the people who live there now. This has become an
entirely different project once it was decided to make it an access road off of an interstate highway. Rather than a connection to
Highway 37 or to an I69 overpass. The only reasonable option for this established residential area of mostly single family homes
is to go with an alternative that eliminates any connection to a highway interchange. This alternative being proposed tonight has
the highest residential impact of any of the choices. I think that our neighborhoods deserve the same right to traffic reducing
measures that any other Bloomington neighborhood as opposed to this which is the exact opposite. Thank you.
Thank you for your consideration.
I do not mean to dismiss the concerns of the residents of Fullerton Pike and hope you will work with them to minimize the impact.
Nonetheless, I believe this corridor must be created, and as soon as possible.
This connection is absolutely essential now that I69 construction is underway and impacts are being felt. I will lose (actually have
already partially lost) my access to SR 37. I must now find alternative routes to work and everywhere else I go. People affected
by the I69 project need multiple new options and this corridor makes absolute sense. It would be an important and significant
improvement in my ability to travel safely for work, shopping, visiting and other trips.
I am unable to attend the hearing this evening but wanted to write and express my strong support for the Fullerton Pike corridor
project.
Nan Brewer
3636 S. Rogers St.
Julio Alonso
1865 W. That Rd.
College Mall Rd. may have to be widened.
Verbal Comment
12/11/2014
Ann Elsner
4017 South Crane
Verbal Comment
12/11/2014
Liz Irwin
th
400 West 7 Street, Suite
102
Page 5 of 40
My name is Ann Elsner. I am an IU faculty member and also a business owner of 501 South Madison. So I have a business on
the south side as well as living in Eagle View and I'm very much against this road. My main concern is the safety of the people
who live within this neighborhood. That is specifically dead children and smashed pets. So the four acres you're talking about
removing is where a lot of people I know walk their dogs and go jogging. And the middle school kids work out there. That's not
going to be there any more. Many comments have been made that people support this road. No one in my neighborhood has
ever said within my hearing that this is a good idea. So the people who live there are not complaining about long commute time
and traffic back up. At the present time they're concerned about future back up when the traffic will be coming from Interstate 69
through the neighborhood that was never there before. So one of the things that Nan Brewer has been trying to do is find out the
estimate of increased traffic coming from the connectivity or some miracle where would you put a lot to make thousands more
cars. There's a lot next door to me but other than that there's almost no lots anywhere in our neighborhood. We're full. We've
been full for ten years. There's nowhere left to build if you stick with single family homes. So you can't have more traffic. It's a
dead end road and a lot of cul-de-sacs. To expect people to have a road that's either going to be a high speed road through the
neighborhood because it's leveled off to have those line of sight corrections, so they won't be able to pull out of their driveways in
a safe manner or pull out of their intersection in a safe manner or watch their children go to school or to the play, the middle
school or walk their dog. It really does impact on neighborhood quality of life. I disagree with the environmental statement. The
section in the pages forty etc,, the methodology for the di minimis finding was not given. The data in the back that have
exception after exception from the CAC members, from the residents, those statements are not addressed in the front. But
commute times we're talking about haven't been compared against a critical alternative which is turning left or having to do Uturns because of the increase of several thousand cars a day. So in terms of my commute, let me give you an example from my
life. I put in yet another longer than 12 hour day at the university job and I knew I could get home safely because I didn't have to
worry about a lot of traffic. And I could just drive from the university to my home. If you have a truck route there I will not be able
to do that. I realize time is short so I carefully read the first 50 pages of the environmental statement. I do not feel the costs
reported are accurate. The 27 million dollars does not include the several million dollars required for the bridges. So the critically
alternative of Tapp Road is more than 37 million. But the 27 million doesn't include the bridges or the connectivity to the bridges.
the southern part of our community and this is where our county's leadership has selected that it be. So we support the project.
We are glad to hear that there's flexibility as they get down to nitty-gritty exactly where the roads are going to be, that they can
move things a little bit further south to try to save people's yards or make people able to turn left when they get out of their
driveway. We support the project and take the opportunity to say so.
Thank you very much. I'm Liz Irwin. I'm here today representing the Bloomington Chamber of Commerce. I want to thank you for
the opportunity to share our insight today about this project. The Chamber does recognize that the Fullerton Pike Expansion
Project has been part of the TIF for many years. Jim mentioned our 2007 Infrastructure Task Force report and this report also
recognized that a Fullerton Pike extension was an important project has been identified been the county. And now we
understand that the county is in a position to move forward with this plan that it has long recognized a need for. One of the other
things that is recognized in that project was the 45/46 bypass project, widening of that also which was somewhat of a controversy
from some of the citizens in town but I will just say when you see you people using that now for needs other than just movement
by vehicle. We also see the great multi paths available alongside. I think that's been a great benefit to the citizens of the
community. It's nice to see at the Fullerton Pike expansion project also will have sidewalks and multiuse paths. I think that will be
an improvement to the residents. Also important I think to recognize that Fullerton Pike is identified as one of the first
Bloomington exits on the south side of Monroe County and the construction of interstate is now underway. But it is really a timely
and be moving forward with the project. We need to make sure that we plan accordingly and follow through with those plans in
the necessary time. We understand that the current plan has scaled back some to address some of the concerns of the
residents. At the Chamber we just hope that the project can continue to be serving the interests of both residents and the rest of
the county in terms of increasing connectivity across east and west side of town. And that it will also consider the transportation
needs of businesses and for the rest of the community. Thank you very much.
Page 6 of 40
Clarence Dillon, I'm a geologist and a teacher. I've lived in the area, I lived on South Rogers for five years and my two daughters
went to Bachelor. I worked at Bachelor and as part of my community involvement for my one hour of my education degree I had
to choose a community involvement in the MCCSC and I chose to participate in the discussions about Bachelor Middle School. It
Clarence Dillon
No address given
Verbal Comment
12/11/2014
Hi, everybody. Ms. Beitvashahi, it's going to be okay. Yes, I did say I envied you because I remember (inaudible). Isabella, it's a
juggernaut. Get used to the juggernaut. The juggernaut comes through, it does what it wants to do. Get used to it. And think of
it as all good. Okay? Tapp Road is there, they're going to build an interchange. But a juggernaut says well, if you go through
Gordon Pike it's not so much the residential areas that are worried or they're concerned, it's all that very valuable undeveloped
land on the west side of Clear Creek Trail, think about that. So it's all good depending on who you are. If you own that
undeveloped land it's great. If you live on Gordon Pike it's not so good. But, buck up, the juggernaut won't crush the people.
And so I know better than pretend it's going to stop because we're here today. But I think it's good for people to see what's going
on. Because the more we see what's going on maybe the next time the juggernaut comes in our direction we'll be aware of it and
we'll be able to stop it ahead of time. And I'm guilty, I was not here when I should have been earlier. But I hope not to make that
mistake again. Thanks for your time.
Randall Stephenson
No address given
Verbal Comment
12/11/2014
Isabella Beitvashahi
That's going to be 10 millon at least, right? So those two are actually similar in costs at the present. The engineering plans aren't
complete enough so we don't know how much it's going to cost to flatten the hill top. I have no idea if anyone will be able to get
into their driveways but that's another point. The property values will be limited or impacted but they are saying there will be no
environmental impact or property values or community cohesion in the statement I feel is incorrect. And I'll just leave it at that.
Thanks.
I just want to say, Mr. Williams, it's so nice to meet you, I've heard your name so many times. There's my husband and my little
daughter Iris, she's five months. I have a spirited two year old who is not here, which you're all probably all grateful for that
because he's bonkers right now. He's with his grandpa in Eagleview. I live at 521 West Gordon Pike. You might have seen us
with our two Irish setters. I landscaped the front, take so much pride in our home. I mowed the lawn every day when I was
pregnant because I loved it. I remember our neighbor, Randy, and like no, I'll do it. You make my feel bad. And I'm like but I
love it. When I first heard this, my husband bought the house when he was 25 and I was 26. Claire Perry who was our real
estate agent never told us that this was in the plan. That would have affected our decision I'm sure. But we found out about this
when I was nine months pregnant with my first son. It was like a bomb dropped. And our community is very quiet and that's what
we love about it. The first time I seen everyone rally together, like everybody scared us. And the dreams I had, having my son,
he is (inaudible). We are a traditional home, we follow a budget, have two babies, take care of them. The only place I feel safe is
the YMCA for his preschool and (inaudible) when I can get some time. (crying) They take care of me as much as I take care of
my baby. And it's scary. I'm afraid of the traffic flow. And mostly I'm heartbroken at the change of our quality of life, six years,
our Irish setters were puppies. (crying) My puppies now are getting old and I understand things change but this happening to us
was done to us, we didn't have a choice. I had Ameer, my husband called a real estate agent because even Bob Saltzburg
assaulted us like we should have known. We were young, homeownership is important and it is something to be very proud of.
Apparently dying is something important. I felt that this didn't take any of that into account. And she said, you know, should we
leave, trade it out, what can we do, you know, we have a family, personally I'm afraid. I'm here at home alone with my babies.
All I have is my dogs. She said, stick it out. You're not going to get your money back. Who knows, it may be better. You're
locked in. You wait until it's there. You know, I felt so wronged, like fools, and we're stuck there. And now I'm just, I appreciate
people listening to us. Me being a mom (crying). Thank you very much, Nannette Brewer I'm so honored to have you as a
beautiful advocate. Because every summer when I was out there mowing the law (crying) I was thinking about (crying) I was so
angry, why are they doing this to me. My home is the only place I feel safe. And it feels like such a (crying – inaudible) And I'm
not going to have it any more. I really appreciate your time. Thank you very much.
I'm Sarah Ryterband. I sit on the Citizens Advisory Committee for the MPO, I'm also, in the City of Bloomington I sit the Traffic
Commission. So I bring two different perspectives to this. First of all, I encourage all of you to come join us on the Citizens
Advisory Commission for the MPO where you can weigh in on these issues. (bell ringing) And what is in and not in on long range
transportation plan. Unfortunately, this was planned 20 years ago and like too many projects it simply gets pushed along but we
can make a difference. So I encourage you to. As I looked at this plan, first of all I opposed the original proposal but I'm equally
appalled by 16 foot travel lane. I encourage all of you to think about a 16 foot travel lane. Now our average roadway has about a
ten foot travel lane. When you raise it to 16 foot you encourage much, much faster traffic. You can see that reflected in the
turning radii at all of those entryways. It's meant for high speed traffic. So although this roadway may be designated as 35 miles
per hour, we would hope because it's neighborhood traffic. I would guess, just off the top of my head in looking at something like
West Third Street, that you're going to have people traveling at 55 to 60 per hour through your neighborhoods. And that's a
Sarah Ryterband
nd
820 West 2 Street
Verbal Comment
12/11/2014
Page 7 of 40
My name is Mary Ellen George and the reason I'm against this proposition is the safety for the students. I'm been an educator for
over 30 years and there are 500 students at Bachelor, 500 students at Jackson Creek. That's over 1000 students , many, many
buses. If you look at just the statistics we have a thousand kids, you have trucks, you have cars coming from an interstate. It's
not if an accident is going to happen, it's a matter of when is when an accident is going to happen. As you have said, you knew
this was in the project since the 1960s. I've lived in a house for 30 years, no one told me that I69 was coming. I understand
perhaps a need for an east/west corridor - why Gordon Pike? Tapp Road exists, it will not cost as much, it has less impact on
people and soon if you must have the east/west corridor you use Tapp Road. Highway Commissioner Lynn said in the paper that
you have listened to the people. You have and I thank you for that. Listen to us now - we say no to the Fullerton Pike Corridor,
yes to Tapp Road. Also please take into consideration, many of you have said this is going to be a good thing for the economy, a
good thing for Bloomington, why let me add some sarcasm please – if any of you would like to buy my house, I'll sell it to you.
Thank you.
Mary Ellen George
601 W. Gordon Pike
Verbal Comment
12/11/2014
was not designed as a prison, if you want to know likewise. I can tell you that clearly. And that was 1970-72 and it was told to us
then that this was going to be a connection over to what was then being constructed as Highway 37, of which I worked summers
there. And since that time the 1965 plan has been in place and from that time on every subdivision, every issue of annexation,
every issue of locating the fire house, the discussion about this improvement has been made. The subdivisions out there even
had to contribute through bonding some money to build a bridge over the unknown tributary. And every time these have to be
recorded in your abstracts. And anybody who purchased property has in their abstract some place that this was going to occur.
Getting back to some other issues, when it was discussed about the school, school buses were discussed. And the number of
school buses that come from my area right now out on Kirksville Road, I see five school buses out my window every morning
leaving. All five of those school buses have to take several miles, different routes, to get their students, extra time to get their
students from the west side of 37 because there's no route from Rockport Road to Bachelor. In 1972 that was an objective of
having a connection there to 37 at that time. Not 69. 69 was planned at the very exact same route from the time it was planned
in the late 1950s. I actually sat out there in 1975 with the state geologist, my boss, and he pointed off of Tramway Road and said
this is the exactly where the road's going to go. And that's exactly where the road has been planned and exactly the impact that
it was going to have on Monroe County was conjectured from that time on. It's not new. So school buses, Bachelor, fire house,
impacts, there's some impacts that I see or suggestions - there needs to be some mitigation done in the spring to each bridge
crossing. I do river watch, I wade the streams, I look at the under the bridges and things like that. I've got a little farm, you know,
part of that should not be plantings at the intersections that gets in the line of sight. You know, I have to put up with. My one
other suggestion I had made, oh talk about the drainage and I would hope that all the drainage coming off of the road way will be
going to the sewage treatment plant and not directly in the local streams. So thank you very much.
Verbal Comment
12/11/2014
Verbal Comment
12/11/2014
Tracee Lutes
No address given
Page 8 of 40
I wasn't sure if I was going to say anything or not until I got here tonight and heard some of Liz, and was taking some notes. I've
been very involved with the Chamber and support. A lot of the activities that are good for business and I know in the past that
we've always, we always look for good ways and I think everybody in here has to say that there's been times that you've wished
for better ways to get from the west side to the east side. I don't think anybody can deny that. I don't think the Chamber really
looked at this, and I may be wrong. But I don't think any of us look at this as an opportunity for development of commercial
because there is no place to put the commercial. It's more of a way to get traffic from 37, which will be the future 69, over to the
east side. There's definitely a need for that. Now I think it's unfortunate that at the time all this happened we didn't have a Tapp
Road interchange so the Fullerton Pike interchange is there and it kind of was out this road would be a stub to nothing, or
Rockport Road or whatever. And we can already see people coming off Rockport. There's a ton of traffic on that intersection
now getting across Fullerton and cutting all over with the construction happening it's kind of a dangerous intersection there today.
That will change when this is done. But I think now that we have Tapp Road maybe it would be prudent to consider, not to longer
traffic feeds, but also preventing large trucks and truck traffic from traveling on this route. Maybe we push them up to Tapp Road
because I think that you're going to see them go that way anyway. I think it will be much more convenient for trucks because I've
given this a lot of thought. I think that's the way they're going to go anyway because that that road is easy, it's better, it dumps it
right out on Winslow, they can go north on Walnut. It's just an easier way for trucks to get there. And so I think that's been a
good, a good development with the 69 project. Now I want to also ask that you consider the fact that where we drive past there
every day and watch our kids try to get to school, unlike many neighborhoods that have a road next to them, this… Unlike other
schools that have a road next to them, this school has two neighborhoods and then a sort of urban area off Rogers where kids
have to walk to school and cross this road to get to the school. They have no choice. They have to walk. So I want to make
sure that you're thinking about a good safe way to get those kids across the road. We're already seeing slip/slide and I've seen
them slide all the way out in the street in the icy weather even from the Highlands and walking that way. So I'll hope you'll
consider that. I hope you'll consider the fact that there's a lot of cross country track meets held not just for Bachelor but other
schools have them there in that field. So there are many times that we as neighbors drive along there and see cars parked all
the way down Gordon Pike watching kids run their cross country meets there. And I also would encourage you to consider
sidewalks on Rogers Street when you're doing this project because you're gonna get a lot of people hit that intersection and head
north on Rogers or south on Rogers. There are no sidewalks now and you'll see kids walking through the grass and trying to get
across Rogers today. It's not always the safest so I think it's gonna be getting even more dangerous. At the very least please
consider sidewalks along there for our kids that have to have to walk to school. Otherwise I do think you'll have some accidents
reflection purely of a 16 foot travel lane – what are people thinking – verses these neighborhood. As already pointed out, the only
commercial area is at Walnut. That is not, despite what the Chamber wants us to believe, is not a commercial area. So why do
we need people traveling at 60 miles per hour and then we're talking about students at two middle schools. I'm appalled and I
don't live there and I'm appalled. So that's some, one piece of it. When I read there's going to be minor impacts on all six
streams I have to laugh because when I think of an extra four times the amount of roadway that you have now is going to have
when you have a major water event. Some of the major rain events we've had, think of what it's going to do to those streams.
Just consider that for a moment. Of course you'll have proper drainage. The other piece that kind of makes me laugh is when I
read that there is going to be appropriate erosion and sediment control practices. We've been promised that before. All we have
to do is look at what happened with I69 and what's happened to our friends. I would hope that this is true and that indeed we're
going to see the appropriate practices but we have not seen IDEM and its Rule #5 actually do anything for us so far. I'm hoping
that once again you will reconsider this project and scale it back even further because what we're looking at is a way of turning
this in to a four or five lane highway. It's very clear from the dimensions that we're being given and that's just not concrete once
again. Thank you.
Verbal Comment
12/11/2014
Page 9 of 40
Thank you, my name is Scott Wells. You know, people who are supporting this highway, I call it a big highway now because it's
kind of like morphed like it's on anabolic steroids. When it first started I remember having my connect list I can definitely see this
being a four lane all the way to at least Walnut Street because that median there is probably going to be eventually taken out as
the traffic increases turning it into a four lane road there. For those people who say this is great, I'm glad we have this, just
imagine this is your property, your front yard there and now how would you think if this happened to your property. That's all I'm
asking. Just think about if the shoe's on the other foot. The other thing is, you know, I'm on the Monroe County Plan
Commission by the way, and you know I like to make good decisions based on facts. We have some projects right now that
relates to the neighborhood. We have a fairly big project that is just not that far north of where Sare Road T's in with Rhorer
Road. And you've got a nice tree lined proposed round about or maybe a stop there in the report. The question is what's the
number of added daily trips. I see nothing in this report and if you want to calculate stuff, I know I69 I remember when Section 4
was going through and did have some erosion control problems with which we still have some of those. I can verify with people
sitting in the audience that can tell you about that. And you're going across six different cuts of stream I hope finally we're going
to do something right if the job's done right so water is protected. I got off track but what I'm trying to do, on the traffic, when you
design the I69, if I recall, it's going to be an increase of 24,000 trips of more vehicles going north and south, of which one-third or
8,000 trips are trucks. If you've got those numbers figured out why don't you have numbers objective when it's going to go east
all the way to Sare Road. I would like to see numbers so I can make good decision on we're going to plan for the ten years our
Scott Wells
No address given
Verbal Comment
12/11/2014
I wasn't going to say anything but the comment that "things change" view. Well, things do change. The world is different than in
1960 or '70 when they envisioned the road. One of the things that changed that hasn't come up that I want to mention is we have
all these walking trails and if you look, it's not just the kids who have to cross the street. Some of these trails that are getting a lot
of traffic are going to be crossing these new interchanges. Well, not interchanges, I'm sorry. New road. So at grade level.
There will be a lot of people, a lot of bikes, people out jogging with kids that will be going across these 16 foot roads. One is
actually just past the circle in front of Jackson Creek there's a crossing. One is down at Clear Creek and those are at-grade
crossings. I think ultimately things are going to have to be done to build bridges. The costs are not realistic because they're
gonna have to be cuts, there's gonna have to be a lot of other changes because things change. So I will wrap it up in a minute
but I think the cost estimates are low ball considerably. I think the cost of maintaining 16 foot roads, salting them, maintaining
median strips which somebody said we can always have gardens in them. Well, who's doing that? So I think this is a project that
wants to exist because people want projects. But I think the need are not well expressed, especially now that there's a second
interchange.
Steve Burns
4017 S. Crane Ct.
and I don't think that, that it will be very safe walking. And so those of you who live along that corridor know, my family has been
involved in development along there and we're very active in Eagle View and we were very active with seeing the platting through
of the Highlands and Bachelor Heights. We didn't finish that project but we were active. In all of our time there we always knew
that Gordon Pike would probably eventually go over that creek and connect to 37. Maybe I'm too young, nothing was ever
brought up that it was going to be 69. As a matter of fact I recall, it may have been an option for 69 as Mr. Dillon mentioned. You
all remember the debates on where 69 was going to go. So it was not for certain that it was going to be there. There were a lot
of controversy about that. So it's there, we've got it but I don't think it was intended to be such a highly trafficked road. We
actually all envisioned it would be very much like Gordon is today and would just continue out to 37. And didn't really expect it to
be this huge wide road. Nobody ever pictured that when we were doing those projects. And I think for your realtors, if you know
anybody looking out there and they're looking in that area, make sure they ask their realtor to find out because a lot of them don't
know. It's not out there where it's easy to find. So there's been a lot of them don't know. We're trying to get the word out and
educate that community but a lot of them are younger and haven't doing it long and they're just not aware. Thank you.
Verbal Comment
12/11/2014
Page 10 of 40
Hi, I'm Sandy Kouns, I live at that corner of Gordon and Falcon. And I'm a teacher at Bloomington South High School and I have
two sons. My oldest goes to a university in West Lafayette and my youngest son is at South. Anyway, I have major concerns on
the traffic and the type of traffic it will have, the speeds. I would hope that we keep it very safe for the children. I really felt
compelled to speak tonight because in 2009 my son the one that lives in West Lafeyette was walking to Bachelor and he was hit
by a car. He's not like a darter. If it were my younger child I would question it. But this is my safe guy. And if there was a
problem then in December of 2009 then once all this goes in I have immense concerns about the children getting to Bachelor.
And I am sure that Jackson Creek area people would have the same kind of concerns. So I just felt compelled kind of for the
sake of my son, to come down and take action. Kids already have problems. And I just wanted to put that on record and kind of
put that out there. Thank you very much.
Sandy Kouns
4001 S. Falcon Dr.
Verbal Comment
12/11/2014
I'm Jennifer Miers. I live at 3212 South Rogers Street, so my property isn't directly affected by this project but I think I will be
affected. I'm against the project for many reasons people have already recited. But one thing I want to point out, it doesn't make
any sense to talk about this without the larger context of I69. So we need to acknowledge what other people are doing with that
other project. And as it stands right now this has been a big discussion about how the plans affect this neighborhood and it's
unfortunate that the discussion hasn't been larger because as I69 stands right now not only are the people in this neighborhood
or the people in Bloomington or the county affected by traffic patterns and that kind of thing but we're going to be buying two
interstate interchanges in less than a mile. And to accomplish that second one at Fullerton and Gordon we're going to have to
tear up more than seven miles of nature. We're paying for two interchanges in less than a mile and we're tearing up and creating
a new road which is an additional cost. And frankly this infuriates me that you would use my tax money this way. Thank you.
Jennifer Miers
3212 S. Rogers St.
roads. I mean, it's all about traffic, right? We want to move traffic. We wouldn't be in the problem right now if we had planned
this road way back and the road was already connected then people wouldn't come in and develop the property and stuff. But
the road is already there now. You've got further set backs from the property. So all I'm asking is, if you're going to do this
presentation, next time I would like to know, I'm sure that number's somewhere, on average daily trips for the next five years
down the road, ten years down the road because I69, I call it a highway until it's actually connects to the 69 highway. I don't want
to, you know, we need to know what traffic trip counts so when the Plan Commission members start approving these
developments we know pretty much how much more traffic is going to be there. Thank you.
Hi, I'm Mike Kramme. I live on South Walnut Street Pike. Everybody I've heard here has spoken on the west side of Old 37. I
certainly can understand that. In fact it's basically a dead end ever since I've moved here from Washington, D.C. in 1989. But I
live on the other side and I live just a block off of Rhorer Road and South Walnut Street Pike on the north side. Many times in the
evening or morning I just sit in my driveway trying to get out because of all the congestion there of people trying to cut through
either going to the east side or trying to cut down Henderson and down to IU and that area. It's a real choke point from kind of a
rural perspective. Like I said, I come from an area where this town has no traffic compared to what I'm used to. But because it is
rural and the roads are smaller we do get these choke points. You know, we do need an east/west connector. The
improvements to Tapp Road have been good. I work on Second Street on the west side by Liberty Drive and you know, what
used to take me about eight to ten minutes to get home from that area will now take me about 35 minutes, especially if I leave at
5:00 o'clock in the afternoon. So we're getting a lot of improvements, we're getting the highway through here. We need to
consider these type of improvements but I think there's been lots of good comments here about the construction of the road and
things that can be done even though you may have the road through Gordon Pike there and you property there will be ways to,
Mike Kramme
3850 S. Walnut Street Pike
Verbal Comment
12/11/2014
Verbal Comment
12/11/2014
Page 11 of 40
My name is Ameer Beitvashahi and I live on Gordon Pike. I have a very brief comment. I heard several mentions of Tapp Road.
Two years ago we had a public hearing somewhere on this when the lane was four lanes and everyone conveniently glossed
over why Gordon Pike was the better alternative than Tapp Road. I've never seen any numbers, just the, someone quickly
bumbling the affects plus revenue. Well, I'd love to know how many residents and I'd love to know how much, you know, how
much more we're talking on Tapp Road because, you know, I'm not a super road designer but I can drive from 37 all the way
across Tapp Road and count way less houses than I do when I cross Gordon Lane. Some facts to back it up would help maybe
in the next presentation. Thanks.
Ameer Beitvashahi
521 W. Gordon Pike
Verbal Comment
12/11/2014
I am a member of the Eagleview subdivision and have been a long time opponent of this particular roadway. I have no idea why
it needs to be 90 feet in width. I have no idea why the Better Business Bureau or Chamber of Commerce cares because there
are exactly eight or nine businesses at the corner of Walnut and Gordon Pike. So what businesses are they representing? Are
they financial businesses or are they development businesses? Is it a business that is going to be used to take that area that is
now pristine land and have multifamily dwellings on it. What are they proposing to … Why are "they" the only, some of the very
few people who are in favor of this. And yet the residents, the people who use that area, who travel in that area, and who walk in
that area because it was a suburban rural area are totally opposed to it. It does not mean that we want to go back to the Dark
Ages. It's not mean that we're not involved in connectivity. But this is not the place for it. There is an adequate and above us,
Tapp Road, that would be a far superior area and would allow for the traffic to go in. I can't imagine a truck coming in off of our
area, getting onto all of the north/south arterial lanes are one way in each direction, making those corners and then winding their
way down little roads at 30 miles an hour with no curve, no lights, no sidewalks to go to IU or any other business located in
downtown Bloomington. So this is taxpayer money that is being wasted. We do not need two exits within a mile. I lived in
Chicago, I can tell you far far better areas have greater distances than the amount of population than what's represented by our
little community. This is a boondoggle. It is some way just to spend the money because it's available. They should take the
money and use it to improve the roads that are already there. Thank you very much.
Harriet Kulis
1430 W. Estate Dr.
Monroe County residents need the Fullerton Pike extension. The usefulness of this project outweighs the desires of the
homeowners who did not check the county planning maps prior to building or buying their homes. The road should be a four-lane,
not a two-lane. The existing section is already two lanes and is inadequate for traffic right now. Project to when I69 is complete. It
will be a mess. Make it a four-lane, and stop bending to the wishes of a few to the detriment of thousands and thousands of
people who will use those four lanes every single day.
Sarah Klaiber
No address given
As a resident of Woodhaven Estates, I say build the road. We have always had to drive through neighborhoods to get to
Batchelor Middle School. We used to cut through the Eagle View neighborhood. Now we cut through the Highlands. People
speed and nearly get hit due to traveling on unfamiliar roads. Is that really safer?
Build the road. If someone bought a house and didn't research the area, it doesn't mean their rights are suddenly more important.
This connector road should not be built. It is not needed. Tapp Rd. has been functioning as a major east-west corridor for years.
There are less residences along Tapp Rd. and more businesses and they are all used to having a busy road passing by. There is
much more land available on Tapp Rd. for widening the road if necessary. Tapp Rd./Country Club/Winslow/Rogers Rds. still
connect to the north end of Sare Rd. and therefore to the bypass. Furthermore, Rogers Rd. connects to Smith Rd., making it
possible for cars heading east to Lake Monroe or Brown County to avoid the busy College Mall area.
Marci Creps
Woodhaven Estates
subdivision
Christine Linnemeier
No address given
Page 12 of 40
Another negative effect of the Fullerton Pike-Gordon Pike connector road would be disturbing one of the longer, more peaceful
sections of the Clear Creek Trail. I have walked on the Rail Trail underneath SR 37. It is very noisy and frightens my dog. I do not
walk that part of the trail anymore because of that. Please, don't ruin another walking trail with an overpass.
I do not live on Gordon Pike, Rhorer Rd. or Sare Rd., though I do live on the south side of town and frequently drive on these
roads and Tapp Rd, and walk on the Clear Creek Trail. It is clear to me that building the Fullerton Pike-Gordon Pike connector
will ruin the neighborhood for those people owning houses along Gordon Pike. It will make walking to Batchelor Middle School
more dangerous. Furthermore, it will send more traffic past Jackson Creek Middle School and bring added traffic and noise to
another residential neighborhood—that on the south end of Sare Rd. When the curving south end of Sare Rd. was built, was it
really intended to be part of a beltway? I don't think so.
Also, this project needs to happen, so cars will stop going through the Highlands. It was never designed to be a road.
A roundabout should be put in at Fullerton and Rockport. It would deal with some of the alignment issues with the two roads. A
sky bridge could be put in for the kids, similar to what is on bypass north of town. There is a school there, as well.
Lisa Williams
No address given
Verbal Comment
12/11/2014
I'm SandraTakarsky. I've lived in Monroe County since 1975. I'm not directly affected by this project. My heart goes out to those
of you who are dealing with this and my praise to all of you who are working so hard on it. One of the points in the presentation
was about the karst. I live on land impacted by I69. The water pollution continues every time it rains. Rule 5 which is supposed
to make sure that sediment from construction sites does not leave construction, water is not supposed to leave construction site.
But in Indian Creek Township it's going off the construction site into the karst system and has contaminated springs and wells.
Unfortunately, in the state of Indiana the highway construction lobby has a stranglehold. I urge you to speak up clearly, precisely
and firmly to all your elected officials.
Sandra Takarsky
No address given
you know, secure the shoulders and the animals and things that are going on in there. I think there can be mitigations done for
that. I think you guys are thinking about that too. So I appreciate that. Thank you.
Stephen Schuster
2415 Rhorer Rd.
Kate Arthur
th
400 E. 7 St.
Nathan Schroder
No address given
Bruce Farrand
750 E. Kirkwood Ave.
Page 13 of 40
Regarding curbs - I believe the drainage issues will add a lot of expense to the project. Furthermore they will be a maintenance
problem. Just look at the gutters along Sare Road; they are full of sand, grass and debris. Who will clean them? The County
However east of Walnut Pike to Sare Road I feel the project should take on a more rural and residential mindset. For example I
can see no need for a median or curb on this portion of the project and the large roadway will reduce the front yards of many
homes. The median is impractical both aesthetically and functionally as this is an existing area that has numerous driveway cuts.
How would people get out of their driveways? You can't expect people to go in the wrong direction and then do a U turn can you?
This boulevard approach works on the Sare Road extension because it was a new development and there are no driveways
directly to Sare Road, only a few streets. Additionally because of the older and more rural feel of this area I believe a grass
median or third turn lane (except where needed - like at Jaimie Lane) would look out of place. Also remember people have to
walk across the road daily to retrieve their mail. A wider faster road would make this difficult.
Thank you for your presentation last night. The proposed project from SR37/I69 to Walnut Pike seems fairly appropriate to me; as
this is the connection from the interchange to commercial areas. Additionally this had been in the plan for at least 30 years so
Batchelor Middle School etc were located in anticipation of this.
Glad to hear this went from 4 to 2 lanes, but really this should either not happen at all, or not be an I-69 interchange. I live in one
of these neighborhoods and have children who will be walking to Batchelor. There is nothing down there that anyone needs to
get to, it would just clog up S Walnut/Old 37, be a nightmare for going grocery shopping at the Kroger… it’s already so busy there
with people coming N and S on Walnut and folks going to and from Rhorer or S Walnut Pike, completely unsafe, noise for no
reason in a residential neighborhood/school zone, etc… The thought itself of an E/W corridor is appealing, but as somebody
living over here it seems quite dreadful, and with the trails… It makes way more sense to make this on Tapp Rd., where most
everything is industrial anyway. I am not a fan. If you want to connect Fullerton/Gordon fine, but definitely no interchange, and
definitely not a 4 lane, and definitely lower the speed limit through there.
Do not downgrade this project any further. It should never have been downgraded from 4 lanes in the first place. Plan for the
future growth, don’t deny that will happen. Do not kick the can down the road like was done with the bypass.
As a resident who lives southwest of Bloomington, I feel the pain of the residents alongside the Fullerton Pike project. I now have
a front row view of I69 out of my front door. I knew when I purchased my home that I69 was someday likely coming through. I
also know, now that it is here, the need for a true West to East corridor for the southern side of the city is even more necessary.
And I say West to East, not West to Walnut. The combination of a major interstate and a major university will only make our city
more attractive to new businesses and residents, further expanding the need for this project.
I was not able to go to the meeting last night and have a question. I live at 320 East Rhorer Rd. (the southeast corner of Rhorer
and Walnut Street Pike). I understand you are widening Rhorer. How much of my yard will I be losing? Or how wide is Rhorer
going to be widened on the south side of the road just east of Walnut Street Pike?
Building this road is a bad idea. Don't do it.
Just because something has been talked about for the past 50 years, does not mean it should be done. Times change. Fifty
years ago there were no housing developments or schools in this area. It was rural. South Sare Rd. did not exist. I-69 was not
planned. Clear Creek Trail did not exist.
Michael Kramme
1983 S. Liberty Dr.
Page 14 of 40
The Fullerton Pike project would alleviate the stress on the Southside by adding another throughput for traffic, so traffic from the
south would have Old 37 access, traffic from the west would have Fullerton Pike and traffic from the north would have Tapp Road
As I try to commute to work there are three choices now, north to Winslow then onto Country Club and Tapp road, south to
Rhorer Road then Gordon Pike to Rogers to That Road and 37 North, or go through town to Grimes Lane, Patterson and then
second street. What used to take me 10-12 minutes to go <6 miles to work now takes me closer to 20 minutes. The reason is
urban sprawl; the city has approved all the new construction over the last several years and the accompanying traffic has
increase dramatically. The Sare Road connector has greatly increased the traffic on the Southside too. All of the buildup has led
to safety, access, speed and lifestyle changes for every resident on the Southwest side of Bloomington. This project would give
me a straight shot to the highway so I would be a contributing factor to traffic flow north of the Fullerton Pike corridor.
First and foremost is the need for an east/west connector on the Southside of Bloomington. The Tapp road improvements had
helped quite a bit for commuting and transiting west to east and vice versa before access to That Road was closed. Now it's
congested worst than it ever has been during peak driving time. It also is only a two lane road through Country Club and Winslow
to the Rogers Street circle. Major and costly improvements would need to be made to make it a viable alternative to the Fullerton
Pike project as some vied for. This project would connect completely through to the east side of town making it a true Southside
connector east/west.
I'm writing comments in favor of the Fullerton Pike project as a resident along the Eastside of the corridor. The open house
hearing held December 11 at the Monroe Courthouse had quite a few residents from the Westside of the project (west of
Business 37) speaking against this project. Their overwhelming concern was safety, access, speed, and lifestyle changes as a
result of their current dead-end residential street (including several side-street cul-de-sacs) being changed to a thoroughfare
connector from a major new highway. High speed truck traffic was the top concern, as well as the increased traffic volume. I
would like to speak to these issues as well as my perspective as a resident on S. Walnut Street Pike and the commute I must
make to work to the Westside of Highway 37, off Second street and onto S. Liberty Drive.
I have lived in the area since 1992 and have long awaited this access.
I am writing this message to express my support for the project. I think it is very important to the south side of Bloomington to
open up this access from the I-69 interchange and provide a good quality east/west connector through the area. The changes to
That Road diminish it as a heavily used path to between SR-37 and Rogers Street. I realize that the project will have a greater
impact (with some aspects negative) on those that live directly on Fullerton Pike/Gordon Pike and Rhorer Road, but I think it will
ultimately benefit all the residents of the area to have efficient access to other parts of the community and access to I-69.
I live in the Eagle View neighborhood adjacent to the planned Fullerton Pike project. I was unable to attend the Public Review on
12/11/14 but was able to download and review the Environmental Assessment Des. no. 0801059.
Reed Adams
1310 W. Feathercrest Ct.
Bill Williams and friends keep saying they want to listen to people and give the people want they want. I will repeat again what the
people are saying: “We don’t want this road.”
James Kulis
No address given
won't and it will be impossible for the residents to stand in a busy road and clean them. They will create huge drainage issues
and you will need to build retention ponds as all of this water cannot flow directly into Jackson Creek. One last thought the
bridges over Jackson Creek were just recently rebuilt so they should be to current standards.
Page 15 of 40
I would like to thank Mr Williams and the rest of the decision-making committee for scaling back the project to plan 1A, the 2-lane
Hello, I was at the most recent public meeting you held at the Courthouse, and wanted to thank you, as well as submit a few
questions
Matt Mullins
No address given
I was just notified that Monroe County is considering buying my property because of the Fullerton Pike project. Can you tell me
when I can expect to hear if they are or if they are not. I’m at 320 East Rhorer Rd.
Thank you for your time.
These people just do not want change. Too bad. I am very disappointed that the Highway Department and the others involved
have kowtowed to this small group that yelled the loudest. We had a real chance for the first effective eastwest passage across
the southside of Bloomington, and now it will just be another half-baked traffic jam because the traffic will be there, whether the
road is designed to handle it or not.
Of course, roads with traffic, even lots of traffic, go through strictly residential areas. Drive around Bloomington. Drive around
Columbus, Indiana or nearly every medium-sized community in the Midwest region. They all have arterial streets going through
neighborhoods where there are schools. There is nothing special, unique, or even "important" about the "Batchelor"
neighborhood.
I have no patience for this "Not In My Backyard" mentality and some of the opinions quoted in the local newspaper on Friday,
December 12 are just plain wrong.
I am writing now to voice my strongest possible objection to the small number of people who are holding our county hostage.
Bruce Farrand
320 E. Rhorer Rd.
Jeff Whitmer
No address given
Finally I'd like to touch on the construction process. There are mostly residential properties along this corridor and being able to
ensure right-of-way property isn't damaged and is returned in good shape after the project is complete is very important. I would
hope the crews are sensitive to the property owners concerns and do all they can to mitigate the heavy equipment and materials
interference during construction. Thank you for this opportunity to voice my opinion on your project, good luck.
It will cost more money to responsively satisfy the environmentalists and the Gordon Pike/Eagle View section of this project, but
collaboratively solving the issues and the funding requirements is what this town is all about. Engage the people, have them help
you solve the issues and the project will benefit from the interaction.
Now, for the few that live along the Westside corridor and have concerns for safety, access, speed, lifestyle or that have
environmental concerns, I believe the Fullerton Pike Project Office should engage with them and mitigate their issues as much as
possible. This is an impactful change for them and I'm sure the design changes you've made so far go a long way towards
addressing their issues. Ensuing the adult, children's and pets safety is number one, access onto and off of the new roadway is
second and speed it probably third. Being environmentally responsibility is one of the areas that this city takes pride in, so not
taking this lightly is very important; especially after the issues Section 4 of I-69 have experienced.
primarily. The leveling of traffic flow would allow for safer conditions, the multiple access would lessen wear & tear on the
roadways, less congestion would ease frustration and lower speeding, and a shorter compute with access from the Westside to
Sare Road would improve lifestyle conditions for most of the people.
Greg Alexander
1015 N. Madison St.
Page 16 of 40
The county has a complete streets policy in place. Don't ignore it.
The only way the road could be good at all is if it had a 25mph design speed. That would mean 10 foot travel lanes, 10 foot curb
radii at intersections, frequent stops/crossings/driveways, you know, like an urban road.
By being an oversized road with a divider, it will encourage a limited access mentality. As a result, connecting residential
development will be of the suburban form, vast networks of cul de sacs with only one connection to the rest of the world. That
design discourages biking and violates the county MPO's complete streets requirement.
It will be inaccessible by bike. You cannot put a bike lane on a highway! You have to design the road for bikes. When you put a
bike path beside a road with large turning radiuses, every intersection becomes a body count. You will literally kill cyclists with
this design. AND YOU KNOW IT -- LOOK AT BEST PRACTICES FOR BIKE DESIGN, THERE IS NO SHORTAGE OF
ENGINEERING DESIGN GUIDES ABOUT BIKES. Earn your pay!
Once it meets Sare Rd, it will effectively form a beltway around Bloomington. That would be a catastrophe, substantially changing
the nature of Bloomington's development patterns. If it attracts development, it will be shitty development, AS YOU WELL KNOW.
Look at the development along roadways of a similar design elsewhere in the nation! And that's the best case -- it's also likely to
just be an overbuilt road with no development on it, a high speed corridor filled with people in cars who don't want to be where
they are. It will actively destroy the sense of place.
I cannot say "No", I must say: HELL NO.
Regarding the plan to make a boulevard or suburban highway out of Fullerton Pike:
Overall, I am very much in favor of this road, as it will improve access to the highway, and smooth out the rest of the road,
making it more convenient for most living along that route. I also think that upon completion, most people near the road (not those
directly on the road, unfortunately) will see a modest property value rise with the ideal location near a direct feeder to I-69.
4) Have any attempts been made to accelerate the construction? Beginning in 2016 seems very far in the future. I would like to
minimize the time as much as possible so that everyone can begin using the road and getting used to the new normal.
3) Also, the property on the NE corner of Rhorer/Walnut St Pike is currently for sale. Has any thought been given to acquiring that
property and using it for a roundabout, minimizing the effect on the other 3 corners? I think that would be a perfect plan.
2) Are there any possibilities of implementing more roundabouts along this route? I believe there would be room (and definitely
the need) at the intersection with Rogers and Walnut St Pike. Roundabouts are just so much more efficient than the 4 way stops
currently in place. There may not be much room at Walnut St Pike, but wouldn't that necessitate a smaller roundabout and slower
speeds? Perhaps another roundabout at the entrance of Batchelor would also be suitable for traffic management as well as
speed control to help the drivers stay focused and help the children cross safely.
1) I live in Eagleview, and have 1 child currently walking to Batchelor (crossing Gordon to get there) and 2 more who will be going
in the next several years. Are there any considerations for an under- or overpass? What traffic-control measures might also work
to control speed in that area? I don't have overwhelming concerns about safety, but believe this would be very useful.
Questions:
road with occasional turn lanes. I think this seems like the 'right size' road for the area and the neighborhoods along the way.
I received a flier at my residence asking for my opinion regarding two interchanges being built within a mile on I69 at Fullerton
Pike and Tapp Road.
Thomas Albright
711 W. Estate Dr.
Page 17 of 40
Yes we should have an interchange at fullerton pike. The interchange and the improvements across to Sare rd. will be a long
range benefit to the community.
Ultimately, I would prefer an overpass at I69 and Fullerton, instead of the proposed off ramp. With Tapp Road only an additional
mile north, it seems like a waste of money and will severely impact the area.
2. Noise. The increase in traffic and truck traffic will create extra noise in the area (especially as they are preparing to stop at
Rogers and Fullerton). How will this be addressed? Examples: Signs to discourage and enforce no air braking, very reduced and
enforced speed limit signs (20 mph school zone), no 48-Dtrucks over a certain weight, sound barriers, etc.
1. Concerned that S. Clear View Drive to W. Hedgewood Drive to Estate Drive will be used as a cut through for traffic when there
is a back up at the new traffic light at Fullerton and Rogers. People will inevitably figure this out and it will create excessive traffic
through our W. Hedgewood Drive neighborhood (risking children, pets, etc.). Will this be addressed with speed bumps on Clear
Creek Estate roads (e.g. W. Hedgewood Drive), a traffic diversion from Clear View, etc.?
I share many of the same concerns expressed by my extended neighbors along the corridor being considered for construction
(Fullerton Pike Project). In addition to the obvious concerns of sending increased traffic (truck and car) off of an Interstate (69)
through the middle of our neighborhood endangering children, pets and other pedestrians, there are two concerns I have specific
to the Clear Creek Estates neighborhood:
Finally, funding is still not totally in place for the proposed corridor, and I (along with many others) do NOT want my federal, state,
and county tax dollars used for this project. All travelers would be better served having our current bridges and roads fixed.
This proposed corridor is not even really an east-west artery. It will become, in fact, a southern bypass moving people away from
downtown businesses and IU. During our recent town hall public meeting, someone spoke admiringly of the 3rd street artery and
how everyone is aided by it. I drive on this once a week when I have to--fast traffic makes it unfriendly and causes unease in
negotiating turn-offs. Also, it is ugly; it is almost an embarrassment for out-of-towners to have to take this--especially as their first
introduction to our city.
It is common knowledge that we have distracted drivers. More so in the past few years than ever! Our proposed corridor will be
one of those streets designed to facilitate traffic through suburbs, and we will see deaths of, and injuries to, our children and
elderly.
In the United States, every 2 hours a pedestrian dies in a traffic accident. More than half of pedestrian traffic deaths over the past
decade occurred on “arterial roads” built through suburban sprawl. These factoids come from the “2014 Dangerous by Design”
report by Smart Growth America. These cities’ poorly thought-out corridors were built only in the interest of moving cars, rather
than built to keep pedestrians safe. More than 90% of people hit by cars traveling at 20 mph survive the crash. At 45 mph, only
35% live. These factoids show what WE will have if this corridor is built as proposed.
I am writing to express my total hate of the proposal to complete the Fullerton Corridor. This “corridor” will immediately become
an arterial road going by two middle schools and through suburbs. Only one intersection is business zoned.
P.J. Smith
703 W. Baywood Dr.
Shawn Laszlo
Clear Creek Estates
subdivision
Rosalie White
3853 S. Cramer Cir.
John Chambers
No address given
Sarah Klaiber
No address given
No name given
No address given
Mo Beit
No address given
PO Box 3261
The most important reason is that there is a hospital located at Fullerton Pike and I69. What could be better than a
hospital with emergency facilities right on the Interstate!
Another good reason is that the Fullerton Pike interchange would complete the “beltway” around Bloomington.
There is really nothing of the same importance at Tapp Road. None of the medical offices near Tapp Road at I69 are
emergency facilities.
Page 18 of 40
Logistics! There is NO WAY that extending Fullerton Pike could ease or speed up travel to the east side of Bloomington. There
are way too many obstacles: Count them. Most existing streets and roads are 2 lane and narrow. Predominately residential. Two
schools. S Roger street stop. Intersecting Trails. S 37 stop light. S Walnut St Pike stop. Rhorer Rd/ Sare Rd intersection. Medical
district on Sare. Rogers roundabout. etc etc
I agree with Mary Ann Williams 12/26 Letter to the HT editor for her reasons and many more. The simplest reason is that it
doesn't make sense. Who would it serve? People driving north? It provides no benefit in time or mileage over the present
corridors. People driving south would use 46 bypass. People driving east have ½ dozen options now. People driving west have
the same options . I would guess that few drivers exiting from I69 would select Fullerton pike to go to the east side of town!
Again, please build the Fullerton Pike extension as the originally-planned court-lane road.
We 100% support the Fullerton Pike extension in Bloomington, IN. However, please make it a four-lane road instead of a twolane road. A two-lane does nothing to facilitate traffic any better than the current road does. People along the route will adapt,
and any increase of traffic during “school hours” will be minimal. It’s not like more students, parents, and staff will be traveling to
and from the schools because of a new road. A new road will not increase the number of busses that currently travel to those
facilities. This is a nonsense complaint that is used as a “scare attempt” to discourage road development in Monroe County.
First, I don't appreciate a flyer in my mailbox, which is unlawful. Second, I support Fullerton Pike as an I 69 Interchange with
improvements to the Corridor to Sare Road.
6. Please put stop to this non sense before one of our children die crossing the street going to school.
5. Monroe county is known to kick small businesses out using the environment for excuse but then they are bringing trucks and
semi in and around our schools and residential.
4. Monroe county politicians are known for making these non sense decisions in our schools and our roads. They are in it for
themselves and do not care about the working people. We will remember that when it is time to vote.
3. The people who are making these decision have a stake in this to make money. all are land owners and are making millions
from tax payers. These people do not live in the area and have no children.
2. You are putting our children and our schools in harm's way. This is residential neighbor hood. Kids are crossing and walking to
school in this area. There is too much traffic already going by the schools.
1. Waste of tax payers money to pay for 2 interchanges. We already have Tapp Rd.
-
-
I live in Clear Creek Estates on Estate Drive which is the next intersection on Rogers Street south of Gordon Pike, so this
discussion is directly relevant to me. I believe that the Fullerton Pike interchange at I69 is far more important to have than the
Tapp Road interchange at I69. If the number of interchanges is limited to one, then it should be built at Fullerton Pike:
Roger Innes
2401 E. Rhorer Rd.
Janet and Jim Ault
No address given
Steve Keucher
4621 N. Shelburne Dr.
Page 19 of 40
I also have concerns about the lack of attention paid to the bikeway in the DEA document. There are very real safety concerns
associated with creation of a separate bikeway when it encounters a busy road. The intersection of South Walnut/Old 37 and
Gordon Pike/Rhorer road is especially concerning. At such broad intersections it is very difficult for drivers to see all potential
hazards. When an additional separate lane for bikes is added, drivers will easily miss seeing a cyclist. I strongly recommend that
an underpass for cyclists be created at this intersection, similar to what was done under the 46 bypass. This will greatly speed up
travel time for cyclists, and greatly reduce hazards for drivers and cyclists alike. Given the proximity to Batchelor and Jackson
Creek middle schools, many of these cyclists will likely be middle school students, who are not yet road savvy. For this reason in
particular I would also recommend an underpass at Rogers Road. I understand that underpasses are costly, but this cost will be
well worth it to avoid a tragic death. I encourage the engineers to visit Boulder Colorado to see a well-designed bikeway system.
I served on the Citizen's Advisory Committee (CAC) for the Fullerton Pike Corridor Improvements project and attended two of the
CAC meetings. In reading over the Draft Environmental Assessment (DEA) document dated October 13, 2014, I was pleased to
see that the preferred alternative (1A) for this corridor is now a two lane road, rather than four lane road. As brought up by
multiple members of the CAC, there were serious concerns about creating a large boulevard that would encourage high speed
travel past numerous residences and two middle schools. Changing this route to two lanes with a median should discourage
speeding. However, I am concerned that the lanes are still too wide at 16 feet, and I question the need for a 16 foot wide median,
which creates a very broad right-of-way when combined with the bike path on the north side and a sidewalk on the south. This
large width will continue to encourage speeding, which will be especially problematic in front of Batchelor Middle School. I would
recommend reducing the lane width further, similar to what has been done on Sare Road north of Jackson Creek School, where
the median creates a narrow lane for cars to pass by, encouraging cars to watch their speed.
Please reconsider relocating the project from Fullerton Pike to Tapp Road and Country Club Road.
The State of Indiana and Bloomington needs to carefully plan the building of such projects that have impacts on safety, pollution,
and tax dollars. I do not see that happening with the current Fullerton Pike Project proposal. If you changed the boulevard
location to Tapp Road and Country Club Road this would be less expensive, less soil and stream erosion, and less hazzardous
to middle school students.
The Fullerton Project is proposed to be built in a large flood plain, adding a huge construction expense, removing hills, and
creating immense soil erosion in the streams that eventually run into Lake Monroe, Bloomington's water source.
The projected building of a boulevard that goes past two middle schools would create a hazzard and potentilal death of one or
more middle school students.. The citizens were told that the boulevard would make it safer for pedestrians, however, many days
and nights I see students run, walk, skateboard, bicycle across the road instead of using crosswalks, something middle school
students commonly do. Crossing a boulevard in this manner would be extremely hazzardous.
The cost of the project is a huge responsibility for tax payers. The project would cost less if it was relocated to Tapp Road and
Country Club Road that already has an existing path.
I am a long time resident of Monroe County and wish to share my concerns about the proposed Fullerton Pike Corridor Project.
As a long-time resident of the Bloomington community I fully support the development, finally, of the last leg of the East-West
corridor we’ve been waiting for. Particularly with the coming of I-69 we need this route. Failure to move forward with this will result
in suboptimal traffic patterns, resulting in pedestrian endangerment and traffic disruption in multiple other locations throughout the
area.
Ann Elsner
Jim Schroeder
No address given
Page 20 of 40
Cramming a Gordon Pike connector through our residential neighborhood creates a major truck route off I-69. It is neither safe,
I hope that you consider all that I have contributed, and if you have any questions feel free to contact me for anymore
consultation.
It is also hoped that there will be a grassy buffer with trees separating the northside bike/ped path and the southside sidewalk
with the roadway. This grassy buffer will be more attractive, enjoyable, and safe for the bicyclists and pedestrians. Do not create
another ugly West Vernal Pike in Monroe County.
Instead of this grassy median, I feel that frequent refuge islands could be added for pedestrians and bicyclists to cross this
corridor. Also, to follow the "complete streets" concept, bicycle lanes should be included on both directions for the entire corridor
to accommodate those bicyclists that desire to ride alongside motor vehicles and not have to worry about crossing driveways and
side streets as if on the northside path.
I disagree with the grassy median in the middle of the corridor It is a waste of space with no purpose, as it will not "slow" traffic
but will frustrate speeders that want to pass law-abiding drivers or bicyclists that choose to legally ride on the road. "Road rage"
apparently was not considered when this boulevard concept was designed.
I agree with Alternate 1A in that it will only be one lane of traffic in each direction. I am worried about the speeds that this road will
promote. I would hope that the posted speed limit be no more than 40mph, and 30- 35mph be preferred. Occasional bumps like
that on Moores Pike at Hyde Park(?) would insure proper speeds.
The overpass over Clear Creek Trail will insure a safe separation of automobile traffic and multiple types of users on this path.
However, I am concerned that there is not an overpass/underpass to accommodate the Bloomington Rail Trail. The county's
future plan is to extend this southward, and I envision this extension to Lake Monroe to be a considerable tourist option for
Bloomington and Monroe County. I am assuming that the current design with the grassy median would include a refuge island for
the Bloomington Rail Trail users so they would only have to navigate one direction of traffic at a time.
I thank the designers that have included a separate bike/ped path on the entire north side and a sidewalk on the entire south
side. This separate bike/ped path will serve the "80-90%" of bicyclists that do not feel safe sharing a roadway with motor vehicles.
This east/west connector bike path will provide access for many suburban bicyclists and families to the Clear Creek Trail,
Bloomington Rail Trail, and the B-Line Trail and then link to downtown Bloomington and Indiana University.
I agree with the county that Fullerton Pike and Gordon Pike need to be connected for the many reasons that are listed by the
county planners.
As President of the Bloomington Bicycle Club I have heard many discussions regarding this controversial east/west corridor of
the southern Bloomington suburban area. Also, I would like to stress that this is only my opinion and wishes and does not
represent all of our 200 members that drive cars and ride bicycles for transportation and recreation.
Lastly, I am particularly concerned about pedestrian access to Batchelor Middle School from the south. The wide width of the
corridor will take significant time to cross, backing up traffic, and posing a risk to the pedestrians. This risk could be eliminated by
incorporating an underpass or overpass at the top of the hill (at the intersection of Clear View Drive and Gordon Pike) that could
be used by both pedestrians and cyclists.
One can cycle around Boulder with almost never crossing a busy intersection due to the many underpasses that they have
created for their bike paths.
Denny VanPelt
4081 S. Rockport Rd.
Karen Laucella
Clear Creek Estates
subdivision
Ginny Myerson
4060 Judee Dr.
4017 S. Crane Ct.
Page 21 of 40
Thanks for your consideration in this matter.
Through this road improvement process I have recently had my driveway access eliminated from Rockport Road and am now
concerned with the entry/exit opportunities from a second driveway access onto Fullerton Pike. Since the project is in
development phase I appreciate the opportunity to express my concerns regarding access from my property onto the new two
lane roadway beginning at Rockport/Fullerton Pike. Since my property borders both Rockport and Fullerton I previously had quick
access to the highway with no real concern. With the Rockport Road driveway being eliminated I now have concern about the
ability to go westbound out of my Fullerton Pike driveway based upon discussions with the project team members during the
public hearing on December 11, 2014. I would like to request that the traffic scheme allow me to exit west or eastbound from my
Fullerton Pike driveway without any back tracking due to a median or some other traffic design that would interrupt my westbound
exit.
Surely, you can do better.
I am writing about my concern over the Fullerton Pike corridor project. I live in the Clear Creek Estates neighborhood. My sons
had to walk to Batchelor Middle school during their 7th & 8th grades of school. Unfortunately, for a major part of the school year,
classes start before the sun is up. My children had a terrible time crossing Gordon Pike while it was dark; many times cars would
not see them or simply choose not to stop. They had to back up quite a few times when cars started through the intersection
while they were starting to cross the road. My point is that the intersection is already unsafe for children having to walk and cross
Gordon Pike; making this road a corridor will only exacerbate the problem. For our children's safety, please use a better option. I
am also confused as to why we need to spend an exorbitant amount of public money that will result in two interchanges within a
mile.
I am sending a copy of this comment & question to the H-T reporter, Rachel Bunn, whose article on Dec. 11 was on this topic and
am hoping she will do some research & reporting that can explain why there have to be TWO exits that fill a need for an eastwest corridor within a 1/2 mile of each other when the existing route (Tapp-Country Club-Rogers corridor) already serves that
purpose and does not upset residential or school routes?
I don't understand why no mention is made of the Tapp road east-west route off of I-69 that can serve the same purpose as the
proposed Fullerton Pike route. I was not at the public meeting about this but I read in the H-T that some people mentioned this.
So if Tapp Rd. is already in place as an exit & does not have the objections about the effect on residential areas as does
Fullerton Pike proposal, why does Bloomington need another east-west route so close-by?
The proposed road needs new funding, so why would we waste money on an east-west artery instead of improved access to the
new IU Health facility, which will be north?
environmentally sound, nor cost-effective. Thousands of cars and trucks are predicted to roar through our yards. Will we still have
children walking to Batchelor Middle School, sports teams working out on the grass, neighbors walking their dogs, families
enjoying the Clear Creek Trail, or cyclists safely crossing on the B-line? The FHWA Environmental Assessment form in the
Monroe County Library has mistakes. Cornfields and mainly single family homes were classified as “urban.” It was concluded that
building this southernmost connector to I-69 would not increase noise. The report said that building a wide artery with thousands
of extra cars and trucks racing on steep grades, where there is now a dead end road, would not affect community cohesion. The
report concluded that property values would not decrease. The acres of woods and grassy fields being exchanged for pavement
were not considered as important to the environment or drainage.
As proposed, our concerns are that these plans/designs will significantly affect the safety, security, habitability and value of the
residence located at 1909 Rhorer Road. As proposed and presented, the project will bring the right of way (roadway/trails etc) to
Mailed Comment
Page 22 of 40
We have concerns with the designs and plans involved with the acquisition of property for the proposed Rockport Road to Sare
Road project, Designation #0801059.
I urge you to examine the area yourselves and look carefully at what a disastrous effect the proposal now in place will bring.
Other obvious, more immediate issues such as driveway access for those homes directly on Gordon Pike, wells and septics in
front yards are also problematic, as is how the bus & parent pick-up back-ups at the schools will be addressed. How will this be
an efficient traffic-moving artery when there are two schools, 2 nursery schools, and numerous driveways and development
entrances that will feed into it.
A smaller connecting road with slow residential & school zone speeds, etc. would not be opposed by most of the neighborhoods
that will be impacted. On the other hand, a roadway that takes up a 70 ft wide footprint, and allow semis to barrel along at 40 mph
will in no way enhance our lives, natural areas and/or ability to traverse through town more quickly. (The north/south feeders that
will connect will be totally inadequate to absorb the anticipated increased traffic flow/ ie. garden hose reducing to a soda straw
effect if you will.)
Our neighborhoods will be less safe, noisy, polluted, disrupted. Our natural areas will be interrupted and noisy, with unknown
other ecological effects and the quality of our lives will be sorely diminished. This plan is not going to enhance our well-being in
any manner and I encourage you to look more deeply into the ramifications and consider the trade-offs that will be made if it is
allowed.
Putting this road through a suburban, developed area makes little logical sense & the vision of this connecting roadway from
many years past is not in touch with today's reality of development. There was no highway 37, nor Tapp rd. exit, nosaturated
residential development. It is therefore an outdated vision.
I question the criteria used to dismiss other ideas for a new west-east connector ...we were told in brief that other options were
considered & dismissed with no explanation of what the dismissals were based on.
As a nearby resident in Batchelor Heights, I have many reservations regarding the proposed Fullerton Pike project. Primary is the
safety of residents and children who must cross Fullerton Pike. (In the dark at certain times of year) Adequate speed controls and
access must be be implemented as the road passes developments containing hundreds of homes and those people need
admittance on and off the roadway. In questioning Structurepoint, (Dec. 11 meeting) these details seem to be unknown. The
currently proposed roadway with 16 ft. wide lanes, will, in my opinion, encourage faster speeds and make our neighborhoods
unsafe and inaccessible to those who are bordered by the roadway.
I reside in the Highlands 2nd Addition very near the proposed exchange site, a very short 1/2 block away as a matter of fact. I do
want to voice my opinion about the proposed route despite the fact that I do not have children in my home. The children belong to
my friends and fellow neighbors and I am in agreement with their concerns for their children's safety. Personally, I do not believe
we need to construct two interchanges within one mile of each other, nor do we need the added expense for the additional
construction. I do not believe that such a costly endeavor is in any way a benefit to our area. It will only increase vehicle
emissions pollution, road disrepair (already an issue), traffic and traffic noise. We can already hear traffic on SR 37 and the
Bloomington Speedway, do we really need to add to that scenario? What happened to our property rights of "peaceful
enjoyment"? I am encouraging you to reconsider and redirect this project. Count me against this construction!
Fred Dunn
1909 Rhorer Rd.
Joan Keeler
3927 S. Cramer Cir.
Deborah Thompson
3895 S. Bushmill Dr.
Ann Elsner
4017 S. Crane Ct.
Sean and Rachael Streff
No address given
01/05/2015
Page 23 of 40
2. On page 43, there is a prediction that there would be no increase in noise, but this cannot be correct. The current Gordon Pike
1. On page 16, the proposed arterial road is marked as “urban,” when in fact there are cornfields, park land, and mainly single
family dwellings. The only commercial area is one intersection at Walnut St. and Gordon Pike/Fullerton Pike. This small shopping
area is already well-served by Walnut St. providing the north-south continuity to other east-west connectors that have less
challenging grades, with the rightof-way to permit roundabouts.
There are several conclusions of “no impact” made in the front section of the report that are in conflict with data, as well as the
discussion from the neighborhood residents. Here are some of the most obvious mistakes or incorrect conclusions, any of which
should lead to a rejection of FONSI.
I urge that the Environmental Impact study for the proposed Fullerton Pike project be shown to demonstrate significant impact.
Please do not agree with and sign the documentation for a finding of no significant impact (FONSI), since there is significant and
negative environment impact. The negative impact on the environment is far greater than that in the conclusions at the beginning
of the report. Evidence of this negative impact is contained within this document, the comments from residents and the end of the
document, records of public hearings, and other sources. The data show that the conclusion of FONSI is unwarranted. The
projected costs will be discussed in another letter.
For these reasons and many more, my wife and I staunchly oppose this new road. We are abhorred at the lack of disregard for
the communities that will be affected by this project You are not just building a road, you are ruining a nice and quiet family
community, homeowners property values, and a beautiful park.
When I moved here, I fall in love with the Clear Creek Trail. You can take a peaceful run through the woods. This new road will
go directly through this beautiful landscape. The wonderful ecosystem and tranquility trail, will be destroyed by one road.
Not only will this road damage our community, it will also damage the price of my house. It will deeply impact this facet, and being
a new homeowner, this is highly frustrating and saddening.
My family and I recently bought a home in this area. We moved from Illinois. We were having a baby at the time, and wanted to
get away from all the fast paced traffic that you find in Illinois. So, when looking for a neighborhood to live in, we wanted a quiet
and safe community. We purchased this home based on these facts. We live on the north side of Gordon pike, which is directly
next to the new road that is being proposed to build. This new road will be a huge detriment to our quiet neighborhood. Also, My
wife and I have a 4.5 month old girl, her bedroom faces Gordon Pike. This new road will make her room loud and noisy,
especially when she will be sleeping. Moreover, this will create a unsafe living condition for her, since the road will be much
closer to our house now.
Thank you for your time and attention. We look forward to successfully resolving our issues and concerns with you at your
convenience.
It is suggested and requested that the proposed 16'wide grass median from the bridge to the Sare Road intersection be omitted
in favor of multi-lane travel on Rhorer Road between the new bridge and the Sare Road roundabout/signal.
within a few yards of the existing residence (1909 Rhorer Road), raising concerns of safety, security, habitability, noise pollution
and property valuation. In addition we are concerned that, as proposed, the only access to the property will be by right turn only
entry/exit due to the proposed 16' grass median. The replacement of Monroe County bridge #610 over Jackson Creek will further
complicate/affect these concerns.
Page 24 of 40
One of the most hotly debated aspects is property values, which were concluded not to decrease. Numerous neighborhood
residents have stated that they believe that their property would be worthless. Home with the largest decrease in value are those
that would not be acquired but would be left with a large and busy road only feet from their windows. The costs of the
This report does not adequately address maintaining diversity. There is a majority of single family homes, but there are also
condo and a few areas with trailers. Neighborhood residents hope to preserve the balance of housing options to maintain
diversity. At present, homes that have virtually no yards have open space and access to a quiet Clear Creek Trail system. If the
proposed, oversized road is built, it would be exceeding difficult to provide an acceptable quality of life for families living in condos
on a noisy road with increased truck emissions, or those in the trailers that do not have much yard space. The individuals who
live in condos and trailers would be losing a significant proportion of their only open recreational land, 4 acres of grass within 2
blocks and a large number of acres of wooded areas scattered over the project.
Community cohesion is far more than sharing a school. Residents living both north and south of Gordon Pike/Fullerton Pike use
the park land that is the southern fields of Batchelor Middle School because we do not have another neighborhood park or
undeveloped space elsewhere. These open lands are places where sports teams work out, cross country meets are held, people
jog and walk their dogs, and other activities that help preserve community cohesion. Residents of our neighborhood walk from
their homes to the Clear Creek Trail for walking, jogging, skating, and biking. At present, the path along Gordon Pike is used by
residents along or in combination with the Clear Creek Trail. This trail provides a truck-free haven for daily recreation throughout
the day. Groups of moms with strollers use the Clear Creek trail for community building through play dates. Small groups
exercise after work and on week-ends. Parents from our neighborhood and all over Bloomington teach their children to ride bikes
on the Clear Creek Trail.
3. On pages 44 – 47, there are a number of related items that are incorrect, such as community cohesion marked as “no” impact
and “no” for decrease in property values. As for cohesion, the cartoon by Joe Lee in the local paper, the Herald-Times, pointed
out that the proposed road would be impossible to cross for the Batchelor Middle School children, of which there are roughly 500.
Our neighborhoods are already built out and existing neighborhoods, with some on the south side of the road and some on the
south, some in Bloomington and others in Monroe County. All feed students into Batchelor Middle School and its after school
sports and activities. One pedestrian bridge for the 2.7 mile long road has been proposed, but even that seems impossible given
the steep grade and lack of space for needed right of way. Community cohesion would be negatively impacted because parents
would not allow theirchildren to cross north or south to their friends’ homes of the activities at the school. Children are unlikely to
walk a mile or more in the wrong direction just to use the bridge, then walk back. The proposed road would be unsafe for
children.
is a steep and dead end local road that provides access to larger connectors for neighborhoods abutting, and both north and
south of the road. Homes are arranged in a series of housing additions and cul de sacs. The proposed road goes virtually
through back, front, and side yards, sometimes directly under bedroom windows of residents. At present, Gordon Pike does not
even connect to SR 37. The connectors are at the other ends of the housing additions where the grades are not as steep. If
Gordon Pike/Fullerton Pike is turned into the southernmost exit for Bloomington from I- 69, there would be a significant increase
in noise 24/7. The models have not been clearly presented or analyzed as to the traffic pattern or speeds that the vehicles would
be travelling. The estimates of cars have been predicted to escalate to somewhere between 4000 and 7000 vehicles per day,
with considerable truck traffic. At the present time, there is virtually no nighttime traffic, and trucks are only utility vehicles, safety,
or delivery trucks because there are no businesses in these quiet residential neighborhoods, but this is projected to change to 24
hr truck traffic.
Nancy A. Newton
1598 E. Rhorer Rd.
Jim Shelton
No address given
Harriet Kulis
1430 W. Estate Dr.
Page 25 of 40
Having resided at 1598 E. Rhorer Rd since 1972, I have witnessed dramatic increase in the traffic on our once-rural road. In the
past several years, the volume of traffic on Rhorer Rd, along with the speed of most of the vehicles that use it, has turned it into a
truly dangerous artery. This reality is dismaying to me.
I understand that the current plan for Fullerton was scaled back to address the concerns of residents. It is hoped that an
agreement can be made that serves the interests of the residents along the corridor and the County, while continuing to address
the connectivity and transportation needs of our growing community.
Fullerton Pike is identified as the first Bloomington exit on the south side of Monroe County and construction of this interstate is
currently underway. With this in mind, it is essential that we plan accordingly and move forward with the project. Without this
project, traffic exiting at Fullerton (including traffic from Crane and Westgate) will work its way east through neighborhood streets.
It would be much safer if there were a path prepared to handle this traffic. Fullerton/Gordon/Rhorer is that pathway selected by
county officials.
I support the County’s decision to move forward with this project at this time, with the understanding that it would greatly improve
east-west connectivity and that expanding Fullerton has been the County’s intention for many years.
The straight road with minimal curves will allow for high speeds. The County does not have the patrols to enforce lower speed
limits, as we see at Tapp Road. Beyond aesthetics, noise, and safety, there is the cost. Tapp Road is a major intersection, just
one mile north, that is available for I-69 users to enter Bloomington. Why are we taxpayers spending $27+ million (est.2013),
including bridges, for a duplicate road? This is waste of our money for a redundant road that continues to lead to nowhere.
The project would consist of one 16' wide travel lane in each direction, plus 4.7' of gutters and curbs, separated by a 16' wide
grass median, a 5’ wide sidewalk, a 10’ wide multi-use path with berms on each side.
I am frustrated by the proposed Fullerton Pike Extension. This 80’ wide swath will cut through residential areas, in front of
schools, churches, and day cares. All of the north-south connecting streets are one-lane each direction, with no plans for
improvement. There are life safety hazards, zoning concerns, loss from removing the bucolic setting, and considerable
environmental hazards, e.g. pollution from semi-trailers, autos, noise and building on the fragile karsts.
Property values would be negatively impacted by the increased noise and pollution of thousands more vehicles per day through a
residential neighborhood. Property values would be negatively impacted by the loss of parkland and its replacement by an ugly
and noisy road. Property values would be negatively impacted by the difficulty in crossing busy traffic to leave home or return
home, or get to Batchelor Middle School. Property values would be negatively impacted by the loss of community cohesiveness.
Property values would be negatively impacted by the significant decrease in safety and the increase in travel times because
residents would now have to turn left across busy traffic either to leave home or return, whereas now the traffic is light and
commuting from this neighborhood is quick and safe.
construction to homeowners would decrease property values, particularly given that it would be clear to potential buyers that
homeowners could be required to pay to move septic systems or other utilities such as the buried electric lines and internet and
telephone cables. The grades and changes in heights of hundreds of driveways, which directly connect with Gordon Pike or
Fullerton Pike, would also lead to sizeable costs to homeowners because some would be too high and some too low to connect
with the wide road that is proposed. The grades of all these driveways could be considerably steeper. Homes with difficult access
are not sought out by potential buyers.
Stephen A. Wolter and
Lynn M. Jamieson
3924 S. Nimit Dr.
Steve Brewer
3636 S. Rogers St.
Page 26 of 40
In reviewing the overall purpose of the Project in various documents there appears to be a major misidentification of the projects
purpose. Although intended as a “quality” east-west transportation facility allowing enhanced connectivity to the City of
Bloomington business district and Indiana University from the south, the project actually constructs a southern IN 45/46 Bypass
I am concerned about how an increase of over 50% more traffic(ADT) by 2030, including at least 5% trucks, will effect the northsouth residential cross streets off of this proposed high-volume access route off of I-69. These roads are not slated for any
improvements. How will all of this traffic be encouraged to go down to the county's existing commercial artery (Walnut
Street/Business 37), rather than turning up earlier residential streets, like Rogers Street, which is steep, narrow, and 100%
single-family residential up to Tapp Road? This area already backs up at rush hour, making it impossible to get out of our
driveways. Instead of a traffic light, which will just increase the problem on Rogers Street and Gordon Pike, could there be a
round-about at this intersection by Bachelor Middle School like those at Jackson Creek and Tri-North Middle Schools? Will these
cross streets be no truck routes and will there be traffic claiming devices and sound abatement (as there should be along Gordon
Pike and Rhorer Road as well)? The environmental impact to the residents of this south-side neighborhood extends beyond the
homes immediately adjacent to this proposed mega-road project. These issues are not addressed in the Environmental
Assessment and would only increase the costs for Alternatives 1 or 2 (i.e. connecting a series of residential streets to an exit off
of an inter-continental highway), making this alternative the wrong choice for a built-out residential community surrounding two
public schools. When we brought our property in 1997 and later when we added on an addition in 2002, we did our due diligence
and contacted the MCHD and were NOT told that Fullerton Pike would be the first exit into Bloomington from the south off of I-69
and that other existing east-west connections to Highway 37 would be eliminated. This is not the same road project that was
discussed in the 1960s, when our 1870 farm house was one of the few homes in the area and neither of the schools or even
Highway 37 existed. As such, this road project should be removed from the TIF and new alternatives that reflect the current
reality and residential character of this area should be discussed with the appropriate amount of public involvement. I support
Alternative 3 (without a connection between Fullerton Pike and Gordon Pike), which would improve the safety and livability of our
neighborhood, rather than doing the exact opposition.
On financial grounds, on engineering grounds, on issues of school and residential safety, I register my strongest opposition to the
proposed Fullerton corridor. I trust you will share my views with those who are charged with decisions about traffic patterns in
Bloomington and Monroe County.
I question the project’s financing in the context of the very dubious engineering idea of taking a major thoroughfare through a
well-known karst area – and why in the world such a route should be chosen when, just north of it, there is already a perfectly
constructed connection of Winslow/Country Club with our Bypass Highway! Why undertake such an expensive and
environmentally destructive project when a wider east-west corridor already exists with a well-engineered connection to the
highway? Could it be the objections of the owners of the Bloomington Country Club? I do not know the answer to this last
question, but I would certainly like to know if my suspicions are valid. It also appears to me that there are fewer residences to be
disturbed by such construction on the Tapp/Country Club/Winslow route than on the Rhorer Rd one.
I share the concerns about this proposed corridor expressed by Mary Ann Williams in her recent letter to the editor published in
the Herald-Times. She highlights the very negative impacts that the corridor’s traffic would have on Batchelor and Jackson Creek
middle schools – dangerous traffic, traffic congestion, terrible traffic noise, dramatically increased traffic pollution; painful loss of
somewhat peaceable surroundings. She also questions the projects’s financial accountability.
But the dismay I feel about the current traffic load and the speed that most cars and trucks use when on Rhorer Rd pales in
comparison with the negative responses I feel toward the proposed Fullerton corridor.
Page 27 of 40
Collisions and near misses among users and/or their vehicles are promoted by poor trail design: These trails have significant
The design of the trail features, while making connections between Bloomington's primary north-south trail connections do so by
creating an experience that crosses major roads at grade and alongside very high noise, high speed and significant truck traffic.
This investment should be reconsidered to reflect standards found in federal research related to conflicts on trails. In
"CONFLICTS ON MULTIPLE-USE TRAILS: Synthesis of the Literature and State of the Practice Sponsored by The Federal
Highway Administration and The National Recreational Trails Advisory Committee" it was found that many situations or
conditions caused by other trail users can keep visitors from achieving their desired trail experiences. This interference is due to
safety concerns is a common source of conflicts on trails and a number of threats to user safety that can occur on trails. Some of
these include:
It is documented in the development proposal and documents that "An additional project consideration is connectivity of the local
trail network. The proposed project corridor crosses three public trails including the Clear Creek Trail, the Bloomington Rail Trail
along Clear Creek which is an extension of Bloomington Rail Trail, and the Sare Road Trail. The majority of existing trails within
the community are configured in a north-south direction, resulting in a lack of connectivity. This project proposes an east-west
connection via multi-use path and sidewalk across the south side of Bloomington, which would tie the three aforementioned trails
together."
Specifically regarding the Fullerton Pike Project Trail Analysis
Result: The Project Scope and EIS as published are flawed and must be restudied to reflect the assumed and implied increased
traffic volume, traffic patterns, and associated impacts to existing properties in the Fullerton Pike project Corridor and continuing
through Bloomington to include Sare Road to IN 45/46.
2) The primary need for this project is the lack of an east-west transportation facility that would allow enhanced connectivity from
the south to the city of Bloomington business district and Indiana University, accommodating the input of traffic resulting from the
proposed I-69 interchange at Fullerton Pike and existing State Road 37 (SR 37), as well as improving cross-town traffic along the
south side of Bloomington. Businesses, residents, and emergency vehicles alike are challenged by the difficulty of accessing the
city of Bloomington from the south and accessing primary arteries to reach other areas of the state I contend these project scope
descriptions are incorrect. Instead, the project scope should state that the primary need for this project is the lack of a completed
southern connection to the IN 45/46 Bypass from I-69, IN 37 and other points south of the municipality of Bloomington, IN. The
project also includes a signficiant east-west transportation facility that would allow enhanced connectivity for Bloomington and
Monroe County long identified inadequate transportation access in the east-west direction.
1) the Fullerton Pike Project has current classifications of Rural Major Collector west of SR 37, an Urban Minor Arterial from SR
37 to Sare Road, and an Urban Major Collector from Sare Road to Snoddy Road.
Specifically regarding the Fullerton Pike Project Scope:
extension to I-69. There is no current planned or identified alternative to using the Fullerton Pike project as the southern
connection to IN 45/46 thereby making this project the defacto connection. The resulting estimates of traffic volume and noise as
depicted in all planning documents are in fact erroneous. The increased number of vehicles who will be using this access method
to travel from points south of Bloomington, IN to connect to major shopping and residential areas on the east side of
Bloomington, as well as to major east travel on Indiana State Highways is significantly underestimated in the planning
documents. The result is that the EIS for the project is in fact inadequate and flawed.
Whitney A. Gates
542 S. College Ave.
Page 28 of 40
I fully support the expansion of Rhorer Road/Gordon Pike/Fullerton Pike to SR 37/I-69. What is the timetable for bridging the gap
from the current proposed expansion and connecting it to I-69?
However, the analysis is flawed as it was conducted for a limited time frame during one day and does NOT consider the impact of
noise from the increased traffic of a bypass use during evening and night hours. These hours are significantly important to the
health of individual residents along the project, and recent studies show a correlation and causation between overall public health
and noise. The October 2014 analysis is subject to a much more thorough analysis. The project noise analysis is inadequate as
the increased evening and night traffic noise will have substantial degradation to the health of residents along this corridor. 337
residential properties will be affected more or less and it is clear that the inadequate analysis has led to conclusions that do not
support development of more noise barriers particularly taking into account elevated portions of the FullertonPike Project which
transmit increased, longer and evening-night noise into residential areas that are lower than the roadway.
The EIS suggests that a 1574 foot long noise barrier is considered reasonable and feasible at the existing (and proposed) rightof-way limit along the north side of Fullerton Pike from near Clear Creek to Wickens Street, subject to the views of property
owners and residents. It is feasible because the barrier would reduce noise levels by at least 5 dBA for the majority of impacted
receptors and benefit 23 dwelling units. A ten-foot barrier at $30 per square foot would cost $20,520 per benefitted receptor,
which is below the $30,000 cost- effectiveness criterion for locations where homes are in place before the new road is built. This
appears to be the only mitigation suggested.
Specifically Regarding the Fullerton Pike Project Noise Analysis
Using this set of standards in analysis of the Fullerton Pike Project shows that the proposed design and operating traffic speeds
for trucks/vehicles are too high for safe pedestrian and bicycle travel along this corridor, especially given proposed sight
distances, traffic volumes and driveway frequencies, and the future installation of a traffic lights. One method to mitigate this poor
design would be a separated 6-8 foot median with trees, trail user overpasses-underpasses at the 3 major intersections, and
carrying the design through the crosswalk at the intersection to include high visibility-user initiateded-prompt response crosswalk
flashers at the 3 main intersections. These efforts included a community workshop and numerous publicaly-held meetings of the
MPO Policy and Technical Committee.
Further, the Bicycle Level of Service Model is based on the research documented by the Transportation Research Board of the
National Academy of Sciences footnote. It was developed using data from over 150,000 miles of evaluated urban, suburban, and
rural roads and streets across North America. Many urban planning agencies and state highway departments are using this
established method of evaluating their roadway networks. These include Anchorage AK, Baltimore MD, Birmingham AL, Buffalo
NY, Gainesville FL, Houston TX, Philadelphia PA, Lexington KY, Sacramento CA, Springfield MA, Tampa FL, as well as the
Delaware Department of Transportation (DelDOT), Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT), New York State Department of
Transportation (NYDOT), Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) Maryland Department of Transportation (MDOT) and
many others.
possible collision and near miss locations at 3 major north-south intersections including Walnut Street Pike, Walnut Street, and
Rogers Road. No plans for high visibility-user initiated-prompt responding crosswalk flashers are planned or for trail overpasses
or underpasses in an east/west direction
Nan Brewer
3636 S. Rogers St.
Liz Irwin
th
400 W. 7 St., Suite 102
Page 29 of 40
3) How were the traffic counts (ADT and hourly volumes) determined? In one place in the report it gives a figure for increased
ADT as 7,500, while in another as 13,976. Which is correct? What is the hourly volume now? Do these figures take into account
the exit off I-69 and closures at That Road and Rockport Road? How was it determined that there would be only a 5% increase in
truck traffic off an interstate? How will an increase of over 50% ADT improve the safety and traffic congestion on our
neighborhood streets, especially with students walking to two schools and neighbors to school functions and to use the schools’
green space? It seems that Alternative 3 can address all of the safety concerns without increasing ADT. Alternatives 1 and 2
2) A major problem with the comparison of the various alternatives is that this report seems to have been written before the
interchange off I-69 at Tapp Road was established, thus making all of these comments irrelevant and the whole report based on
false assumptions.
1) I was one of few residents from the neighborhoods directly affected by this project on the CAC (as recommended by the
MCHD) that was not a developer or realtor. Although the report claimed that there were “many” comments in favor of this project,
I recall at the Public Information Meeting at Bachelor Middle School on Oct. 3, 2012, that over 90% of the verbal public comments
given that night were negative about all of the proposed alternatives, except for Alternative 3 that did not connect our
neighborhood residential streets to an inter-continental highway (I-69) interchange. We were told at that meeting that our
comments were being transcribed, but I didn’t see them included in this report. Why? Since there was only one public meeting
prior to this report and many of the negative comments were not included here, I think that it is incorrect to claim that there isn’t
public opposition to this project, which there clearly is.
We understand that the current plan for Fullerton was scaled back to address the concerns of residents. We are supportive of
changes to better serve the interests of the residents along the corridor and the County, while continuing to address the
connectivity and transportation needs of our growing community.
Increasing east-west connectivity continues to be an important issue to our Chamber members. In our recent member survey,
many Chamber members expressed the importance of completing the Fullerton Pike expansion project. With construction
currently underway on I-69, this need becomes even more pressing. Fullerton Pike is identified as the first Bloomington exit for
Interstate 69 on the south side of Monroe County. It is essential that the County plan accordingly and move forward with the
project as quickly as possible.
The Chamber has historically supported projects that improve east-west connectivity. In a 2007 Infrastructure Task Force Report,
The Chamber recommended that community leaders give high priority to developing east-west thoroughfares and elevate these
projects to the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). The report also recognized the Fullerton Pike expansion as a project
that would fulfill this need and had been identified as a priority for the County for many years.
I am writing on behalf of the Greater Bloomington Chamber of Commerce and its 900+ members to express the organization’s
support of the County’s decision to move forward with the Fullerton Pike Expansion project. When complete, Fullerton Pike will
provide a much-needed east-west route along the south side of the community
Page 30 of 40
9) This is NOT the same road project envisioned in the 1960s plan, when almost none of these homes or schools existed, nor
was there a plan to make this road an access road off of I-69 in 2010 or 2011, which was also prior to any CAC meetings or
public comment period. When did INDOT make their final announcement of the interchanges? When was the interchange at
Tapp Road added only one mile north? Who was pushing for the interchange at Fullerton? MCHD or INDOT? The LOS (level of
service) on these roads is fine without a connection to I-69, since there is little room for more residential expansion. Instead of
8) This construction will definitely have an impact on many school and community events held at both middle schools both during
the school year and the summer.
7) I don’t understand how this proposed roadway complies with local and regional development patterns, when it is zoned 99%
residential, but this plan suggests changing a series of residential streets into a commercial artery. If this was the case, all of the
suburban developments (some relatively recent) should not have been zoned for this area. Please explain how this plan will
increase property values, when there is little room for any further residential development (it is almost completely “built out”) and
one local realtor (Tracee Lutes) has already seen reduced home values along the road’s proposed route. How is there no low
income impact (no EJ population of concern) in this area, when there are over 170 mobile homes in the Southcrest Mobile Home
community immediately adjacent to this roadway?
6) I would like to know more about how you plan for noise abatement (category A and B) given that there is no way to do sound
barriers in this densely populated residential area with many of the homes’ driveways dumping directly onto the roadway? What
is the noise increase that is projected with a more than 50% increase of cars and trucks? Is there any concern about the interior
noise impact? I live in a historic 1870 farm house (Thomas Randall House) (on the BRI list and being considered for the National
Historic Registry) and will need to have new windows and doors to make the old home inhabitable, due to the increased sound,
which may cause preservation issues.
5) At the last CAC meeting, I asked for an example of a comparable roadway with 14 ft. lanes and a 16 ft. medium through a
residential area and was only told the north end of Clarizz Blvd. next to K-Mart, Bloomingfoods East, a medical office building,
and the back of an apartment complex. This is clearly NOT the type of road through a built-out suburban neighborhood of
primarily single family homes. A member of CONA (Council of Neighborhood Associations) also said that this is not the size or
type of street that is recommended in a neighborhood setting per AASHTO guidelines.
4) The biggest error in the whole report is to categorize this 2.7 mile series of road as “urban,” when there is only one
commercially-zoned intersection along the whole route from Highway 37 to Sare Road at Walnut Street/Business 37 (with the
exception of an old stone company near Highway 37). By any account this is a 99% residential area. It comprises mostly single
family homes surrounding two public schools. This report does not seem to take into any account the environmental impact on
the hundreds of residents in this area and the 500 students at each school. Could you please explain howthis project has a “de
minimus” impact on schools? In INDOT’s own guidelines for choosing appropriate interchanges and access roads recommended
“minimal” residential impact and following “established” commercial arteries. How does this proposed project meet these criteria?
have the highest number of rightof-way acquisition from primarily residential properties; highest total forest loss (with exception of
That Road upgrade); highest amount of perennial/intermittent stream crossings (with the exception of That Road upgrade);
highest amount of new construction; and highest use of farmland (with exception of That Road upgrade). Many of the other
environmental impacts were not even considered from the other alternatives, making the comparisons unless. The cost
comparison for Alternative 1 didn’t include many elements of the project (such as the expensive bridges, roundabouts, etc.),
making any true comparison impossible.
Mary Ann Williams
3550 South McDougal
Street
uncertain cost and financing
economic hardship on homeowners, due to declining real estate values and the cost of remediation of septic systems
along corridor.
the destruction of wildlife habitat that has already occurred, on Fullerton from Rockport to Rt. 37
toxic emissions and run-off that will require curbs, gutters, trees
public health considerations related to stress and illness
Page 31 of 40
Fatal pedestrian injury remains a leading cause of death for people 15 years of age and younger. The street must be design to
reduce speed at schools and through neighborhoods. A slower speed would be safer for residents in neighborhoods,
pedestrians, school personnel, students, and traffic and customers driving into various commercial locations.
Question 5: The speed limits above conflict. Can the proposed “designed” and legal speeds be decreased to more readily fit with
the established neighborhood homes, the four schools, and various shops and offices?
Question 4: How would Alternative 1A be designed and built to assure that slower neighborhood and school area driving speeds
are observed? Indiana’s maximum residential road speed is 30 mph. For school zones, the maximum speed is 20-25 mph. The
Designed (40 mph) and Legal Speeds (35 mph) exceed these maximums.
Speed
Suggestion: An urban street must accommodate more pedestrians, bicyclists, curb cuts, speeds and frequency of potential
points-of-contact. The street should be 10’ to 11’ wide, no median, and 4’ shoulders. The street must match the neighborhood
character—not too flat, wide or open. The speed must be 20-25 mph in school zones, with appropriate signage, crosswalks,
sidewalks, multi-use paths, crossing guards, and street trees.
Question 3: The current character of the environment and neighborhoods along the proposed route varies greatly. Can the road
be built to accommodate and enhance this diversity, e.g. eight + neighborhoods, wildlife habitat, trails, bike and walking, four
schools, commercial? Specifically, what could be done to accomplish these things?
Question 2: Why is the character considered to be “urban” rather than “sub-urban?” What is the difference between these two?
Roadway Character
Question 1: Please describe the decision-making process that led to the answer of “No” for the question, “Will the project involve
substantial controversy concerning community and/or natural resource impacts?” What process was used to create this “no”
answer?
-
-
Both at the hearing and in other public events, discussion varies widely on topics such as:
I observed substantial controversy at the Public Hearing on December 11, 2014.
Controversy
building an expensive, high-traffic access route off an interstate through a residential area (Alternative 1 and 2), the County
needs to upgrade the existing southside neighborhood roads along Fullerton Pike, Gordon Pike, Rhorer Road, and Sare Road
(Alternative 3).The number of errors, problems and mis-characterizations of the history of this project warrant a delay and reassessment of it, with more opportunities for public comments.
Stephen Burns
No address given
Unity of Bloomington
Kevin Luers
4051 Jamie Lane
6-8 neighborhoods, with many homes
2 middle schools
2 nursery schools
commercial
Page 32 of 40
The Justification has been put forth is based on the assumption that this connector will decrease traffic load in other parts of the
My concerns center on several issues. Some are related to the issues of safety and environment, which I do not find to be fully
addressed. Others relate to the underlying justification and cost estimates, which arise both from the scope of the current project
as well as from the fact that the project seems to have been arbitrarily separated from related portions, which unrealistically
obscures the true cost of the project. Finally, I am concerned about the basis for the projections and the fact that modern trends
in commuting and urbanization are not following the implicit assumptions of suburbanization that dominated discussions during
the 1960’s when the current proponents apparently formed their plans. This suggests that the documents are based on
outmoded models of traffic and community growth.
As the project moves forward, I am happy to be the contact person for Unity of Bloomington for both American Structurepoint and
the Monroe County Planning Department.
Also in consideration of the proposed project, Unity of Bloomington requests that impacts to our parking areas be as minimal as
possible. The semi-circular drive and parking area off Rogers Street is used by office personnel, for special events attendees and
for better ADA access into the main level of the building. Impacts to this parking area can limit usability by the church. Likewise,
reduction of the parking area nearer the Rogers Street and Gordon Pike intersection and along Gordon Pike should also be
minimal so as to not impact our ability to provide adequate parking.
In consideration of the proposed project, Unity of Bloomington requests that the only entrance into the church parking lot, entered
off Gordon Pike, not be blocked nor made inaccessible by any means. It is critical that no median strip be installed that would
prevent west-bound access into the parking lot off Gordon Pike. Likewise, it is also critical that access to and from the semicircular drive off Rogers Street not be blocked nor made inaccessible by any means.
On behalf of the board of trustees and members of Unity of Bloomington, I am submitting comments to you regarding the
Fullerton Pike Corridor project. As you are no doubt aware, Unity of Bloomington is located at the SE corner of the
Fullerton/Gordon Pike and Rogers Street intersection.
I will be very receptive to this extension if Rhorer is modified substantially, but I will not cooperate if this is built as proposed.
My biggest objection to this project is the width of the lanes and median for the Rhorer Rd. portion. My home sits on the corner of
Jamie and Rhorer and is in the direct path of the proposed widening. The width of the road as proposed will jeopardize my
families quality of life. I want a safe road and I do want a bicycle/walking path on the North side of the Rhorer, as I do want to
safely bike or walk to the trail or Kroger etc. However, the width of the median is unprecedented in size and would require
millions to build and maintain. I would also think one bike/walking lane would be sufficient for the amount of foot traffic this path
would generate which would save on the width of this project.
-
Question 6: What consideration can be given to varying the type of roadway, along the corridor, so that the road fits with the
various existing natural and built-out qualities and conditions and enhances their character?
Speed and Character
Page 33 of 40
7. Grading and weather control. Presumably Federal requirements would alleviate the direct safety concerns by requiring
considerable grading of this route. However if it is not properly graded and maintained it is a very hillly region of Bloomington that
has seen the roads close by flooding twice within the last few years. That is, both creeks along Gordon Pike and the gap
between Gordon Pike and Fullerton have gone significantly outside their banks. This relates to the related environmental
concern of now providing miles of drainage, installed along the roadway and properly diverting it into streams that already flood.
The concrete footprint of this project is larger than almost any other two lane road and this will cause unwarranted environmental
loads on the water carrying capacity of the streams and Karst features. The findings of the study seem to ignore the hydrology
with little to document the findings.
6. This route goes past two schools and a church. Already there were enough problems with Bachelor school access that stop
signs needed to be installed for safety. This is on a road fed only by the local housing developments. Because Bachelor has
only one real entrance path, either major traffic flow improvements at the school will be needed, or there will need to be some
other modifications will be required. There a lot of kids living in the areas around Bachelor and Jackson Creek, and so extreme
care (and corresponding costs) would be required that go beyond the direct costs of the connector. The cost estimates and
provision of a road designed for high speeds do not seem to discuss the costs of traffic control devices.
5. As mentioned, it will dump traffic onto roads that lack even a shoulder.
Safety: This route will cause a number of safety consideration.
4. For Westbound traffic there are no obvious routes to connect to this project. If traffic from College Mall (and Nashville) aims
for this connector it will be forced to either go via Sare, or Third street. Both already have high volumes and I see no way that the
addition of another route that draws traffic to these will be beneficial or help throughput in any way at all. In fact, with access to
69 at Country Club and further North, most traffic progressing in a Westbound direction will naturally use these exits, since all
start further North and the routes take a diagonal course.
3. For Eastbound traffic the assumption for routing to downtown seems to be that people take the first exit. However, the
distance when mapped is considerably shorter to take Country Club and Rockport, by a distance of more than 1 mile. Thus, it
will not alleviate traffic on those routes.
2. For Eastbound traffic (from the Evansville directrion) this means that the “connector” will dump high volumes of cars and trucks
onto a series of two lane roads. Already traffic on Walnut and Rogers can be quite bad during commuting time. If the connector
becomes a major traffic attractor, then it means that the volume on these other two lane roads will increase, and may decrease
traffic on 2nd street, but increase it on Walnut and Rogers. Safety is a major concern here since if the traffic estimates are met,
then it will push traffic onto roads that are not designed for that traffic and represent a significant safety issue.
1. For Northbound traffic (proceeding Northbound from Bedford), this road will only lengthen the distance to downtown compared
to Walnut street, and will require traversing a longer route, through residential neighborhoods, back to Walnut, a considerably
longer route.
City of Bloomington and meet regional transportation needs. Specifically mentioned are access from the south to downtown and
to Indiana University. I do not believe that the project will actually alleviate problems of traffic throughput. The proposal calls for
two lanes that will extend from I 69/Rte 37 to Sare Road. The road beds are unusually large, apparently to accommodate higher
speeds and larger vehicles, however of the existing endpoints only Walnut supports truck traffic realistically, and it is only two
lanes and often fills with traffic from the south. .
Page 34 of 40
13. Overall, it is not clear what part of the community benefits from this large project. This is at the southern border of the
population density of Bloomington. The existence of an entrance to I69 a mile north, and the general trending of the roads to the
southwest will not serve most of the residents. There is little commercial zoning along the roadway, with the exception of the
e. As mentioned the incorporation of duplicate pedestrian access, which in turn requires extra shoulder work and drainage is
not well justified and seems more designed to increase the footprint for construction than to meet actual needs. One mult-use
pathway seems to meet realistic needs, and at a minimum a fact based assessment of need should be presented.
d. There is mention of numerous other “abutting” projects. Some appear related to the fact that the scope of this project was
changed during the review, and some of the other projects mentioned during the hearing seem to represent these changes in
scope. This suggests that the entire cost should be calculated based on a combination of all related projects.
c. There will be an ongoing burden on budget for maintaining more than 2 miles of 16 foot wide median.
b. Traffic control costs will be high in order to ensure safety at major crossings (and there will be foot and bicycle traffic at
every crossing).
a. There will need to be large amounts of sculpting for topography, it is not clear how land acquisition was computed in the
absence of this, since at the meetings engineers would not address how terrain would be changed near some of the houses near
crests of hills.
12. The costing estimates seem to not include numerous items.
11. It is a very large project footprint. The roadway footprint proposed is over 70 feet (including lanes, medians, shoulders/runoff
control, multi-use path and sidewalk). Already there is a second exit to I69 proposed within a mile that has a complete road,
already upgraded, and lesser residential impact. As mentioned above the aspects that will ultimately be required by the City and
County for safety ameliorations, will expand the cost way beyond what is put forth. The documentation for the choice of such a
large footprint is not provided. Lower speeds are mentioned for safety reasons, but low speed residential roads should not
require 16 foot travel lanes plus dual shoulders.
Good use of our funds. The cost benefit of this plan seem to be poor for the community.
10. Driveways will open directly onto this road, and given the footprint it can be expected that speeds will be such that this is a
risk. This again calls into the lack of justification for 16 foot travel lanes plus shoulders.
9. Related to this is the fact that each intersection will also cross the multi-use pathways. While turn lanes are provided, most of
these will require traffic control to be safe, since the traffic will be dealing with crossing proposed high volumes and high speeds
of oncoming traffic, and will not be attending to individuals crossing on the multi-use or sidewalks. Note that the assumptions of a
low speed limit will not be met without traffic control and the costing seems to not include a comprehensive traffic control plan and
implementation.
8. The proposal actually involves two complete walkways/multi-use pathways, with a sidewalk on one side and a large multi-use
pathway on the other. It is not clear that both are needed and no justification is provided, since in general multi-use includes
walking. This is a safety concern because the connection of the three existing multi-use trails by this project is likely to increase
bicycle and waling usage, yet two of the main crossings are at street level. Already there are problems at crossings and there
has been the need to construct more warnings and traffic control. The traffic control costs do not seem to be part of the costing
so their absence represents a major safety concern.
Page 35 of 40
The table also states 16 home re-locations for the Alternate 2: Tapp Road Upgrade, even though the text of the analysis clearly
This shows a “No” value for “Property Owner Impacts Minimized” for the Alternate 2: Tapp Road Upgrade and a “Yes” value for
the Preferred Alternative 1A. However, the preferred option uses significantly more right-of-way (31.2 acres v. 23.2 acres) and
primarily affects homeowners. Fifty per cent of the right-of-way for Tapp Road comes from commercial property, according to the
document.
Question 3: Please address all comparable issues in order to make for a balanced analysis of alternatives.
In contrast, the analysis of the Preferred Alternative 1A does not address the loss of parking spaces currently being used for
Unity Church and the Clear Creek Trail, the loss of acreage at Batchelor Middle School, or the loss of acreage at Jackson Creek
Middle School. These seem like comparable impacts to the above mentioned for the “Upgrades to Tapp Rd” alternative
The analysis of the Alternate 2: Tapp Road Upgrade addresses potential lost parking spaces for businesses along the roadway,
the potential relocation of a church, and the potential for loss of tees and greens at the Bloomington Country Club.
Question 2: Why are economic impacts not considered in the environmental assessment?
Since INDOT’s guidance is being ignored, as mentioned in Question 1, it is even more import to assess economic impacts on the
affected areas.
On the other hand, Alternate 2: Tapp Road Upgrade would improve access to an area that is already commercially-zoned and
developed. This has the potential for economic growth.
In analyzing the alternatives, the environmental impact document assesses the short-term cost or each alternative, but not the
medium- or long-term economic impacts. For example, since the “preferred option” would place an arterial through a
neighborhood, hundreds of homes will lose value. Additionally, many residents along the Rhorer Road section of the corridor will
likely have to pay out-of-pocket to upgrade septic systems affected by the construction. This is a severe negative impact to the
economy of the area.
Question 1: Please justify the decision to ignore INDOT’s very specific guidance regarding placing this type of arterial through a
neighborhood.
Since the roadway may connect to a full interstate interchange, it is accurate to describe it as, at least, a minor arterial. The South
Batchelor neighborhoods consist of 500+ homes. The corridor itself will be along the back yards of at least 35 residences and the
driveways of at least 25 others.
On minor arterials, Section 40-1.01(01) of INDOT’s Indiana Design Manual states, “In an urban area, a minor arterial may carry
local bus route and provide intra-community connections, but it will not, for example, penetrate a neighborhood.”
Ameer Beitvashahi
I am writing to voice my approval for the Fullerton Pike expansion.I believe it is the logical choice to connect east/west
Bloomington.
Tina Boggs
850 W. Rosewood Dr.
Walnut Intersection, thus the commercial value seems to be for longer distance traffic. Given the strong evidence that bypasses
weaken the downtown areas of small cities, it is not clear that it is a good investment of citizen’s taxes to build routes that will
weaken our city.
Council of Neighborhood
Melinda Hamilton
No address given
uses significantly more right-of-way
uses more forest
has more Perennial/Intermittent Stream crossings
has more Ephemeral Stream Encroachments
impacts more acres of farmland
impacts more identified karst features
has more identified impacts to potential archaelogical sites
has more impacted noise receivers
creates more miles of new construction
Page 36 of 40
The Council of Neighborhood Associations (CONA) represents the approximately 65 neighborhood associations in Bloomington
Thank you for allowing us submissions. Please consider any possible alternatives that will be better for the area. One I have read
about is an overpass and frontage road from Fullerton Pike to Tapp Road. I do not know if this would be the best one, but it is
one to consider. I am sure there are a few more.
6) cost, OY! seems like a big price tag
5) age of the real plan, when was it created and does it work well within the area at this time as things are NOW, not then
4) destruction or damage to karst features and several creeks
3) safety of crossing of the Clear Creek Trail
2) 2 interchanges so close to each other (why here, why 2?)
1) safety regarding the location of 2 middle schools.
I am emailing to request reconsideration of the proposed "Fullerton Pike Corridor." I am looking at the map and I am concerned
about several items.
Question 8: Will the county pay to install new sewer systems for residents whose septic systems will be impacted by the
construction? Or are residents expected to pay for this expense out-of-pocket?
Question 7: Will the county reimburse property owners whose property values are severely impacted by the increase in traffic and
noise?
Question 6: The project proposes a stoplight at the intersection of Gordon Pike and South Rogers. Several residences are just a
few feet from this light. What provisions will be taken to make sure there are no traffic backups in front of driveways? What traffic
control alternatives, e.g. round-a-bouts, have been considered?
Question 5: Based on this comparison, please explain how can a “finding of no significant environmental impact” can be justified?
-
In Table 1, the comparison of Alternate 2: Tapp Road Upgrade to the Preferred Alternative 1A shows that the Preferred
Alternative 1A:
Question 4: Considering the large amount of right-of-way being used and the quantity of homes whose property value will be
affected, can “Propert Owner Impacts Minimized” be corrected to a “No” for Preferred Alternative 1A in Table 1, Page 14?
states that 12 of those relocations can be avoided by using land from the county club.
Associations
The 2012 Final Engineering Assessment for the Fullerton Pike Corridor Improvements prepared for the Monroe County
Board of Commissioners by American Structurepoint, Inc., which determined the Fullerton Pike interchange to be the
most cost effective enhancement in this area, focused primarily on reducing travel times and enhancing vehicle
operation with little regard to other important considerations such as neighborhood continuity, pedestrian and bike
safety, community character, or the environmental impact to the area.
I-69 is already connected via the proposed interchange at Tapp Road, 1 mile from this proposed interchange. CONA
questions the expense of this expansion given the many drawbacks to this road widening project, and the other
transportation needs the County has due to I 69.
According to the US Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration’s Highway Functional Classification
Concepts, Criteria and Procedures: Arterial Considerations, “Arterials should avoid neighborhoods. They often serve as
buffers between incompatible land uses and should avoid penetration of residential neighborhoods.” Gordon Pike and
Rhorer Road, which, in fact, is the same road, in different townships, are the sites of two middle schools with a student
population of 1,095 for the 2013-14 school year (this represents two thirds of Bloomington’s Middle School population)
as well as many neighborhoods falling to the north and south of the roadway. Virtually all of this construction has taken
place within the past 30 years, after the original plan for this roadway to become an arterial corridor.
The long-term plan does not consider changes to traffic patterns and capacity based on alternative modes of
transportation, changing fuel costs, public transportation and other considerations.
Our first recommendation is to eliminate this interchange and adjoining road expansion entirely. This is the “No-Build
Option” in the Fullerton Pike Transportation Improvement Project.
Page 37 of 40
- Secondly, if this project does go forward, we recommend the following for the Fullerton Pike corridor:
-
Recommendations:
- numerous existing residential neighborhoods.
- 2 existing schools, Batchelor Middle School and Jackson Creek Middle School.
- existing residential septic systems which will be destroyed at significant cost.
- many driveway cuts, creating potential points of collision
- 3 primary public pedestrian and bike trails, Clear Creek Trail, Bloomington Rail Trail and Olcott Trail.
The proposed corridor will cross or otherwise affect:
-
-
-
-
After much discussion, the CONA membership recognized the following problems with the Fullerton Pike interchange and new
corridor:
Residents from the area near the proposed Fullerton Pike interchange discussed their opposition to the new interchange and the
connected corridor.
CONA met on Wednesday, December 17 to discuss, among other things, the impact of I-69 on various neighborhoods in
Bloomington and Monroe County. In particular, we discussed the impact of increased traffic on 17th Street between Crescent
Bend and the roundabout and the impact of the interchange at Fullerton Pike. Concerned neighbors from each area expressed
their concerns about each project and the impact on their particular neighborhoods.
and Monroe County working with them to create healthy, secure neighborhoods, provide organizational support, and serve as a
unified, advocating voice for neighborhood concerns.
Skip Daley
Highlands subdivision
Nicholas Roberts
No address given
Create every possible safety measure possible for this school zone including:
Reduce speed to 20mph in school zone (current plan is for 40mph).
Design road to discourage speeding in school zone, rather than depend on enforcement.
Add signage and signaled cross walks.
-
Page 38 of 40
The project will allow residents like myself amazing access to both I69 and SR37
Ease of Transportation:
I fully support this project for a number of reasons, some of those include the following:
I am a resident of a neighborhood known as the Highlands in Monroe County, Indiana, and I live adjacent to Gordon Pike and
Fullerton Road. While I have declined to be part of the formal process of the advisory committee, I am a direct stakeholder in the
outcome.
I would not like to see this project continue. But if it somehow does, homeowners directly affected by the proposed construction
should be amply compensated or given fair and equitable relocation.
3. Incompatibility with Bloomington: this sort of development is emblematic of the kind of characterless suburban sprawl one can
find a few miles up the road in Indianapolis. It is not “Bloomington” and the lack of such development is part of what has made
this town unique and liveable.
2. Dangerous: it does not make any sense to attempt to build a highway exit that touches driveways, endangers small children,
and endangers school children
1. Property values will plummet: family friends live along this corridor and were not informed of this plan when they purchased
their house almost 10 years ago. The development that would eat part of their front yard would have disastrous consequences
for their property value and that of their neighbors.
Although I do not reside along the corridor that would be affected by this proposed construction, I am a longtime Bloomington
resident interested in responsible development of this town. I am not convinced that the proposed corridor project makes sense
for the area it would affect. My main concerns:
This message is to contribute to the record of public comments regarding the proposed Fullerton Pike Corridor project in
Bloomington, Indiana. I am in opposition to this proposal.
We urge you to abandon the Fullerton Pike interchange for the reasons stated above. If this is not possible, then we strongly urge
you to consider the recommendations above to make the new corridor as unobtrusive and safe as possible for the adjacent
neighborhoods.
-
- No bike lanes since there is a proposed multi-use path adjoining the project. Bike lanes are redundant, a waste of
money and encourage excessive speeds.
- Outside shoulders no larger than 4’ wide.
- No more than 2 undivided lanes.
- Maximum of 11’ wide lanes.
- The road must be made compatible with existing neighborhood context including:
Bob Poortinga
5930 N. Maple Grove Rd.
Lynn Coyne
Bloomington Economic
Development Corporation
The section of Gordon Pike immediately east of Rogers Street has been in grave need of repair for many years
This project will end the number of vehicles which use the residential neighborhoods such as Eagleview and the
Highlands as a short access route.
The project will eliminate the excessive traffic which intersects the pedestrian trail on Rockport Road
The project will include much needed improvements to the walking and biking trail which flows through the area
Page 39 of 40
2) Better access to Batchelor Middle School is necessary. The intersection of Gordon Pike and Rogers St is often overwhelmed
with traffic leaving/entering the school.
1) The Tapp/Country Club Rd corridor is wholly inadequate to handle the projected increase in traffic that will result in the
completion of I-69 and resulting development that will ensue. A second access road to I-69 on the south side of Bloomington will
be required.
The Fullerton Pike Corridor is needed and necessary for a number of reasons.
Bloomington and Monroe County has suffered under the artificial boundaries created by a lack of east-west access for too long,
and the Fullerton Pike project offers a unique opportunity to bring our community closer together for the benefit of all.
The original design of the project has been modified and narrowed over concerns about truck traffic and further delay would
continue to deprive our fellow citizens of the advantage of the connectivity this project provides.
In addition, we should keep in mind not only the traffic movement improvements that will be provided, but why those
improvements are needed. They will allow increased communication between the facilities on both sides of our community. This
includes easier access to employment opportunities and all the support services that are involved, such as day care. Expansion
of community facilities such as parks, trails and entertainment venues on the west side will be facilitated and continue to increase
the quality of life opportunities for everyone, and relieve some of the development pressures on the east side. Access to fire,
ambulance and law enforcement services will be enhanced. It will also open up reciprocal opportunities for our regional neighbors
to have access to education, entertainment and employment opportunities.
The Fullerton Pike connector proposal is important to the future growth of employment and community opportunities for Monroe
County. The Greater Bloomington Chamber of Commerce has clearly stated many good reasons to support this needed
improvement.
I am excited for the groundbreaking ceremony!
There is no mistaking the benefits, and equally, no mistaking the reality that this project has been intended for decades.
Regardless of whether or not one pays attention to long term infrastructure planning before moving into a neighborhood, no one
can ignore the writing on the wall, which was the intentionally deep setbacks of sidewalks and utilities on Gordon Pike west of
Rogers Street.
My neighbors are all excited for these much anticipated improvements. Driving through the labyrinths of residential developments
has been a dangerous chore, at best. Rockport Road is ridden with curves and blind spots . . . Fullerton (east of SR37) has been
a disgrace for as long as I have lived in town.
The project will inevitably assist with better disbursement of bus routes to Bachelor Middle School
-
-
Increased Local Safety:
-
Page 40 of 40
I would also add that that several traffic roundabouts should be developed on this corridor: the intersection of Gordon Pike and
Rogers St; the intersection of Gordon Pike, Clear View Dr, and Batchelor School Dr should be realigned with a roundabout; and
the intersection of Rockport Rd / Fullerton Pike.
4) Much of the area in the vicinity of I-69 / Fullerton is undeveloped. Construction of the corridor will provide better opportunities
for development of this area and increased economic activity.
3) Better access to the Rhorer Rd / Sare Rd corridor is necessary. This includes access to Jackson Creek Middle School and
Sherwood Oaks Christian Church. The project should also include improvements to the Walnut Pike / Rhorer Rd intersection.
From:
To:
Subject:
Date:
Attachments:
Fullerton Pike Project
chmelliott@gmail.com
Fullerton Pike Project Wednesday, December 17, 2014 5:04:00 PM
FHWA_Relocation_2014-10.pdf
Hello,
We spoke at the Fullerton Pike Public Hearing last week, and I mentioned that I would send over
the updated Federal Highway Administration Relocation Pamphlet. Please find this pamphlet
attached.
I will also mail a copy to you, is this address correct:
1640 E Rhorer Road
Please let me know that you received this message, a quick email reply is sufficient.
Thank you very much for attending the hearing, and please let us know if you have any other
questions at this time.
Thanks,
Ben Harvey
_________________________________________
7260 Shadeland Station, Indianapolis, Indiana 46256
T 317.547.5580 E fullertonpike@structurepoint.com
F 317.543.0270 W www.structurepoint.com
Follow us on
From:
To:
Subject:
Date:
Hilary Elliott
Re: Fullerton Pike Project Wednesday, December 17, 2014 5:36:49 PM
Mr. Harvey
Thank you and yes the address is correct.
Hilary Elliott
Sent from my iPhone
On Dec 17, 2014, at 5:04 PM, Fullerton Pike Project
<Fullertonpike@structurepoint.com> wrote:
Hello,
We spoke at the Fullerton Pike Public Hearing last week, and I mentioned that I
would send over the updated Federal Highway Administration Relocation Pamphlet.
Please find this pamphlet attached.
I will also mail a copy to you, is this address correct:
1640 E Rhorer Road
Please let me know that you received this message, a quick email reply is sufficient.
Thank you very much for attending the hearing, and please let us know if you have
any other questions at this time.
Thanks,
Ben Harvey
_________________________________________
7260 Shadeland Station, Indianapolis, Indiana 46256
T 317.547.5580 E fullertonpike@structurepoint.com
F 317.543.0270 W www.structurepoint.com
<image001.jpg>
Follow us on <image002.jpg> <image003.jpg>
DISCLAIMER:
This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the
UPS: Tracking Information
1 of 2
http://wwwapps.ups.com/WebTracking/detail
United Kingdom
My UPS
Shipping
New User | Log-In Search
Tracking
Freight
Locations
Support
UPS Solutions
Cookie Disclosure
This website uses cookies. By continuing to use the website, you consent to the use of cookies.
Learn More
Do not show this message again
Log-In for additional tracking details.
Track
Tracking Detail
Print
Help
A
A A
Updated: 09/01/2015 16:15 Eastern Time
1Z4390800367960757
Shipping Information
Delivered
Delivered On:
Monday, 29/12/2014 at 10:51
Request Status Updates »
Left At:
Front door
To:
BLOOMINGTON, IN, US
Shipped By
UPS Ground
Proof of Delivery
Won't be home? Reschedule
your parcel, even before the
first delivery attempt. Click
Continue now.
®
I am already a UPS My Choice Member
What's this?
Shipment Progress
Location
Date
Local
Activity
Time
Bloomington, IN, United States 29/12/2014 10:51 Delivered
29/12/2014 3:53
Out for Delivery
Bloomington, IN, United States 27/12/2014 5:54
Arrival Scan
Indianapolis, IN, United States
27/12/2014 4:15
Departure Scan
Indianapolis, IN, United States
26/12/2014 23:43 Arrival Scan
26/12/2014 23:18 Departure Scan
26/12/2014 17:13 Origin Scan
26/12/2014 14:37 Collection Scan
United States
24/12/2014 11:59 Order Processed: Ready for UPS
Additional Information
Shipped/Billed On:
Type:
Weight:
24/12/2014
Package
1.00 lb
1/9/2015 4:16 PM
2 of 2
http://wwwapps.ups.com/WebTracking/detail
Subscribe to UPS E-mail: Enter e-mail address
Contact UPS
Browse Online Support
E-mail UPS
Call Customer Service
Sign Up »
View Examples
Support
Get Started
Register
Open a Shipping Account
Change Your Delivery
Home
About UPS
Service Terms and Conditions
Solutions for:
Small Business
Healthcare
International Trade
More...
Site Guide
Careers
Website Terms of Use
Pressroom
Privacy Notice
UPS Global
Other UPS Sites:
UPS Mobile
Cookie Disclosure
Protect Against Fraud
Copyright © 1994-2015 United Parcel Service of America, Inc. All rights reserved.
1/9/2015 4:16 PM
1 of 1
http://wwwapps.ups.com/WebTracking/processPOD?Requester=&track...
Proof of Delivery
Close Window
Dear Customer,
This notice serves as proof of delivery for the shipment listed below.
Tracking Number:
Service:
Weight:
Shipped/Billed On:
Delivered On:
Delivered To:
Left At:
1Z4390800367960757
UPS Ground
1.00 lb
24/12/2014
29/12/2014 10:51
BLOOMINGTON, IN, US
Front door
Thank you for giving us this opportunity to serve you.
Sincerely,
UPS
Tracking results provided by UPS: 09/01/2015 16:16 ET
Print This Page
Close Window
1/9/2015 4:16 PM
4.
3.
2.
1.
Comment
No.
Email Comment
11/26/2014
Email Comment
11/26/2014
Matthew
Russell
4000 S. Rogers
St.
Rodney Friend
No address
given
Email Comment
11/26/2014
Geoff McKim
No address
given
Email Comment
11/26/2014
Name /
Address /
Method / Date
John Carter
560 E. Miller Dr.
Page 1 of 60
There was mention of raising the road by about 2 feet from the intersection west. My
Will the sidewalk on the south of the road be at road level or at my property level? It
concerns me to have sidewalk at the same level as my home considering the
proposed proximity of it to my home. (4-C)
Will the south side of Gordon Pike west of Rogers be regraded to a more gradual
slope or will be a retaining wall be erected? (4-B)
I own property at 4000 S Rogers St that will be significantly effected by the
proposed road project. I went to the library to review the Environmental Assessment
and was disappointed that it did not match what was stated in the letter i received.
The letter stated that the entire corridor would consist of a single lane in each
direction with a center median. All the maps in the EA showed 2 lanes in each
direction at the Rogers St intersection. Can you please supply me with the updated
routing maps indicated the proposed right of way? (4-A) I also have a few questions.
Please send a map of the purposed project. Your written description in this notice is
poor and extremely hard to visualize. (3-A)
Your Legal notice of hearing describes in one paragraph an intersection of Fullerton
Pike and Sare Road. There is no intersecting of these streets as they exist not
unless some current streets get renamed.
Greetings -- is a copy of the EA for the Fullerton Pike Project available in electronic
form? (2-A)
Any light you could shed on these questions would be appreciated.
Looking over the Final Engineering Assessment for the Fullerton Pike Project I was
unable to determine exactly how the intersection of Fullerton/Gordon Pike and
Batchelor Drive was to be treated. We do have students walking from Clear Creek
Estates across Fullerton/Gordon Pike. Will there still be a 3 way stop there? Will it
be signalized? We also have more than 20 buses entering/exiting twice per day. (1-A)
Comment
4-A
3-A
2-A
1-A
Response
No.
Email response 12/01/2014:
Please keep in mind that the current
level of design is very preliminary,
and formal design has not occurred
at this section of the roadway. You
are correct about the approximate
number of lanes at this location.
Traffic modeling showed that the
number of lanes would need to be
increased at the intersections to
keep traffic moving through the
intersections within the design
standards. At this intersection there
is a left, right, and center lane in the
eastbound direction.
At this point in the development of
the project, the specific items you
mentioned below have not been
determined. As design moves
forward on that specific section of
the roadway, there will be additional
coordination between the engineers
and the County to decide what type
of
traffic
control
or
design
modifications are necessary.
The EA has been uploaded to the
Highway Department’s website. You
can get to the page via this
link: http://www.co.monroe.in.us/tsd/
Government/Infrastructure/Highway
Department/Projects.aspx.
Thank you very much for your input
Mr. Friend. A map is attached.
Response
Disposition of Comments on Des 0801059 Fullerton Pike Corridor Improvements
6.
5.
Tammy
Kawanishi
Email Comment
12/11/2014
Lloyd Hawkins
Highlands
subdivision
Page 2 of 60
When we moved to Bloomington over 10 years ago, we looked at a number of
housing developments. We chose Eagleview because it was close to everything we
Please voice my opinion for me that I am a supporter of the project.
It seems to me that by completing the new project with a divided roadway, whether
it be two lanes or four lanes, will make it safer for all residents in the area. The
median will provide pedestrians an area to avoid trying to cross both east and west
bound traffic at the same time. The road will keep through-traffic out of the sub
divisions and the traffic will be on a road that is designed to handle it.
Right now, The Highlands subdivision is used as a cut-through to connect Gordon
Pike to Rockport Road. Cars cut through the subdivision in order to gain access to
State Road 37. They speed through on roads that are not designed to handle heavy
traffic. These cars drive down Wickens Street to McDougal Street or Hennessey
Street and they often ignore stop signs and are well over the 20 mph speed limit.
The Fire Department and Ambulance Service also use the neighborhood to get to
calls and avoid the long drive by using either Tap Road or That Road to get to State
Road 37 or Rockport Road.
My name is Lloyd Hawkins and I live in The Highlands subdivision between Gordon
Pike and Rockport Road. I am a supporter of the new project to connect Fullerton
Pike and Gordon Pike with access to I69. I would like to see a four lane project that
would be able to handle traffic for many years to come as Bloomington continues to
grow, but I understand concerns and I am supportive of the scaled down version of
the project as well.
driveway is on Rogers just south of the intersection. I currently have drainage issues
in my drive due to road resurfacing of Rogers that raised the road above my drive.
How will drainage on my property be addressed to prevent flooding of my property
due to an increased road level? (4-D)
The current proposed plans for the
project have curb and gutter within
the roadway sections to catch rainfall
within the roadway. Drainage design
is not done until later in the project,
but the designers typically look at all
of the on-site drainage to make sure
that there is positive drainage toward
a receiving stream or storm sewer.
4-D
Upgrading
Tapp
Road
was
considered as an alternative to the
Sidewalks are typically placed at the
grade of the roadway, and then the
slope outside of the sidewalk will be
tied into the existing grade outside
the roadway. The sidewalks are
typically sloped so that drainage
from them flows back towards the
roadway
4-C
6-A
The likely design slope would be a
4:1, although this has not been
finalized at this time.
4-B
8.
7.
Email Comment
12/11/2014
Joel Fosha
Clear Creek
Estates
subdivision
Email Comment
12/11/2014
Terrill Cosgray
3700 S Mae Ct.
Email Comment
12/11/2014
4011 S. Crane
Ct.
Page 3 of 60
I am a home owner in Clear Creek Estates and will be affected by the Fullerton Pike
road project. I am writing to you as an opponent of the project. This project was
conceived many years ago when there was little or no development in the area. The
plan is simply outdated given the neighborhood development that was allowed to be
established in the area. The project, even in it’s scaled-down form, will adversely
affect the quality of life for residents of the three surrounding neighborhoods (8-A) in
terms of traffic density, (8-B) noise pollution, (8-C) lowered property values, (8-D) the
health and safety of residents, and those who will attend school at Batchelor Middle
School. (8-E and 8-F) Additionally, there is no infrastructure to handle the increased
I'm writing to support the current Fullerton Pike plan as described in today's
Bloomington Herald Times newspaper article. I reside in a neighborhood off of
Rhorer Road and am very familiar with the traffic patterns in Bloomington's
Southeast side of town. There is very high need for a major East-West corridor.
However road enhancements are also needed beyond Sare Road to Snoddy Road
as well to move traffic further East and North to Rogers Road and then on to Smith
Road. Also, Rhorer Road going East from Sare Road to Snoddy is very popular with
bicyclists but the road is very narrow which can be dangerous for drivers and
cyclists; a bike path and sidewalk are needed.
Easy access to the trail is also important to help combat the rise in obesity and
inactivity as highlighted on the front page of today’s paper (We’re Fat, We Smoke
and We Refuse to Exercise – The Herald Times – Thursday December 11, 2014). It
is important to point out that Bloomington has been given the honor of being
awarded a gold level bicycle friendly community (one of only 55 in the country).
What does it say about our community when we’re willing to damage/destroy a
portion of the trail that makes this community unique. (6-B) I ask that the committee
seriously consider making the exit at Tapp Road to minimize the impact on healthy
activity and living that makes Bloomington a unique place.
A better alternative exsists with Tapp Road. Tapp road with its recent upgrades
have allowed for bridges to already be built over the trail. Tapp Road has many
businesses that would love the increased exposure that the increase in traffic would
bring. Tapp Road also has ample room for the number of lanes needed to
accommodate the corridor. (6-A) The Fullerton Pike proposal will impact 2 large
middle schools that have a good deal of walkers as well as a number of houses that
have been built in the area where the corridor is proposed to run.
needed, but away from the hussle and bussle of the eastside of town. We also loved
the fact that our backyard was adjacent to a “feeder” to the trail. We love to ride our
bikes, walk and run the trail. We use the trail several times a week (even during the
winter) and have met some wonderful people on the trail. My husband has spent
numerous hours (day and night) on the trail as he has trained for obstacle course
races including World’s Toughest Mudder three times – which was highlighted in
InStride in October of 2012.
8-A
7-A
6-B
Coordination with the local parks
department has been ongoing and
will continue throughout the project
development and design process.
Impacts to existing trails will be
minimized to the maximum extent
practicable. For example, a bridge
will be constructed to carry the
roadway over the Clear Creek Trail,
eliminating the need for an at-grade
trail crossing at this location. In
addition, the project would improve
access to trails by providing a 10foot multi-use path that would
connect the trails already in
existence along the project corridor –
Clear Creek Trail, Bloomington Rail
Trail, and Sare Road Trail.
Sare Road was chosen as the
eastern terminus for this project
because traffic counts do not
indicate the same level of congestion
that is present west of Sare Road.
Improvements to the Fullerton Pike
corridor east and west of the
proposed project limits may be
considered in the future as part of a
separate project.
The intent of the project is to develop
the best project for the community
while still accomplishing the purpose
and need of the project. The project
team will continue to solicit and
review input from the public. This
input will be used to develop and
incorporate
context
sensitive
solutions into the project to the
proposed project. This alternative
does not satisfy the purpose and
need for the project. Please see the
“Other Alternatives Considered” in
the
Environmental
Assessment
(Page 9 – Page 15) which explains
why upgrading Tapp Road was not
selected as the preferred alternative
for the project.
Page 4 of 60
I urge the powers that be to reconsider this project This is simply not a good idea.
Once the flood gates are opened, the unforeseen costs of infrastructure updates
with no commercial benefits, and most importantly, a greatly diminished quality of
life for the residents, will be the outcome! It’s not too late to drop this project and
bury it! I strongly urge you to do so on behalf of my family and all the family that will
be adversely affected.
traffic as it pushes east. The early morning and five o’clock evening traffic
bottlenecks as it is. (8-G) That Road is, and will continue to be, a not-so-perfect
solution to this problem if an east-west artery needs to be introduced in the area.
The negative impact on people, neighborhoods, and costs would be much less if
this were an option.(8-H)
One of the goals of the project is to
reduce congestion. Traffic forecasts
indicate that without improvements,
several areas along the project
corridor will experience severe
congestion by 2034. For more
information, see the “Purpose and
Need” section of the Environmental
Assessment (Page 5-Page 6).
A noise study was completed in
accordance with INDOT policy. This
study and its recommendations are
included in the Environmental
Assessment (Page 41 – Page 43).
The INDOT Noise Policy, which
provides appropriate measures for
noise mitigation, will be followed
throughout project development and
design.
The project is not anticipated to have
any impact on the property values of
residences not located directly along
the project corridor. Any foreseeable
reduction in property values would
be incorporated into the right-of-way
This is a
acquisition process.
standardized INDOT/FHWA process
over which the County has no
influence. For more information on
this
process,
see
The project integrates roadway and
pedestrian characteristics that would
be anticipated to increase the
pedestrian and bicycle safety along
the corridor. The exact nature and
locations of some pedestrian and
bicycle amenities will be determined
later in the project development
process, with crosswalks and
median cuts as an example.
8-B
8-C
8-D
8-E
maximum extent practicable.
10.
9.
Email Comment
12/11/2014
Jolene
Bettencourt
No address
given
Email Comment
12/11/2014
Roberta L.
Taylor
3931 S. Cramer
Cir.
Page 5 of 60
I cannot attend the meeting this evening, but would like to offer my perspective. It is
with great concern that I write about the proposed Fullerton Pike corridor. Since my
family lives in close proximity to this road I think the safety concerns are great. I
have a current student at Batchelor Middle School and two younger children who
will also walk to this school daily within the coming years. With the current school
schedule my student walks to school in complete darkness for a large portion of the
school year. He must cross multiple intersections, including the main one to the
This exit should be at Tapp Road for very obvious reasons!!!! (9-B)
I vehemently disagree with putting an exit off 69 onto Fullerton Pike, a residential
district!!! You've heard a lot of people against this - LISTEN TO THE PEOPLE!!! (9-A)
Upgrading
That
Road
was
considered as an alternative to the
proposed project. Please see the
“Other Alternatives Considered” in
the
Environmental
Assessment
(Page 9 – Page 15) which explains
why upgrading That Road was not
selected as the preferred alternative
for the project.
The scope of this project does not
include any I-69 interchanges.
8-H
10-B
10-A
9-B
A significant volume of truck traffic is
not anticipated along the corridor
due to the limited commercial and
industrial development to which the
roadway leads.
Regardless of a Tapp Road
interchange, there is a need for for a
direct connection between SR 37
and the residences Gordon Pike and
Rhorer Road, reduction of traffic
congestion, safety improvements,
and trail connectivity improvements.
There is independent utility for the
project. Please see the “Purpose
and
Need”
section
of
the
Environmental Assessment (Page 5
– Page 6) for a more detailed
discussion.
See response 8-F.
See Response 7-A
8-G
9-A
The project would be anticipated to
improve safety for motorists and
pedestrians along the corridor.
Additional design characteristics will
be considered and incorporated into
the plans if they are warranted for
ensuring safe pedestrian crossings
near schools. This includes but is
not limited to evaluating pedestrian
crossing
assistance
between
Batchelor Middle School and Eagle
View Subdivision.
8-F
11.
Email Comment
12/11/2014
Melinda
Johnson
The Highlands
subdivision
Page 6 of 60
I am unable to attend the public meeting but I did want to comment on the project. I
live in the Highlands subdivision and I think a new road is very needed. The current
way to get to Ind 37 from my neighbourhood is extremely hazardous. The roadway
is way too narrow with no shoulders. The tree overhang on Rockport road keeps the
roadway wet and slick most of the time. There are several deer in the area and no
place to go when you see one because of no shoulders. The intersection of
Rockport and Fullerton is also extremely dangerous. The sight line to the west is
very limited and when cars are coming from the highway and you are turning onto
Rockport from Fullerton you cannot see if a car is in the dip in the road or not. There
have been accidents resulting in death on this stretch of Rockport because of
pedestrians walking at night with no shoulder for them to get on. There is no lighting
on this dark hilly road making it a hazard for both drivers and pedestrians. With the
new interchange we are going to have more traffic on this county road and we need
a safe road for the extra traffic. Not only is the road unsafe but what a way for
people to view Bloomington for the first time if they choose to use this interchange
and end up on unsafe roads. The ambulances to Monroe hospital must also use this
interchange from the city side because of no Tapp road interchange. If you were to
meet an ambulance on the road there would be no place to get out of the way.
There are many safety issues far more important than the size of someone’s front
yard. They could also put a stop light at the crossing for the few students who do
need to walk to school. This would also alleviate cars who live in the neighbourhood
Please take a very close look at other possibilities other than adding yet another
road through dense residential development, which could prove to be fatal mistake
for our young people traversing this direction every day.
I'm afraid I do not see the benefit to adding a connection from Fullerton to I69 when
Tapp Road has recently been upgraded, enlarged, widened, etc. The upgrades
already given to Tapp along with its current mix of business/industrial/residential
makes a much better thoroughfare than a non-existent road through untouched
growth, a trail system, very close frontage neighborhoods and a middle school. (10-F)
The Clear Creek trail is also an major issue for this road. Some type of overpass or
underpass would need to be constructed in order to keep all the patrons of the trail
safe from the flow of fast moving traffic. (10-D) It makes much more sense to use
Tapp Road, which already has a nice underpass for the trail. Tapp Road already
has business/commercial offerings, much less residential frontage and the same
access to major roads, and does not cross in front of a public school. (10-E)
school as it crosses Fullerton. (10-A and 10-C) There is already a decent amount of
traffic as all the residential traffic takes it's course on the way to work at this time of
day. To take this closed road and then connect it to not only a highway, but a soon
to be Interstate, would substantially increase traffic, much to the large number of
walking students detriment. And it would not simply be an increase in the volume of
traffic, but also include larger vehicles, delivery trucks and such. (10-B) The Batchelor
Middle School cross country team also uses the surrounding neighborhoods and
Clear Creek trail for training runs. They intentionally keep the kids from high traffic
areas now, but this would become almost impossible if Fullerton is an Interstate exit
and "beltway around the city."
See response 6-A.
See response 9-A and 9-B.
10-E
10-F
Only preliminary roadway design has
been completed for the proposed
project at this time.
As design
progresses, all intersections will be
analyzed to determine the most
appropriate method of traffic control.
See response 6-B.
10-D
11-A
See response 8-E.
10-C
14.
13.
12.
Verbal
Comment
12/11/2014
Nan Brewer
3636 S. Rogers
St.
Email Comment
12/11/2014
Julio Alonso
1865 W. That
Rd.
Email Comment
12/11/2014
Jimmy Ratcliff
No address
given
Page 7 of 60
I just want to state that I'm tired of hearing that this revised plan has mullified
neighbor's concern about the Monroe County Highway Department's plan for the
Fullerton Pike/Gordon Pike/Rohr Road expansion project and that it has to be built
to serve the need for I69. (14-A) Simply deciding not to make these residential streets
into a five lane mega road which would have been wider than most of the state's
highways passing through the county does not address our real concern. Instead, a
three lane road running past two middle schools, several churches, two rails-to-trails
path would bring a high volume of traffic and trucks. (14-B) By the county's own
estimate an increase of at least 40% within five (5) years. As the first exit off I69 in
to Bloomington this estimate may be conservative. (14-C) The plan essentially
changes our neighborhood streets into a commercial artery. I think there must have
been an error in the report identifying our area as "urban" when it is clearly 99%
suburban. As you all know there is only one commercially zoned intersection along
the entire stretch from Fullerton Pike to Snoddy Road at Walnut, Business 37. And
no empty land for further commercial development. (14-D) INDOT’s directives
recommended not placing exits or access roads dumping traffic through primarily
Thank you for your consideration.
I do not mean to dismiss the concerns of the residents of Fullerton Pike and hope
you will work with them to minimize the impact. (13-A) Nonetheless, I believe this
corridor must be created, and as soon as possible.
This connection is absolutely essential now that I69 construction is underway and
impacts are being felt. I will lose (actually have already partially lost) my access to
SR 37. I must now find alternative routes to work and everywhere else I go. People
affected by the I69 project need multiple new options and this corridor makes
absolute sense. It would be an important and significant improvement in my ability
to travel safely for work, shopping, visiting and other trips.
I am unable to attend the hearing this evening but wanted to write and express my
strong support for the Fullerton Pike corridor project.
I support the construction of the Fullerton Pike Corridor. I think the Eagle View
neighborhood won an ill advised concession regarding the number of traffic lanes
being proposed for the area. This corridor to Sare Road should be four lanes all the
way. That is what planning for the future is all about. I live on the southwest side of
S.R. 37 (soon to be I- 69). Like many others, who use Rockport Rd. to access S.R.
37 from the southwest, I-69 is going to cause an inconvenience since we no longer
will be able to get onto it without taking That Rd. to Fullerton Pike. The bottom line is
one person's inconvenience is another person's convenience. Being able to drive
across I-69 on Rockport Rd. and then take Fullerton Pike all the way to Sare Rd. will
be a convenience for us who have to travel Rockport Rd. to get to the eastside of
Bloomington. At some point Sare Rd. all the way to College Mall Rd. may have to
be widened.
from having to stop at a 4 way stop several times a day and night and all summer
when school is not in session. The busses could file out more quickly with a light
instead of the stop and wait we have now. The traffic flow could be greatly improved
for all with a stop light. (11-A)
The need for the Fullerton Pike
project has been demonstrated to be
independent of the I-69 project.
Without the construction of an I-69
interchange, safety and connectivity
would continue to define the need
for improvements to the existing
corridor.
See response 10-B.
The process to determine future
traffic counts included coordination
with the Bloomington/Monroe County
Metropolitan Planning Organization
and the INDOT I-69 project team.
14-B
14-C
The project team will continue to
engage the public throughout the
design process.
14-A
13-A
Page 8 of 60
residential neighborhood, i.e. having a low residential impact, and to follow
established commercial traffic patterns. (14-E) This plan does neither. This is the first
public comment meeting on this proposal. (14-F) Although it would drastically alter the
quality of life, (14-G) property values, (14-H) safety of our children, (14-I) noise and light
levels (14-J) and residential character in many built out established south side
neighborhoods, including the Highlands, Eagle View, Clear Creek Estates, Bachelor
Heights and Southcrest. Just to name a few. Let's not talk about an outdated
irrelevant highway plan from the 1960s before these neighborhoods were built and
Highway 37 even existed. How about thinking about what would best serve the
people who live there now. This has become an entirely different project once it
was decided to make it an access road off of an interstate highway. Rather than a
connection to Highway 37 or to an I69 overpass. The only reasonable option for
this established residential area of mostly single family homes is to go with an
alternative that eliminates any connection to a highway interchange.
This
alternative being proposed tonight has the highest residential impact of any of the
choices. (14-K) I think that our neighborhoods deserve the same right to traffic
reducing measures that any other Bloomington neighborhood as opposed to this
which is the exact opposite. Thank you.
The roadway is classified as an
Urban Arterial per the INDOT
Functional Classification Maps found
on INDOT’s website.
The location of proposed exits is
outside the scope of this project.
The proposed corridor travels
between
two
neighborhoods.
Eagleview and The Highlands
neighborhoods
are
already
separated by a roadway and each
neighborhood was developed to
allow space for the proposed
completion of this project.
There has been extensive public
outreach in regards to the proposed
project, and the current preferred
alternative was presented during the
second CAC meeting on 7/23/2012.
During much of this coordination, the
preferred alternative was a four-lane
roadway. Impacts are reduced for
the current preferred alternative twolane roadway and are all included in
the analysis of the four-lane roadway
that was presented for public
comment previously. Please see the
“Public Involvement” section of the
– Page 4) for a discussion of all
public involvement activities that
have occurred to date.
See response 8-A.
See response 8-D.
See response 8-F.
See response 8-C.
14-D
14-E
14-F
14-G
14-H
14-I
14-J
Traffic data can be found in the
“Roadway Character” section of the
Environmental Assessment (Page
16).
16.
15.
Verbal
Comment
12/11/2014
Liz Irwin
th
400 West 7
Street, Suite
102
Verbal
Comment
12/11/2014
Jim Shelton
1716 S.
Springhouse
Page 9 of 60
Good evening, I'm Jim Shelton, I'm representing the Greater Bloomington Chamber
of Commerce. The Chamber's been engaged in the process on this project for a
long time representing the 900 businesses that are Chamber members, as
members of the CAC. It has been stated this need been long recognized for
improved east/west traffic throughout this entire community, not just on the south
side. In 2006 the Chamber did a survey of its members from key points that needed
improvement. And one of them that came back was infrastructure plans from trying
to improve the infrastructure in the community. A team was put together and a
report was produced in 2007 that identified the areas of storm water, water and
sewer, etc. and transportation. One of the things the plan recognized was we need
improved east/west traffic capability on the south side of the community and it
recognized that the Fullerton Pike Corridor expansion when it's already in the
Transportation Improvement Program. The taskforce also, at the same time the
county leadership created a TIF, Fullerton Pike TIF to produce the funds to match
the federal funding that would eventually be needed and it still exists and it's got
funds in it right now. In a recent survey that we did just this year our certified
membership again indicated that they think this road needs to be built, or this
capability needs to be created in the southern part of our community and this is
where our county's leadership has selected that it be. So we support the project.
We are glad to hear that there's flexibility as they get down to nitty-gritty exactly
where the roads are going to be, that they can move things a little bit further south
to try to save people's yards or make people able to turn left when they get out of
their driveway. We support the project and take the opportunity to say so.
Thank you very much. I'm Liz Irwin. I'm here today representing the Bloomington
Chamber of Commerce. I want to thank you for the opportunity to share our insight
today about this project. The Chamber does recognize that the Fullerton Pike
Expansion Project has been part of the TIF for many years. Jim mentioned our
2007 Infrastructure Task Force report and this report also recognized that a
Fullerton Pike extension was an important project has been identified been the
county. And now we understand that the county is in a position to move forward
with this plan that it has long recognized a need for. One of the other things that is
recognized in that project was the 45/46 bypass project, widening of that also which
was somewhat of a controversy from some of the citizens in town but I will just say
when you see you people using that now for needs other than just movement by
14-K
Please see the “Other Alternatives
Considered”
section
of
the
– Page 15) for a comparison of
anticipated impacts of all alternatives
considered. Only one alternative –
the
Intersection
Improvements
alternative – would result in fewer
residential relocations, and this
alternative would not address the
purpose and need of the project.
17.
Verbal
Comment
12/11/2014
Ann Elsner
4017 South
Crane
Page 10 of 60
My name is Ann Elsner. I am an IU faculty member and also a business owner of
501 South Madison. So I have a business on the south side as well as living in
Eagle View and I'm very much against this road. My main concern is the safety of
the people who live within this neighborhood. That is specifically dead children and
smashed pets. (17-A and 17-B) So the four acres you're talking about removing is where
a lot of people I know walk their dogs and go jogging. And the middle school kids
work out there. That's not going to be there any more. Many comments have been
made that people support this road. No one in my neighborhood has ever said
within my hearing that this is a good idea. So the people who live there are not
complaining about long commute time and traffic back up. At the present time
they're concerned about future back up when the traffic will be coming from
Interstate 69 through the neighborhood that was never there before. So one of the
things that Nan Brewer has been trying to do is find out the estimate of increased
traffic coming from the connectivity or some miracle where would you put a lot to
make thousands more cars. There's a lot next door to me but other than that there's
almost no lots anywhere in our neighborhood. We're full. We've been full for ten
years. There's nowhere left to build if you stick with single family homes. So you
can't have more traffic. It's a dead end road and a lot of cul-de-sacs. To expect
people to have a road that's either going to be a high speed road through the
neighborhood because it's leveled off to have those line of sight corrections, so they
won't be able to pull out of their driveways in a safe manner or pull out of their
intersection in a safe manner or watch their children go to school or to the play, the
middle school or walk their dog. It really does impact on neighborhood quality of
life. (17-C) I disagree with the environmental statement. The section in the pages
forty etc,, the methodology for the di minimis finding was not given. (17-D) The data in
the back that have exception after exception from the CAC members, from the
residents, those statements are not addressed in the front. But commute times
we're talking about haven't been compared against a critical alternative which is
turning left or having to do U-turns because of the increase of several thousand cars
a day. So in terms of my commute, let me give you an example from my life. I put
in yet another longer than 12 hour day at the university job and I knew I could get
vehicle. We also see the great multi paths available alongside. I think that's been a
great benefit to the citizens of the community. It's nice to see at the Fullerton Pike
expansion project also will have sidewalks and multiuse paths. I think that will be an
improvement to the residents. Also important I think to recognize that Fullerton Pike
is identified as one of the first Bloomington exits on the south side of Monroe County
and the construction of interstate is now underway. But it is really a timely and be
moving forward with the project. We need to make sure that we plan accordingly
and follow through with those plans in the necessary time. We understand that the
current plan has scaled back some to address some of the concerns of the
residents. At the Chamber we just hope that the project can continue to be serving
the interests of both residents and the rest of the county in terms of increasing
connectivity across east and west side of town. And that it will also consider the
transportation needs of businesses and for the rest of the community. Thank you
very much.
See response 8-A.
The Fullerton Pike Section 4(f)
evaluation follows Federal Highway
Administration procedures.
For
more
information,
see
http://www.environment.fhwa.dot.gov
/4f/index.asp.
The project corridor is not proposed
to be converted to a designated
truck route.
The cost estimate includes all
design,
right-of-way,
and
construction costs for the entire
project, including bridges.
See response 8-D.
17-D
17-E
17-F
17-G
See response 8-F.
17-B
17-C
See response 8-E.
17-A
18.
Verbal
Comment
12/11/2014
Isabella
Beitvashahi
521 West
Gordon Pike
Page 11 of 60
home safely because I didn't have to worry about a lot of traffic. And I could just
drive from the university to my home. If you have a truck route there I will not be
able to do that. (17-E) I realize time is short so I carefully read the first 50 pages of
the environmental statement. I do not feel the costs reported are accurate. The 27
million dollars does not include the several million dollars required for the bridges.
So the critically alternative of Tapp Road is more than 37 million. But the 27 million
doesn't include the bridges or the connectivity to the bridges. That's going to be 10
millon at least, right? So those two are actually similar in costs at the present. The
engineering plans aren't complete enough so we don't know how much it's going to
cost to flatten the hill top. (17-F) I have no idea if anyone will be able to get into their
driveways but that's another point. The property values will be limited or impacted
but they are saying there will be no environmental impact or property values or
community cohesion in the statement I feel is incorrect. (17-G) And I'll just leave it at
that. Thanks.
I just want to say, Mr. Williams, it's so nice to meet you, I've heard your name so
many times. There's my husband and my little daughter Iris, she's five months. I
have a spirited two year old who is not here, which you're all probably all grateful for
that because he's bonkers right now. He's with his grandpa in Eagleview. I live at
521 West Gordon Pike. You might have seen us with our two Irish setters. I
landscaped the front, take so much pride in our home. I mowed the lawn every day
when I was pregnant because I loved it. I remember our neighbor, Randy, and like
no, I'll do it. You make my feel bad. And I'm like but I love it. When I first heard
this, my husband bought the house when he was 25 and I was 26. Claire Perry who
was our real estate agent never told us that this was in the plan. That would have
affected our decision I'm sure. But we found out about this when I was nine months
pregnant with my first son. It was like a bomb dropped. And our community is very
quiet and that's what we love about it. The first time I seen everyone rally together,
like everybody scared us. And the dreams I had, having my son, he is (inaudible).
We are a traditional home, we follow a budget, have two babies, take care of them.
The only place I feel safe is the YMCA for his preschool and (inaudible) when I can
get some time. (crying) They take care of me as much as I take care of my baby.
And it's scary. I'm afraid of the traffic flow. And mostly I'm heartbroken at the
change of our quality of life, six years, our Irish setters were puppies. (crying) My
puppies now are getting old and I understand things change but this happening to
us was done to us, we didn't have a choice. I had Ameer, my husband called a real
estate agent because even Bob Saltzburg assaulted us like we should have known.
We were young, homeownership is important and it is something to be very proud
of. Apparently dying is something important. I felt that this didn't take any of that
into account. And she said, you know, should we leave, trade it out, what can we
do, you know, we have a family, personally I'm afraid. I'm here at home alone with
my babies. All I have is my dogs. She said, stick it out. You're not going to get your
money back. Who knows, it may be better. You're locked in. You wait until it's
there. You know, I felt so wronged, like fools, and we're stuck there. And now I'm
18-A
See response 8-A.
20.
19.
Verbal
Comment
12/11/2014
Clarence Dillon
No address
given
Verbal
Comment
12/11/2014
Randall
Stephenson
No address
given
Page 12 of 60
Clarence Dillon, I'm a geologist and a teacher. I've lived in the area, I lived on South
Rogers for five years and my two daughters went to Bachelor. I worked at Bachelor
and as part of my community involvement for my one hour of my education degree I
had to choose a community involvement in the MCCSC and I chose to participate in
the discussions about Bachelor Middle School. It was not designed as a prison, if
you want to know likewise. I can tell you that clearly. And that was 1970-72 and it
was told to us then that this was going to be a connection over to what was then
being constructed as Highway 37, of which I worked summers there. And since that
time the 1965 plan has been in place and from that time on every subdivision, every
issue of annexation, every issue of locating the fire house, the discussion about this
improvement has been made. The subdivisions out there even had to contribute
through bonding some money to build a bridge over the unknown tributary. And
every time these have to be recorded in your abstracts. And anybody who
purchased property has in their abstract some place that this was going to occur.
Getting back to some other issues, when it was discussed about the school, school
buses were discussed. And the number of school buses that come from my area
right now out on Kirksville Road, I see five school buses out my window every
morning leaving. All five of those school buses have to take several miles, different
Hi, everybody. Ms. Beitvashahi, it's going to be okay. Yes, I did say I envied you
because I remember (inaudible). Isabella, it's a juggernaut. Get used to the
juggernaut. The juggernaut comes through, it does what it wants to do. Get used to
it. And think of it as all good. Okay? Tapp Road is there, they're going to build an
interchange. But a juggernaut says well, if you go through Gordon Pike it's not so
much the residential areas that are worried or they're concerned, it's all that very
valuable undeveloped land on the west side of Clear Creek Trail, think about that.
So it's all good depending on who you are. If you own that undeveloped land it's
great. If you live on Gordon Pike it's not so good. But, buck up, the juggernaut
won't crush the people. And so I know better than pretend it's going to stop
because we're here today. But I think it's good for people to see what's going on.
Because the more we see what's going on maybe the next time the juggernaut
comes in our direction we'll be aware of it and we'll be able to stop it ahead of time.
And I'm guilty, I was not here when I should have been earlier. But I hope not to
make that mistake again. Thanks for your time.
just, I appreciate people listening to us. Me being a mom (crying). Thank you very
much, Nannette Brewer I'm so honored to have you as a beautiful advocate.
Because every summer when I was out there mowing the law (crying) I was thinking
about (crying) I was so angry, why are they doing this to me. My home is the only
place I feel safe. And it feels like such a (crying – inaudible) And I'm not going to
have it any more. I really appreciate your time. Thank you very much.
Due to anticipated impacts to
jurisdictional streams considered
“waters of the US,” a US Army Corps
of Engineers 404 Regional General
Permit and IDEM 401 Water Quality
Certification would be required for
the proposed projects. Impact
amounts would be determined at the
time of preliminary design, and
mitigation may be required for these
anticipated impacts.
Roadway drainage will be collected
in the curb and gutter system and
will outfall into existing or proposed
stormwater facilities. Drainage will
be designed in compliance with local
and state ordinances and the current
INDOT design manual. Stormwater
20-A
20-B
22.
21.
Verbal
Comment
12/11/2014
Sarah
Ryterband
nd
820 West 2
Street
Verbal
Comment
12/11/2014
Mary Ellen
George
601 W. Gordon
Pike
Page 13 of 60
I'm Sarah Ryterband. I sit on the Citizens Advisory Committee for the MPO, I'm
also, in the City of Bloomington I sit the Traffic Commission. So I bring two different
perspectives to this. First of all, I encourage all of you to come join us on the
Citizens Advisory Commission for the MPO where you can weigh in on these
issues. (bell ringing) And what is in and not in on long range transportation plan.
Unfortunately, this was planned 20 years ago and like too many projects it simply
gets pushed along but we can make a difference. So I encourage you to. As I
My name is Mary Ellen George and the reason I'm against this proposition is the
safety for the students. (21-A) I'm been an educator for over 30 years and there are
500 students at Bachelor, 500 students at Jackson Creek. That's over 1000
students , many, many buses. If you look at just the statistics we have a thousand
kids, you have trucks, you have cars coming from an interstate. It's not if an
accident is going to happen, it's a matter of when is when an accident is going to
happen. (21-B) As you have said, you knew this was in the project since the 1960s.
I've lived in a house for 30 years, no one told me that I69 was coming. I understand
perhaps a need for an east/west corridor - why Gordon Pike? Tapp Road exists, it
will not cost as much, it has less impact on people and soon if you must have the
east/west corridor you use Tapp Road. Highway Commissioner Lynn said in the
paper that you have listened to the people. You have and I thank you for that.
Listen to us now - we say no to the Fullerton Pike Corridor, yes to Tapp Road. (21-C)
Also please take into consideration, many of you have said this is going to be a
good thing for the economy, a good thing for Bloomington, why let me add some
sarcasm please – if any of you would like to buy my house, I'll sell it to you. Thank
you.
routes, to get their students, extra time to get their students from the west side of 37
because there's no route from Rockport Road to Bachelor. In 1972 that was an
objective of having a connection there to 37 at that time. Not 69. 69 was planned
at the very exact same route from the time it was planned in the late 1950s. I
actually sat out there in 1975 with the state geologist, my boss, and he pointed off of
Tramway Road and said this is the exactly where the road's going to go. And that's
exactly where the road has been planned and exactly the impact that it was going to
have on Monroe County was conjectured from that time on. It's not new. So school
buses, Bachelor, fire house, impacts, there's some impacts that I see or suggestions
- there needs to be some mitigation done in the spring to each bridge crossing. (20-A)
I do river watch, I wade the streams, I look at the under the bridges and things like
that. I've got a little farm, you know, part of that should not be plantings at the
intersections that gets in the line of sight. You know, I have to put up with. My one
other suggestion I had made, oh talk about the drainage and I would hope that all
the drainage coming off of the road way will be going to the sewage treatment plant
and not directly in the local streams. (20-B) So thank you very much.
See response 8-F.
See response 10-B.
See response 6-A.
The lanes are sixteen feet wide in
order to allow emergency vehicles
room to pass yielding vehicles. The
lane width is in accordance with the
INDOT Design Manual.
The posted speed limit on the
21-A
21-B
21-C
22-A
22-B
quality improvement BMPs were
rd
CAC
discussed during the 3
meeting, and will be evaluated when
final design is conducted.
23.
Verbal
Comment
12/11/2014
Tracee Lutes
No address
given
Page 14 of 60
I wasn't sure if I was going to say anything or not until I got here tonight and heard
some of Liz, and was taking some notes. I've been very involved with the Chamber
and support. A lot of the activities that are good for business and I know in the past
that we've always, we always look for good ways and I think everybody in here has
to say that there's been times that you've wished for better ways to get from the
west side to the east side. I don't think anybody can deny that. I don't think the
Chamber really looked at this, and I may be wrong. But I don't think any of us look
at this as an opportunity for development of commercial because there is no place
to put the commercial. It's more of a way to get traffic from 37, which will be the
future 69, over to the east side. There's definitely a need for that. Now I think it's
unfortunate that at the time all this happened we didn't have a Tapp Road
interchange so the Fullerton Pike interchange is there and it kind of was out this
road would be a stub to nothing, or Rockport Road or whatever. And we can
looked at this plan, first of all I opposed the original proposal but I'm equally
appalled by 16 foot travel lane. I encourage all of you to think about a 16 foot travel
lane. (22-A) Now our average roadway has about a ten foot travel lane. When you
raise it to 16 foot you encourage much, much faster traffic. You can see that
reflected in the turning radii at all of those entryways. It's meant for high speed
traffic. So although this roadway may be designated as 35 miles per hour, we
would hope because it's neighborhood traffic. (22-B) I would guess, just off the top of
my head in looking at something like West Third Street, that you're going to have
people traveling at 55 to 60 per hour through your neighborhoods. And that's a
reflection purely of a 16 foot travel lane – what are people thinking – verses these
neighborhood. As already pointed out, the only commercial area is at Walnut. That
is not, despite what the Chamber wants us to believe, is not a commercial area. So
why do we need people traveling at 60 miles per hour and then we're talking about
students at two middle schools. I'm appalled and I don't live there and I'm appalled.
So that's some, one piece of it. When I read there's going to be minor impacts on all
six streams I have to laugh because when I think of an extra four times the amount
of roadway that you have now is going to have when you have a major water event.
Some of the major rain events we've had, think of what it's going to do to those
streams. Just consider that for a moment. Of course you'll have proper drainage.
The other piece that kind of makes me laugh is when I read that there is going to be
appropriate erosion and sediment control practices. We've been promised that
before. All we have to do is look at what happened with I69 and what's happened to
our friends. I would hope that this is true and that indeed we're going to see the
appropriate practices but we have not seen IDEM and its Rule #5 actually do
anything for us so far. (22-C) I'm hoping that once again you will reconsider this
project and scale it back even further because what we're looking at is a way of
turning this in to a four or five lane highway. It's very clear from the dimensions that
we're being given and that's just not concrete once again. Thank you.
Erosion and sediment control will be
included in design plans, and an
IDEM Rule 5 Notice of Intent will be
required in accordance with state
regulations.
See response 10-B.
See response 8-F.
22-C
23-A
23-B
roadway will be 35 mph and the
design speed is 40 mph.
Page 15 of 60
already see people coming off Rockport. There's a ton of traffic on that intersection
now getting across Fullerton and cutting all over with the construction happening it's
kind of a dangerous intersection there today. That will change when this is done.
But I think now that we have Tapp Road maybe it would be prudent to consider, not
to longer traffic feeds, but also preventing large trucks and truck traffic from traveling
on this route. (23-A) Maybe we push them up to Tapp Road because I think that
you're going to see them go that way anyway. I think it will be much more
convenient for trucks because I've given this a lot of thought. I think that's the way
they're going to go anyway because that that road is easy, it's better, it dumps it
right out on Winslow, they can go north on Walnut. It's just an easier way for trucks
to get there. And so I think that's been a good, a good development with the 69
project. Now I want to also ask that you consider the fact that where we drive past
there every day and watch our kids try to get to school, unlike many neighborhoods
that have a road next to them, this… Unlike other schools that have a road next to
them, this school has two neighborhoods and then a sort of urban area off Rogers
where kids have to walk to school and cross this road to get to the school. They
have no choice. They have to walk. So I want to make sure that you're thinking
about a good safe way to get those kids across the road. (23-B) We're already seeing
slip/slide and I've seen them slide all the way out in the street in the icy weather
even from the Highlands and walking that way. So I'll hope you'll consider that. I
hope you'll consider the fact that there's a lot of cross country track meets held not
just for Bachelor but other schools have them there in that field. So there are many
times that we as neighbors drive along there and see cars parked all the way down
Gordon Pike watching kids run their cross country meets there. And I also would
encourage you to consider sidewalks on Rogers Street when you're doing this
project because you're gonna get a lot of people hit that intersection and head north
on Rogers or south on Rogers. There are no sidewalks now and you'll see kids
walking through the grass and trying to get across Rogers today. It's not always the
safest so I think it's gonna be getting even more dangerous. At the very least
please consider sidewalks along there for our kids that have to have to walk to
school. Otherwise I do think you'll have some accidents and I don't think that, that it
will be very safe walking. And so those of you who live along that corridor know, my
family has been involved in development along there and we're very active in Eagle
View and we were very active with seeing the platting through of the Highlands and
Bachelor Heights. We didn't finish that project but we were active. In all of our time
there we always knew that Gordon Pike would probably eventually go over that
creek and connect to 37. Maybe I'm too young, nothing was ever brought up that it
was going to be 69. As a matter of fact I recall, it may have been an option for 69
as Mr. Dillon mentioned. You all remember the debates on where 69 was going to
go. So it was not for certain that it was going to be there. There were a lot of
controversy about that. So it's there, we've got it but I don't think it was intended to
25.
24.
Verbal
Comment
12/11/2014
Scott Wells
No address
given
Verbal
Comment
12/11/2014
Steve Burns
4017 S. Crane
Ct.
Page 16 of 60
Thank you, my name is Scott Wells. You know, people who are supporting this
highway, I call it a big highway now because it's kind of like morphed like it's on
anabolic steroids. When it first started I remember having my connect list I can
definitely see this being a four lane all the way to at least Walnut Street because
that median there is probably going to be eventually taken out as the traffic
increases turning it into a four lane road there. For those people who say this is
great, I'm glad we have this, just imagine this is your property, your front yard there
and now how would you think if this happened to your property. That's all I'm
asking. Just think about if the shoe's on the other foot. The other thing is, you
know, I'm on the Monroe County Plan Commission by the way, and you know I like
to make good decisions based on facts. We have some projects right now that
relates to the neighborhood. We have a fairly big project that is just not that far
north of where Sare Road T's in with Rhorer Road. And you've got a nice tree lined
I wasn't going to say anything but the comment that "things change" view. Well,
things do change. The world is different than in 1960 or '70 when they envisioned
the road. One of the things that changed that hasn't come up that I want to mention
is we have all these walking trails and if you look, it's not just the kids who have to
cross the street. Some of these trails that are getting a lot of traffic are going to be
crossing these new interchanges. Well, not interchanges, I'm sorry. New road. So
at grade level. There will be a lot of people, a lot of bikes, people out jogging with
kids that will be going across these 16 foot roads. One is actually just past the circle
in front of Jackson Creek there's a crossing. One is down at Clear Creek and those
are at-grade crossings. I think ultimately things are going to have to be done to build
bridges. (24-A) The costs are not realistic because they're gonna have to be cuts,
there's gonna have to be a lot of other changes because things change. So I will
wrap it up in a minute but I think the cost estimates are low ball considerably. (24-B) I
think the cost of maintaining 16 foot roads, salting them, maintaining median strips
which somebody said we can always have gardens in them. Well, who's doing
that? So I think this is a project that wants to exist because people want projects.
But I think the need are not well expressed, especially now that there's a second
interchange.
be such a highly trafficked road. We actually all envisioned it would be very much
like Gordon is today and would just continue out to 37. And didn't really expect it to
be this huge wide road. Nobody ever pictured that when we were doing those
projects. And I think for your realtors, if you know anybody looking out there and
they're looking in that area, make sure they ask their realtor to find out because a lot
of them don't know. It's not out there where it's easy to find. So there's been a lot of
them don't know. We're trying to get the word out and educate that community but a
lot of them are younger and haven't doing it long and they're just not aware. Thank
you.
See response 6-B.
The costs discussed in the
20) do not include maintenance.
The costs reflect design, right-of-way
acquisition, and construction.
See the “Roadway Character”
section
of
the
Environmental
Assessment (Page 15) for the
average daily traffic for 2010 and
2030.
24-A
24-B
25-A
27.
26.
Sandy Kouns
4001 S. Falcon
Verbal
Comment
12/11/2014
Jennifer Miers
3212 S. Rogers
St.
Page 17 of 60
Hi, I'm Sandy Kouns, I live at that corner of Gordon and Falcon. And I'm a teacher
at Bloomington South High School and I have two sons. My oldest goes to a
I'm Jennifer Miers. I live at 3212 South Rogers Street, so my property isn't directly
affected by this project but I think I will be affected. I'm against the project for many
reasons people have already recited. But one thing I want to point out, it doesn't
make any sense to talk about this without the larger context of I69. So we need to
acknowledge what other people are doing with that other project. And as it stands
right now this has been a big discussion about how the plans affect this
neighborhood and it's unfortunate that the discussion hasn't been larger because as
I69 stands right now not only are the people in this neighborhood or the people in
Bloomington or the county affected by traffic patterns and that kind of thing but we're
going to be buying two interstate interchanges in less than a mile. And to
accomplish that second one at Fullerton and Gordon we're going to have to tear up
more than seven miles of nature. We're paying for two interchanges in less than a
mile and we're tearing up and creating a new road which is an additional cost. (26-A)
And frankly this infuriates me that you would use my tax money this way. Thank
you.
proposed round about or maybe a stop there in the report. The question is what's
the number of added daily trips. I see nothing in this report and if you want to
calculate stuff, I know I69 I remember when Section 4 was going through and did
have some erosion control problems with which we still have some of those. I can
verify with people sitting in the audience that can tell you about that. And you're
going across six different cuts of stream I hope finally we're going to do something
right if the job's done right so water is protected. I got off track but what I'm trying to
do, on the traffic, when you design the I69, if I recall, it's going to be an increase of
24,000 trips of more vehicles going north and south, of which one-third or 8,000
trips are trucks. If you've got those numbers figured out why don't you have
numbers objective when it's going to go east all the way to Sare Road. I would like
to see numbers so I can make good decision on we're going to plan for the ten
years our roads. (25-A) I mean, it's all about traffic, right? We want to move traffic.
We wouldn't be in the problem right now if we had planned this road way back and
the road was already connected then people wouldn't come in and develop the
property and stuff. But the road is already there now. You've got further set backs
from the property. So all I'm asking is, if you're going to do this presentation, next
time I would like to know, I'm sure that number's somewhere, on average daily trips
for the next five years down the road, ten years down the road because I69, I call it
a highway until it's actually connects to the 69 highway. I don't want to, you know,
we need to know what traffic trip counts so when the Plan Commission members
start approving these developments we know pretty much how much more traffic is
going to be there. Thank you.
27-A
26-A
See response 10-B.
See response 9-A.
29.
28.
Ameer
Beitvashahi
521 W. Gordon
Pike
Verbal
Comment
12/11/2014
Harriet Kulis
1430 W. Estate
Dr.
Verbal
Comment
12/11/2014
Dr.
Page 18 of 60
My name is Ameer Beitvashahi and I live on Gordon Pike. I have a very brief
comment. I heard several mentions of Tapp Road. Two years ago we had a public
hearing somewhere on this when the lane was four lanes and everyone
conveniently glossed over why Gordon Pike was the better alternative than Tapp
Road. I've never seen any numbers, just the, someone quickly bumbling the affects
I am a member of the Eagleview subdivision and have been a long time opponent of
this particular roadway. I have no idea why it needs to be 90 feet in width. (28-A) I
have no idea why the Better Business Bureau or Chamber of Commerce cares
because there are exactly eight or nine businesses at the corner of Walnut and
Gordon Pike. So what businesses are they representing? Are they financial
businesses or are they development businesses? Is it a business that is going to be
used to take that area that is now pristine land and have multifamily dwellings on it.
What are they proposing to … Why are "they" the only, some of the very few people
who are in favor of this. And yet the residents, the people who use that area, who
travel in that area, and who walk in that area because it was a suburban rural area
are totally opposed to it. It does not mean that we want to go back to the Dark
Ages. It's not mean that we're not involved in connectivity. But this is not the place
for it. There is an adequate and above us, Tapp Road, that would be a far superior
area and would allow for the traffic to go in. (28-B) I can't imagine a truck coming in
off of our area, getting onto all of the north/south arterial lanes are one way in each
direction, making those corners and then winding their way down little roads at 30
miles an hour with no curve, no lights, no sidewalks to go to IU or any other
business located in downtown Bloomington. (28-C) So this is taxpayer money that is
being wasted. We do not need two exits within a mile. I lived in Chicago, I can tell
you far far better areas have greater distances than the amount of population than
what's represented by our little community. This is a boondoggle. It is some way
just to spend the money because it's available. They should take the money and
use it to improve the roads that are already there. Thank you very much.
university in West Lafayette and my youngest son is at South. Anyway, I have
major concerns on the traffic and the type of traffic it will have, (27-A) the speeds. (27-B)
I would hope that we keep it very safe for the children. I really felt compelled to
speak tonight because in 2009 my son the one that lives in West Lafeyette was
walking to Bachelor and he was hit by a car. He's not like a darter. If it were my
younger child I would question it. But this is my safe guy. And if there was a
problem then in December of 2009 then once all this goes in I have immense
concerns about the children getting to Bachelor. And I am sure that Jackson Creek
area people would have the same kind of concerns. (27-C) So I just felt compelled
kind of for the sake of my son, to come down and take action. Kids already have
problems. And I just wanted to put that on record and kind of put that out there.
Thank you very much.
29-A
See response 6-A.
See response 10-B.
See response 6-A.
28-B
28-C
See response 22-A
See response 8-F.
27-C
28-A
The posted speed limit will be 35
mph. This is the same as the posted
speed limit on the existing roadways.
27-B
32.
31.
30.
Sarah Klaiber
No address
Verbal
Comment
12/11/2014
Sandra
Takarsky
No address
given
Verbal
Comment
12/11/2014
Mike Kramme
3850 S. Walnut
Street Pike
Verbal
Comment
12/11/2014
Page 19 of 60
Monroe County residents need the Fullerton Pike extension. The usefulness of this
project outweighs the desires of the homeowners who did not check the county
I'm SandraTakarsky. I've lived in Monroe County since 1975. I'm not directly
affected by this project. My heart goes out to those of you who are dealing with this
and my praise to all of you who are working so hard on it. One of the points in the
presentation was about the karst. I live on land impacted by I69. The water
pollution continues every time it rains. Rule 5 which is supposed to make sure that
sediment from construction sites does not leave construction, water is not supposed
to leave construction site. But in Indian Creek Township it's going off the
construction site into the karst system and has contaminated springs and wells. (22-C)
Unfortunately, in the state of Indiana the highway construction lobby has a
stranglehold. I urge you to speak up clearly, precisely and firmly to all your elected
officials.
Hi, I'm Mike Kramme. I live on South Walnut Street Pike. Everybody I've heard
here has spoken on the west side of Old 37. I certainly can understand that. In fact
it's basically a dead end ever since I've moved here from Washington, D.C. in 1989.
But I live on the other side and I live just a block off of Rhorer Road and South
Walnut Street Pike on the north side. Many times in the evening or morning I just sit
in my driveway trying to get out because of all the congestion there of people trying
to cut through either going to the east side or trying to cut down Henderson and
down to IU and that area. It's a real choke point from kind of a rural perspective.
Like I said, I come from an area where this town has no traffic compared to what I'm
used to. But because it is rural and the roads are smaller we do get these choke
points. You know, we do need an east/west connector. The improvements to Tapp
Road have been good. I work on Second Street on the west side by Liberty Drive
and you know, what used to take me about eight to ten minutes to get home from
that area will now take me about 35 minutes, especially if I leave at 5:00 o'clock in
the afternoon. So we're getting a lot of improvements, we're getting the highway
through here. We need to consider these type of improvements but I think there's
been lots of good comments here about the construction of the road and things that
can be done even though you may have the road through Gordon Pike there and
you property there will be ways to, you know, secure the shoulders and the animals
and things that are going on in there. I think there can be mitigations done for that.
I think you guys are thinking about that too. So I appreciate that. Thank you.
plus revenue. Well, I'd love to know how many residents and I'd love to know how
much, you know, how much more we're talking on Tapp Road because, you know,
I'm not a super road designer but I can drive from 37 all the way across Tapp Road
and count way less houses than I do when I cross Gordon Lane. (29-A) Some facts to
back it up would help maybe in the next presentation. Thanks.
32-A
31-A
Level of Service (LOS) is a
measurement of a roadway’s
See response 22-C.
35.
34.
33.
Page 20 of 60
I do not live on Gordon Pike, Rhorer Rd. or Sare Rd., though I do live on the south
side of town and frequently drive on these roads and Tapp Rd, and walk on the
Clear Creek Trail. It is clear to me that building the Fullerton Pike-Gordon Pike
connector will ruin the neighborhood for those people owning houses along Gordon
Pike. (35-B) It will make walking to Batchelor Middle School more dangerous.
Furthermore, it will send more traffic past Jackson Creek Middle School (35-C) and
bring added traffic and noise (35-D) to another residential neighborhood—that on the
south end of Sare Rd. When the curving south end of Sare Rd. was built, was it
Build the road. If someone bought a house and didn't research the area, it doesn't
mean their rights are suddenly more important.
This connector road should not be built. It is not needed. Tapp Rd. has been
functioning as a major east-west corridor for years. There are less residences along
Tapp Rd. and more businesses and they are all used to having a busy road passing
by. There is much more land available on Tapp Rd. for widening the road if
necessary. Tapp Rd./Country Club/Winslow/Rogers Rds. still connect to the north
end of Sare Rd. and therefore to the bypass. Furthermore, Rogers Rd. connects to
Smith Rd., making it possible for cars heading east to Lake Monroe or Brown
County to avoid the busy College Mall area. (35-A)
Email Comment
12/12/2014
Christine
Linnemeier
No address
given
Email Comment
12/12/2014
As a resident of Woodhaven Estates, I say build the road. We have always had to
drive through neighborhoods to get to Batchelor Middle School. We used to cut
through the Eagle View neighborhood. Now we cut through the Highlands. People
speed and nearly get hit due to traveling on unfamiliar roads. Is that really safer?
Also, this project needs to happen, so cars will stop going through the Highlands. It
was never designed to be a road.
B)
A roundabout should be put in at Fullerton and Rockport. It would deal with some of
the alignment issues with the two roads. (33-A) A sky bridge could be put in for the
kids, similar to what is on bypass north of town. There is a school there, as well. (33-
planning maps prior to building or buying their homes. The road should be a fourlane, not a two-lane. The existing section is already two lanes and is inadequate for
traffic right now. Project to when I69 is complete. It will be a mess. Make it a fourlane, and stop bending to the wishes of a few to the detriment of thousands and
thousands of people who will use those four lanes every single day. (32-A)
Marci Creps
Woodhaven
Estates
subdivision
Email Comment
12/12/2014
Lisa Williams
No address
given
Email Comment
12/11/2014
given
See response 8-C.
Compared to an at-grade crossing,
the bridge over Clear Creek Trail is
intended to make the trail safer for
users by reducing contact between
trail users and motorists, and
allowing
continuous
pedestrian
movement
under
the
bridge.
Coordination with the local parks
department regarding trail resources
35-E
See response 8-F.
35-C
35-D
See response 8-A.
35-B
33-B
See response 6-A.
See response 8-F.
33-A
35-A
capacity to accommodate traffic.
According to the INDOT Design
Manual,
the
minimum
LOS
requirement for an urban arterial
such as Fullerton Pike is LOS D.
The traffic analysis conducted for the
project determined that the entire
corridor would achieve a LOS D or
better and is therefore adequate to
meet INDOT requirements.
See response 11-A.
38.
37.
36.
Kate Arthur
th
400 E. 7 St.
Email Comment
12/12/2014
Nathan
Schroder
No address
given
Email Comment
12/12/2014
Bruce Farrand
750 E. Kirkwood
Ave.
Page 21 of 60
Glad to hear this went from 4 to 2 lanes, but really this should either not happen at
all, or not be an I-69 interchange. I live in one of these neighborhoods and have
children who will be walking to Batchelor. (38-A) There is nothing down there that
Do not downgrade this project any further. It should never have been downgraded
from 4 lanes in the first place. (37-A) Plan for the future growth, don’t deny that will
happen. Do not kick the can down the road like was done with the bypass.
As a resident who lives southwest of Bloomington, I feel the pain of the residents
alongside the Fullerton Pike project. I now have a front row view of I69 out of my
front door. I knew when I purchased my home that I69 was someday likely coming
through. I also know, now that it is here, the need for a true West to East corridor for
the southern side of the city is even more necessary. And I say West to East, not
West to Walnut. The combination of a major interstate and a major university will
only make our city more attractive to new businesses and residents, further
expanding the need for this project.
I was not able to go to the meeting last night and have a question. I live at 320 East
Rhorer Rd. (the southeast corner of Rhorer and Walnut Street Pike). I understand
you are widening Rhorer. How much of my yard will I be losing? Or how wide is
Rhorer going to be widened on the south side of the road just east of Walnut Street
Pike? (36-A)
Building this road is a bad idea. Don't do it.
Just because something has been talked about for the past 50 years, does not
mean it should be done. Times change. Fifty years ago there were no housing
developments or schools in this area. It was rural. South Sare Rd. did not exist. I-69
was not planned. Clear Creek Trail did not exist.
Another negative effect of the Fullerton Pike-Gordon Pike connector road would be
disturbing one of the longer, more peaceful sections of the Clear Creek Trail. I have
walked on the Rail Trail underneath SR 37. It is very noisy and frightens my dog. I
do not walk that part of the trail anymore because of that. Please, don't ruin another
walking trail with an overpass. (35-E)
really intended to be part of a beltway? I don't think so.
See response 8-F.
See response 8-C.
38-B
See response 32-A.
Only preliminary roadway design has
been completed for the proposed
project at this time, so right-of-way
numbers are not finalized. For more
information on the right-of-way
purchase
process,
see
This is a standardized INDOT/FHWA
process over which the County has
no influence.
38-A
37-A
36-A
has been ongoing and will continue
throughout the project development
and design process.
40.
39.
James Kulis
No address
given
Email Comment
12/12/2014
Stephen
Schuster
2415 Rhorer
Rd.
Email Comment
12/12/2014
Page 22 of 60
Bill Williams and friends keep saying they want to listen to people and give the
people want they want. I will repeat again what the people are saying: “We don’t
want this road.”
Regarding curbs - I believe the drainage issues will add a lot of expense to the
project. Furthermore they will be a maintenance problem. Just look at the gutters
along Sare Road; they are full of sand, grass and debris. Who will clean them? The
County won't and it will be impossible for the residents to stand in a busy road and
clean them. They will create huge drainage issues and you will need to build
retention ponds as all of this water cannot flow directly into Jackson Creek. (39-E)
One last thought the bridges over Jackson Creek were just recently rebuilt so they
should be to current standards. (39-F)
However east of Walnut Pike to Sare Road I feel the project should take on a more
rural and residential mindset. For example I can see no need for a median or curb
on this portion of the project and the large roadway will reduce the front yards of
many homes. The median is impractical both aesthetically and functionally as this is
an existing area that has numerous driveway cuts. (39-A) How would people get out
of their driveways? You can't expect people to go in the wrong direction and then do
a U turn can you? (39-B) This boulevard approach works on the Sare Road extension
because it was a new development and there are no driveways directly to Sare
Road, only a few streets. Additionally because of the older and more rural feel of
this area I believe a grass median or third turn lane (except where needed - like at
Jaimie Lane) would look out of place. Also remember people have to walk across
the road daily to retrieve their mail. (39-C) A wider faster road (39-D) would make this
difficult.
Thank you for your presentation last night. The proposed project from SR37/I69 to
Walnut Pike seems fairly appropriate to me; as this is the connection from the
interchange to commercial areas. Additionally this had been in the plan for at least
30 years so Batchelor Middle School etc were located in anticipation of this.
anyone needs to get to, it would just clog up S Walnut/Old 37, be a nightmare for
going grocery shopping at the Kroger… it’s already so busy there with people
coming N and S on Walnut and folks going to and from Rhorer or S Walnut Pike,
completely unsafe, noise (38-B) for no reason in a residential neighborhood/school
zone, etc… The thought itself of an E/W corridor is appealing, but as somebody
living over here it seems quite dreadful, and with the trails… It makes way more
sense to make this on Tapp Rd., (38-C) where most everything is industrial anyway. I
am not a fan. If you want to connect Fullerton/Gordon fine, but definitely no
interchange, (38-D) and definitely not a 4 lane, and definitely lower the speed limit
through there. (38-E)
See response 27-B.
The storm sewer will be designed to
meet serviceability criteria out-letting
water at allowable velocities.
39-D
39-E
Existing bridge conditions will be
evaluated as design continues.
See response 8-E.
39-C
39-F
It has not yet been determined
where the breaks in the median are
to occur. This will be determined on
a case by case basis at a later date.
The median will allow a refuge for
pedestrians crossing the road.
39-B
See response 27-B.
38-E
The median will be designed in
accordance with the INDOT Design
Manual.
See response 9-A.
38-D
39-A
See response 6-A.
38-C
42.
41.
Email Comment
12/12/2014
Michael
Kramme
1983 S. Liberty
Dr.
Email Comment
12/12/2014
Email Comment
12/12/2014
Reed Adams
1310 W.
Feathercrest Ct.
Page 23 of 60
As I try to commute to work there are three choices now, north to Winslow then onto
Country Club and Tapp road, south to Rhorer Road then Gordon Pike to Rogers to
That Road and 37 North, or go through town to Grimes Lane, Patterson and then
second street. What used to take me 10-12 minutes to go <6 miles to work now
First and foremost is the need for an east/west connector on the Southside of
Bloomington. The Tapp road improvements had helped quite a bit for commuting
and transiting west to east and vice versa before access to That Road was closed.
Now it's congested worst than it ever has been during peak driving time. It also is
only a two lane road through Country Club and Winslow to the Rogers Street circle.
Major and costly improvements would need to be made to make it a viable
alternative to the Fullerton Pike project as some vied for. This project would connect
completely through to the east side of town making it a true Southside connector
east/west.
I'm writing comments in favor of the Fullerton Pike project as a resident along the
Eastside of the corridor. The open house hearing held December 11 at the Monroe
Courthouse had quite a few residents from the Westside of the project (west of
Business 37) speaking against this project. Their overwhelming concern was safety,
access, speed, and lifestyle changes as a result of their current dead-end residential
street (including several side-street cul-de-sacs) being changed to a thoroughfare
connector from a major new highway. High speed truck traffic was the top concern,
as well as the increased traffic volume. I would like to speak to these issues as well
as my perspective as a resident on S. Walnut Street Pike and the commute I must
make to work to the Westside of Highway 37, off Second street and onto S. Liberty
Drive.
I have lived in the area since 1992 and have long awaited this access.
I am writing this message to express my support for the project. I think it is very
important to the south side of Bloomington to open up this access from the I-69
interchange and provide a good quality east/west connector through the area. The
changes to That Road diminish it as a heavily used path to between SR-37 and
Rogers Street. I realize that the project will have a greater impact (with some
aspects negative) on those that live directly on Fullerton Pike/Gordon Pike and
Rhorer Road, but I think it will ultimately benefit all the residents of the area to have
efficient access to other parts of the community and access to I-69.
I live in the Eagle View neighborhood adjacent to the planned Fullerton Pike project.
I was unable to attend the Public Review on 12/11/14 but was able to download and
review the Environmental Assessment Des. no. 0801059.
The project team will continue to
engage the public throughout the
design process.
The County will comply with the
Uniform Act, which ensures that
property
owners
are
fairly
compensated for impacts to their
property. For more information on
the
Uniform
Act,
see
42-A
42-B
43.
Email Comment
Jeff Whitmer
No address
given
Page 24 of 60
I have no patience for this "Not In My Backyard" mentality and some of the opinions
quoted in the local newspaper on Friday, December 12 are just plain wrong.
I am writing now to voice my strongest possible objection to the small number of
people who are holding our county hostage.
Finally I'd like to touch on the construction process. There are mostly residential
properties along this corridor and being able to ensure right-of-way property isn't
damaged and is returned in good shape after the project is complete is very
important. I would hope the crews are sensitive to the property owners concerns
and do all they can to mitigate the heavy equipment and materials interference
during construction. (42-B) Thank you for this opportunity to voice my opinion on your
project, good luck.
It will cost more money to responsively satisfy the environmentalists and the Gordon
Pike/Eagle View section of this project, but collaboratively solving the issues and the
funding requirements is what this town is all about. Engage the people, have them
help you solve the issues and the project will benefit from the interaction. (42-A)
Now, for the few that live along the Westside corridor and have concerns for safety,
access, speed, lifestyle or that have environmental concerns, I believe the Fullerton
Pike Project Office should engage with them and mitigate their issues as much as
possible. This is an impactful change for them and I'm sure the design changes
you've made so far go a long way towards addressing their issues. Ensuing the
adult, children's and pets safety is number one, access onto and off of the new
roadway is second and speed it probably third. Being environmentally responsibility
is one of the areas that this city takes pride in, so not taking this lightly is very
important; especially after the issues Section 4 of I-69 have experienced.
The Fullerton Pike project would alleviate the stress on the Southside by adding
another throughput for traffic, so traffic from the south would have Old 37 access,
traffic from the west would have Fullerton Pike and traffic from the north would have
Tapp Road primarily. The leveling of traffic flow would allow for safer conditions, the
multiple access would lessen wear & tear on the roadways, less congestion would
ease frustration and lower speeding, and a shorter compute with access from the
Westside to Sare Road would improve lifestyle conditions for most of the people.
takes me closer to 20 minutes. The reason is urban sprawl; the city has approved all
the new construction over the last several years and the accompanying traffic has
increase dramatically. The Sare Road connector has greatly increased the traffic on
the Southside too. All of the buildup has led to safety, access, speed and lifestyle
changes for every resident on the Southwest side of Bloomington. This project
would give me a straight shot to the highway so I would be a contributing factor to
traffic flow north of the Fullerton Pike corridor.
43-A
See response 32-A.
45.
44.
Email Comment
12/18/2014
Email Comment
12/15/2014
Matt Mullins
No address
given
Bruce Farrand
320 E. Rhorer
Rd.
12/13/2014
Page 25 of 60
2) Are there any possibilities of implementing more roundabouts along this route? I
believe there would be room (and definitely the need) at the intersection with
Rogers and Walnut St Pike. Roundabouts are just so much more efficient than the 4
way stops currently in place. There may not be much room at Walnut St Pike, but
wouldn't that necessitate a smaller roundabout and slower speeds? Perhaps
another roundabout at the entrance of Batchelor would also be suitable for traffic
management as well as speed control to help the drivers stay focused and help the
1) I live in Eagleview, and have 1 child currently walking to Batchelor (crossing
Gordon to get there) and 2 more who will be going in the next several years. Are
there any considerations for an under- or overpass? What traffic-control measures
might also work to control speed in that area? I don't have overwhelming concerns
about safety, but believe this would be very useful. (45-A and 45-B)
Questions:
I would like to thank Mr Williams and the rest of the decision-making committee for
scaling back the project to plan 1A, the 2-lane road with occasional turn lanes. I
think this seems like the 'right size' road for the area and the neighborhoods along
the way.
Hello, I was at the most recent public meeting you held at the Courthouse, and
wanted to thank you, as well as submit a few questions
I was just notified that Monroe County is considering buying my property because of
the Fullerton Pike project. Can you tell me when I can expect to hear if they are or if
they are not. I’m at 320 East Rhorer Rd. (44-A)
Thank you for your time.
These people just do not want change. Too bad. I am very disappointed that the
Highway Department and the others involved have kowtowed to this small group
that yelled the loudest. We had a real chance for the first effective eastwest
passage across the southside of Bloomington, and now it will just be another halfbaked traffic jam because the traffic will be there, whether the road is designed to
handle it or not. (43-A)
Of course, roads with traffic, even lots of traffic, go through strictly residential areas.
Drive around Bloomington. Drive around Columbus, Indiana or nearly every
medium-sized community in the Midwest region. They all have arterial streets going
through neighborhoods where there are schools. There is nothing special, unique,
or even "important" about the "Batchelor" neighborhood.
See response 8-F.
See response 27-B.
See response 11-A.
Phased construction will be utilized
in order to begin construction as
soon as funding is available.
45-B
45-C
45-D
After the environmental process is
complete,
the
right-of-way
acquisition will begin.
45-A
44-A
46.
Email Comment
12/19/2014
Greg Alexander
1015 N.
Madison St.
Page 26 of 60
The only way the road could be good at all is if it had a 25mph design speed. That
would mean 10 foot travel lanes, 10 foot curb radii at intersections, frequent
stops/crossings/driveways, you know, like an urban road.
By being an oversized road with a divider, it will encourage a limited access
mentality. As a result, connecting residential development will be of the suburban
form, vast networks of cul de sacs with only one connection to the rest of the world.
That design discourages biking and violates the county MPO's complete streets
requirement.
It will be inaccessible by bike. You cannot put a bike lane on a highway! You have to
design the road for bikes. When you put a bike path beside a road with large turning
radiuses, every intersection becomes a body count. You will literally kill cyclists with
this design. AND YOU KNOW IT -- LOOK AT BEST PRACTICES FOR BIKE
DESIGN, THERE IS NO SHORTAGE OF ENGINEERING DESIGN GUIDES
ABOUT BIKES. (46-B) Earn your pay!
(46-A)
Once it meets Sare Rd, it will effectively form a beltway around Bloomington. That
would be a catastrophe, substantially changing the nature of Bloomington's
development patterns. If it attracts development, it will be shitty development, AS
YOU WELL KNOW. Look at the development along roadways of a similar design
elsewhere in the nation! And that's the best case -- it's also likely to just be an
overbuilt road with no development on it, a high speed corridor filled with people in
cars who don't want to be where they are. It will actively destroy the sense of place.
I cannot say "No", I must say: HELL NO.
Regarding the plan to make a boulevard or suburban highway out of Fullerton Pike:
Overall, I am very much in favor of this road, as it will improve access to the
highway, and smooth out the rest of the road, making it more convenient for most
living along that route. I also think that upon completion, most people near the road
(not those directly on the road, unfortunately) will see a modest property value rise
with the ideal location near a direct feeder to I-69.
4) Have any attempts been made to accelerate the construction? Beginning in 2016
seems very far in the future. I would like to minimize the time as much as possible
so that everyone can begin using the road and getting used to the new normal. (45-D)
3) Also, the property on the NE corner of Rhorer/Walnut St Pike is currently for sale.
Has any thought been given to acquiring that property and using it for a roundabout,
minimizing the effect on the other 3 corners? I think that would be a perfect plan.
children cross safely. (45-C)
46-B
46-A
Safety of bicyclists as well as
motorists is factored into design of
bike paths and roadways. Proper
facility use by both parties
determines how safe the facility is.
The development patterns of the
area are not anticipated to change
significantly because the current
built-out nature of the area.
48.
47.
Email Comment
12/21/2014
Shawn Laszlo
Clear Creek
Estates
subdivision
Email Comment
12/20/2014
Rosalie White
3853 S. Cramer
Cir.
Page 27 of 60
1. Concerned that S. Clear View Drive to W. Hedgewood Drive to Estate Drive will
be used as a cut through for traffic when there is a back up at the new traffic light at
Fullerton and Rogers. People will inevitably figure this out and it will create
excessive traffic through our W. Hedgewood Drive neighborhood (risking children,
I share many of the same concerns expressed by my extended neighbors along the
corridor being considered for construction (Fullerton Pike Project). In addition to the
obvious concerns of sending increased traffic (truck and car) (48-A) off of an Interstate
(69) through the middle of our neighborhood endangering children, (48-B) pets and
other pedestrians, (48-C) there are two concerns I have specific to the Clear Creek
Estates neighborhood:
Finally, funding is still not totally in place for the proposed corridor, and I (along with
many others) do NOT want my federal, state, and county tax dollars used for this
project. (47-C) All travelers would be better served having our current bridges and
roads fixed.
This proposed corridor is not even really an east-west artery. It will become, in fact,
a southern bypass moving people away from downtown businesses and IU. During
our recent town hall public meeting, someone spoke admiringly of the 3rd street
artery and how everyone is aided by it. I drive on this once a week when I have to-fast traffic makes it unfriendly and causes unease in negotiating turn-offs. Also, it is
ugly; it is almost an embarrassment for out-of-towners to have to take this-especially as their first introduction to our city.
It is common knowledge that we have distracted drivers. More so in the past few
years than ever! Our proposed corridor will be one of those streets designed to
facilitate traffic through suburbs, and we will see deaths of, and injuries to, our
children and elderly.
In the United States, every 2 hours a pedestrian dies in a traffic accident. More than
half of pedestrian traffic deaths over the past decade occurred on “arterial roads”
built through suburban sprawl. These factoids come from the “2014 Dangerous by
Design” report by Smart Growth America. These cities’ poorly thought-out corridors
were built only in the interest of moving cars, rather than built to keep pedestrians
safe. More than 90% of people hit by cars traveling at 20 mph survive the crash. At
45 mph, only 35% live. These factoids show what WE will have if this corridor is built
as proposed. (47-A and 47-B)
I am writing to express my total hate of the proposal to complete the Fullerton
Corridor. This “corridor” will immediately become an arterial road going by two
middle schools and through suburbs. Only one intersection is business zoned.
The county has a complete streets policy in place. Don't ignore it.
See response 8-E.
48-C
The traffic analysis has shown that
all intersections will operate at an
acceptable level of service, meaning
significant
backups
are
not
anticipated.
Traffic control for
See response 8-F.
48-B
48-D
See response 10-B.
48-A
Funding for the first phase is
programmed
in
the
MPO’s
Transportation
Improvement
Program (TIP), with the remaining
funds described in the TIP but not
yet programmed. Local matching
funds will come from the Local Road
& Street Account, Cumulative Bridge
Fund, and the existing Fullerton Pike
Economic Development Area Tax
Increment Financing District (TIF).
See Appendix G, Page G-3 to G-4
for relevant pages from the TIP.
See response 27-B.
47-B
47-C
See response 8-E.
47-A
51.
50.
49.
Email Comment
12/26/2014
Mo Beit
No address
given
Email Comment
12/25/2014
Email Comment
12/22/2014
Thomas Albright
711 W. Estate
Dr.
PO Box 3261
P.J. Smith
703 W.
Baywood Dr.
The most important reason is that there is a hospital located at Fullerton
Pike and I69. What could be better than a hospital with emergency facilities
right on the Interstate!
Another good reason is that the Fullerton Pike interchange would complete
the “beltway” around Bloomington.
There is really nothing of the same importance at Tapp Road. None of the
medical offices near Tapp Road at I69 are emergency facilities.
Page 28 of 60
3. The people who are making these decision have a stake in this to make money.
all are land owners and are making millions from tax payers. These people do not
2. You are putting our children and our schools in harm's way. This is residential
neighbor hood. Kids are crossing and walking to school in this area. There is too
much traffic already going by the schools. (51-B)
(51-A)
1. Waste of tax payers money to pay for 2 interchanges. We already have Tapp Rd.
-
-
-
I live in Clear Creek Estates on Estate Drive which is the next intersection on
Rogers Street south of Gordon Pike, so this discussion is directly relevant to me. I
believe that the Fullerton Pike interchange at I69 is far more important to have than
the Tapp Road interchange at I69. If the number of interchanges is limited to one,
then it should be built at Fullerton Pike: (50-B)
I received a flier at my residence asking for my opinion regarding two interchanges
being built within a mile on I69 at Fullerton Pike and Tapp Road. (50-A)
Yes we should have an interchange at fullerton pike. (49-A) The interchange and the
improvements across to Sare rd. will be a long range benefit to the community.
Ultimately, I would prefer an overpass at I69 and Fullerton, instead of the proposed
off ramp. With Tapp Road only an additional mile north, it seems like a waste of
money and will severely impact the area. (48-G)
2. Noise. The increase in traffic and truck traffic will create extra noise in the area
(especially as they are preparing to stop at Rogers and Fullerton). How will this be
addressed? (48-E) Examples: Signs to discourage and enforce no air braking, very
reduced and enforced speed limit signs (20 mph school zone), (48-F) no trucks over a
certain weight, sound barriers, etc.
pets, etc.). Will this be addressed with speed bumps on Clear Creek Estate roads
(e.g. W. Hedgewood Drive), a traffic diversion from Clear View, etc.? (48-D)
See response 9-A.
48-G
See response 8-F.
See response 10-B.
51-B
51-C
See response 9-A.
See response 9-A.
50-B
51-A
Please note that fliers were
developed by an unknown private
party and are in no way associated
with the Fullerton Pike design team,
Monroe County, INDOT, or the
Federal Highway Administration.
50-A
See response 9-A.
See response 27-B.
48-F
49-A
See response 8-C.
48-E
neighborhood streets is beyond the
scope of this project.
54.
53.
52.
Email Comment
12/27/2014
John Chambers
No address
given
Email Comment
12/26/2014
Email Comment
12/26/2014
Sarah Klaiber
No address
given
No name given
No address
given
Page 29 of 60
Logistics! There is NO WAY that extending Fullerton Pike could ease or speed up
travel to the east side of Bloomington. There are way too many obstacles: Count
them. Most existing streets and roads are 2 lane and narrow. Predominately
residential. Two schools. S Roger street stop. Intersecting Trails. S 37 stop light. S
Walnut St Pike stop. Rhorer Rd/ Sare Rd intersection. Medical district on Sare.
I agree with Mary Ann Williams 12/26 Letter to the HT editor for her reasons and
many more. The simplest reason is that it doesn't make sense. Who would it serve?
People driving north? It provides no benefit in time or mileage over the present
corridors. People driving south would use 46 bypass. People driving east have ½
dozen options now. People driving west have the same options . I would guess that
few drivers exiting from I69 would select Fullerton pike to go to the east side of
town! (54-A)
Again, please build the Fullerton Pike extension as the originally-planned court-lane
road.
We 100% support the Fullerton Pike extension in Bloomington, IN. However, please
make it a four-lane road instead of a two-lane road. A two-lane does nothing to
facilitate traffic any better than the current road does. (53-A) People along the route
will adapt, and any increase of traffic during “school hours” will be minimal. It’s not
like more students, parents, and staff will be traveling to and from the schools
because of a new road. A new road will not increase the number of busses that
currently travel to those facilities. This is a nonsense complaint that is used as a
“scare attempt” to discourage road development in Monroe County.
First, I don't appreciate a flyer in my mailbox, which is unlawful. (52-A) Second, I
support Fullerton Pike as an I 69 Interchange with improvements to the Corridor to
Sare Road. (52-B)
6. Please put stop to this non sense before one of our children die crossing the
street going to school.
5. Monroe county is known to kick small businesses out using the environment for
excuse but then they are bringing trucks and semi in and around our schools and
residential. (51-C)
4. Monroe county politicians are known for making these non sense decisions in our
schools and our roads. They are in it for themselves and do not care about the
working people. We will remember that when it is time to vote.
live in the area and have no children.
54-A
Please see the “Purpose and Need”
section
of
the
Environmental
See response 32-A.
See response 9-A.
52-B
53-A
See response 50-A.
52-A
57.
56.
55.
Email Comment
12/28/2014
Roger Innes
2401 E. Rhorer
Rd.
Email Comment
12/28/2014
Email Comment
12/27/2014
Janet and Jim
Ault
No address
given
Steve Keucher
4621 N.
Shelburne Dr.
Page 30 of 60
I served on the Citizen's Advisory Committee (CAC) for the Fullerton Pike Corridor
Improvements project and attended two of the CAC meetings. In reading over the
Draft Environmental Assessment (DEA) document dated October 13, 2014, I was
pleased to see that the preferred alternative (1A) for this corridor is now a two lane
road, rather than four lane road. As brought up by multiple members of the CAC,
there were serious concerns about creating a large boulevard that would encourage
high speed travel past numerous residences and two middle schools. Changing this
route to two lanes with a median should discourage speeding. However, I am
Please reconsider relocating the project from Fullerton Pike to Tapp Road and
Country Club Road.
The State of Indiana and Bloomington needs to carefully plan the building of such
projects that have impacts on safety, pollution, and tax dollars. I do not see that
happening with the current Fullerton Pike Project proposal. If you changed the
boulevard location to Tapp Road and Country Club Road this would be less
expensive, less soil and stream erosion, and less hazzardous to middle school
students.
The Fullerton Project is proposed to be built in a large flood plain, adding a huge
construction expense, removing hills, and creating immense soil erosion in the
streams that eventually run into Lake Monroe, Bloomington's water source. (56-C)
The projected building of a boulevard that goes past two middle schools would
create a hazzard and potentilal death of one or more middle school students.. The
citizens were told that the boulevard would make it safer for pedestrians, however,
many days and nights I see students run, walk, skateboard, bicycle across the road
instead of using crosswalks, something middle school students commonly do.
Crossing a boulevard in this manner would be extremely hazzardous. (56-B)
The cost of the project is a huge responsibility for tax payers. The project would cost
less if it was relocated to Tapp Road and Country Club Road that already has an
existing path. (56-A)
I am a long time resident of Monroe County and wish to share my concerns about
the proposed Fullerton Pike Corridor Project.
As a long-time resident of the Bloomington community I fully support the
development, finally, of the last leg of the East-West corridor we’ve been waiting for.
Particularly with the coming of I-69 we need this route. Failure to move forward with
this will result in suboptimal traffic patterns, resulting in pedestrian endangerment
and traffic disruption in multiple other locations throughout the area.
Rogers roundabout. etc etc
See response 27-B.
See response 8-F.
57-C
57-D
See response 39-A.
57-B
See response 22-C.
56-C
See response 22-A.
See response 8-F.
56-B
57-A
See response 6-A.
56-A
58.
Email Comment
12/30/2014
Jim Schroeder
No address
given
Page 31 of 60
I thank the designers that have included a separate bike/ped path on the entire
I agree with the county that Fullerton Pike and Gordon Pike need to be connected
for the many reasons that are listed by the county planners.
As President of the Bloomington Bicycle Club I have heard many discussions
regarding this controversial east/west corridor of the southern Bloomington
suburban area. Also, I would like to stress that this is only my opinion and wishes
and does not represent all of our 200 members that drive cars and ride bicycles for
transportation and recreation.
Lastly, I am particularly concerned about pedestrian access to Batchelor Middle
School from the south. The wide width of the corridor will take significant time to
cross, backing up traffic, and posing a risk to the pedestrians. This risk could be
eliminated by incorporating an underpass or overpass at the top of the hill (at the
intersection of Clear View Drive and Gordon Pike) that could be used by both
pedestrians and cyclists. (57-D)
I also have concerns about the lack of attention paid to the bikeway in the DEA
document. There are very real safety concerns associated with creation of a
separate bikeway when it encounters a busy road. The intersection of South
Walnut/Old 37 and Gordon Pike/Rhorer road is especially concerning. At such
broad intersections it is very difficult for drivers to see all potential hazards. When an
additional separate lane for bikes is added, drivers will easily miss seeing a cyclist. I
strongly recommend that an underpass for cyclists be created at this intersection,
similar to what was done under the 46 bypass. This will greatly speed up travel time
for cyclists, and greatly reduce hazards for drivers and cyclists alike. Given the
proximity to Batchelor and Jackson Creek middle schools, many of these cyclists
will likely be middle school students, who are not yet road savvy. For this reason in
particular I would also recommend an underpass at Rogers Road. I understand that
underpasses are costly, but this cost will be well worth it to avoid a tragic death. I
encourage the engineers to visit Boulder Colorado to see a well-designed bikeway
system. One can cycle around Boulder with almost never crossing a busy
intersection due to the many underpasses that they have created for their bike
paths. (57-E)
concerned that the lanes are still too wide at 16 feet, (57-A) and I question the need
for a 16 foot wide median, (57-B) which creates a very broad right-of-way when
combined with the bike path on the north side and a sidewalk on the south. This
large width will continue to encourage speeding, (57-C) which will be especially
problematic in front of Batchelor Middle School. (57-D) I would recommend reducing
the lane width further, similar to what has been done on Sare Road north of Jackson
Creek School, where the median creates a narrow lane for cars to pass by,
encouraging cars to watch their speed.
See response 27-B.
The need for and placement of
refuge islands in the median will be
58-C
The current design for the roadway
at the Bloomington Rail Trail
crossing will include a median refuge
for bicyclist safety.
See response 46-B.
58-B
58-A
57-E
59.
Ann Elsner
4017 S. Crane
Ct.
Page 32 of 60
Cramming a Gordon Pike connector through our residential neighborhood creates a
major truck route off I-69. (59-A) It is neither safe, (59-B) environmentally sound, nor
cost-effective. Thousands of cars and trucks are predicted to roar through our yards.
Will we still have children walking to Batchelor Middle School, (8-C) sports teams
I hope that you consider all that I have contributed, and if you have any questions
feel free to contact me for anymore consultation.
It is also hoped that there will be a grassy buffer with trees separating the northside
bike/ped path and the southside sidewalk with the roadway. This grassy buffer will
be more attractive, enjoyable, and safe for the bicyclists and pedestrians. (58-E) Do
not create another ugly West Vernal Pike in Monroe County.
Instead of this grassy median, I feel that frequent refuge islands could be added for
pedestrians and bicyclists to cross this corridor. (58-C) Also, to follow the "complete
streets" concept, bicycle lanes should be included on both directions for the entire
corridor to accommodate those bicyclists that desire to ride alongside motor
vehicles and not have to worry about crossing driveways and side streets as if on
the northside path. (58-D)
I disagree with the grassy median in the middle of the corridor It is a waste of space
with no purpose, as it will not "slow" traffic but will frustrate speeders that want to
pass law-abiding drivers or bicyclists that choose to legally ride on the road. "Road
rage" apparently was not considered when this boulevard concept was designed.
I agree with Alternate 1A in that it will only be one lane of traffic in each direction. I
am worried about the speeds that this road will promote. I would hope that the
posted speed limit be no more than 40mph, and 30- 35mph be preferred. (58-B)
Occasional bumps like that on Moores Pike at Hyde Park(?) would insure proper
speeds.
The overpass over Clear Creek Trail will insure a safe separation of automobile
traffic and multiple types of users on this path. However, I am concerned that there
is not an overpass/underpass to accommodate the Bloomington Rail Trail. The
county's future plan is to extend this southward, and I envision this extension to
Lake Monroe to be a considerable tourist option for Bloomington and Monroe
County. I am assuming that the current design with the grassy median would
include a refuge island for the Bloomington Rail Trail users so they would only have
to navigate one direction of traffic at a time. (58-A)
north side and a sidewalk on the entire south side. This separate bike/ped path will
serve the "80-90%" of bicyclists that do not feel safe sharing a roadway with motor
vehicles. This east/west connector bike path will provide access for many suburban
bicyclists and families to the Clear Creek Trail, Bloomington Rail Trail, and the BLine Trail and then link to downtown Bloomington and Indiana University.
See response 10-B.
See response 8-E.
59-B
A grass buffer will separate both the
bike lane and the sidewalk from the
roadway. Tree planting in this area
is not planned at this time due to
visibility concerns.
58-E
59-A
The roadway lanes are wide enough
to safely accommodate bicyclists
who choose to ride on the road.
58-D
determined further along in the
design process on a case by case
basis.
61.
60.
Email Comment
01/03/2015
Karen Laucella
Clear Creek
Estates
subdivision
Email Comment
01/02/2015
Ginny Myerson
4060 Judee Dr.
Email Comment
12/31/2014
Page 33 of 60
I am writing about my concern over the Fullerton Pike corridor project. I live in the
Clear Creek Estates neighborhood. My sons had to walk to Batchelor Middle school
during their 7th & 8th grades of school. Unfortunately, for a major part of the school
year, classes start before the sun is up. My children had a terrible time crossing
Gordon Pike while it was dark; many times cars would not see them or simply
choose not to stop. They had to back up quite a few times when cars started
through the intersection while they were starting to cross the road. My point is that
the intersection is already unsafe for children having to walk and cross Gordon Pike;
making this road a corridor will only exacerbate the problem. For our children's
safety, please use a better option. (61-A) I am also confused as to why we need to
spend an exorbitant amount of public money that will result in two interchanges
within a mile. (61-B)
I am sending a copy of this comment & question to the H-T reporter, Rachel Bunn,
whose article on Dec. 11 was on this topic and am hoping she will do some
research & reporting that can explain why there have to be TWO exits that fill a
need for an east-west corridor within a 1/2 mile of each other when the existing
route (Tapp-Country Club-Rogers corridor) already serves that purpose and does
not upset residential or school routes?
I don't understand why no mention is made of the Tapp road east-west route off of I69 that can serve the same purpose as the proposed Fullerton Pike route. I was not
at the public meeting about this but I read in the H-T that some people mentioned
this. So if Tapp Rd. is already in place as an exit & does not have the objections
about the effect on residential areas as does Fullerton Pike proposal, why does
Bloomington need another east-west route so close-by? (60-A and 60-B)
The proposed road needs new funding, (59-H) so why would we waste money on an
east-west artery instead of improved access to the new IU Health facility, which will
be north?
working out on the grass, neighbors walking their dogs, families enjoying the Clear
Creek Trail, or cyclists safely crossing on the B-line? (59-D) The FHWA Environmental
Assessment form in the Monroe County Library has mistakes. Cornfields and mainly
single family homes were classified as “urban.” (59-I) It was concluded that building
this southernmost connector to I-69 would not increase noise. (59-E) The report said
that building a wide artery with thousands of extra cars and trucks racing on steep
grades, where there is now a dead end road, would not affect community cohesion.
(59-F) The report concluded that property values would not decrease. (59-G) The acres
of woods and grassy fields being exchanged for pavement were not considered as
important to the environment or drainage.
See response 8-D.
See response 47-C.
See response 14-D.
See response 6-A.
See response 9-A.
59-G
59-H
59-I
60-A
60-B
See response 9-A.
See response 8-A.
59-F
61-B
See response 8-C.
59-E
See response 8-F.
See response 6-B.
59-D
61-A
See response 8-F.
59-C
64.
63.
62.
Email Comment
01/05/2015
Joan Keeler
3927 S. Cramer
Cir.
Email Comment
01/05/2015
Deborah
Thompson
3895 S.
Bushmill Dr.
Email Comment
01/04/2015
Denny VanPelt
4081 S.
Rockport Rd.
Page 34 of 60
As a nearby resident in Batchelor Heights, I have many reservations regarding the
proposed Fullerton Pike project. Primary is the safety of residents and children who
must cross Fullerton Pike. (64-A and 64-B) (In the dark at certain times of year) Adequate
speed controls and access must be be implemented as the road passes
developments containing hundreds of homes and those people need admittance on
and off the roadway. (64-C) In questioning Structurepoint, (Dec. 11 meeting) these
details seem to be unknown. The currently proposed roadway with 16 ft. wide lanes,
I reside in the Highlands 2nd Addition very near the proposed exchange site, a very
short 1/2 block away as a matter of fact. I do want to voice my opinion about the
proposed route despite the fact that I do not have children in my home. The children
belong to my friends and fellow neighbors and I am in agreement with their
concerns for their children's safety. (63-A) Personally, I do not believe we need to
construct two interchanges within one mile of each other, nor do we need the added
expense for the additional construction. (630B) I do not believe that such a costly
endeavor is in any way a benefit to our area. It will only increase vehicle emissions
pollution, (63-C) road disrepair (already an issue), (63-D) traffic and traffic noise. (63-E)
We can already hear traffic on SR 37 and the Bloomington Speedway, do we really
need to add to that scenario? What happened to our property rights of "peaceful
enjoyment"? I am encouraging you to reconsider and redirect this project. Count me
against this construction!
Thanks for your consideration in this matter.
Through this road improvement process I have recently had my driveway access
eliminated from Rockport Road and am now concerned with the entry/exit
opportunities from a second driveway access onto Fullerton Pike. Since the project
is in development phase I appreciate the opportunity to express my concerns
regarding access from my property onto the new two lane roadway beginning at
Rockport/Fullerton Pike. Since my property borders both Rockport and Fullerton I
previously had quick access to the highway with no real concern. With the Rockport
Road driveway being eliminated I now have concern about the ability to go
westbound out of my Fullerton Pike driveway based upon discussions with the
project team members during the public hearing on December 11, 2014. I would like
to request that the traffic scheme allow me to exit west or eastbound from my
Fullerton Pike driveway without any back tracking due to a median or some other
traffic design that would interrupt my westbound exit. (62-A)
Surely, you can do better.
See response 8-F.
See response 9-A.
This project has been determined to
generate minimal air quality impacts.
Please see the “Air Quality” section
of the Environmental Assessment
(Page 40) for additional information.
Maintenance is the responsibility of
the County and the City and
financed through a separate fund not
associated with specific roadway
projects.
See response 8-C.
See response 8-F.
See response 8-E.
See response 27-B.
See response 22-A.
63-B
63-C
63-D
63-E
64-A
64-B
64-C
64-D
It has not yet been determined
where the breaks in the median are
to occur. This will be determined on
a case by case basis at a later date.
Your request will be forwarded to the
design team for consideration.
63-A
62-A
65.
Mailed
Comment
01/05/2015
Fred Dunn
1909 Rhorer
Rd.
Page 35 of 60
As proposed, our concerns are that these plans/designs will significantly affect the
safety, security, habitability and value of the residence located at 1909 Rhorer
Road. As proposed and presented, the project will bring the right of way
(roadway/trails etc) to within a few yards of the existing residence (1909 Rhorer
Road), raising concerns of safety, security, habitability, (65-A) noise pollution (65-B) and
property valuation. (65-C) In addition we are concerned that, as proposed, the only
We have concerns with the designs and plans involved with the acquisition of
property for the proposed Rockport Road to Sare Road project, Designation
#0801059.
I urge you to examine the area yourselves and look carefully at what a disastrous
effect the proposal now in place will bring.
Other obvious, more immediate issues such as driveway access for those homes
directly on Gordon Pike, wells and septics in front yards are also problematic, (42-B)
as is how the bus & parent pick-up back-ups at the schools will be addressed. How
will this be an efficient traffic-moving artery when there are two schools, 2 nursery
schools, and numerous driveways and development entrances that will feed into it.
A smaller connecting road with slow residential & school zone speeds, etc. would
not be opposed by most of the neighborhoods that will be impacted. On the other
hand, a roadway that takes up a 70 ft wide footprint, and allow semis (64-J) to barrel
along at 40 mph will in no way enhance our lives, natural areas and/or ability to
traverse through town more quickly. (The north/south feeders that will connect will
be totally inadequate to absorb the anticipated increased traffic flow/ ie. garden
hose reducing to a soda straw effect if you will.)
Our neighborhoods will be less safe, noisy, 64-F) polluted, (64-G) disrupted. Our natural
areas will be interrupted and noisy, with unknown other ecological effects (64-H) and
the quality of our lives will be sorely diminished. (64-I) This plan is not going to
enhance our well-being in any manner and I encourage you to look more deeply into
the ramifications and consider the trade-offs that will be made if it is allowed.
Putting this road through a suburban, developed area makes little logical sense &
the vision of this connecting roadway from many years past is not in touch with
today's reality of development. There was no highway 37, nor Tapp rd. exit,
nosaturated residential development. It is therefore an outdated vision.
I question the criteria used to dismiss other ideas for a new west-east connector
...we were told in brief that other options were considered & dismissed with no
explanation of what the dismissals were based on. (64-E)
will, in my opinion, encourage faster speeds and make our neighborhoods unsafe
and inaccessible to those who are bordered by the roadway. (64-D)
See response 8-D.
See response 39-A.
See response 39-F.
65-C
65-D
65-E
See response 8-C.
See response 42-B.
64-K
65-B
See response 10-B.
64-J
See response 8-A.
See response 8-A.
64-I
65-A
Please
see
the
“Ecological
Resources”
section
of
the
21 – Page 28).
See response 63-C.
64-G
64-H
See response 8-C.
Considered” in the Environmental
Assessment (Page 9 – Page 15) for
a detailed discussion of the reasons
other alternatives were dismissed.
64-F
64-E
67.
66.
Email Comment
01/07/2015
Ann Elsner
4017 S. Crane
Ct.
Email Comment
01/06/2015
Sean and
Rachael Streff
No address
given
Page 36 of 60
I urge that the Environmental Impact study for the proposed Fullerton Pike project
be shown to demonstrate significant impact. Please do not agree with and sign the
documentation for a finding of no significant impact (FONSI), since there is
significant and negative environment impact. The negative impact on the
environment is far greater than that in the conclusions at the beginning of the report.
Evidence of this negative impact is contained within this document, the comments
from residents and the end of the document, records of public hearings, and other
sources. The data show that the conclusion of FONSI is unwarranted. The projected
For these reasons and many more, my wife and I staunchly oppose this new road.
We are abhorred at the lack of disregard for the communities that will be affected by
this project You are not just building a road, you are ruining a nice and quiet family
community, homeowners property values, and a beautiful park.
When I moved here, I fall in love with the Clear Creek Trail. You can take a peaceful
run through the woods. This new road will go directly through this beautiful
landscape. The wonderful ecosystem and tranquility trail, will be destroyed by one
road. (66-D)
Not only will this road damage our community, (66-B) it will also damage the price of
my house. (66-C) It will deeply impact this facet, and being a new homeowner, this is
highly frustrating and saddening.
My family and I recently bought a home in this area. We moved from Illinois. We
were having a baby at the time, and wanted to get away from all the fast paced
traffic that you find in Illinois. So, when looking for a neighborhood to live in, we
wanted a quiet and safe community. We purchased this home based on these facts.
We live on the north side of Gordon pike, which is directly next to the new road that
is being proposed to build. This new road will be a huge detriment to our quiet
neighborhood. Also, My wife and I have a 4.5 month old girl, her bedroom faces
Gordon Pike. This new road will make her room loud and noisy, especially when
she will be sleeping. (66-A) Moreover, this will create a unsafe living condition for her,
since the road will be much closer to our house now.
Thank you for your time and attention. We look forward to successfully resolving our
issues and concerns with you at your convenience.
It is suggested and requested that the proposed 16'wide grass median from the
bridge to the Sare Road intersection be omitted in favor of multi-lane travel on
Rhorer Road between the new bridge and the Sare Road roundabout/signal.
access to the property will be by right turn only entry/exit due to the proposed 16'
grass median. (65-D) The replacement of Monroe County bridge #610 over Jackson
Creek will further complicate/affect these concerns. (65-E)
See response 8-D.
66-C
See response 14-D.
The Noise Analysis determined that
there would be an increase in noise
levels but that noise mitigation is not
reasonable or feasible for much of
the corridor. The Noise Analysis will
be re-evaluated during final design.
67-A
67-B
See response 6-B.
See response 8-A.
66-B
66-D
See response 8-C.
66-A
Page 37 of 60
3. On pages 44 – 47, there are a number of related items that are incorrect, such as
community cohesion marked as “no” impact (67-C) and “no” for decrease in property
values. (67-E and 67-I) As for cohesion, the cartoon by Joe Lee in the local paper, the
Herald-Times, pointed out that the proposed road would be impossible to cross for
the Batchelor Middle School children, of which there are roughly 500. (67-F) Our
neighborhoods are already built out and existing neighborhoods, with some on the
south side of the road and some on the south, some in Bloomington and others in
Monroe County. All feed students into Batchelor Middle School and its after school
sports and activities. One pedestrian bridge for the 2.7 mile long road has been
proposed, but even that seems impossible given the steep grade and lack of space
for needed right of way. (67-G) Community cohesion would be negatively impacted
because parents would not allow theirchildren to cross north or south to their
2. On page 43, there is a prediction that there would be no increase in noise, but
this cannot be correct. The current Gordon Pike is a steep and dead end local road
that provides access to larger connectors for neighborhoods abutting, and both
north and south of the road. Homes are arranged in a series of housing additions
and cul de sacs. The proposed road goes virtually through back, front, and side
yards, sometimes directly under bedroom windows of residents. At present, Gordon
Pike does not even connect to SR 37. The connectors are at the other ends of the
housing additions where the grades are not as steep. If Gordon Pike/Fullerton Pike
is turned into the southernmost exit for Bloomington from I- 69, there would be a
significant increase in noise 24/7. The models have not been clearly presented or
analyzed as to the traffic pattern or speeds that the vehicles would be travelling. The
estimates of cars have been predicted to escalate to somewhere between 4000 and
7000 vehicles per day, with considerable truck traffic. At the present time, there is
virtually no nighttime traffic, and trucks are only utility vehicles, safety, or delivery
trucks because there are no businesses in these quiet residential neighborhoods,
but this is projected to change to 24 hr truck traffic. (67-B and 67-D)
1. On page 16, the proposed arterial road is marked as “urban,” when in fact there
are cornfields, park land, and mainly single family dwellings. The only commercial
area is one intersection at Walnut St. and Gordon Pike/Fullerton Pike. This small
shopping area is already well-served by Walnut St. providing the north-south
continuity to other east-west connectors that have less challenging grades, with the
rightof-way to permit roundabouts. (67-A)
There are several conclusions of “no impact” made in the front section of the report
that are in conflict with data, as well as the discussion from the neighborhood
residents. Here are some of the most obvious mistakes or incorrect conclusions,
any of which should lead to a rejection of FONSI.
costs will be discussed in another letter.
According to the INDOT Procedural
Manual for Preparing Environmental
Documents, negative neighborhood
or community cohesion impacts may
include relocations, splitting or
isolating neighborhoods or ethnic
groups,
generating
new
development, and changing property
values. Relocations for the project
have been minimized to one.
Several separate neighborhoods are
located along the corridor. None of
these
individual
neighborhoods
would be divided by the project, and
the separate neighborhoods are
already separated by an existing
roadway. New development is not
anticipated due to the built-out
nature of the area. The project is not
anticipated to have any impact on
the property values of residences not
located directly along the project
corridor, and any foreseeable
reduction in property values would
be incorporated into the right-of-way
purchase process.
For these
reasons, no negative impact to
community cohesion is anticipated.
However
positive
impacts
to
community cohesion are anticipated
as a result of the project such as
improved
pedestrian
facilities,
enhanced connection to trails, and a
reduction in the number of vehicles
utilizing residential streets within
subdivisions for through travel.
See response 10-B.
See response 8-D.
67-C
67-D
67-E
Page 38 of 60
One of the most hotly debated aspects is property values, which were concluded
not to decrease. Numerous neighborhood residents have stated that they believe
that their property would be worthless. Home with the largest decrease in value are
those that would not be acquired but would be left with a large and busy road only
feet from their windows. The costs of the construction to homeowners would
decrease property values, particularly given that it would be clear to potential buyers
that homeowners could be required to pay to move septic systems or other utilities
such as the buried electric lines and internet and telephone cables. The grades and
changes in heights of hundreds of driveways, which directly connect with Gordon
Pike or Fullerton Pike, would also lead to sizeable costs to homeowners because
some would be too high and some too low to connect with the wide road that is
proposed. The grades of all these driveways could be considerably steeper. Homes
This report does not adequately address maintaining diversity. There is a majority of
single family homes, but there are also condo and a few areas with trailers.
Neighborhood residents hope to preserve the balance of housing options to
maintain diversity. At present, homes that have virtually no yards have open space
and access to a quiet Clear Creek Trail system. If the proposed, oversized road is
built, it would be exceeding difficult to provide an acceptable quality of life for
families living in condos on a noisy road with increased truck emissions, or those in
the trailers that do not have much yard space. The individuals who live in condos
and trailers would be losing a significant proportion of their only open recreational
land, 4 acres of grass within 2 blocks and a large number of acres of wooded areas
scattered over the project. (67-H)
Community cohesion is far more than sharing a school. Residents living both north
and south of Gordon Pike/Fullerton Pike use the park land that is the southern fields
of Batchelor Middle School because we do not have another neighborhood park or
undeveloped space elsewhere. These open lands are places where sports teams
work out, cross country meets are held, people jog and walk their dogs, and other
activities that help preserve community cohesion. Residents of our neighborhood
walk from their homes to the Clear Creek Trail for walking, jogging, skating, and
biking. At present, the path along Gordon Pike is used by residents along or in
combination with the Clear Creek Trail. This trail provides a truck-free haven for
daily recreation throughout the day. Groups of moms with strollers use the Clear
Creek trail for community building through play dates. Small groups exercise after
work and on week-ends. Parents from our neighborhood and all over Bloomington
teach their children to ride bikes on the Clear Creek Trail.
friends’ homes of the activities at the school. Children are unlikely to walk a mile or
more in the wrong direction just to use the bridge, then walk back. The proposed
road would be unsafe for children.
See response 63-C.
See response 42-B.
67-I
67-K
See response 8-A.
67-H
INDOT has set design standards for
driveway connections to ensure
grades are appropriate for safe
entrance and exit. INDOT standards
will be followed for the project.
No pedestrian bridges are proposed
for the project at this time.
Additional design characteristics will
be considered and incorporated into
the plans if they are warranted for
ensuring safe pedestrian crossings
near schools.
67-G
67-J
See response 8-F.
A school
crossing from Eagle View to
Batchelor Middle school will be
reviewed during detailed design
preparation.
67-F
68.
Email Comment
01/07/2015
Harriet Kulis
1430 W. Estate
Dr.
Page 39 of 60
The straight road with minimal curves will allow for high speeds. The County does
not have the patrols to enforce lower speed limits, as we see at Tapp Road. (68-G)
Beyond aesthetics, noise, (68-E) and safety, there is the cost. Tapp Road is a major
intersection, just one mile north, that is available for I-69 users to enter Bloomington.
(68-H) Why are we taxpayers spending $27+ million (est.2013), including bridges, for
a duplicate road? This is waste of our money for a redundant road that continues to
lead to nowhere.
The project would consist of one 16' wide travel lane in each direction, plus 4.7' of
gutters and curbs, separated by a 16' wide grass median, a 5’ wide sidewalk, a 10’
wide multi-use path with berms on each side.
I am frustrated by the proposed Fullerton Pike Extension. This 80’ wide swath will
cut through residential areas, in front of schools, churches, and day cares. All of the
north-south connecting streets are one-lane each direction, with no plans for
improvement. There are life safety hazards, (8-E and 8-F) zoning concerns, loss from
removing the bucolic setting, (68-C) and considerable environmental hazards, e.g.
pollution from semi-trailers, (68-D) autos, noise and building on the fragile karsts. (68-F)
Property values would be negatively impacted by the increased noise and pollution
(67-K) of thousands more vehicles per day through a residential neighborhood.
Property values would be negatively impacted by the loss of parkland and its
replacement by an ugly and noisy road. Property values would be negatively
impacted by the difficulty in crossing busy traffic to leave home or return home, or
get to Batchelor Middle School. Property values would be negatively impacted by
the loss of community cohesiveness. Property values would be negatively impacted
by the significant decrease in safety and the increase in travel times because
residents would now have to turn left across busy traffic either to leave home or
return, whereas now the traffic is light and commuting from this neighborhood is
quick and safe.
with difficult access are not sought out by potential buyers. (67-J)
See response 8-E.
See response 8-F.
See response 46-A.
See response 10-B.
See response 8-C.
Studies have been undertaken to
identify karst features. Additional
studies may be warranted as the
project
continues.
Best
Management Practices will be
utilized to ensure that no roadway
drainage is routed into the karst
system.
Please see the “Karst”
section
of
the
Environmental
Assessment (Page 27) for more
information.
The segment of Tapp Road
mentioned is a city-maintained
street, patrolled by the City of
Bloomington Police Department.
See response 9-A.
68-A
68-B
68-C
68-D
68-E
68-F
68-G
68-H
70.
69.
But the dismay I feel about the current traffic load and the speed that most cars and
trucks use when on Rhorer Rd pales in comparison with the negative responses I
feel toward the proposed Fullerton corridor.
Email Comment
01/07/2015
Page 40 of 60
I question the project’s financing in the context of the very dubious engineering idea
of taking a major thoroughfare through a well-known karst area (70-F) – and why in
the world such a route should be chosen when, just north of it, there is already a
perfectly constructed connection of Winslow/Country Club with our Bypass Highway!
Why undertake such an expensive and environmentally destructive project when a
wider east-west corridor already exists with a well-engineered connection to the
highway? Could it be the objections of the owners of the Bloomington Country
Club? I do not know the answer to this last question, but I would certainly like to
know if my suspicions are valid. It also appears to me that there are fewer
residences to be disturbed by such construction on the Tapp/Country Club/Winslow
I share the concerns about this proposed corridor expressed by Mary Ann Williams
in her recent letter to the editor published in the Herald-Times. She highlights the
very negative impacts that the corridor’s traffic would have on Batchelor and
Jackson Creek middle schools (70-A) – dangerous traffic, traffic congestion, terrible
traffic noise, (70-C) dramatically increased traffic pollution; (70-B) painful loss of
somewhat peaceable surroundings. (70-D) She also questions the projects’s financial
accountability. (70-E)
Having resided at 1598 E. Rhorer Rd since 1972, I have witnessed dramatic
increase in the traffic on our once-rural road. In the past several years, the volume
of traffic on Rhorer Rd, along with the speed of most of the vehicles that use it, has
turned it into a truly dangerous artery. This reality is dismaying to me.
I understand that the current plan for Fullerton was scaled back to address the
concerns of residents. It is hoped that an agreement can be made that serves the
interests of the residents along the corridor and the County, while continuing to
address the connectivity and transportation needs of our growing community.
Fullerton Pike is identified as the first Bloomington exit on the south side of Monroe
County and construction of this interstate is currently underway. With this in mind, it
is essential that we plan accordingly and move forward with the project. Without this
project, traffic exiting at Fullerton (including traffic from Crane and Westgate) will
work its way east through neighborhood streets. It would be much safer if there
were a path prepared to handle this traffic. Fullerton/Gordon/Rhorer is that pathway
selected by county officials.
I support the County’s decision to move forward with this project at this time, with
the understanding that it would greatly improve east-west connectivity and that
expanding Fullerton has been the County’s intention for many years.
Nancy A.
Newton
1598 E. Rhorer
Rd.
Email Comment
01/07/2015
Jim Shelton
No address
given
See response 47-C.
See response 68-F.
See response 6-A.
70-E
70-F
70-G
See response 8-C.
70-C
See response 8-A.
See response 63-C.
70-B
70-D
See response 8-F.
70-A
72.
71.
Stephen A.
Wolter and
Lynn M.
Jamieson
Email Comment
01/07/2015
Steve Brewer
3636 S. Rogers
St.
Page 41 of 60
In reviewing the overall purpose of the Project in various documents there appears
to be a major misidentification of the projects purpose. Although intended as a
“quality” east-west transportation facility allowing enhanced connectivity to the City
of Bloomington business district and Indiana University from the south, the project
I am concerned about how an increase of over 50% more traffic(ADT) by 2030,
including at least 5% trucks, will effect the north-south residential cross streets off of
this proposed high-volume access route off of I-69. These roads are not slated for
any improvements. How will all of this traffic be encouraged to go down to the
county's existing commercial artery (Walnut Street/Business 37), rather than turning
up earlier residential streets, like Rogers Street, which is steep, narrow, and 100%
single-family residential up to Tapp Road? (71-A) This area already backs up at rush
hour, making it impossible to get out of our driveways. Instead of a traffic light,
which will just increase the problem on Rogers Street and Gordon Pike, could there
be a round-about at this intersection by Bachelor Middle School like those at
Jackson Creek and Tri-North Middle Schools? (71-B) Will these cross streets be no
truck routes (71-C) and will there be traffic claiming devices and sound abatement (as
there should be along Gordon Pike and Rhorer Road as well)? The environmental
impact to the residents of this south-side neighborhood extends beyond the homes
immediately adjacent to this proposed mega-road project. These issues are not
addressed in the Environmental Assessment and would only increase the costs for
Alternatives 1 or 2 (i.e. connecting a series of residential streets to an exit off of an
inter-continental highway), making this alternative the wrong choice for a built-out
residential community surrounding two public schools. When we brought our
property in 1997 and later when we added on an addition in 2002, we did our due
diligence and contacted the MCHD and were NOT told that Fullerton Pike would be
the first exit into Bloomington from the south off of I-69 and that other existing eastwest connections to Highway 37 would be eliminated. This is not the same road
project that was discussed in the 1960s, when our 1870 farm house was one of the
few homes in the area and neither of the schools or even Highway 37 existed. As
such, this road project should be removed from the TIF and new alternatives that
reflect the current reality and residential character of this area should be discussed
with the appropriate amount of public involvement. I support Alternative 3 (without a
connection between Fullerton Pike and Gordon Pike), (71-D) which would improve the
safety (71-E) and livability of our neighborhood, (71-F) rather than doing the exact
opposition.
On financial grounds, on engineering grounds, on issues of school and residential
safety, I register my strongest opposition to the proposed Fullerton corridor. I trust
you will share my views with those who are charged with decisions about traffic
patterns in Bloomington and Monroe County.
route than on the Rhorer Rd one. (70-G)
See response 10-B.
Considered”
section
of
the
– Page 15) which explains in detail
why each of these alternative we
dismissed.
See response 8-E.
See response 8-A.
71-C
71-D
71-E
71-F
Please note that an Environmental
Assessment (EA) was prepared for
this project, not an Environmental
Impact Statement (EIS) which is a
See response 11-A.
71-B
72-A
Traffic travelling on arterials tends to
stay on arterials until approaching
the destination. This is the safest
and quickest route for traffic because
of the frequent stop signs and
visibility issues on nearby residential
roads.
Therefore, a significant
increase in traffic on these
residential roads is not anticipated.
71-A
Email Comment
01/08/2015
3924 S. Nimit
Dr.
Page 42 of 60
It is documented in the development proposal and documents that "An additional
project consideration is connectivity of the local trail network. The proposed project
corridor crosses three public trails including the Clear Creek Trail, the Bloomington
Rail Trail along Clear Creek which is an extension of Bloomington Rail Trail, and the
Sare Road Trail. The majority of existing trails within the community are configured
Specifically regarding the Fullerton Pike Project Trail Analysis
Result: The Project Scope and EIS as published are flawed and must be restudied
to reflect the assumed and implied increased traffic volume, traffic patterns, and
associated impacts to existing properties in the Fullerton Pike project Corridor and
continuing through Bloomington to include Sare Road to IN 45/46.
2) The primary need for this project is the lack of an east-west transportation facility
that would allow enhanced connectivity from the south to the city of Bloomington
business district and Indiana University, accommodating the input of traffic resulting
from the proposed I-69 interchange at Fullerton Pike and existing State Road 37
(SR 37), as well as improving cross-town traffic along the south side of
Bloomington. Businesses, residents, and emergency vehicles alike are challenged
by the difficulty of accessing the city of Bloomington from the south and accessing
primary arteries to reach other areas of the state I contend these project scope
descriptions are incorrect. Instead, the project scope should state that the primary
need for this project is the lack of a completed southern connection to the IN 45/46
Bypass from I-69, IN 37 and other points south of the municipality of Bloomington,
IN. The project also includes a signficiant east-west transportation facility that would
allow enhanced connectivity for Bloomington and Monroe County long identified
inadequate transportation access in the east-west direction.
1) the Fullerton Pike Project has current classifications of Rural Major Collector west
of SR 37, an Urban Minor Arterial from SR 37 to Sare Road, and an Urban Major
Collector from Sare Road to Snoddy Road.
Specifically regarding the Fullerton Pike Project Scope:
actually constructs a southern IN 45/46 Bypass extension to I-69. There is no
current planned or identified alternative to using the Fullerton Pike project as the
southern connection to IN 45/46 thereby making this project the defacto connection.
The resulting estimates of traffic volume and noise as depicted in all planning
documents are in fact erroneous. The increased number of vehicles who will be
using this access method to travel from points south of Bloomington, IN to connect
to major shopping and residential areas on the east side of Bloomington, as well as
to major east travel on Indiana State Highways is significantly underestimated in the
planning documents. (72-B and 72-C) The result is that the EIS (72-A) for the project is in
fact inadequate and flawed.
There are no projects currently
programmed for Fullerton Pike west
of SR 37.
See response 6-B.
See response 46-B.
The noise analysis for the project
was completed in accordance with
the requirements set forth in INDOTs
Traffic Noise Analysis Procedure
(2011). The FHWA requires the
traffic projections included in the
noise analysis model to be based on
the worst hour, which is normally
during either the AM or PM rush
hour. These traffic projections are
included in three models that were
prepared for the project, one for
existing conditions using current
year traffic, one for the Build
Alternative in the design year (20
years out) using design year traffic
projections, and one for the No Build
Alternative in the design year. The
model developed for the project
utilized FHWAs approved software,
Traffic Noise Model, Version 2.5
(TNM 2.5). This software is three
dimensional and does take into
account changes in elevations
between the noise source, in this
case the road, and the receptor.
The
ambient
measurements
collected by the noise analysts are
not intended to identify impacted
72-D
72-E
72-F
See response 14-C.
72-C
72-B
higher level document.
Page 43 of 60
Using this set of standards in analysis of the Fullerton Pike Project shows that the
proposed design and operating traffic speeds for trucks/vehicles are too high for
safe pedestrian and bicycle travel along this corridor, especially given proposed
sight distances, traffic volumes and driveway frequencies, and the future installation
of a traffic lights. One method to mitigate this poor design would be a separated 6-8
foot median with trees, trail user overpasses-underpasses at the 3 major
intersections, and carrying the design through the crosswalk at the intersection to
Further, the Bicycle Level of Service Model is based on the research documented
by the Transportation Research Board of the National Academy of Sciences
footnote. It was developed using data from over 150,000 miles of evaluated urban,
suburban, and rural roads and streets across North America. Many urban planning
agencies and state highway departments are using this established method of
evaluating their roadway networks. These include Anchorage AK, Baltimore MD,
Birmingham AL, Buffalo NY, Gainesville FL, Houston TX, Philadelphia PA,
Lexington KY, Sacramento CA, Springfield MA, Tampa FL, as well as the Delaware
Department of Transportation (DelDOT), Florida Department of Transportation
(FDOT), New York State Department of Transportation (NYDOT), Virginia
Department of Transportation (VDOT) Maryland Department of Transportation
(MDOT) and many others. (72-D and 72-E)
Collisions and near misses among users and/or their vehicles are promoted by poor
trail design: These trails have significant possible collision and near miss locations
at 3 major north-south intersections including Walnut Street Pike, Walnut Street,
and Rogers Road. No plans for high visibility-user initiated-prompt responding
crosswalk flashers are planned or for trail overpasses or underpasses in an
east/west direction
The design of the trail features, while making connections between Bloomington's
primary north-south trail connections do so by creating an experience that crosses
major roads at grade and alongside very high noise, high speed and significant
truck traffic. This investment should be reconsidered to reflect standards found in
federal research related to conflicts on trails. In "CONFLICTS ON MULTIPLE-USE
TRAILS: Synthesis of the Literature and State of the Practice Sponsored by The
Federal Highway Administration and The National Recreational Trails Advisory
Committee" it was found that many situations or conditions caused by other trail
users can keep visitors from achieving their desired trail experiences. This
interference is due to safety concerns is a common source of conflicts on trails and
a number of threats to user safety that can occur on trails. Some of these include:
in a north-south direction, resulting in a lack of connectivity. This project proposes
an east-west connection via multi-use path and sidewalk across the south side of
Bloomington, which would tie the three aforementioned trails together."
receptors along the project. Rather,
these measurements are collected to
validate the noise model. As such,
there are no restrictions as to when
the measurements are taken, or for
how long.
Generally, these are
short-term measurements ranging
from 5-30 minutes.
During the
sampling time, the analysts record
atmospheric conditions, traffic and
speed, which are adjusted in the
model to an hourly equivalent. If the
noise output is within 3 decibels of
what was measured in the field the
model is considered to be valid.
Validation of the model confirms the
intended accuracy of the noise
outputs generated at all modeled
receptors, not just those subjected to
ambient measurements. The TNM
2.5 model prepared for this project
was determined to be technically
sufficient by INDOT.
73.
Email Comment
01/08/2015
Whitney A.
Gates
542 S. College
Ave.
Page 44 of 60
I fully support the expansion of Rhorer Road/Gordon Pike/Fullerton Pike to SR 37/I69. What is the timetable for bridging the gap from the current proposed expansion
and connecting it to I-69? (73-A)
However, the analysis is flawed as it was conducted for a limited time frame during
one day and does NOT consider the impact of noise from the increased traffic of a
bypass use during evening and night hours. (72-F) These hours are significantly
important to the health of individual residents along the project, and recent studies
show a correlation and causation between overall public health and noise. The
October 2014 analysis is subject to a much more thorough analysis. The project
noise analysis is inadequate as the increased evening and night traffic noise will
have substantial degradation to the health of residents along this corridor. 337
residential properties will be affected more or less and it is clear that the inadequate
analysis has led to conclusions that do not support development of more noise
barriers particularly taking into account elevated portions of the FullertonPike
Project which transmit increased, longer and evening-night noise into residential
areas that are lower than the roadway.
The EIS suggests that a 1574 foot long noise barrier is considered reasonable and
feasible at the existing (and proposed) right- of-way limit along the north side of
Fullerton Pike from near Clear Creek to Wickens Street, subject to the views of
property owners and residents. It is feasible because the barrier would reduce noise
levels by at least 5 dBA for the majority of impacted receptors and benefit 23
dwelling units. A ten-foot barrier at $30 per square foot would cost $20,520 per
benefitted receptor, which is below the $30,000 cost- effectiveness criterion for
locations where homes are in place before the new road is built. This appears to be
the only mitigation suggested.
Specifically Regarding the Fullerton Pike Project Noise Analysis
include high visibility-user initiateded-prompt response crosswalk flashers at the 3
main intersections. These efforts included a community workshop and numerous
publicaly-held meetings of the MPO Policy and Technical Committee.
73-A
Construction is anticipated to begin
on Phase I - the portion of the
corridor between Walnut Street and
Walnut Street Pike - in 2016.
Beyond the Phase I portion of the
corridor,
the
sequencing
and
scheduling of future phases has not
been finalized.
75.
74.
Email Comment
01/08/2015
Nan Brewer
3636 S. Rogers
St.
Email Comment
01/08/2015
Liz Irwin
th
400 W. 7 St.,
Suite 102
Page 45 of 60
2) A major problem with the comparison of the various alternatives is that this report
seems to have been written before the interchange off I-69 at Tapp Road was
established, thus making all of these comments irrelevant and the whole report
1) I was one of few residents from the neighborhoods directly affected by this
project on the CAC (as recommended by the MCHD) that was not a developer or
realtor. (75-A) Although the report claimed that there were “many” comments in favor
of this project, I recall at the Public Information Meeting at Bachelor Middle School
on Oct. 3, 2012, that over 90% of the verbal public comments given that night were
negative about all of the proposed alternatives, except for Alternative 3 that did not
connect our neighborhood residential streets to an inter-continental highway (I-69)
interchange. We were told at that meeting that our comments were being
transcribed, but I didn’t see them included in this report. Why? (75-B) Since there was
only one public meeting prior to this report and many of the negative comments
were not included here, I think that it is incorrect to claim that there isn’t public
opposition to this project, which there clearly is. (72-C)
We understand that the current plan for Fullerton was scaled back to address the
concerns of residents. We are supportive of changes to better serve the interests of
the residents along the corridor and the County, while continuing to address the
connectivity and transportation needs of our growing community.
Increasing east-west connectivity continues to be an important issue to our
Chamber members. In our recent member survey, many Chamber members
expressed the importance of completing the Fullerton Pike expansion project. With
construction currently underway on I-69, this need becomes even more pressing.
Fullerton Pike is identified as the first Bloomington exit for Interstate 69 on the south
side of Monroe County. It is essential that the County plan accordingly and move
forward with the project as quickly as possible.
The Chamber has historically supported projects that improve east-west
connectivity. In a 2007 Infrastructure Task Force Report, The Chamber
recommended that community leaders give high priority to developing east-west
thoroughfares and elevate these projects to the Transportation Improvement
Program (TIP). The report also recognized the Fullerton Pike expansion as a project
that would fulfill this need and had been identified as a priority for the County for
many years.
I am writing on behalf of the Greater Bloomington Chamber of Commerce and its
900+ members to express the organization’s support of the County’s decision to
move forward with the Fullerton Pike Expansion project. When complete, Fullerton
Pike will provide a much-needed east-west route along the south side of the
community
CAC members were identified from
publically available information on
neighborhood
homeowners
associations and local officials, as
well as recommendations from the
County Highway Department, who
recommended your inclusion on the
CAC. During initial CAC meetings
and in the CAC invitation letter, the
project
team
asked
for
recommendations
for
additional
representatives
from
any
neighborhood
that
was
not
represented.
The only formal requirement for
75-A
75-B
Page 46 of 60
5) At the last CAC meeting, I asked for an example of a comparable roadway with
14 ft. lanes and a 16 ft. medium through a residential area and was only told the
north end of Clarizz Blvd. next to K-Mart, Bloomingfoods East, a medical office
building, and the back of an apartment complex. This is clearly NOT the type of road
through a built-out suburban neighborhood of primarily single family homes. A
member of CONA (Council of Neighborhood Associations) also said that this is not
the size or type of street that is recommended in a neighborhood setting per
AASHTO guidelines. (75-K)
4) The biggest error in the whole report is to categorize this 2.7 mile series of road
as “urban,” when there is only one commercially-zoned intersection along the whole
route from Highway 37 to Sare Road at Walnut Street/Business 37 (with the
exception of an old stone company near Highway 37). By any account this is a 99%
residential area. (75-H) It comprises mostly single family homes surrounding two
public schools. This report does not seem to take into any account the
environmental impact on the hundreds of residents in this area and the 500 students
at each school. Could you please explain howthis project has a “de minimus” impact
on schools? (75-I) In INDOT’s own guidelines for choosing appropriate interchanges
and access roads recommended “minimal” residential impact and following
“established” commercial arteries. How does this proposed project meet these
criteria? (75-H)
3) How were the traffic counts (ADT and hourly volumes) determined?(75-E) In one
place in the report it gives a figure for increased ADT as 7,500, while in another as
13,976. Which is correct? What is the hourly volume now? Do these figures take
into account the exit off I-69 and closures at That Road and Rockport Road? How
was it determined that there would be only a 5% increase in truck traffic off an
interstate? How will an increase of over 50% ADT improve the safety and traffic
congestion on our neighborhood streets, especially with students walking to two
schools and neighbors to school functions and to use the schools’ green space? It
seems that Alternative 3 can address all of the safety concerns without increasing
ADT. Alternatives 1 and 2 have the highest number of rightof-way acquisition from
primarily residential properties; highest total forest loss (with exception of That Road
upgrade); highest amount of perennial/intermittent stream crossings (with the
exception of That Road upgrade); highest amount of new construction; and highest
use of farmland (with exception of That Road upgrade). Many of the other
environmental impacts were not even considered from the other alternatives,
making the comparisons unless. (75-F) The cost comparison for Alternative 1 didn’t
include many elements of the project (such as the expensive bridges, roundabouts,
etc.), making any true comparison impossible. (75-G)
based on false assumptions. (75-D)
Considered”
section
of
the
– Page 15) which explains in detail
why each of these alternative we
dismissed.
See response 17-F.
See response 14-D.
The term “de minimus” refers to
Section 4(f) of the US Department of
Transportation Act of 1966. The law
applies to publicly owned parks,
recreation
areas,
and
wildlife/waterfowl
refuges,
and
National Register eligible or listed
historic properties. The schools do
not qualify as Section 4(f) resources.
See response 14-E.
CONA’s
75-F
75-G
75-H
75-I
75-J
75-K
been
See response 14-C.
75-E
have
75-D
comments
All comments received in writing, via
email, and during the public hearing
have
been
included
in
the
Environmental Assessment.
75-C
transcription is at the public hearing.
The project team attempted to
record and transcribe the Public
Information meeting discussion, but
the facility conditions and recording
quality was not good enough for
transcription.
76.
Mary Ann
Williams
Controversy
Page 47 of 60
9) This is NOT the same road project envisioned in the 1960s plan, when almost
none of these homes or schools existed, nor was there a plan to make this road an
access road off of I-69 in 2010 or 2011, which was also prior to any CAC meetings
or public comment period. When did INDOT make their final announcement of the
interchanges? When was the interchange at Tapp Road added only one mile north?
Who was pushing for the interchange at Fullerton? MCHD or INDOT? The LOS
(level of service) on these roads is fine without a connection to I-69, since there is
little room for more residential expansion. Instead of building an expensive, hightraffic access route off an interstate through a residential area (Alternative 1 and 2),
the County needs to upgrade the existing southside neighborhood roads along
Fullerton Pike, Gordon Pike, Rhorer Road, and Sare Road (Alternative 3).The
number of errors, problems and mis-characterizations of the history of this project
warrant a delay and re-assessment of it, with more opportunities for public
comments.
Q)
8) This construction will definitely have an impact on many school and community
events held at both middle schools both during the school year and the summer. (75-
7) I don’t understand how this proposed roadway complies with local and regional
development patterns, when it is zoned 99% residential, but this plan suggests
changing a series of residential streets into a commercial artery. If this was the
case, all of the suburban developments (some relatively recent) should not have
been zoned for this area. (75-N) Please explain how this plan will increase property
values, when there is little room for any further residential development (it is almost
completely “built out”) and one local realtor (Tracee Lutes) has already seen
reduced home values along the road’s proposed route. (75-O) How is there no low
income impact (no EJ population of concern) in this area, when there are over 170
mobile homes in the Southcrest Mobile Home community immediately adjacent to
this roadway? (75-P)
6) I would like to know more about how you plan for noise abatement (category A
and B) given that there is no way to do sound barriers in this densely populated
residential area with many of the homes’ driveways dumping directly onto the
roadway? What is the noise increase that is projected with a more than 50%
increase of cars and trucks? (75-L) Is there any concern about the interior noise
impact? I live in a historic 1870 farm house (Thomas Randall House) (on the BRI list
and being considered for the National Historic Registry) and will need to have new
windows and doors to make the old home inhabitable, due to the increased sound,
which may cause preservation issues. (75-M)
During construction access will be
maintained to the schools.
The
schools have been, and will continue
to be included, in the project
development process.
See response 47-C.
75-Q
76-A
Please see the “Environmental
Justice” section of the Environmental
This section explains both the
methodology and the results of the
environmental justice analysis.
75-P
See response 46-A.
75-N
See response 8-D.
The property located at 3636 South
Rogers Street does not lie within the
Area of Potential Effects (APE) for
the project as show in Appendix C,
Page 25. Please see the “Cultural
Resources”
section
of
the
31 – Page 36) for more information
on the studies conducted for the
project in accordance with Section
106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act. Additionally, the
property located at 3636 South
Rogers Street is not identified as a
noise sensitive receptor – defined as
being located within 500 feet of the
project, in accordance with INDOT’s
Traffic Noise Policy.
75-M
75-O
See response 8-C.
75-L
addressed directly.
Email Comment
01/08/2015
3550 South
McDougal
Street
Page 48 of 60
Fatal pedestrian injury remains a leading cause of death for people 15 years of age
Question 5: The speed limits above conflict. Can the proposed “designed” and legal
speeds be decreased to more readily fit with the established neighborhood homes,
the four schools, and various shops and offices?
Question 4: How would Alternative 1A be designed and built to assure that slower
neighborhood and school area driving speeds are observed? Indiana’s maximum
residential road speed is 30 mph. For school zones, the maximum speed is 20-25
mph. The Designed (40 mph) and Legal Speeds (35 mph) exceed these maximums.
Speed
Suggestion: An urban street must accommodate more pedestrians, bicyclists, curb
cuts, speeds and frequency of potential points-of-contact. The street should be 10’
to 11’ wide, no median, and 4’ shoulders. The street must match the neighborhood
character—not too flat, wide or open. The speed must be 20-25 mph in school
zones, with appropriate signage, crosswalks, sidewalks, multi-use paths, crossing
guards, and street trees. (76-I and 76-J)
Question 3: The current character of the environment and neighborhoods along the
proposed route varies greatly. Can the road be built to accommodate and enhance
this diversity, e.g. eight + neighborhoods, wildlife habitat, trails, bike and walking,
four schools, commercial? Specifically, what could be done to accomplish these
things?
Question 2: Why is the character considered to be “urban” rather than “sub-urban?”
What is the difference between these two? (76-H)
Roadway Character
Question 1: Please describe the decision-making process that led to the answer of
“No” for the question, “Will the project involve substantial controversy concerning
community and/or natural resource impacts?” What process was used to create this
“no” answer? (76-G)
-
-
uncertain cost and financing (76-B)
economic hardship on homeowners, due to declining real estate values
and the cost of remediation of septic systems along corridor. (76-B and 76-C)
the destruction of wildlife habitat that has already occurred, on Fullerton
from Rockport to Rt. 37 (76-D)
toxic emissions and run-off that will require curbs, gutters, trees (76-E and 76-F)
public health considerations related to stress and illness
Please note that the construction
between SR 37 and Rockport Road
is a part of the I-69 project and is not
included in the scope of the Fullerton
Pike project.
See response 63-C.
See response 4-D.
The Environmental Assessment (EA)
study provides a detailed analysis of
the environmental impacts proposed
by this undertaking. INDOT and
FHWA, by approving the EA, have
concurred that the project does not
involve
substantial
controversy
concerning
community
and/or
natural resource impacts.
See response 14-D.
See response 8-F.
See response 8-E.
See response 8-A.
76-E
76-F
76-G
76-H
76-I
76-J
76-K
See response 42-B.
See response 8-D.
76-D
76-C
Both at the hearing and in other public events, discussion varies widely on topics
such as:
-
76-B
I observed substantial controversy at the Public Hearing on December 11, 2014.
78.
77.
Email Comment
01/08/2015
Unity of
Bloomington
4001 South
Rogers Street
Email Comment
01/08/2015
Kevin Luers
4051 Jamie
Lane
6-8 neighborhoods, with many homes
2 middle schools
2 nursery schools
commercial
Page 49 of 60
Also in consideration of the proposed project, Unity of Bloomington requests that
impacts to our parking areas be as minimal as possible. The semi-circular drive and
parking area off Rogers Street is used by office personnel, for special events
attendees and for better ADA access into the main level of the building. Impacts to
this parking area can limit usability by the church. Likewise, reduction of the parking
In consideration of the proposed project, Unity of Bloomington requests that the only
entrance into the church parking lot, entered off Gordon Pike, not be blocked nor
made inaccessible by any means. It is critical that no median strip be installed that
would prevent west-bound access into the parking lot off Gordon Pike. Likewise, it is
also critical that access to and from the semi-circular drive off Rogers Street not be
blocked nor made inaccessible by any means. (78-A)
On behalf of the board of trustees and members of Unity of Bloomington, I am
submitting comments to you regarding the Fullerton Pike Corridor project. As you
are no doubt aware, Unity of Bloomington is located at the SE corner of the
Fullerton/Gordon Pike and Rogers Street intersection.
I will be very receptive to this extension if Rhorer is modified substantially, but I will
not cooperate if this is built as proposed.
My biggest objection to this project is the width of the lanes (77-A) and median (77-B)
for the Rhorer Rd. portion. My home sits on the corner of Jamie and Rhorer and is
in the direct path of the proposed widening. The width of the road as proposed will
jeopardize my families quality of life. (77-C) I want a safe road and I do want a
bicycle/walking path on the North side of the Rhorer, as I do want to safely bike or
walk to the trail or Kroger etc. However, the width of the median is unprecedented
in size and would require millions to build and maintain. I would also think one
bike/walking lane would be sufficient for the amount of foot traffic this path would
generate which would save on the width of this project.
-
Question 6: What consideration can be given to varying the type of roadway, along
the corridor, so that the road fits with the various existing natural and built-out
qualities and conditions and enhances their character?(76-K)
Speed and Character
and younger. The street must be design to reduce speed at schools and through
neighborhoods. A slower speed would be safer for residents in neighborhoods,
pedestrians, school personnel, students, and traffic and customers driving into
various commercial locations.
See response 62-A.
Impacts to parking areas will be
minimized to the greatest extent
possible.
78-A
78-B
See response 8-A.
See response 39-A.
77-B
77-C
See response 22-A.
77-A
79.
Email Comment
01/08/2015
Stephen Burns
No address
given
Page 50 of 60
2. For Eastbound traffic (from the Evansville directrion) this means that the
“connector” will dump high volumes of cars and trucks onto a series of two lane
roads. Already traffic on Walnut and Rogers can be quite bad during commuting
time. If the connector becomes a major traffic attractor, then it means that the
volume on these other two lane roads will increase, and may decrease traffic on
2nd street, but increase it on Walnut and Rogers. Safety is a major concern here
since if the traffic estimates are met, then it will push traffic onto roads that are not
designed for that traffic and represent a significant safety issue.
1. For Northbound traffic (proceeding Northbound from Bedford), this road will only
lengthen the distance to downtown compared to Walnut street, and will require
traversing a longer route, through residential neighborhoods, back to Walnut, a
considerably longer route.
The Justification has been put forth is based on the assumption that this connector
will decrease traffic load in other parts of the City of Bloomington and meet regional
transportation needs.
Specifically mentioned are access from the south to
downtown and to Indiana University. I do not believe that the project will actually
alleviate problems of traffic throughput. (79-A) The proposal calls for two lanes that
will extend from I 69/Rte 37 to Sare Road. The road beds are unusually large, (79-B)
apparently to accommodate higher speeds (79-C) and larger vehicles, (79-D) however
of the existing endpoints only Walnut supports truck traffic realistically, and it is only
two lanes and often fills with traffic from the south.
My concerns center on several issues. Some are related to the issues of safety and
environment, which I do not find to be fully addressed. Others relate to the
underlying justification and cost estimates, which arise both from the scope of the
current project as well as from the fact that the project seems to have been
arbitrarily separated from related portions, which unrealistically obscures the true
cost of the project. Finally, I am concerned about the basis for the projections and
the fact that modern trends in commuting and urbanization are not following the
implicit assumptions of suburbanization that dominated discussions during the
1960’s when the current proponents apparently formed their plans. This suggests
that the documents are based on outmoded models of traffic and community
growth.
As the project moves forward, I am happy to be the contact person for Unity of
Bloomington for both American Structurepoint and the Monroe County Planning
Department.
(78-B)
area nearer the Rogers Street and Gordon Pike intersection and along Gordon Pike
should also be minimal so as to not impact our ability to provide adequate parking.
79-L
While the long-term goal is to
improve the Fullerton Pike/Gordon
Pike/Rhorer Road corridor from SR
45 to Snoddy Road, there are no
immediate plans for improvements
west of Rockport Road or east of
Sare Road by Monroe County.
See response 63-D.
See response 6-A.
79-I
79-K
See response 46-B.
79-H
See response 44-A.
See response 39-E.
79-G
79-J
See response 8-F.
See response 10-B.
79-D
79-F
See response 27-B.
79-C
See response 67-J
See response 22-A.
79-B
79-E
The traffic analysis has shown that
all intersections will operate at an
acceptable level of service, meaning
significant
backups
are
not
anticipated.
79-A
Page 51 of 60
8. The proposal actually involves two complete walkways/multi-use pathways, with a
sidewalk on one side and a large multi-use pathway on the other. It is not clear that
both are needed and no justification is provided, since in general multi-use includes
walking. This is a safety concern because the connection of the three existing multi-
7. Grading and weather control. Presumably Federal requirements would alleviate
the direct safety concerns by requiring considerable grading of this route. However
if it is not properly graded and maintained it is a very hillly region of Bloomington
that has seen the roads close by flooding twice within the last few years. That is,
both creeks along Gordon Pike and the gap between Gordon Pike and Fullerton
have gone significantly outside their banks.
This relates to the related
environmental concern of now providing miles of drainage, installed along the
roadway and properly diverting it into streams that already flood. The concrete
footprint of this project is larger than almost any other two lane road and this will
cause unwarranted environmental loads on the water carrying capacity of the
streams and Karst features.
The findings of the study seem to ignore the
hydrology with little to document the findings.
6. This route goes past two schools and a church. Already there were enough
problems with Bachelor school access that stop signs needed to be installed for
safety. This is on a road fed only by the local housing developments. Because
Bachelor has only one real entrance path, either major traffic flow improvements at
the school will be needed, or there will need to be some other modifications will be
required. There a lot of kids living in the areas around Bachelor and Jackson Creek,
and so extreme care (and corresponding costs) would be required that go beyond
the direct costs of the connector. (79-F) The cost estimates and provision of a road
designed for high speeds do not seem to discuss the costs of traffic control devices.
5. As mentioned, it will dump traffic onto roads that lack even a shoulder.
Safety: This route will cause a number of safety consideration.
4. For Westbound traffic there are no obvious routes to connect to this project. If
traffic from College Mall (and Nashville) aims for this connector it will be forced to
either go via Sare, or Third street. Both already have high volumes and I see no
way that the addition of another route that draws traffic to these will be beneficial or
help throughput in any way at all. In fact, with access to 69 at Country Club and
further North, most traffic progressing in a Westbound direction will naturally use
these exits, since all start further North and the routes take a diagonal course.
3. For Eastbound traffic the assumption for routing to downtown seems to be that
people take the first exit. However, the distance when mapped is considerably
shorter to take Country Club and Rockport, by a distance of more than 1 mile.
Thus, it will not alleviate traffic on those routes.
The cost benefit of this plan seem to be poor for the
Page 52 of 60
d. There is mention of numerous other “abutting” projects. Some appear related
to the fact that the scope of this project was changed during the review, and some
c. There will be an ongoing burden on budget for maintaining more than 2 miles
of 16 foot wide median. (79-K)
b. Traffic control costs will be high in order to ensure safety at major crossings
(and there will be foot and bicycle traffic at every crossing).
a. There will need to be large amounts of sculpting for topography, it is not clear
how land acquisition was computed in the absence of this, since at the meetings
engineers would not address how terrain would be changed near some of the
houses near crests of hills.
12. The costing estimates seem to not include numerous items.
11. It is a very large project footprint. The roadway footprint proposed is over 70
feet (including lanes, medians, (79-G) shoulders/runoff control, multi-use path and
sidewalk). Already there is a second exit to I69 proposed within a mile that has a
complete road, already upgraded, and lesser residential impact. (79-I) As mentioned
above the aspects that will ultimately be required by the City and County for safety
ameliorations, will expand the cost way beyond what is put forth.
The
documentation for the choice of such a large footprint is not provided. Lower
speeds are mentioned for safety reasons, but low speed residential roads should
not require 16 foot travel lanes plus dual shoulders.
Good use of our funds.
community.
10. Driveways will open directly onto this road, and given the footprint it can be
expected that speeds will be such that this is a risk. (79-E) This again calls into the
lack of justification for 16 foot travel lanes plus shoulders.
9. Related to this is the fact that each intersection will also cross the multi-use
pathways. While turn lanes are provided, most of these will require traffic control to
be safe, since the traffic will be dealing with crossing proposed high volumes and
high speeds of oncoming traffic, and will not be attending to individuals crossing on
the multi-use or sidewalks. Note that the assumptions of a low speed limit will not
be met without traffic control and the costing seems to not include a comprehensive
traffic control plan and implementation.
use trails by this project is likely to increase bicycle and waling usage, yet two of the
main crossings are at street level. Already there are problems at crossings and
there has been the need to construct more warnings and traffic control. The traffic
control costs do not seem to be part of the costing so their absence represents a
major safety concern. (79-H)
81.
80.
Email Comment
01/08/2015
Email Comment
01/08/2015
Ameer
Beitvashahi
521 West
Gordon Pike
Tina Boggs
850 W.
Rosewood Dr.
Page 53 of 60
In analyzing the alternatives, the environmental impact document assesses the
short-term cost or each alternative, but not the medium- or long-term economic
impacts. For example, since the “preferred option” would place an arterial through a
neighborhood, hundreds of homes will lose value. (81-B) Additionally, many residents
along the Rhorer Road section of the corridor will likely have to pay out-of-pocket to
upgrade septic systems affected by the construction. (81-C) This is a severe negative
impact to the economy of the area.
Question 1: Please justify the decision to ignore INDOT’s very specific guidance
regarding placing this type of arterial through a neighborhood. (81-A)
Since the roadway may connect to a full interstate interchange, it is accurate to
describe it as, at least, a minor arterial. The South Batchelor neighborhoods consist
of 500+ homes. The corridor itself will be along the back yards of at least 35
residences and the driveways of at least 25 others.
On minor arterials, Section 40-1.01(01) of INDOT’s Indiana Design Manual states,
“In an urban area, a minor arterial may carry local bus route and provide intracommunity connections, but it will not, for example, penetrate a neighborhood.”
I am writing to voice my approval for the Fullerton Pike expansion.I believe it is the
logical choice to connect east/west Bloomington.
13. Overall, it is not clear what part of the community benefits from this large project.
This is at the southern border of the population density of Bloomington. The
existence of an entrance to I69 a mile north, and the general trending of the roads to
the southwest will not serve most of the residents. There is little commercial zoning
along the roadway, with the exception of the Walnut Intersection, thus the
commercial value seems to be for longer distance traffic. Given the strong evidence
that bypasses weaken the downtown areas of small cities, it is not clear that it is a
good investment of citizen’s taxes to build routes that will weaken our city.
e. As mentioned the incorporation of duplicate pedestrian access, which in turn
requires extra shoulder work and drainage is not well justified and seems more
designed to increase the footprint for construction than to meet actual needs. One
mult-use pathway seems to meet realistic needs, and at a minimum a fact based
assessment of need should be presented.
of the other projects mentioned during the hearing seem to represent these changes
in scope. This suggests that the entire cost should be calculated based on a
combination of all related projects. (79-L)
The proposed roadway does not
penetrate
a
neighborhood.
Eagleview neighborhood exists on
the south side of Gordon Pike and
the Highlands exists on the north
side of Gordon Pike.
These
neighborhoods
are
currently
separated by a roadway, and each
See response 8-D.
See response 42-B
See response 6-A.
81-A
81-B
81-C
81-D
-
Page 54 of 60
uses significantly more right-of-way
uses more forest
has more Perennial/Intermittent Stream crossings
has more Ephemeral Stream Encroachments
impacts more acres of farmland
In Table 1, the comparison of Alternate 2: Tapp Road Upgrade to the Preferred
Alternative 1A shows that the Preferred Alternative 1A: (81-J)
Question 4: Considering the large amount of right-of-way being used and the
quantity of homes whose property value will be affected, can “Propert Owner
Impacts Minimized” be corrected to a “No” for Preferred Alternative 1A in Table 1,
Page 14?
The table also states 16 home re-locations for the Alternate 2: Tapp Road Upgrade,
even though the text of the analysis clearly states that 12 of those relocations can
be avoided by using land from the county club. (81-H)
This shows a “No” value for “Property Owner Impacts Minimized” for the Alternate 2:
Tapp Road Upgrade and a “Yes” value for the Preferred Alternative 1A. However,
the preferred option uses significantly more right-of-way (31.2 acres v. 23.2 acres)
and primarily affects homeowners. Fifty per cent of the right-of-way for Tapp Road
comes from commercial property, according to the document. (81-G)
Question 3: Please address all comparable issues in order to make for a balanced
analysis of alternatives.
In contrast, the analysis of the Preferred Alternative 1A does not address the loss of
parking spaces currently being used for Unity Church and the Clear Creek Trail, the
loss of acreage at Batchelor Middle School, or the loss of acreage at Jackson Creek
Middle School. These seem like comparable impacts to the above mentioned for the
“Upgrades to Tapp Rd” alternative (81-F)
The analysis of the Alternate 2: Tapp Road Upgrade addresses potential lost
parking spaces for businesses along the roadway, the potential relocation of a
church, and the potential for loss of tees and greens at the Bloomington Country
Club. (81-E)
Question 2: Why are economic impacts not considered in the environmental
assessment?
Since INDOT’s guidance is being ignored, as mentioned in Question 1, it is even
more import to assess economic impacts on the affected areas.
On the other hand, Alternate 2: Tapp Road Upgrade would improve access to an
area that is already commercially-zoned and developed. This has the potential for
economic growth. (81-D)
“Property owners” refers to owners
of all types of property, not just
residential property owners. The
Tapp Road Upgrade would require
at least 16 residential relocations
and 2 business relocations, whereas
the preferred alternative would
require
only
one
residential
relocation. Relocation is considered
a much greater impact to property
owners than acquisition of strip rightof-way.
Potential impacts to the golf course
may be of sufficient magnitude to
require acquisition of the entire
course, and at-best would require
substantial compensation to reconstruct and/or re-design the
course. The golf course property
impacts or the potential relocation of
12 residences are each greater in
81-H
It was determined that the primary
use of Batchelor and Jackson Creek
Middle
Schools
as
education
facilities would not be diminished by
the project.
81-F
81-G
Tapp Road Upgrade does not satisfy
the purpose and need for the
project. During analysis of the Tapp
Road Upgrade parking space
acquisition was determined to be of
sufficient magnitude to potentially
require the relocation of businesses.
The same determination was not
made with regard to Unity Church.
Parking spaces were not identified
on Alternative 1A in the vicinity of
Clear Creek Trail.
81-E
82.
Email Comment
01/09/2015
Melinda
Hamilton
No address
given
impacts more identified karst features
has more identified impacts to potential archaelogical sites
has more impacted noise receivers
creates more miles of new construction
6) cost, OY! seems like a big price tag (82-G)
Page 55 of 60
5) age of the real plan, when was it created and does it work well within the area at
this time as things are NOW, not then (82-F)
4) destruction or damage to karst features and several creeks (82-D and 82-E)
3) safety of crossing of the Clear Creek Trail (82-C)
2) 2 interchanges so close to each other (why here, why 2?) (82-B)
1) safety regarding the location of 2 middle schools. (82-A)
I am emailing to request reconsideration of the proposed "Fullerton Pike Corridor." I
am looking at the map and I am concerned about several items.
Question 8: Will the county pay to install new sewer systems for residents whose
septic systems will be impacted by the construction? Or are residents expected to
pay for this expense out-of-pocket?
Question 7: Will the county reimburse property owners whose property values are
severely impacted (81-I) by the increase in traffic and noise?
Question 6: The project proposes a stoplight at the intersection of Gordon Pike and
South Rogers. Several residences are just a few feet from this light. What provisions
will be taken to make sure there are no traffic backups in front of driveways? What
traffic control alternatives, e.g. round-a-bouts, have been considered? (81-L)
Question 5: Based on this comparison, please explain how can a “finding of no
significant environmental impact” can be justified? (81-K)
-
The determination of a finding of no
significant impact is not based on the
project’s alternatives analysis or a
comparison between alternatives.
The proposed project does not have
significant environmental impacts, as
described in the approved EA.
See response 11-A.
See response 8-F.
See response 9-A.
81-K
81-L
82-A
82-B
82-E
82-D
Efforts will be made during design
and construction to avoid and
minimize
impacts
to
water
resources.
Please see the
See response 68-F.
See response 6-B.
Tapp Road Upgrade does not satisfy
the purpose and need for the
project. A formal investigation into
Karst features, noise receivers, and
historic resources along Tapp Road
is beyond the scope of this project;
however, predicted property owner
impacts and stream impacts were
considerably higher along the Tapp
Road Upgrade.
81-J
82-C
All property will be acquired in
accordance with federal and state
regulations, including compensation
for any real reduction in property
value.
81-I
magnitude than property owner
impacts related to Alternative 1A.
83.
Email Comment
01/09/2015
Council of
Neighborhood
Associations
-
-
-
Page 56 of 60
The 2012 Final Engineering Assessment for the Fullerton Pike Corridor
Improvements prepared for the Monroe County Board of Commissioners
by American Structurepoint, Inc., which determined the Fullerton Pike
interchange to be the most cost effective enhancement in this area,
focused primarily on reducing travel times and enhancing vehicle operation
with little regard to other important considerations such as neighborhood
continuity, pedestrian and bike safety, community character, or the
environmental impact to the area. (83-B and 83-C)
I-69 is already connected via the proposed interchange at Tapp Road, 1
mile from this proposed interchange. CONA questions the expense of this
expansion given the many drawbacks to this road widening project, and
the other transportation needs the County has due to I 69.
According to the US Department of Transportation Federal Highway
Administration’s Highway Functional Classification Concepts, Criteria and
Procedures:
Arterial
Considerations,
“Arterials
should
avoid
neighborhoods. They often serve as buffers between incompatible land
After much discussion, the CONA membership recognized the following problems
with the Fullerton Pike interchange and new corridor:
Residents from the area near the proposed Fullerton Pike interchange discussed
their opposition to the new interchange and the connected corridor.
CONA met on Wednesday, December 17 to discuss, among other things, the
impact of I-69 on various neighborhoods in Bloomington and Monroe County. In
particular, we discussed the impact of increased traffic on 17th Street between
Crescent Bend and the roundabout and the impact of the interchange at Fullerton
Pike. (83-A) Concerned neighbors from each area expressed their concerns about
each project and the impact on their particular neighborhoods.
The Council of Neighborhood Associations (CONA) represents the approximately
65 neighborhood associations in Bloomington and Monroe County working with
them to create healthy, secure neighborhoods, provide organizational support, and
serve as a unified, advocating voice for neighborhood concerns.
Thank you for allowing us submissions. Please consider any possible alternatives
that will be better for the area. One I have read about is an overpass and frontage
road from Fullerton Pike to Tapp Road. (82-H) I do not know if this would be the best
one, but it is one to consider. I am sure there are a few more.
See response 8-A.
See response 47-C.
See response 6-A.
Please see the “Purpose and Need”
section
of
the
Environmental
Assessment (Page 5 – Page 6). The
purpose of the project includes the
motorized
traffic
improvements
mentioned as well as improvements
to pedestrian safety and trail access.
Please see the “Community Impacts”
section
of
the
Environmental
Assessment (Page 43 – Page 44)
and the “Ecological Resources”
section
of
the
Environmental
Assessment (Page 21 – Page 28) for
reference to the analysis conducted
for this project on the referenced
topics.
The proposed roadway does not
penetrate
a
neighborhood.
Eagleview neighborhood exists on
the south side of Rhorer Road and
the Highlands exists on the north
side of Rhorer Road.
These
neighborhoods
are
currently
separated by a roadway, and each
82-F
82-G
82-H
83-A
83-B
83-C
83-D
“Streams, Rivers, Watercourses, and
Jurisdictional Ditches” section of the
Environment Assessment (Page 21
– Page 23) for a discussion of
potential stream impacts.
Our first recommendation is to eliminate this interchange and adjoining
road expansion entirely. This is the “No-Build Option” in the Fullerton Pike
Transportation Improvement Project. (83-K)
- Outside shoulders no larger than 4’ wide.
- No more than 2 undivided lanes.
- Maximum of 11’ wide lanes.
-
-
Page 57 of 60
Create every possible safety measure possible for this school zone
including:
Reduce speed to 20mph in school zone (current plan is for 40mph). (83-N)
Design road to discourage speeding in school zone, rather than depend on
- No bike lanes since there is a proposed multi-use path adjoining the
project. Bike lanes are redundant, a waste of money and encourage excessive
speeds. (83-M)
(83-L)
- The road must be made compatible with existing neighborhood context including:
- Secondly, if this project does go forward, we recommend the following for the
Fullerton Pike corridor:
-
Recommendations:
- numerous existing residential neighborhoods. (83-J)
- 2 existing schools, Batchelor Middle School and Jackson Creek Middle School.
All INDOT of Federal Highway
Administration standards will be
conformed to in the design of the
roadway.
Bike lanes are not proposed. A
multi-use path will be constructed on
the north side of the roadway for
bicycle traffic.
83-M
The “No-Build” Alternative was not
selected because it does not
address the purpose and need of the
project.
Please see the “Other
Alternatives Considered” section of
the
Environmental
Assessment
(Page 9 – Page 15) for more
explanation.
83-K
83-L
See response 8-A.
See response 42-B.
83-J
83-I
The project would in fact eliminate
points of conflict by introducing a
grassed median to limit left turns out
of driveways.
83-H
- many driveway cuts, creating potential points of collision (83-H)
- existing residential septic systems which will be destroyed at significant cost. (83-I)
See response 6-B.
The Bloomington/Monroe County
Metropolitan Planning Organization
is responsible for assessing future
transportation needs, including the
effect of alternative transportation
and fuel costs on local traffic
patterns.
83-F
83-G
See response 8-F.
83-E
- 3 primary public pedestrian and bike trails, Clear Creek Trail, Bloomington Rail
Trail and Olcott Trail. (83-G)
The proposed corridor will cross or otherwise affect:
-
uses and should avoid penetration of residential neighborhoods.” (83-D)
Gordon Pike and Rhorer Road, which, in fact, is the same road, in different
townships, are the sites of two middle schools with a student population of
1,095 for the 2013-14 school year (this represents two thirds of
Bloomington’s Middle School population) (83-F) as well as many
neighborhoods falling to the north and south of the roadway. Virtually all of
this construction has taken place within the past 30 years, after the original
plan for this roadway to become an arterial corridor.
The long-term plan does not consider changes to traffic patterns and
capacity based on alternative modes of transportation, changing fuel costs,
public transportation and other considerations. (83-F)
85.
84.
Email Comment
01/09/2015
Skip Daley
Highlands
subdivision
Email Comment
01/09/2015
Nicholas
Roberts
No address
given
enforcement.
Add signage and signaled cross walks.
-
Page 58 of 60
The project will allow residents like myself amazing access to both I69 and
SR37
Ease of Transportation:
I fully support this project for a number of reasons, some of those include the
following:
I am a resident of a neighborhood known as the Highlands in Monroe County,
Indiana, and I live adjacent to Gordon Pike and Fullerton Road. While I have
declined to be part of the formal process of the advisory committee, I am a direct
stakeholder in the outcome.
I would not like to see this project continue. But if it somehow does, homeowners
directly affected by the proposed construction should be amply compensated or
given fair and equitable relocation.
3. Incompatibility with Bloomington: this sort of development is emblematic of the
kind of characterless suburban sprawl one can find a few miles up the road in
Indianapolis. It is not “Bloomington” and the lack of such development is part of
what has made this town unique and liveable. (84-D)
and 84-C)
2. Dangerous: it does not make any sense to attempt to build a highway exit that
touches driveways, endangers small children, and endangers school children. (84-B
1. Property values will plummet: family friends live along this corridor and were not
informed of this plan when they purchased their house almost 10 years ago. The
development that would eat part of their front yard would have disastrous
consequences for their property value and that of their neighbors. (84-A)
Although I do not reside along the corridor that would be affected by this proposed
construction, I am a longtime Bloomington resident interested in responsible
development of this town. I am not convinced that the proposed corridor project
makes sense for the area it would affect. My main concerns:
This message is to contribute to the record of public comments regarding the
proposed Fullerton Pike Corridor project in Bloomington, Indiana. I am in opposition
to this proposal.
We urge you to abandon the Fullerton Pike interchange for the reasons stated
above. If this is not possible, then we strongly urge you to consider the
recommendations above to make the new corridor as unobtrusive and safe as
possible for the adjacent neighborhoods.
-
84-D
See response 46-A.
See response 9-A.
See response 8-F.
84-B
84-C
See response 8-D.
See response 27-B.
84-A
83-N
86.
Email Comment
01/09/2015
Lynn Coyne
Bloomington
Economic
Development
Corporation
The section of Gordon Pike immediately east of Rogers Street has been in
grave need of repair for many years
This project will end the number of vehicles which use the residential
neighborhoods such as Eagleview and the Highlands as a short access
route.
The project will eliminate the excessive traffic which intersects the
pedestrian trail on Rockport Road
The project will include much needed improvements to the walking and
biking trail which flows through the area
Page 59 of 60
The original design of the project has been modified and narrowed over concerns
In addition, we should keep in mind not only the traffic movement improvements that
will be provided, but why those improvements are needed. They will allow increased
communication between the facilities on both sides of our community. This includes
easier access to employment opportunities and all the support services that are
involved, such as day care. Expansion of community facilities such as parks, trails
and entertainment venues on the west side will be facilitated and continue to
increase the quality of life opportunities for everyone, and relieve some of the
development pressures on the east side. Access to fire, ambulance and law
enforcement services will be enhanced. It will also open up reciprocal opportunities
for our regional neighbors to have access to education, entertainment and
employment opportunities.
The Fullerton Pike connector proposal is important to the future growth of
employment and community opportunities for Monroe County. The Greater
Bloomington Chamber of Commerce has clearly stated many good reasons to
support this needed improvement.
I am excited for the groundbreaking ceremony!
There is no mistaking the benefits, and equally, no mistaking the reality that this
project has been intended for decades. Regardless of whether or not one pays
attention to long term infrastructure planning before moving into a neighborhood, no
one can ignore the writing on the wall, which was the intentionally deep setbacks of
sidewalks and utilities on Gordon Pike west of Rogers Street.
My neighbors are all excited for these much anticipated improvements. Driving
through the labyrinths of residential developments has been a dangerous chore, at
best. Rockport Road is ridden with curves and blind spots . . . Fullerton (east of
SR37) has been a disgrace for as long as I have lived in town.
The project will inevitably assist with better disbursement of bus routes to Bachelor
Middle School
-
-
-
Increased Local Safety:
-
87.
Email Comment
01/10/2015
Bob Poortinga
5930 N. Maple
Grove Rd.
Page 60 of 60
I would also add that that several traffic roundabouts should be developed on this
corridor: the intersection of Gordon Pike and Rogers St; the intersection of Gordon
Pike, Clear View Dr, and Batchelor School Dr should be realigned with a
roundabout; and the intersection of Rockport Rd / Fullerton Pike. (87-A)
4) Much of the area in the vicinity of I-69 / Fullerton is undeveloped. Construction of
the corridor will provide better opportunities for development of this area and
increased economic activity.
3) Better access to the Rhorer Rd / Sare Rd corridor is necessary. This includes
access to Jackson Creek Middle School and Sherwood Oaks Christian Church. The
project should also include improvements to the Walnut Pike / Rhorer Rd
intersection.
2) Better access to Batchelor Middle School is necessary. The intersection of
Gordon Pike and Rogers St is often overwhelmed with traffic leaving/entering the
school.
1) The Tapp/Country Club Rd corridor is wholly inadequate to handle the projected
increase in traffic that will result in the completion of I-69 and resulting development
that will ensue. A second access road to I-69 on the south side of Bloomington will
be required.
The Fullerton Pike Corridor is needed and necessary for a number of reasons.
Bloomington and Monroe County has suffered under the artificial boundaries
created by a lack of east-west access for too long, and the Fullerton Pike project
offers a unique opportunity to bring our community closer together for the benefit of
all.
about truck traffic and further delay would continue to deprive our fellow citizens of
the advantage of the connectivity this project provides.
87-A
See response 11-A.
From:
To:
Subject:
Date:
michelle.allen@dot.gov
Fullerton Pike Project; bwilliams@co.monroe.in.us; Harvey, Benjamin
FW: Decision Fullerton
Wednesday, February 11, 2015 6:42:18 AM
Please include in the project record.
Michelle Allen
FHWA-IN
(317) 226-7344
From: Ann Elsner [mailto:aeelsnerhome@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2015 8:12 PM
To: Allen, Michelle (FHWA)
Subject: Fwd: Decision Fullerton
So many of us want the Fullerton Pike road project stopped. Here is my video. I plan to
send it to a few H-T reporters, since it is cross-cutting between Monroe County, nature, and
arts. I plan to send it to Bloomington, Monroe County, and Indiana highway officials.
Your video has been published at http://youtu.be/qYtaP6fpZO4
Decision Fullerton
So many of us have fought long and hard to stop the truck route through our
neighborhoods near Batchelor Middle School. This music video shows some of what will be
lost. The Clear Creek trail is a wetlands habitat, and the section to be developed is at
present without traffic noise or pollution. Dog walkers, joggers, cyclists, kids in strollers, and
walkers share the peace and serenity with heron, fish, river mammals, and crawfish. The
road into this pristine area dead ends just past the entrance to Batchelor Heights. The
westernmost housing additions along Gordon Pike and Fullerton Pike, Batchelor Heights,
Eagleview, and Clear Creek Estates house hundreds of families. Most of these home were
built more than 10 years ago, some more than 20 years ago, with approval from Monroe
County. There is not space for a large road because the right of way was not planned for
anything more than a small neighborhood street.
Batchelor Middle School would not be visible from an exit off I-69. This puts at least 500
children at risk. Other children use the parkland on Gordon Pike as a sports practice field.
Cross country is popular here. This puts more children at risk if a major arterial were built
here. It also degrades the air quality and introduces high noise levels. Cars and trucks
might be assuming that 50 mph was OK, given that this route is proposed as the first exit to
Bloomington when driving north on I-69, when in fact this is a residential neighborhood.
Thousands of extra cars are predicted to drive through what is now people’s yards.
The park land near Batchelor and the sidewalks along Gordon Pike are all part of a
pedestrian and bicycle loop that hooks into both the Clear Creek Trail and the Rails to Trails,
which are at the southern end of the B-line trail system. This system is now used
extensively for recreation. Those who live in the condos, apartments, trailers have this as
their green space. It is not unused land, and there is no Bryan Park near-by. Those who live
along Gordon Pike engage in a variety of activities, such as basketball, directly next to the
proposed high speed and large roadway.
The Rails to Trails crossing currently cuts through a wooded area at grade. This trail has
boomed in popularity in the last year. This means that the hundreds of people who use this
trial will have to hope that the thousands of cars can see them and can stop in time. The
same difficulty will be faced by people travelling in or out of the Unity Church.
A large number of homes have driveways directly on Gordon Pike. It will be nearly
impossible to pull out of their driveways into the large volume of traffic. The opposite side
of this problem occurs for many of these residents returning home and needing to turn left
against a high volume of traffic. If this is possible, it will slow the traffic to a crawl at rush
hour. How some of these driveways can be made to work, due to the steep grade of
Gordon Pike, is problematic. The proposed road may be above or below where the
driveways now are.
There is a good reason why again and again Monroe County decided not build a major
road at Gordon Pike and Fullerton Pike: the grade is exceptionally steep and unsuitable for a
high speed road. The large volume of traffic on such a steep grade creates an unsafe
situation. We need to decide again not to build this road.
Mitigation and Project Commitments
Des# 0801059 – Fullerton Pike Corridor Improvement Project
Project Commitments
Firm Commitments
1. Minimize and contain within the project limits in channel disturbance and the clearing of
trees and brush within the floodway. (IDNR)
2. Revegetate "low-maintenance" areas within the floodway with a mixture of grasses
(excluding all varieties of tall fescue), legumes, and native shrub and hardwood tree species
as soon as possible upon completion. (IDNR)
3. Do not cut any trees suitable for Indiana bat roosting (greater than three inches diameter at
breast height (DBH), living or dead, with loose hanging bark) from April 1 through
September 30. (USFWS and IDNR)
4. Appropriately designed measures for controlling erosion and sediment must be implemented
to prevent sediment from entering the stream or leaving the construction site; maintain these
measures until construction is complete and all disturbed areas are stabilized. (IDNR and
IDEM)
5. If any archaeological artifacts or human remains are uncovered during construction,
demolition, or earthmoving activities, state law (Indiana Code 14-21-1-27 and 29) requires
that the discovery must be reported to the Department of Natural Resources within two (2)
business days. (IDNR)
6. Reasonable precautions must be taken to minimize fugitive dust emissions from construction
and demolition activities. Dirt tracked onto paved roads from unpaved areas should be
minimized. (IDEM)
7. The use of cutback asphalt or asphalt emulsion containing more than seven percent (7
percent) oil distillate is prohibited during the months of April through October. (IDEM)
8. Install silt fence or other erosion control measures around the perimeter of any wetlands
and/or other water bodies to remain undisturbed at the project site. (IDEM)
9. Stabilize all disturbed areas upon completion of land-disturbing activities. (IDEM)
10. Wastes and unused building materials shall be managed and disposed of in accordance with
all applicable statutes and regulations. (IDEM)
11. A stable construction site access shall be provided at all points of construction traffic ingress
and egress to the project site. (IDEM)
12. Public or private roadways shall be kept cleared of accumulated sediment that is a result of
run-off or tracking. (IDEM)
13. If any permanent structures or equipment utilized for the proposed project penetrates the
100:1 slope from the Bloomington Monroe County Airport, FAA form 7460 (Notice of
Proposed construction or alteration) must be filed. (INDOT Office of Aviation)
14. The stone gateposts at the Winston Thomas Wastewater Treatment Plant would be relocated
away from the proposed roadway per the project’s Section 106 Memorandum of
Understanding. (DNR-SHPO)
15. The principles of context-sensitive solutions shall be implemented during project
development. In addition, the County should consider the use of limestone treatment in
landscaping. (DNR-SHPO)
16. Three interpretive signs shall be placed at accessible locations along the multi-use trail.
These signs shall discuss historic themes relating to the Maple Hill Mill and Quarry as part of
the NCCHLD, transportation and the dimension limestone industry in Monroe County. The
design of the signs shall be coordinated with the DNR-SHPO prior to installation. (DNRSHPO)
17. If the scope of work or right of way amounts change, INDOT Environmental Services would
be contacted immediately. (INDOT)
18. Any work in a wetland area within County’s right-of-way or in borrow/waste areas directly
related to this project is prohibited unless specifically allowed in the US Army Corps of
Engineers or IDEM permit. (INDOT)
19. If any potential hazardous materials are discovered during construction the IDEM Spill Line
should be notified with details of the discovery within 24 hours. (IDEM)
20. Install appropriate erosion and sediment control practices to minimize runoff and sediment
deposition in the sinkhole areas identified in the Karst Report (Monroe County)
21. Install vegetative filter strips and minimize the placement of fill in the vicinity of the
sinkhole areas identified in the Karst Report (Monroe County).
22. A hydraulic design study that addresses various structure size alternatives will be completed
for the new bridge, two bridge replacements and the extension of Monroe County Bridge 610
during the preliminary design phase. A summary of this study will be included with the
Field Check Plans (Monroe County).
23. Sediment and soil excavated for construction of piers/foundations in Clear Creek
(replacement of Monroe County Bridge 74) sampled an analyzed for PCBs to determine
appropriate disposal of excavated material. (Monroe County)
24. Prior to the initiation of any construction activities on bridges, including the removal of any
bridge structures, the underside of each bridge should be carefully examined for the presence
of bats, especially between April 1 and September 30. If any bats are found roosting on the
underside of the bridge, immediately contact USFWS. (USFWS)
25. Prior to the demolition of older structures, such as barns and sheds, a visual search should be
performed to see if bats are using the structure for roosting. Should bats be found using the
structure, please contact USFWS to discuss options for excluding the bats prior to
demolition. (USFWS)
26. Avoid Channel Work during the fish spawning season (April 1 through June 30). (USFWS
and IDNR)
27. Post DO NOT DISTURB signs at the construction zone boundaries and do not clear trees or
understory vegetation outside the boundaries. (USFWS)
28. Implement temporary erosion and siltation control devices, such as placement of straw bales
in drainage ways and ditches; covering exposed areas with burlap, jute matting, or straw; and
grading slopes to retain runoff in basins. (USFWS)
29. Revegetate all disturbed soil areas immediately upon project completion, using native species
in riparian areas and natural areas. (USFWS)
30. Restrict below low-water work to placement of piers, pilings and/or footings, shaping of the
spill slopes around the bridge abutments, and placement of riprap. (USFWS and IDNR)
31. Restrict channel work and vegetation clearing to the minimum necessary for installation of
the bridge. (USFWS)
32. Culverts should span the active stream channel, should be either embedded or a 3-sided or
open-arch culvert, and be installed where practicable on an essentially flat slope. When an
open-bottomed culvert is used in a stream with good bottom substrate for aquatic habitat
(gravel, cobbles and boulders), the existing substrate should be left undisturbed beneath the
culvert. (USFWS)
33. All available design measures, including reduced construction zone width, should be used in
sensitive areas to minimize impacts on streams, forest, karst features, and steep slopes.
(USFWS)
34. Mitigation should include enhancement of riparian buffers along the major streams in this
roadway corridor. (USFWS)
35. If riprap is utilized for bank stabilization, extend it below low-water elevation to provide
aquatic habitat. (USFWS/IDNR)
36. Minimize the extent of artificial bank stabilization and use bioengineering methods wherever
feasible. (USFWS/IDNR)
37. Implement appropriate safeguards to ensure that groundwater is not endangered, including
precautions for fueling/servicing large equipment and developing contingency plans to
handle the release of any hazardous materials. (USEPA – Ground Water and Drinking Water
Branch)
38. Comply with the Monroe County Stormwater Management Ordinance, including provisions
for runoff in sinkhole watersheds, the capture and infiltration of stormwater runoff, and
reducing the post-construction stormwater discharge to pre-construction levels. (Monroe
County Highway Department Drainage Engineer)
39. The new structure must not create conditions that are less favorable for wildlife passage
under the new structure compared to the current conditions. (IDNR)
40. If tree clearing is determined to be necessary for this project, avoidance of cutting any trees
suitable for Indiana bat roosting, which are trees greater than three inches diameter at breast
height (dbh), living or dead, with loose hanging bark, is required from April 1 through
September 30. (USFWS)
41. Impacts to the parking areas of the Unity of Bloomington Church will be minimized to the
maximum extent practicable. (Unity of Bloomington)
42. Appropriate efforts shall be made to minimize disturbance to trail resources and pedestrians
utilizing these resources during construction activities. Design shall ensure that no long-term
diminishment of the features or attributes of the trail resources occurs, and that the project
will maintain or enhance public access to trails relative to existing conditions. (Bloomington
Parks Department)
43. The Bloomington Parks Department will continue to be involved in discussions on the
project and will be able to provide input regarding roadway/trail intersections as the design
progresses. (Bloomington Parks Department)
44. A noise analysis re-evaluation shall occur prior to final plan development in the area west of
existing Gordon Pike. The re-evaluation will determine if noise mitigation (including noise
walls) is reasonable and feasible, and the appropriate coordination with INDOT and the
public will occur at that time. (Project Sponsor)
Items for Further Consideration
1. Appropriate structures and techniques should be utilized both during the construction phase,
and after completion of the project, to minimize the impacts associated with stormwater
runoff. (IDEM)
2. The City requests design input and review of the Walnut Street and Rhorer Road/Gordon
Pike intersection, and recommends that a modern roundabout alternative be evaluated at this
intersection. If this occurs, INDOT ES will be notified as soon as possible to determine if an
Additional Information document is needed. (City of Bloomington Engineering Department)
3. Quantify traffic impacts to South Walnut Street and South Sare Road during the design
process to coordinate future City infrastructure improvements. (City of Bloomington
Engineering Department)
4. Smooth-surfaced material should be placed on the side-slopes instead of riprap, such as
articulated concrete mats or turf reinforcement mats, so as to not impair wildlife movement
along the banks under the bridge. (IDNR)
5. Impacts to non-wetland forest under one (1) acre should be mitigated at a 1:1 ratio, while
impacts to non-wetland forest over one (1) acre should be mitigated at a 2:1 ratio. Impacts to
wetlands should be mitigated at the appropriate ratio as well. (IDNR)
6. IDNR recommends bridges rather than culverts and bottomless culverts rather than box or
pipe culverts for purposes of maintaining fish passage through a crossing structure. Wide
culverts are better than narrow culverts, and culverts with shorter through lengths are better
than culverts with longer through lengths. If box or pipe culverts are used, the bottoms
should be buried a minimum of 6” (or 20% of the culvert height/pipe diameter, whichever is
greater up to a maximum of 2’) below the stream bed elevation to allow a natural streambed
to form within or under the crossing structure). (IDNR)
7. Soft armoring and bioengineering techniques should be considered prior to hard armoring
(riprap) for stabilization and erosion control. (IDNR)
8. Riprap should be used only at the toe of the side slopes up to the ordinary high water mark
(OHWM). (IDNR)
9. Do not construct any temporary runarounds or causeways. (IDNR)
10. Post “Do Not Mow or Spray” signs along the right-of-way. (IDNR)
11. The physical disturbance of the stream and riparian vegetation, especially large trees
overhanging any affected water bodies should be limited to only that which is absolutely
necessary to complete the project. (IDEM)
12. The principles of Low Impact Development shall be considered during design of the project.
These principles shall be considered to improve stormwater quality related to the proposed
roadway improvement. (CAC Process)
13. Additional signage, mid-block crosswalks, and the use of traffic slowing design
modifications shall be considered in the areas surrounding existing schools. (CAC Process,
public outreach)
14. The use of under or overpasses shall be considered where trail resources cross the project or
pedestrian crossings are planned. (CAC Process)
15. Due to the potential for residual PCB contamination within the sediment in Clear Creek,
sampling for PCBs is recommended for soils and sediment excavated during construction of
piers and foundations for the replacement of Monroe County Bridge 74 to determine
appropriate disposal of excavated material. (Project sponsor)
16. Incorporate street trees between the curb and pedestrian facilities. For all City roadway
projects, a minimum five foot wide grass plot containing large canopy street trees planted 40
feet apart is required. (City of Bloomington Planning Director)
17. A median break will be considered at the north entrance of the Unity of Bloomington Church
to allow westbound traffic to enter the church from the north. (Unity of Bloomington)

Certification of Public Involvement, Official Public Hearing Transcript

Transcription

Similar documents

American Cancer Society Relay for Life

LAND FOR SALE Who is Beiler

Brochure - Equity Retail Brokers

Insurance - Mihaylo College of Business and Economics

Marketing Sheets_NEW3.indd

The Market Insider - Pike Place Market

Space Flyer - Port of Seattle

File