Public Involvement Report For the Environmental Assessment 07 18_i-55_ea_errata... · Public...

Public Involvement Report

For the Environmental Assessment

Interstate 55 Interstate 355 to Interstate 90/94

Managed Lane Project

July 2016

i

Contents Executive Summary .......................................................................................................................................... 1

Public Hearing Summary .................................................................................................................................. 1

Meeting Attendance ...............................................................................................................................................2

Comments ..............................................................................................................................................................2

Public Hearing Outreach Efforts ....................................................................................................................... 4

Postcard ..................................................................................................................................................................4

Display Ad ...............................................................................................................................................................5

Press Release ..........................................................................................................................................................6

E-blast Invitation .....................................................................................................................................................7

3rd Party Announcements .......................................................................................................................................8

Website ...............................................................................................................................................................8

Website Analysis ............................................................................................................................................... 9

Site Visits ................................................................................................................................................................9

Content and Page Views ................................................................................................................................. 11

Visitors ................................................................................................................................................................. 12

Public Hearing- Photographs .......................................................................................................................... 13

Public Hearing Materials ................................................................................................................................ 15

Newsletter ........................................................................................................................................................... 15

Presentation ........................................................................................................................................................ 16

Appendices Appendix A- Written Comments Submitted at Public Hearing Appendix B- Transcripts of Comments Provided During Public Hearing Appendix C- Comments Submitted via Mail Appendix D- Comments Submitted via Email

1

Executive Summary This report documents public involvement for the I-55 Managed Lane Phase I Project subsequent to the signature of the Environmental Assessment (EA) by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) on April 27, 2016. The public involvement includes the public hearing which took place on May 17, 2016 and comments received on the EA and public hearing through the close of the public comment period on June 1st.

Public Hearing Summary The Public Hearing for the Environmental Assessment for the I-55 Managed Lane Project was held on May 17, 2016 at the Holiday Inn, 6201 Joliet Road, Countryside, Illinois from 4:00 PM to 7:00 PM. Participants were invited to view a continuous audio-visual presentation on the project and to visit a room that featured numerous display boards that included a project overview, project purpose and need, current study area conditions, alternatives development, overview of the alternatives, environmental considerations, noise evaluation, project timeline, and next steps in the process. Participants were offered an opportunity to submit written comment forms. Viewing stations included:

• Roll plot maps of the corridor that depicted the common noise environment and the proposed geometrics were also on display

• A brief video on Active Transportation Management Strategies that demonstrated how

overhead lane signage works

• A video of a simulation of a managed lane on I-55

• A listening station in which participants were invited to use a head set to hear the differences in potential noise levels

At 6 p.m. attendees were invited to participate in a Public Forum in which they could register to speak for up to two minutes regarding the project. A court reporter documented each of the 16 participant’s comments.

- The meeting was attended by 130 people.

2

Meeting Attendance Public Officials:

• Kathy Abbate, Trustee, Downers Grove Township • Dominic Misasi, Trustee, Village of Hodgkins • Henry Oszakiewski, Trustee,Village of Justice • Linda Painter, Forest Preserve Commissioner of DuPage County • Sergio Rodriguez, Mayor, Village of Summit

Municipal Representatives:

• Matt Eastman, Planning and Zoning Administrator, Village of Bolingbrook • Daniel Gombac, Community Development Director, City of Darian • Rich Jaczak, Deputy Chief of Police, Stickney Police Dept. • Michael Mays, Director of Community Development, Village of Woodridge • Chris Milojevich, Sergeant, Hodgkins Police Dept. • David Preissig, Public Works Director, Village of Burr Ridge • Lucas Rickelman, Director of Public Services and Development, Village of Bolingbrook • Kathleen Rush, Administrator, Village of Woodridge

Agency Representatives:

• Chris Byars, FHWA • Aimee Lee, Illinois Tollway • Mark Pitstick, RTA • Chris Snyder, DuPage DOT • John Yonain, Cook Co. DOT

Media Outlets:

• Daily Herald Additional Organizations:

• George Antos, IUOE Local 150 • Michael Drew, IUOE Local 150

Comments Comments received by June 1, 2016 are part of the Public Hearing record. Five comment forms were submitted at the meeting. These comments and a disposition of comments table can be found in Appendix A. Topics include the following:

• Noise abatement

3

• Increased congestion • Concern over eligibility in the noise wall • Vote process • Support for the project

Sixteen (16) comments were documented by the court reporter at the public hearing. Transcripts of those comments and a disposition of comments table can be found in Appendix B. Six comments were received by mail. These comments along with a disposition of comments table and corresponding letter responses can be found in Appendix C. An additional twenty three (23) comments were received via email. These comments and a disposition of their comments can be found in Appendix D.

The topics for these comments mimicked those received at the public meeting. Additional comment topics included overall support the project to relieve congestion, opposition to toll express lanes, costs, preference for a rail solution, a recommended option for a barrier, a concern about fire hydrant locations, alternative solutions for lane access, converting general purpose lanes to toll lanes, adding amenity plazas and police patrols.

Exhibit 1 Public Hearing Comment Form

4

Public Hearing Outreach Efforts A Public Hearing for the I-55 Managed Lane Project was held on May 17, 2016. The following discussion provides a description of each of the various means used to advertise the hearing, as well as to request participation in the study.

Postcard In order to provide stakeholders an advance notice of the hearing, a postcard invitation was created to announce the May 17, 2016 Public Hearing. Information concerning the meeting format was included. The postcard invitation was mailed to 2,500 stakeholders on May 2, 2016.

Exhibit 2 Public Hearing Postcard

5

Display Ad A display ad also was created in order to notify the public of the May 17, 2016 Public Hearing. The ad included a brief description of the hearing agenda, contact information, and the address to the project website. The ad was distributed to the Chicago Sun-Times and the Daily Herald. The ad was run in the Chicago Sun-Times on May 2 and May 12, 2016 in the main news section.

Exhibit 3 Public Hearing Advertisement

6

Press Release The press release announcing the May 17, 2016 Public Hearing was written and approved based on IDOT’s communication guidelines and was distributed on April 29, 2016 by IDOT’s Office of Communications.

Exhibit 4 Public Hearing Press Release

7

E-blast Invitation In addition to the postcard invitation, press release, and advertisements, a beneficial way to reach stakeholders is to announce the Public Hearing via electronic invitations. These invitations were sent to those stakeholders that have email addresses on record.

Exhibit 5 Public Hearing E-blast Invitation

8

3rd Party Announcements

Website

In additional to the postcard invitation, advertisements, and press releases, all municipalities, and townships, as well as a number of organizations within the study area were contacted in order to request that they include an online advertisement on their websites for the Public Meeting. A 3rd party color ad was emailed, along with the press release to the following municipalities and organizations:

• Village of Alsip • Berwyn Township • DuPage Township • Village of Bolingbrook • Stickney Township • Village of Burr Ridge • City of Chicago • Town Of Cicero • City of Countryside • Lyons Township • City of Darien • Downers Grove Township • Village of Justice • Lemont Township • Village of Lemont • Village of Lyons • Village of McCook • Palos Township • Riverside Township • Village of Stickney • Village of Summit • Village of Willowbrook • Village of Woodridge • Village of Indian Head Park • West Suburban Chamber of Commerce • Chicagoland Chamber of Commerce • Illinois Road and Transportation Builders Association • Illinois Trucking Association • Transportation for Illinois Coalition

9

• Will County Farm Bureau • Cook County Farm Bureau

The purpose of these emails was to request that municipalities and organizations place the notice on their websites. Other potential opportunities for including the meeting notice were in the context of board meeting agendas or announcements, in local newsletters, or as email forwards to co-workers and residents.

The Public Hearing information was announced on the home page of the project website. All materials from the May 17, 2016 meeting were posted to the document library section of the project website.

Website Analysis

The Public Hearing information was announced on the home page of the website via the News and Events.

Site Visits

The Public Hearing occurred on May 17, 2016. For purposes of this website summary, data from Google Analytics was reviewed for a five-week period, from April 19, 2016 to June 1, 2016.

During this period, 1,066 visits were recorded for the website. Website trends show that the number of daily visits increased significantly the week the public hearing was held.

Figure 1 depicts the number of visits that occurred each week during this timeframe. As aforementioned, the number of visits peaked the week that the public hearing was held. For example, on the day of the Public Hearing, 75 visitors were recorded for the website.

Figure 1 Weekly Website Visitation from April 19 through June 1

Traffic Sources

Public Hearing

10

Traffic sources are the different locations that sent visitors to the I-55 Managed Lane Project website. The following includes a description of each type of traffic source utilized as part of the Google Analytics:

• Direct Traffic: Visits from people who clicked a bookmark to come to the site or who

typed the URL directly into their browser. • Referring Sites: Visits from people who clicked to the site from another site (e.g.,

electronic advertisements or municipal websites). • Organic Search Traffic: Visits from people who clicked to the site from a search engine

result page. • Social Traffic: Visits from people search who clicked on to the site via a social media link.

Figures 2 and 3 depict the traffic source information during the Public Hearing timeframe:

Figure 2 Percentage of Visitors from Each Traffic Source

11

Figure 3 Percentage and Number of Visitors from Specific Websites

As shown in Figure 2, the highest percentage of visitors directly entered the site to the home page (73.41 percent) to the project website. Figure 3 shows that the largest percentage of visitors came from dnainfo.com/Chicago content portal at 20.38%.

Content and Page Views

A Page View is the view of an individual page on the website.

• 3,662 page views occurred during the Public Hearing timeframe. In order of the highest number of page views, the five most popular pages on the website during the Public Hearing timeframe include the information library, news & events, about the study, get involved and the FAQs (see Figure 4).

12

Figure 4 The Five Most Visited Pages within the Project Website

Visitors During the Public Hearing timeframe, 67.64 % of website visitors were New Visitors, indicating a growing visitor base. Figure 5 depicts the percentage of each type of visitor.

Figure 5 Percentage of New and Returning Visitors

13

Public Hearing- Photographs

14

15

Public Hearing Materials

Newsletter A newsletter was created for distribution at the Public Hearing. The newsletter is used as a medium to keep stakeholders informed of new project developments. A copy of the newsletter was posted to the project website and the following article topics were included within the newsletter:

• Input and Comments Needed • Environmental Assessment • Phase I Preliminary Engineering • Public Input Helped Guide the Study

Process

• Recommended Preferred Alternatives

• Express Toll Lanes • Traffic Noise Study • Next Steps

Exhibit 6 Public Hearing Newsletter Issue

1

Public HearingMay 17, 2016

22

Agenda

• Project Overview• Alternatives Development & Evaluation• Recommended Preferred Alternative• Environmental Considerations• Noise Evaluation• Next Steps

3

Project Overview

44

Typical IDOT Project Phases

smithcj

Stamp

smithcj

Typewritten Text

16

55

• Initiate stakeholder involvement

• Collect data• Analyze

existing conditions

We are Here

• Develop a summary of the transportation problems that will be addressed

• Develop alternatives

• Evaluate the effectivenessof each alternative

• Evaluate potential impacts

• Select preferred alternative(s)

• Quantify potentialimpacts

• Develop mitigation strategies

• Document findings of environmental studies

CPG Meetings Public Meetings/Hearing

Phase I Timeline

66

Study Limits: I-355 to I-90/I-9425 miles

Study Limits:I-355 to I-90/I-94

N

Communities: 16System Interchanges: 3Service Interchanges: 14

I-55 Study Area

77

Average Daily Traffic (ADT)• Year 2040 (No-Build) 200,000 to 250,000 vehicles per day• Current 140,000 to 180,000 vehicles per day

Passenger Vehicle Occupancy

• 1 passenger 83.5%• 2 passengers 13.7%• 3 or more passengers 2.8%

Trucks

• 13 – 15% of total volume

250,00000 vevehihiclcleses pperr dayaycleessss pppepeeeepeeepeeepeerrr rrrrrrrrr daaaadaadaadadadaadadaddadaayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy

Existing Traffic Characteristics

88

I-55 Bus-on-Shoulder Program

Successes:• Since inception in 2011, ridership

increased approximately 60% to 90%• On-time performance improved to nearly

90%

Limitations:• Buses can only use the shoulder for 18

miles of the 25 mile corridor• 35 mph maximum speed limit• May only use shoulder when mainline

traffic speed is less than 35 mph

99

Typical Roadway Section

40 feetApprox. 15 miles

60 feetApprox. 10 miles

1010

• Mobility and operational efficiency to adapt to changing travel demands

• Congestion management strategies to improve system performance & travel time reliability

• New travel choices supporting transit opportunities

• Sustainable transportation solutions that meets future environmental & economic needs

• Maximize use of existing facility to recognize funding constraints

Project Purpose and Need

1111

Corridor Planning Group

Elected officials

Community leaders

Community organizations

Regional planning agencies

Transit agencies

Environmental agencies

Local stakeholders

1212

• Problem Statement Created

CPG #1 October 2012

• Purpose & Need Developed

CPG #2 August 2013

• Alternatives Identified

CPG #3 January 2014

• Alternatives Evaluation

CPG #4 November 2015

• Preferred Alternative Identified

CPG #5 January 2016

Corridor Planning Group

1313

• 2 Public Meetings– PM #1 November 12, 2012– PM #2 December 8, 2015

• 171 attendees• 66 written comments • 510 on-line

survey responses Conducted Nov 11- Dec 15, 2013

15

255

Public Outreach

14

Alternatives Development &Evaluation

15

Preferred Alternative

Refinement of Alternatives

Preliminary Alternatives Analysis

Evaluation of Conceptual Alternatives

Evaluation Process

GreaterDetail We are

Here

16

Concept Alternative Screening

General Purpose Lane:• Fails to provide sustainable/reliable transportation• Does not provide alternative to stop and go traffic concerns• Eliminates Median Bus-on-Shoulder Benefit

Truck Only Lane:• Does not address congestion management• Does not maximize use of existing facility, requires complete reconstruction

of facility bridges, interchanges and I-55• Does not provide sustainable transportation solutions• Not financially feasible requires additional right-of-way to accommodate

increased foot print

Alternatives that Fail to Address Purpose and Need

17

HOV-2+ • Only carpools

• 2+ Occupants

• No Toll

HOV-3+ • Only carpools

• 3+ Occupants

• No Toll

HOT-2+ • 2+ Occupants

Ride Free

• Single Occupants Vehicles

Pay Toll

HOT-3+ • 3+ Occupants

Ride Free

• Single and 2 Occupants Vehicles Pay Toll

ETL• All Vehicles Pay

3

$

2

$

$

$

3

2

2

4

$

33

4

3

Alternatives Carried Forward

18

Alternatives Evaluation Summary

PROJECT GOALS & OBJECTIVES

HOV LANES HOT LANES

EXPRESS TOLL LANES2 or more

occupants 3 or more occupants

2 or more occupants

3 or more occupants

Travel Performance

Consumer Benefits

Sustainability

HOV LANES HOT LANES

2 or more occupants

3 or moreoccupants

2 or more occupants

3 or moreoccupants

EXPRESS TOLL LANES

19

• Time savingsETL - 10 to 15 minutes time savings in AM and PM Peak

Existing Free Lanes - 5 to 10 minutes time savings

• Person throughput – 11-14% Increase

• Greatest Ability to control congestion• Best accommodates Pace bus service• Ease of Enforcement• Compatible with regional

tolling technology

Express Toll Lane (ETL): Best Addresses Corridor Needs

Preferred Alternative

20

Express Toll Lane Before and After

21

Continuous Access

Controlled Access

Traffic

Flow

Traffic

Flow

Managed Lane Access

22

Active Traffic Management Strategies (ATMS)

22

• Dynamic message signs relay real time information to drivers about traffic conditions

• Redirecting traffic with arrows and x’s over each lane

• Provides opportunity to close lanes as needed for incidents or maintenance

23

Environmental Considerations

2424

Study Process: What is NEPA?

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)

• Federal act to ensure consideration of impacts to natural/social/built environment

• Facilitates open and transparent study process

2525

Environmental Assessment

• Purpose and Need

• Alternatives Considered

– Build: Express Toll Lane (ETL)

– No Build: Existing freeway

• Preferred Alternative

• Environmental Impacts

2626262626

Key Environmental Issue Areas Reviewed

• Air Quality

• Water Quality

• Natural Resources

• Cultural Resources

• Traffic Noise

2727

Air Quality

By the year 2040:• Significant decrease in emissions as

compared to No-Build

• Vehicle emission are reduced up to 5% with the ETL

• Benefits are consistent with the reduction in Vehicle Hours Traveled (VHT) and speed improvement from ETL

2828

Water Quality

• 110 local drainage outfalls– Detentions Facilities– Defined Channels– Intercepting Sewer– Roadway ditches or non-defined outlets

• 8 stream/river crossing along corridor– Existing median enclosed at all locations– No widening at all locations

2929

Water Quality Best Management Practices (BMPs)

BMPs benefit water

resources:

• Flood control

• Filters pollutants

• Provides storm water

retention

3030

Natural Resources

Evaluation includes a review of:

• Threatened & endangered species

• Wetlands

• Floodplains

• Illinois Natural Areas Inventory Sites (INAI)

3131

Cultural ResourcesNational Historic Preservation Act

Section 106 requires consideration of project impacts on historic architectural and archeological resources.

No adverse effects were identified

14 resources identified in the corridor

5were not

eligible

7were eligible

2in the

National Register

of Historic Places

32

Noise Analysis Overview

33

Public Meeting #2 Public Hearing

Data Collection & Evaluation of Existing

Conditions

Identify Noise

Impacts

Evaluate Potential

Noise Abatement Solutions

Stakeholder Outreach

Viewpoint Solicitation

Final Noise Abatement Solutions Identified

2016

Alternative Development & Evaluation Preferred Alternative Development Complete Environmental Documentation

Fall 2015 Winter 2016 Spring 2016

We are Here

Traffic Noise Impacts Evaluation

34

A receptor is an outdoor area of frequent human use along I-55

that is analyzed for noise

impacts due to the project.

Golf Course

Residential

Forest Preserve

Identify Noise Receptors

35

CATEGORY A:Serene lands - rarely applies. (e.g.: Tomb of the Unknown Solider)

CATEGORY B: Residential

CATEGORY C: Hospitals, schools, places of worship, parks

CATEGORY D*: Hospitals, libraries, places of worship, institutions, schools

CATEGORY E: Hotels, offices, restaurants

No Established NAC

CATEGORY F:Agricultural,

industrial, retail, utilities

CATEGORY G:Undeveloped lands

*Interior noise, to be studied only after exterior is studied, or if noise abatement is not feasible and reasonable

FHWA Noise Abatement Criteria (NAC)

36

Common Noise Levels

37

Feasibility:• Must achieve at least a 5 decibel traffic

noise reduction

• Must be feasible to construct

Reasonableness:• In general, noise abatement must be less

than $24,000* per benefited receptor

• Must achieve at least an 8 decibel reduction at a benefited receptor *Adjustment factors can

increase the allowable cost per benefited receptor.

Feasibility & Reasonableness Policy

38

Proposed Noise Walls

• 17 noise walls studied• 13 walls were

feasible/reasonable• Wall heights range from

10 to 18 feet• 11 miles of potential new

noise wall

Recommended WallsDetermined after the viewpoint solicitation

alllssnt solicitation

39

Benefited Receptors Rental properties: One vote for tenant, one vote for owner (per unit)

Receptors that share property line with I-55receive TWO (2) VOTESBenefited Receptors will be contacted up to Two (2) times to maximize response rate

RESPONSE GOAL OF 33%of benefited receptors per proposed barrier

If more than half of the votes are in favor of a barrier, the proposed abatement measure will be likely to be implemented

Viewpoint Solicitation

40

Next Steps

41

• Compile viewpoint results • Mail second viewpoint solicitation if a

33% response rate is not reached• Determine recommended walls• Address comments received on the

Environmental Assessment• Anticipate a Finding of No Significant

Impact (FONSI)

Next Steps

42

A Forum is taking place at 6:00 pm. If you would like to make a public statement on this project, please fill out a speakers card and return it to a study team member.

Public Comment

43

We Want to Hear from You!

• Written comment forms• Leave a comment with the court reporter• Online comment forms on the project

website

Comments received by June 1, 2016 will become part of the public hearing record.

44

Please visit the exhibit room and meet with study team members

Thank you for attending!

Appendix A: Written Comments Submitted at Public Hearing

Record Date Individual Comment/Question Response

5/17/2016

Bill Molony Adding Capacity to I-55 will result in attracting more traffic to I-55, resulting in very little

improvement in travel times. The Metra service line most closely parallel to I-55 is the Heritage

Corridor - the Metra line with the least train frequencies. By doubling or even tripling the number of

train frequencies in the Heritage Corridor, the demand for capacity on I-55 will be greatly diminished.

It simply is not possible to out-build the demand for highway traffic.

Your comment has been incorporated into the project record and has been made part of the EA

document. We would like to note that the addition of a general purpose was evaluated and later

dismissed due to elimination of the Bus-on-Shoulder program, limitation of travel choices, and

failing to provide a sustainable transportation system. Traffic projections indicate that by 2040

operations along 90% of the corridor would fail if this alternative were selected. However, the

addition of a managed lane will increase the capacity of the overall roadway with the greatest

ability to manage congestion. Based on our analysis, with the introduction of the managed lane, the

general purpose (free) lanes would also experience reduced congestion and travel time savings.

In terms of additional capacity on the Metra Heritage Corridor Service which generally parallels I-55,

the Heritage corridor is constrained by track capacity and operates a limited peak hour service. It is

not a reasonable alternative to address the needs along the I-55 corridor.

5/17/2016

Tom

Kerrins

Not sure my home would have a benefit 8818 Carlisle Ct., Darien. I am willing to support whatever

neighbors want, most are in favor now. Some concerns are, 1) snow removal by area B3/R7 2) top of

wall curving toward I-55 to push noise back to roadway.


document. We would like to note that due to Federal Highway Administration’s (FHWA) regulations,

noise analyses are required on many of IDOT projects, often resulting in noise walls. No concerns or

issues have been identified in terms of snow removal in areas adjacent to noise walls.

FHWA has conducted research on various noise barrier caps for the purpose of shortening barrier

heights, but attaining similar sound deadening or reduction in results to those of a taller barrier. The

analysis found that curved top barriers do not have substantial benefits and are not recommended,

unless an absorptive treatment was incorporated into the barrier tops. Additional information on

FHWA’s analysis can be found at

http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/noise/noise_barriers/design_construction/design/design03

.cfm

5/17/2016 Nicole

Taylor

First, thank you for the proposed noise walls. Due to ash borer infestation, trees that previously

deflected noise are no longer available. Please install drainage structures under the noise wall at 71st

Place + Willow Springs to prevent new and abate existing drainage problems.


document. We would like to note that the final design and placement of the proposed noise walls

along the I-55 corridor will be completed as part of contract plan preparation (Phase II). The

Proposed Drainage Plan and corresponding Location Drainage Study propose to maintain the

existing drainage patterns around the proposed noise walls.

Specifically at this location, residences sit on top of an embankment and surface drains north to I-

55. The proposed improvements to the existing ditches may alleviate your current surface runoff

issues; however the final design of the system will be completed during contract plan preparation.

5/17/2016 Mary

Simpson

I want a wall – I am entitled because folks around me are getting or some already have a wall. I want

or rather demand another noise test during peak hours. You are discriminating against me because I

am a poor old lady whit widow on a fixed income and obviously with no brains because I put up with

being pushed around. Fix your broken down fence along 71st.


document. We would like to note that as part of this project, in conformance with FHWA

requirements contained in Title 23 Code of Federal Regulations Part 772, the Department

conducted a highway traffic noise study which evaluated noise impacts within the project study

limits. In order for a noise abatement measure to be constructed, it must meet both the feasibility

and reasonableness criteria. Feasibility requires achievement of at least a 5 decibel traffic noise

reduction at an impacted receptor. Reasonability is determined based on achieving three evaluation

criteria which are the noise reduction design goal, cost effectiveness of the noise barrier (cost per

benefitted receptor), and viewpoints of benefitted receptors. A benefitted receptor is defined as a

recipient of a noticeable (five decibels or more) reduction in noise level as a result of the proposed

wall. The B17 noise barrier was the barrier evaluated in your area. The analysis indicated that the proposed B17 noise wall did not meet the cost-effective (not reasonable) criteria and was therefore eliminated from further consideration. The Department will pursue opportunities to enhance the overall project including improvement of the landscape within the project corridor.

5/17/2016 John Yonan Cook County Dept of Transportation is very excited about this new innovative financing package to bring congestion relief on a key link between Will County and the large population of people & businesses in Cook County, a project like this is a welcomed idea that we would like to see built in the near future. Please count on our support from off system improvements to working with local municipalities, we stand as a partner with IDOT on such a great project as this.

Thank you for your comment. The Department’s goal is to provide an effective way to improve corridor performance. We appreciate your support of the I-55 Managed Lane project and look forward to your continued participation.

smithcj

Rectangle

smithcj

Rectangle

smithcj

Rectangle

smithcj

Rectangle

smithcj

Rectangle

smithcj

Rectangle

smithcj

Rectangle

Appendix B: Transcripts of Comments Provided During

Public Hearing

Record Date Individual Comment/Question Response 5/17/2016 Christine

Spitkovsky Hello. My name is Christine Spitkovsky. I live at 7103 Pleasantdale Court in Countryside, Illinois 60525. And my comment is they are proposing putting up a sound wall and that might be a good thing, but I'm very concerned about losing the natural green space that exists there now. I think they are going to put the – from the plans it looks like they are going to put the sound wall up in front of the natural green space and I am hoping if they do do that, that they will replace the greenery that was once there.

Your comment has been incorporated into the project record and has been made part of the EA document. We would like to note that IDOT will pursue opportunities for providing replacement trees where trees must be removed as well as opportunities to enhance the overall project. All trees and other plants removed for construction will be replaced as stated in Departmental Policy D&E-18, “Preservation and Replacement of Trees”. Any additional landscaping opportunities beyond IDOT’s standard practice may be incorporated contingent upon local cost participation and maintenance.

5/17/2016 Gary Baker My name is Gary Baker, B-a-k-e-r. I work for Amec Foster Wheeler, which is a consulting engineering firm, and I would like to commend the Department and the State on considering alternative congestion management methods that have been successful elsewhere in the country and also alternative financing methods which we all know how difficult it is for the states to finance major projects. As a consultant, I would hope though that our legislators would consider qualification-based selection for the engineering portion of the work.

Your comment has been incorporated into the project record and has been made part of the EA document.

5/17/2016 Joseph O’Shea

My name is Joseph O'Shea, O'-S-h-e-a, and my question is considering that the census bureau has only projected that the population of the midwest, including Illinois, will grow by about 6 percent in the next 20 some odd years, on what basis does IDOT say that the traffic on I-55 will increase by I think it's about 60 percent based on 140,000 to 240,000 which is about roughly 60 percent and with the increase in lane capacity of 33 percent be adequate to handle the projected increase. I know it's two questions in one.

Your comment has been incorporated into the project record and has been made part of the EA document. Traffic projections were based upon coordination with Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning (CMAP) which is the regional planning organization for the seven-county region of northeastern Illinois which includes the counties of Cook, DuPage, Kane, Kendall, Lake, McHenry, and Will. As part of their GO TO 2040 comprehensive regional plan, CMAP modeled population, employment and land use trends necessary to evaluate future transportation needs. Traffic projections were based on CMAP’s analysis of population growth trends of Chicago. More information can be found at http://www.cmap.illinois.gov/data/demographics/population-forecast. Based on our analysis, adding capacity to the corridor in the form of a general purpose lane will result in 90% failure of the corridor by 2040. The implementation of a managed lane will provide an effective way to improve corridor performance within the existing footprint. Due to infrastructure limitations, providing additional capacity beyond the proposed managed lane (one in each direction) is not financially feasible as it would require reconstruction of a significant number of structures along the study corridor.

5/17/2016 Bill Molony My name is Bill Molony. I live in the city of Lockport, Will county. When I look at this presentation, IDOT seems to be very eager to add capacity to Interstate 55 which in my opinion is simply going to bring more traffic and fill that capacity in a relatively short time. IDOT doesn't seem to even consider adding any capacity to the mostly closely parallel Metra computer rail lines. The Metra- Heritage corridor runs along Metra service corridors is the least train frequency: Three in in the morning, four out in the evening and on weekdays no midday, no weekend service. By adding capacity in the Heritage corridor, possibly on the Burlington, I think you would reduce the demand for the traffic. Instead of catering to the motorist, it's become very apparent that this current younger generation they would rather not drive, they would rather take the train or use public transportation. By adding capacity doubling or even tripling the train frequency on the Heritage corridor, I think you will reduce and minimize the demand for increased vehicular traffic on Interstate 55 at a far less expense.

Your comment has been incorporated into the project record and has been made part of the EA document. We would like to note that the addition of a managed lane will increase the capacity of the overall roadway; however based on our analysis, the general purpose (free) lanes would experience reduced congestion and travel time savings. In terms of additional capacity on the Metra Heritage Corridor Service which generally parallels I-55, the Heritage corridor is constrained by track capacity and can only operate a limited peak hour service. It is not a reasonable alternative to address the needs along the I-55 corridor. However, when it comes to public transportation, the Bus-on-Shoulder program was introduced to the I-55 corridor by Pace in 2011 as a pilot program. Pace has indicated that with the program’s implementation their on-time performance improved from 60% to over 90% and has experienced up to 150% growth in ridership. Currently, Pace buses may only access the existing shoulder for only 15 miles or 65% of the 25 mile corridor due to geometric constraints. In addition, the shoulder may only be utilized when general traffic is moving at less than 35 miles per hour (mph), and buses shall not exceed the speed of mainline traffic by more than 15 mph with the maximum speed being 35 mph. Upon project completion, Pace buses

http://www.cmap.illinois.gov/data/demographics/population-forecast

http://www.cmap.illinois.gov/data/demographics/population-forecast

will be able to ride in the 25 mile long managed lane of I-55 from I-355 to I-94 without the operational restrictions present in the current I-55 Bus-on-Shoulder program. As a result, the proposed managed lane will noticeably enhance transit within the corridor by further improving travel times and on-time performance of the Pace bus service along I-55.

5/17/2016 Kathleen Rush

Kathleen Rush, R-u-s-h. I'm the village administrative for the village of Woodridge. We would like to include in the public record that if the project proceeds, the village of Woodridge feels it's very important to mitigate any environmental issues that arise, including any noise mitigation which would include sound walls. Thank you.

Your comment has been incorporated into the project record and has been made part of the EA document. At this time the noise wall voting period has concluded, and the proposed B1 noise wall located north of I-55 between Woodward Ave and Lemont Road in the Village of Woodridge is likely to be implemented as part of the proposed improvements contingent upon more detailed engineering analysis. The noise wall voting results are available on the project website at http://www.i55managedlaneproject.org/.

5/17/2016 Charles Sahs

First name is Charles Sahs, S-a-h-s, and I live on Andrus Road. And I'm very much in favor of this project and I have been there 60 years so I can tell you the difference between then and now if my memory is that good. Also, I can tell the difference in my home the dirt that the road creates. I'm probably an eighth of a mile back from the highway on Andrus Road but today we go from heat to air-conditioning mainly because of the road noise. If the wind is from the northwest, it sounds like they are coming down Andrus Road. So that's my comment.

Thank you for your comment and your vote on the proposed B3 noise wall located north of I-55 between Lemont Road and Cass Avenue. At this time the noise wall voting period has concluded, and the B3 noise wall is likely to be implemented as part of the proposed improvements contingent upon more detailed engineering analysis. The noise wall voting results are available on the project website at http://www.i55managedlaneproject.org/.

5/17/2016 Dave May My name is Dave May. I live at 400 8th Avenue in LaGrange. I used to live at Route 83 and I-55. I moved there in 1980 and I had an office at Archer and Western so I'd drive to work from Route 83 down to California. Back in 1980, in the early '80s, if I got out of bed on time and hit the road by 7 o'clock, the speed was the speed limit. And for years then things got worse and worse. In the '90s, I wrote several letters to politicians suggesting that since it was clear the CTA was never going to build a line down the middle of the Stevenson in that huge median, that they ought to build some lanes there. Of course nobody ever responded to my letters. It's nice to see that that concept now is being discussed here. Part of the problem is insufficient funding. Our gas tax is not indexed to inflation so we are going to have less money every year to spend on highway transportation projects and in addition, IDOT'S district one portion is too small. Instead of paying an additional 5 or 10 cents per gallon, commuters sit in traffic for an extra hour every day which is a stupid tradeoff and now we still don't have enough money so we have to build another tollway with these express lanes which seems to only happen in northeastern Illinois not in the rest of the state. As someone else said, I suggest that although this particular study does not look at other transportation improvements to reduce Stevenson traffic congestion and delay, they still should be considered by IDOT and CMAP, especially improving Metra transit options. There should be additional traffic sightings on the Heritage corridor to allow more frequent and reliable Metra service, a new Heritage corridor station at Cicero as part of a transit-oriented development of the former CHA LeClaire Courts property, a station that should have shuttle bus service to Midway for airport workers and travelers. There should be additional trains and improved speed and frequency on the southwest service and improved scheduling and speed on the Rock Island line to attract more commuters from the Homer Glen and New Lenox areas. Also Metra should experiment with running small electric station cars with small parking stalls to B and M stations to commuters, focusing on residents of the area north of I-55 between Route 83 and Route 30.

Your comment has been incorporated into the project record and has been made part of the EA document. We would like to note that the implementation of a managed lane within the existing median in conjunction with active traffic management technologies will provide options to adapt to frequently changing traffic conditions across all lanes, and provide a sustainable transportation solution. In addition, the general purpose (free) lanes will also experience reduced congestion and travel time savings. In terms of additional capacity on the Metra Heritage Corridor Service which generally parallels I-55, the Heritage corridor is constrained by track capacity, operates a limited peak hour service, and continues to be adversely impacted by conflicts with heavy rail freight service. It is not a reasonable alternative to address the needs along the I-55 corridor. I-55 is a unique corridor with a variation in distribution of origin-destination trips. The existing congestion is bidirectional; therefore implementation of an additional reversible lane would not address the congestion of the corridor as a whole. In addition, due to infrastructure limitations a third lane is not financially feasible as it would require reconstruction of a significant number of structures along the study corridor.

http://www.i55managedlaneproject.org/


Specifically as to the express lanes, I think IDOT should consider two lanes west of the Tri-State and three lanes east of the Tri-State. The three lane segment would have one reversible lane. This added lane would mostly be in the segment with the extra wide 60-foot median which is sufficient to accommodate 3, 12-foot lanes. This segment has heavier traffic than the western portion where only two extra lanes should suffice. Besides accommodating daily inbound and outbound rush-hour traffic volumes, the three-lane design would allow slow vehicles or disabled vehicle in one of the two lanes in which traffic is going in the same direction to be passed by other vehicles and not completely disrupt traffic flow, thereby traffic can maintain the expected higher speeds which will be more attractive to regular customers and it will be more attractive to investors because obstructing vehicles where you have two lanes in one direction will not scare away customers and reduce revenue as they would on the single lane of a two-lane design. Also, finally, IDOT should not expect private developers to spend a fortune to prepare a proposal if the Illinois State Toll's Highway Authority is then allowed to take over the project by matching the best private proposal. The private developers will not expend their time and money to prepare a proposal if ISTHA can then step in and do the job.

5/17/2016 Richard Jaczak

Good afternoon. My name is Rich Jaczak. I live at 1231 South Somerset Lane, Woodridge. I'm also the deputy chief of police for the Stickney police department which is north of I-55 between Harlem Avenue and Cicero. I think I can offer unique perspectives and I will be quick. Number 1. I drive I-55 every day. I have for the past 15 years putting over 200,000 miles on my vehicles. Traffic is getting worse and worse and worse. The congestion is getting worse every single day. I have been lucky most of my career I have been on the day shift and my ride takes considerably longer now than it did in 2003 when I started. Number 2. I live just off of I-55 and in my area a sound wall was built approximately 7, 8 years ago on the south end, noise is much, much louder than it ever was. I have my two children with me, who I love, they are loud. They speak up in school, at home. They are just loud in general from the noise back there. In our backyard we can't enjoy it because of the dust and everything getting kicked up from I-55. So we are very, very much in favor of the sound wall back there also. As a deputy chief of the Stickney police department, when congestion backs up, we get a lot of traffic through town. Our town is relatively small but we have two grade schools and a lot of one-way streets. We are constantly pulling over and writing tickets to people who don't necessarily deserve them but when you are going the wrong way past a school, you are going to get stopped and it's going to cost you over $200. My last point which I will bring up briefly. I respectfully disagree about mass transit. At 36 I'm not the youngest generation but I have many that work for me. They are willing to pay for convenience, not mass transit. I know myself personally if I'm going to a sporting event in downtown, I'll go to 355 and cut back and pay extra to get directly to 294. I think they would rather pay for convenience and time than actually mass transit. Thank you.

Thank you for your comment and your vote on the proposed B1 noise wall located north of I-55 between Woodward Avenue and Lemont Road. At this time the noise wall voting period has concluded, and the B1 noise wall is likely to be implemented as part of the proposed improvements contingent upon more detailed engineering analysis. The noise wall voting results are available on the project website at http://www.i55managedlaneproject.org/. In regard to traffic on local routes, based on our analysis traffic which might otherwise use I-55 is utilizing alternate parallel routes to avoid this congestion. As the addition of the managed lane adds roadway capacity, the analysis further indicates that the improved I-55 corridor will draw traffic away from the local parallel routes improving traffic flow.

5/17/2016 Lee Jepsen Lee Jepsen, J-e-p-s-e-n. I live at 10S270 Andrus Road right next to that good-looking gentleman who was up here earlier. I live one house closer to I-55 than they do. I have been at my address since 1987 so I've watched the progress, if you want to call it that, of the road noise from I-55 and the noise is terrific. We cannot sit outside. Like somebody else said, we have to use air-conditioning rather than open the windows at night and that's not a very healthy way




to live. Also, I have been now in real estate since 1989, and I can tell you that the property values are not going to remain the same if that noise level is as bad as it stays. You get out of your house in the driveway and you can immediately hear the noise of the road. I have told myself I don't know how many times, it's just the sound of the waves crashing on the shore. You try to picture yourself in a nice little vacation spot but it doesn't work. It's there. And it's definitely going to affect our property values if they don't do something to cut down the noise factor. Thank you.

In regard to property values, proximity to a highway is one of the several factors including zoning, land use planning, desirability and economic conditions that affect the determination of land values. Alleged “proximity damages” or damages suffered in common (traffic noise) by all property owners in the neighborhood are not compensable.

5/17/2016 Ivan Harrison

My name is Ivan Harrison, H-a-r-r-i-s-o-n. I live at 7518 Hamilton in Burr Ridge, Illinois. I have lived there since 1992 and my house is directly behind the Stevenson. There's nothing between the Stevenson and my house other than about a thousand feet. Since 1992, I have a large deck out back but over the years the noise level has gotten so high, that the last several years we haven't used it because we can be sitting 2, 3 feet from each other and we have to yell. We can't even talk on a cell phone because of the noise level. So the sound barriers are very important to us. The house next door to me was on the market for six or seven years and a lot of the people that looked at it that I have talked to, many of them, it's the noise level. So it is impacting the homeowners in the area. And the home values. I'm retired so I'm about to travel but I'm home more. Thank you.

Thank you for your comment and your vote on the proposed B9 noise wall located south of I-55 between Grant Street and County Line Road. At this time the noise wall voting period has concluded. The B9 noise wall achieved the 33% response rate with the majority of votes opposing construction of the wall. As such, the B9 noise wall will not be implemented. The noise wall voting results are available on the project website at http://www.i55managedlaneproject.org/. In regard to property values, proximity to a highway is one of the several factors including zoning, land use planning, desirability and economic conditions that affect the determination of land values. Alleged “proximity damages” or damages suffered in common (traffic noise) by all property owners in the neighborhood are not compensable.

5/17/2016 Tom Kerrins

My name is Tom Kerrins, K-e-r-r-i-n-s. I have lived in Darien since 1988. I live on Carlisle Court, 8818 Carlisle Court just east of the two couples that were talking before. I have a few concerns and I'm really on the fence. My property is about 20 feet above grade, the street level, so I'm not sure that a 16-foot wall is going to make much difference for me. I bought my house knowing that the Stevenson was there so it really didn't bother me in the first place. I have also worked downtown for the last 30, 40 years, whatever. One of the concerns also is the snow removal. Where the snow is going to go from the Stevenson with a limited amount of space from the roadway to the fence. Another question is the aesthetics of a wall. Frontage Road is very close to the Stevenson and I don't know if you build a wall there, what it's really going to look like. If it's going to be like a barrier or how it's going to look. The final thing is I'm not a racing fan but I'm wondering if the state ever thought about the top of the wall curving back towards the road to help the noise go back into the traffic as opposed to going towards the homes. And that's about all I have to say. Thank you.

Your comment has been incorporated into the project record and has been made part of the EA document. We would like to note that as part of this project, in conformance with FHWA requirements contained in Title 23 Code of Federal Regulations Part 772, the Department conducted a highway traffic noise study which evaluated noise impacts within the project study limits. In coordination with our Bureau of Maintenance, no concerns or issues have been identified in terms of snow removal in areas adjacent to noise walls. The standard noise wall constructed on IDOT projects exhibits an ashlar finish. An exhibit depicting this wall can be accessed thru the project website at http://i55managedlaneproject.org/information_library/ under the “Public Hearing Exhibit Boards”. In addition, FHWA has conducted research on various noise barrier caps for the purpose of shortening barrier heights, but attaining similar sound reduction to that of a taller barrier. The analysis found that curved top barriers do not have substantial benefits, unless an absorptive treatment was incorporated into the barrier tops. Additional information on FHWA’s analysis can be found at http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/noise/noise_barriers/design_construction/design/design03.cfm

5/17/2016 Jack Calo My name is Jack Calo. I live in Darien, 9004 Darien Woods Court. We moved in there in the year 2000 and our house is right on Frontage Road and I-55. It's maybe 50 feet from the highway there. And just like the others that are concerned about the noise, we are very concerned about the noise. So we are very in favor of having a sound wall installed there. There's also discussion that I have heard that they are considering only building the wall up until Kearney and we live on Darien Woods Court which is one street over from Kearney. So for us, I mean, that would be the absolute worst scenario. If there was a wall on the north side of the highway and then a wall ending right before our road, it

Thank you for your comment and your vote on the proposed B4 noise wall located south of I-55 between Lemont Road and Cass Avenue. At this time the noise wall voting period has concluded, and the B4 noise wall is likely to be implemented as part of the proposed improvements contingent upon more detailed engineering analysis. The noise wall voting results are available on the project website at http://www.i55managedlaneproject.org/. In regard to property values, proximity to a highway is one of the several factors including zoning, land use planning, desirability and economic conditions that affect the determination of land values. Alleged “proximity damages” or damages suffered in common (traffic noise) by all property owners


http://i55managedlaneproject.org/information_library/

http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/noise/noise_barriers/design_construction/design/design03.cfm

http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/noise/noise_barriers/design_construction/design/design03.cfm


seems that all the noise would just be funneled and entering our neighborhood. We have two kids. Our street and the other street in our community it's full of kids and a lot of families there and make that area even louder, be very upsetting and the noise we just feel that it will be unbearable. And, of course, like the others said, the property values would suffer and also there's a concern of safety too from the highway. Over the years randomly we will have people that are broken down on the highway hopping over and just coming into our neighborhood and stuff. Or as someone mentioned not so much for the noise wall but just for the project and improving traffic there we get cars because the highway is so backed up cars will just fly down Frontage Road and making that unsafe for us as well too.

in the neighborhood are not compensable.

5/17/2016 Jenn Jaczak Jenn Jaczak. My husband was already up here but we are going to take advantage of two speaking. I'm at 1231 South Somerset in Woodridge. One thing I wanted to just ask on the record. We had an informational meeting they said that if the project goes through, it will be done and the wall would be added later. So I know a lot of people in our neighborhood asked when we came that we advocate for the wall to be one of the first things to go up because obviously already the noise is a problem from what's currently there. So now we are going to have the noise from the traffic and the construction as well. So we would like that to be one of the first options that goes up even before that starts. I can backup what some people are saying about property values. We tried to refinance and one of the specific comments of the appraiser was the noise in our backyard. So we haven't tried to sell but just a refinance we got that listed on our thing that it was too noisy and that that was decreasing the value. So that's definitely something. And I second the fact that we keep our windows closed all the time. My kids can't sleep with the windows open. So, again, really consider that. And no matter what happens with this, I hope that the fact that all of these people are bothered by noise and while we chose to live on I-55, we did not choose for the traffic to increase. I did not choose for a wall to be built on the other side of my house. We were very investigative before we bought our property. We went morning, noon, afternoon and night several times to assess the noise and that's before there was a wall on the other side and we decided to buy without that wall and then that got put up. So, again, the wall is keen no matter what for the people that are living there for several reasons. Thank you.

Thank you for your comment and your vote on the proposed B1 noise wall located north of I-55 between Woodward Avenue and Lemont Road. At this time the noise wall voting period has concluded, and the B1 noise wall is likely to be implemented as part of the proposed improvements contingent upon more detailed engineering analysis. The noise wall voting results are available on the project website at http://www.i55managedlaneproject.org/. In regard to property values, proximity to a highway is one of the several factors including zoning, land use planning, desirability and economic conditions that affect the determination of land values. Alleged “proximity damages” or damages suffered in common (traffic noise) by all property owners in the neighborhood are not compensable.

5/17/2016 Bill Svatos My name is Bill Svagos, S-v-a-g-o-s. I moved to Burr Ridge in 1974 and you could count the cars on the Stevenson as they went by and everybody knows you can't do that now. My concern is that -- two things. One is, when I have friends over at my house, mostly in the summertime, and they will say, Is it always this loud? And I will say, You are here on a Sunday. This is our good day. You should be here during the week. Not only that, there was a home for sale south of me right next door and there was an elderly fellow and his wife were looking at the home and I was in the yard and they came up to me and they says, Is it always this noisy? I said, Unfortunately, yes, I can't lie to you. And the other instance I had is when I was walking my dog there's a big lot not too far from me right off of 75th Street and I was talking to a young fellow. He had his pickup truck and he was looking at the land. He said the same thing to me. Is it always this noisy here? And I said, I can't lie to you. It is what it is. My concern is that through the years our property value has gone downhill and nobody -- when they

Thank you for your comment and your vote on the proposed B9 noise wall located south of I-55 between Grant Street and County Line Road. At this time the noise wall voting period has concluded. The B9 noise wall achieved the 33% response rate with the majority of votes opposing construction of the wall. As such, the B9 noise wall will not be implemented. The noise wall voting results are available on the project website at http://www.i55managedlaneproject.org/. In regard to property values, proximity to a highway is one of the several factors including zoning, land use planning, desirability and economic conditions that affect the determination of land values. Alleged “proximity damages” or damages suffered in common (traffic noise) by all property owners in the neighborhood are not compensable.



do look at property near there, just as soon as they hear the noise, that's it. There's no sale. Thank you.

5/17/2016 Jacek Tyszciewicz

My name is Jacek Tyszciewicz. I live in Elgin but I have a business in Lisle. I'm not a property owner along the corridor but I'm a user of I-55 and as a business person traveling on I-55, I really do need to have congestion relief. Again, there's many, many people and like everybody said, gentleman previously, basically said that when he moved in, they could count the cars and now it's congested. And my perspective as a user of I-55 and I'd like to see something done. We have managed lanes or we have the bus on shoulder lanes. It seems like it's wide enough to be able to do some improvements to be able to increase capacity, move traffic and get business people to where they need to work and that would be a good thing for my perspective as a user of the facility. So I would like to see this project done. Thank you.

Your comment has been incorporated into the project record and has been made part of the EA document.

5/17/2016 Joe Schrimpl

My name is Joe Schrimpl, and I live at 1208 South Somerset Lane, Woodridge. I'm in favor of the sound wall alongside of the Farmingdale Village community.

Thank you for your comment and your vote on the proposed B1 noise wall located north of I-55 between Woodward Avenue and Lemont Road. At this time the noise wall voting period has concluded, and the B1 noise wall is likely to be implemented as part of the proposed improvements contingent upon more detailed engineering analysis. The noise wall voting results are available on the project website at http://www.i55managedlaneproject.org/.


1 of 7 sheets KATHLEEN W. BONO, CSR 630-834-7779

1

BEFORE THE ILLINOIS

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

In the Matter of: ) ) )I-55 PHASE 1 STUDY )FROM I-355 TO I-90/94. )

Report of comments taken at the Public

Hearing of the above-entitled matter before the

Illinois Department of Transportation, at

Holiday Inn, 6201 Joliet Road, Countryside,

Illinois, on the 17th day of May, A.D. 2016, at

the hour of 4:00 p.m.

KATHLEEN W. BONO, CSR 630-834-7779 2 of 7 sheets

2

MS. SPITKOVSKY: Hello. My name is

Christine Spitkovsky. I live at 7103

Pleasantdale Court in Countryside, Illinois

60525.

And my comment is they are

proposing putting up a sound wall and that might

be a good thing, but I'm very concerned about

losing the natural green space that exists there

now. I think they are going to put the -- from

the plans it looks like they are going to put

the sound wall up in front of the natural green

space and I am hoping if they do do that, that

they will replace the greenery that was once

there.

MR. BAKER: My name is Gary Baker,

B-a-k-e-r. I work for Amec Foster Wheeler,

which is a consulting engineering firm, and I

would like to commend the Department and the

State on considering alternative congestion

management methods that have been successful

elsewhere in the country and also alternative

financing methods which we all know how

3

difficult it is for the states to finance major

projects.

As a consultant, I would hope

though that our legislators would consider

qualification-based selection for the

engineering portion of the work.

MR. O'SHEA: My name is Joseph O'Shea,

O'-S-h-e-a, and my question is considering that

the census bureau has only projected that the

population of the midwest, including Illinois, 06:05:02PM

will grow by about 6 percent in the next 20 some

odd years, on what basis does IDOT say that the

traffic on I-55 will increase by I think it's

about 60 percent based on 140,000 to 240,000

which is about roughly 60 percent and with the

increase in lane capacity of 33 percent be

adequate to handle the projected increase. I

know it's two questions in one.

MR. MOLONY: My name is Bill Molony. I

live in the city of Lockport, Will county. 06:06:14PM

When I look at this presentation,

IDOT seems to be very eager to add capacity to

4

Interstate 55 which in my opinion is simply

going to bring more traffic and fill that

capacity in a relatively short time.

IDOT doesn't seem to even consider

adding any capacity to the mostly closely

parallel Metra computer rail lines. The Metra-

Heritage corridor runs along Metra service

corridors is the least train frequency: Three

in in the morning, four out in the evening and

on weekdays no midday, no weekend service. By 06:06:54PM

adding capacity in the Heritage corridor,

possibly on the Burlington, I think you would

reduce the demand for the traffic. Instead of

catering to the motorist, it's become very

apparent that this current younger generation

they would rather not drive, they would rather

take the train or use public transportation. By

adding capacity doubling or even tripling the

train frequency on the Heritage corridor, I

think you will reduce and minimize the demand 06:07:22PM

for increased vehicular traffic on Interstate 55

at a far less expense.

5

MS. RUSH: Kathleen Rush, R-u-s-h. I'm

the village administrative for the village of

Woodridge.

We would like to include in the

public record that if the project proceeds, the

village of Woodridge feels it's very important

to mitigate any environmental issues that arise,

including any noise mitigation which would

include sound walls. Thank you.

MR. SAHS: First name is Charles Sahs, 06:09:16PM

S-a-h-s, and I live on Andrus Road. And I'm

very much in favor of this project and I have

been there 60 years so I can tell you the

difference between then and now if my memory is

that good.

Also, I can tell the difference in

my home the dirt that the road creates. I'm

probably an eighth of a mile back from the

highway on Andrus Road but today we go from heat

to air-conditioning mainly because of the road 06:09:54PM

noise. If the wind is from the northwest, it

sounds like they are coming down Andrus Road.


6

So that's my comment.

MR. MAY: My name is Dave May. I live

at 400 8th Avenue in LaGrange. I used to live

at Route 83 and I-55. I moved there in 1980 and

I had an office at Archer and Western so I'd

drive to work from Route 83 down to California.

Back in 1980, in the early '80s, if

I got out of bed on time and hit the road by 7

o'clock, the speed was the speed limit. And for

years then things got worse and worse. 06:10:56PM

In the '90s, I wrote several

letters to politicians suggesting that since it

was clear the CTA was never going to build a

line down the middle of the Stevenson in that

huge median, that they ought to build some lanes

there. Of course nobody ever responded to my

letters. It's nice to see that that concept now

is being discussed here.

Part of the problem is insufficient

funding. Our gas tax is not indexed to 06:11:22PM

inflation so we are going to have less money

every year to spend on highway transportation

7

projects and in addition, IDOT'S district one

portion is too small. Instead of paying an

additional 5 or 10 cents per gallon, commuters

sit in traffic for an extra hour every day which

is a stupid tradeoff and now we still don't have

enough money so we have to build another tollway

with these express lanes which seems to only

happen in northeastern Illinois not in the rest

of the state.

As someone else said, I suggest 06:11:56PM

that although this particular study does not

look at other transportation improvements to

reduce Stevenson traffic congestion and delay,

they still should be considered by IDOT and

CMAT, especially improving Metra transit

options.

There should be additional traffic

sightings on the Heritage corridor to allow more

frequent and reliable Metra service, a new

Heritage corridor station at Cicero as part of a 06:12:20PM

transit-oriented development of the former CHA

LeClaire Courts property, a station that should

8

have shuttle bus service to Midway for airport

workers and travelers. There should be

additional trains and improved speed and

frequency on the southwest service and improved

scheduling and speed on the Rock Island line to

attract more commuters from the Homer Glen and

New Lenox areas. Also Metra should experiment

with running small electric station cars with

small parking stalls to B and M stations to

commuters, focusing on residents of the area 06:12:50PM

north of I-55 between Route 83 and Route 30.

Specifically as to the express

lanes, I think IDOT should consider two lanes

west of the Tri-State and three lanes east of

the Tri-State. The three lane segment would

have one reversible lane. This added lane would

mostly be in the segment with the extra wide

60-foot median which is sufficient to

accommodate 3, 12-foot lanes. This segment has

heavier traffic than the western portion where 06:13:18PM

only two extra lanes should suffice. Besides

accommodating daily inbound and outbound rush-

9

hour traffic volumes, the three-lane design

would allow slow vehicles or disabled vehicle in

one of the two lanes in which traffic is going

in the same direction to be passed by other

vehicles and not completely disrupt traffic

flow, thereby traffic can maintain the expected

higher speeds which will be more attractive to

regular customers and it will be more attractive

to investors because obstructing vehicles where

you have two lanes in one direction will not 06:13:54PM

scare away customers and reduce revenue as they

would on the single lane of a two-lane design.

Also, finally, IDOT should not

expect private developers to spend a fortune to

prepare a proposal if the Illinois State Toll's

Highway Authority is then allowed to take over

the project by matching the best private

proposal. The private developers will not

expend their time and money to prepare a

proposal if ISTHA can then step in and do the 06:14:22PM

job.

MR. JACZAK: Good afternoon. My name


10

is Rich Jaczak. I live at 1231 South Somerset

Lane, Woodridge. I'm also the deputy chief of

police for the Stickney police department which

is north of I-55 between Harlem Avenue and

Cicero. I think I can offer unique perspectives

and I will be quick.

Number 1. I drive I-55 every day.

I have for the past 15 years putting over

200,000 miles on my vehicles. Traffic is

getting worse and worse and worse. The 06:15:30PM

congestion is getting worse every single day. I

have been lucky most of my career I have been on

the day shift and my ride takes considerably

longer now than it did in 2003 when I started.

Number 2. I live just off of I-55

and in my area a sound wall was built

approximately 7, 8 years ago on the south end,

noise is much, much louder than it ever was. I

have my two children with me, who I love, they

are loud. They speak up in school, at home. 06:15:58PM

They are just loud in general from the noise

back there. In our backyard we can't enjoy it

11

because of the dust and everything getting

kicked up from I-55. So we are very, very much

in favor of the sound wall back there also.

As a deputy chief of the Stickney

police department, when congestion backs up, we

get a lot of traffic through town. Our town is

relatively small but we have two grade schools

and a lot of one-way streets. We are constantly

pulling over and writing tickets to people who

don't necessarily deserve them but when you are 06:16:22PM

going the wrong way past a school, you are going

to get stopped and it's going to cost you over

$200.

My last point which I will bring up

briefly. I respectfully disagree about mass

transit. At 36 I'm not the youngest generation

but I have many that work for me. They are

willing to pay for convenience, not mass

transit.

I know myself personally if I'm 06:16:44PM

going to a sporting event in downtown, I'll go

to 355 and cut back and pay extra to get

12

directly to 294. I think they would rather pay

for convenience and time than actually mass

transit. Thank you.

MS. JEPSEN: Lee Jepsen, J-e-p-s-e-n.

I live at 10S270 Andrus Road right next to that

good-looking gentleman who was up here earlier.

I live one house closer to I-55 than they do.

I have been at my address since

1987 so I've watched the progress, if you want

to call it that, of the road noise from I-55 and 06:17:38PM

the noise is terrific. We cannot sit outside.

Like somebody else said, we have to use

air-conditioning rather than open the windows at

night and that's not a very healthy way to live.

Also, I have been now in real

estate since 1989, and I can tell you that the

property values are not going to remain the same

if that noise level is as bad as it stays. You

get out of your house in the driveway and you

can immediately hear the noise of the road. I 06:18:16PM

have told myself I don't know how many times,

it's just the sound of the waves crashing on the

13

shore. You try to picture yourself in a nice

little vacation spot but it doesn't work. It's

there. And it's definitely going to affect our

property values if they don't do something to

cut down the noise factor. Thank you.

MR. HARRISON: My name is Ivan

Harrison, H-a-r-r-i-s-o-n. I live at 7518

Hamilton in Burr Ridge, Illinois. I have lived

there since 1992 and my house is directly behind

the Stevenson. There's nothing between the 06:19:30PM

Stevenson and my house other than about a

thousand feet.

Since 1992, I have a large deck out

back but over the years the noise level has

gotten so high, that the last several years we

haven't used it because we can be sitting 2,

3 feet from each other and we have to yell. We

can't even talk on a cell phone because of the

noise level. So the sound barriers are very

important to us. 06:20:00PM

The house next door to me was on

the market for six or seven years and a lot of


14

the people that looked at it that I have talked

to, many of them, it's the noise level. So it

is impacting the homeowners in the area. And

the home values. I'm retired so I'm about to

travel but I'm home more. Thank you.

MR. KERRINS: My name is Tom Kerrins,

K-e-r-r-i-n-s. I have lived in Darien since

1988. I live on Carlisle Court, 8818 Carlisle

Court just east of the two couples that were

talking before. 06:21:16PM

I have a few concerns and I'm

really on the fence. My property is about 20

feet above grade, the street level, so I'm not

sure that a 16-foot wall is going to make much

difference for me. I bought my house knowing

that the Stevenson was there so it really didn't

bother me in the first place. I have also

worked downtown for the last 30, 40 years,

whatever.

One of the concerns also is the 06:21:40PM

snow removal. Where the snow is going to go

from the Stevenson with a limited amount of

15

space from the roadway to the fence.

Another question is the aesthetics

of a wall. Frontage Road is very close to the

Stevenson and I don't know if you build a wall

there, what it's really going to look like. If

it's going to be like a barrier or how it's

going to look.

The final thing is I'm not a racing

fan but I'm wondering if the state ever thought

about the top of the wall curving back towards 06:22:16PM

the road to help the noise go back into the

traffic as opposed to going towards the homes.

And that's about all I have to say. Thank you.

MR. CALO: My name is Jack Calo. I

live in Darien, 9004 Darien Woods Court. We

moved in there in the year 2000 and our house is

right on Frontage Road and I-55. It's maybe

50 feet from the highway there.

And just like the others that are

concerned about the noise, we are very concerned 06:23:18PM

about the noise. So we are very in favor of

having a sound wall installed there.

16

There's also discussion that I have

heard that they are considering only building

the wall up until Kearney and we live on Darien

Woods Court which is one street over from

Kearney. So for us, I mean, that would be the

absolute worst scenario.

If there was a wall on the north

side of the highway and then a wall ending right

before our road, it seems that all the noise

would just be funneled and entering our 06:23:58PM

neighborhood.

We have two kids. Our street and

the other street in our community it's full of

kids and a lot of families there and make that

area even louder, be very upsetting and the

noise we just feel that it will be unbearable.

And, of course, like the others

said, the property values would suffer and also

there's a concern of safety too from the

highway. 06:24:48PM

Over the years randomly we will

have people that are broken down on the highway

17

hopping over and just coming into our

neighborhood and stuff. Or as someone mentioned

not so much for the noise wall but just for the

project and improving traffic there we get cars

because the highway is so backed up cars will

just fly down Frontage Road and making that

unsafe for us as well too.

MS. JACZAK: Jenn Jaczak. My husband

was already up here but we are going to take

advantage of two speaking. I'm at 1231 South 06:25:46PM

Somerset in Woodridge.

One thing I wanted to just ask on

the record. We had an informational meeting

they said that if the project goes through, it

will be done and the wall would be added later.

So I know a lot of people in our neighborhood

asked when we came that we advocate for the wall

to be one of the first things to go up because

obviously already the noise is a problem from

what's currently there. So now we are going to 06:26:12PM

have the noise from the traffic and the

construction as well. So we would like that to


18

be one of the first options that goes up even

before that starts.

I can backup what some people are

saying about property values. We tried to

refinance and one of the specific comments of

the appraiser was the noise in our backyard. So

we haven't tried to sell but just a refinance we

got that listed on our thing that it was too

noisy and that that was decreasing the value.

So that's definitely something. 06:26:48PM

And I second the fact that we keep

our windows closed all the time. My kids can't

sleep with the windows open. So, again, really

consider that. And no matter what happens with

this, I hope that the fact that all of these

people are bothered by noise and while we chose

to live on I-55, we did not choose for the

traffic to increase. I did not choose for a

wall to be built on the other side of my house.

We were very investigative before we bought our 06:27:08PM

property. We went morning, noon, afternoon and

night several times to assess the noise and

19

that's before there was a wall on the other side

and we decided to buy without that wall and then

that got put up. So, again, the wall is keen no

matter what for the people that are living there

for several reasons. Thank you.

MR. SVAGOS: My name is Bill Svagos,

S-v-a-g-o-s. I moved to Burr Ridge in 1974 and

you could count the cars on the Stevenson as

they went by and everybody knows you can't do

that now. 06:28:02PM

My concern is that -- two things.

One is, when I have friends over at my house,

mostly in the summertime, and they will say, Is

it always this loud? And I will say, You are

here on a Sunday. This is our good day. You

should be here during the week.

Not only that, there was a home for

sale south of me right next door and there was

an elderly fellow and his wife were looking at

the home and I was in the yard and they came up 06:28:30PM

to me and they says, Is it always this noisy? I

said, Unfortunately, yes, I can't lie to you.

20

And the other instance I had is

when I was walking my dog there's a big lot not

too far from me right off of 75th Street and I

was talking to a young fellow. He had his

pickup truck and he was looking at the land. He

said the same thing to me. Is it always this

noisy here? And I said, I can't lie to you. It

is what it is.

My concern is that through the

years our property value has gone downhill and 06:29:04PM

nobody -- when they do look at property near

there, just as soon as they hear the noise,

that's it. There's no sale. Thank you.

MR. TYSZCIEWICZ: My name is Jacek

Tyszciewicz. I live in Elgin but I have a

business in Lisle. I'm not a property owner

along the corridor but I'm a user of I-55 and as

a business person traveling on I-55, I really do

need to have congestion relief.

Again, there's many, many people 06:30:02PM

and like everybody said, gentleman previously,

basically said that when he moved in, they could

21

count the cars and now it's congested. And my

perspective as a user of I-55 and I'd like to

see something done. We have managed lanes or we

have the bus on shoulder lanes. It seems like

it's wide enough to be able to do some

improvements to be able to increase capacity,

move traffic and get business people to where

they need to work and that would be a good thing

for my perspective as a user of the facility.

So I would like to see this project done. Thank 06:30:38PM

you.

MR. SCHRIMPL: My name is Joe Schrimpl,

and I live at 1208 South Somerset Lane,

Woodridge.

I'm in favor of the sound wall

alongside of the Farmingdale Village community.

KATHLEEN W. BONO, CSR, LIMITED630-834-7779

22

STATE OF ILLINOIS )) ss:

COUNTY OF DU PAGE )

I, KATHLEEN W. BONO, Certified

Shorthand Reporter, Notary Public in and for the

County DuPage, State of Illinois, do hereby

certify that the comments given to me was

reduced to writing by means of shorthand and

thereafter transcribed into typewritten form;

and that the foregoing is a true, correct and

complete transcript of my shorthand notes so

taken aforesaid.

IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF I have

hereunto set my hand and affixed my notarial

seal this 24th day of May, A.D. 2016.

_________________________KATHLEEN W. BONO,C.S.R. No. 84-1423,Notary Public, DuPage County237 South Wisconsin Avenue,Addison, IL 60101-3837

Appendix C: Comments Submitted via Mail

Record Date Agency/ Individual Response

5/17/2016

Forest Preserve District of DuPage County – Kevin Stough

The Forest Preserve District of DuPage County recently received a Notice of Public Hearing regarding the Illinois Department of Transportation's I-55 Managed Lane Project. We appreciate receiving notification of such hearings that may have an impact on our property. On April14, 2016, Forest Preserve District staff met with IDOT to discuss potential impacts of this project on Forest Preserve District property at Waterfall Glen and Oak Grove Forest Preserves. At this meeting, the following items were discussed: 1) Grading operations and vegetation management within the lDOT ROW contributes to the spread of invasive species. The District requested that IDOT consider performing removal of invasive species within the project corridor to avoid their spread into the District's forest preserves. 2) The District would like to be allowed the opportunity to comment on the plant species that will be installed in the ROW near our preserves and part of any proposed mitigation/BMP requirements for grading occurring within wetlands/native areas in the ROW. 3) Certain portions of District property were inadvertently omitted as a benefitted receptor of a noise barrier. These portions are located near County line Road, near Oak Grove Forest Preserve and between Cass Avenue and Clarendon Hills Road near Waterfall Glen Forest Preserve. Maps are attached which identify these areas. Please include the District as a benefitted receptor as it relates to the aforementioned locations. Thank you for meeting with us on April 14th to discuss the project, and we request the opportunity to review and comment on any future revisions that may affect District property.

This is in follow-up to our April 14, 2016 meeting and your May 17, 2016 letter as well as comments concerning the Illinois Department of Transportation’s (IDOT) preliminary engineering and environmental (Phase I) study of Interstate 55 (I-55) from Interstate 355 (I-355) to Interstate 90/94 (I-90/94). IDOT offers the following responses: 1. At this time, IDOT is preparing contract plans (Phase II) to conduct I-55 maintenance activities from Weber Road to County Line Road. The scope of work includes resurfacing, bridge repairs and drainage corrections. Invasive species removal is also included in the scope of this project. If you would like additional information regarding removal of invasive species, please contact Steve Lipkie in Bureau of Maintenance, Roadside Maintenance Unit, at (847) 705-4173. 2. In accordance with the Department’s Preservation and Replacement of Trees policy, the Department will pursue opportunities for providing replacement trees where trees must be removed as well as opportunities to enhance the overall project. The Department will plant replacement trees within the existing expressway right-of-way as part of a future contract for the addition of the managed lanes. A special design and construction consideration will be added to the Phase I report requesting that Phase II coordinate with you regarding the development of a landscape plan adjacent to the forest preserve property. 3. Thank you for submitting your viewpoint response form for the referenced area near County Line Road which was identified as a benefitted receptor. However, other areas identified on your exhibit did not qualify as benefitted receptors. When performing noise analysis, areas adjacent to proposed improvements are categorized according to activity type on which receptor locations are based. Per the IDOT Highway Traffic Noise Assessment Manual, forest preserves qualify as activity category C for which an exterior area where frequent human use occurs. A pavilion, bench or picnic area is considered an optimal receptor location. The identified locations near Oak Grove Forest Preserve and between Cass Avenue and Clarendon Hills Road near Waterfall Glen Forest Preserve do not appear to possess areas which qualify as suitable receptors based on the above criteria, so they were not considered in the noise analysis.

5/18/2016 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency – Kenneth A. Westlake

EPA has reviewed the draft Environmental Assessment (EA) document for the referenced project, which was prepared by the Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT) and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), pursuant to our authorities under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), Council on Environmental Quality regulations ( 40 CFR Parts 1500-1508), and Section 309 of the Clean Air Act. The proposed project involves adding an additional lane on both northbound and southbound travel directions of lnterstate 55, between I-355 and I-90/94. The additional lanes are expected to be constructed within the existing median. Eight alternatives have been proposed in the EA:

• No Build. The proposed project would not proceed;

Thank you for your May 18, 2016 letter and comments pertaining to the Environmental Assessment (EA) document for the Illinois Department of Transportation’s (IDOT) preliminary engineering and environmental (Phase I) study of Interstate 55 (I-55) from Interstate 355 (I-355) to Interstate 90/94 (I-90/94). Currently, I-55 carries 128,000 to 176,000 vehicles per day (vpd) and experiences congested conditions approximately 12 hours per day. This traffic is expected to grow up to 235,000 vpd in 2040. Based on our analysis, traffic that might otherwise use I-55 is utilizing parallel alternate routes due to this congestion. Travel along these alternate routes occurs at slower speeds and on roadways with numerous traffic flow disruptions caused by driveways. As the addition of a managed lane adds roadway capacity, our analysis indicates it will draw traffic away from adjacent

• General Purpose Lane (GPL); • Truck Only Lane (TOL); • High-Occupancy Vehicle with Two or More Occupants (HOV 2+ ); • High-Occupancy Vehicle with Three or More Occupants (HOV 3+); • High Occupancy Toll 2+ (HOT 2+); • High Occupancy Toll 3+ (HOT 3+); and • Express Toll Lane (ETL) (Preferred Alternative).

Based on our review, we have comments relating to climate change and greenhouse gas emissions, and stormwater management, as stated below. Climate Change and Greenhouse Gas Emissions The EA adequately described potential impacts for this project relating to climate change. As we understand it, the proposed action is expected to result in a decrease in air pollutants and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions when compared to the no action alternative. We recommend, though, explaining in greater detail how adding capacity to the existing infrastructure will result in reduced GHG emissions. We are pleased to see IDOT has implemented many air pollutant and GHG reduction measures into this project, including an anti-idling policy, and use of biodiesel fuel in large construction vehicles. Stormwater Management The EA explains that stormwater from the roadway surface of l-55 currently drains directly into local streams and combined sewer overflows. We understand no changes for managing stormwater are proposed. We highly encourage FHWA and IDOT to consider working closely with local, state, Federal, and citizen groups to identify potential options for constructing green stormwater features. Additionally, phytoremediation, when used in conjunction with bioretention, may be an option, given the current impairment status of many streams in the Des Plaines River, Chicago River watersheds. We are available to discuss these comments on the EA at your convenience. Please feel free to contact Mike Sedlacek of my staff at 312-886-1 765, or by email at [email protected].

parallel routes improving traffic flow and resulting in an overall reduction in emissions. Additional content discussing these results will be added to the EA Errata. The impacts to storm water were included in the EA document. In particular, chloride load and the Stochastic Empirical Loading and Dilution Model (SELDM) analyses were performed to evaluate the effects to stormwater runoff of converting the existing paved shoulders to new travel lanes that drain directly to Sawmill Creek, Flag Creek, the Des Plaines River, Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal, or Bubbly Creek. The remaining portion of I-55 within the study area did not require a storm water runoff analysis as it drains directly to the existing combined sewer system. The results of the analyses are discussed in Part VII of the EA. Concerning phytoremediation and bioretention, these types of water quality features or Best Management Practices (BMPs) can be incorporated into highway projects. Additional evaluation of incorporating BMPs into this project will be conducted during the development of the contract plans.

5/24/2016 Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning – Joseph Szabo

I applaud the high priority that the Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT) and Governor Rauner are placing on construction of a new managed lane on the I-55 Stevenson Expressway. Releasing the Environmental Assessment (EA) for public comment is an important step in the regulatory process, and our comments are as follows. As you know, the GO TO 2040 regional comprehensive plan identified the I -55 managed lane as one of the Chicago region's most important major capital projects. It addresses one of our region's most congested and unreliable stretches of expressway. The economic impact of those traffic tie-ups is magnified because this is also one of the state's most critical freight corridors. CMAP has found that, compared to other candidate projects, adding a managed lane to I-55 would be a cost-effective investment in terms of regional congestion reduction and economic impact. This project will also advance the policy established in GO TO 2040 of implementing congestion

Thank you for your May 24, 2016 letter of support regarding the Illinois Department of Transportation's (lDOT) I-55 Managed Lanes project. IDOT remains committed to supporting projects that complement transit service in the Chicago Region, in particular along state routes. The I-55 Pace bus on shoulder program is a success. Pace has indicated their on-time performance improved from 60% to over 90% and has experienced up to 150% growth in ridership. We will continue to work with Pace to ensure that this project allows them to continue this success. Upon project completion, Pace buses will be able to ride in the 25 mile long managed lane of I-55 from I-355 to I-94 without the operational restrictions present in the current I-55 bus on shoulder program. It is estimated that the Express Toll Lane will provide Pace buses an additional 10 to 15 minutes in travel time savings from I-355 to I-90/94 in the year 2040. In regard to financing for this project, IDOT recently advertised and selected a public-private

mailto:[email protected]

pricing on new expressway capacity in the Chicago region. CMAP supports operating the region's future managed lanes as Express Toll Lanes (ETL) rather than High-Occupancy Toll (HOT) or High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes. We agree with IDOT that the added complexity of pricing rules and enforcement would likely outweigh any incremental benefits of discounted tolls for HOV vehicles. Thus, CMAP supports the EA’s identification of the ETL option as the locally preferred alternative. In general, tolling will provide a new choice for travelers that would result in significant travel time savings. Our analysis at http://www.cmap.Hlinois.ogv/mobility/roads/congestion-pricing also suggests that travelers from across the income spectrum would use tolled lanes. Furthermore, unless such steps are taken to manage traffic, any new capacity on the Stevenson would erode over time, diminishing the public's investment. Managed lanes also provide opportunities to enhance transit service. The EA rightly points out how the managed lane would benefit Pace's bus-on-shoulder service. We urge the Department to indicate in the EA that it will include transit improvements in the corridor during Phase II Engineering as an integral component of the overall project, including a financial plan for providing that service. The Illinois Tollway's partnership with Pace in the expansion of the I-90 Addams Tollway is a possible model. Regarding the Stevenson, the already successful Pace bus-on-shoulder operation could be expanded while enhancing the speed and reliability of the service. Lastly, while a public-private partnership (PPP) should be explored as an innovative funding option, GO TO 2040 notes the complexity of PPP arrangements and stresses that they must be evaluated on a case-by-case basis and with a high degree of transparency and care. We urge the Department to evaluate all options, both public and private, to find the best solution to implement managed lanes on I-55. IDOT should commit to providing timely information on the finances and other details of any proposed PPP deal to ensure that it can be evaluated by stakeholders in the region. In considering innovative strategies, we urge the Department to ensure that any PPP protects the public interest and minimizes long-term financial risk to the state and region. Protecting the public interest requires not only a transparent procurement process -- including demonstration of value for money --but also ongoing public access to performance data related to the facility, interoperability of the toll facility with existing state and regional technical frameworks (namely the Tollway's I-PASS system), performance benchmarking, coordination of operations strategies with other agencies, and remediation provisions. CMAP applauds the project's inclusion of active traffic management on all lanes of the facility, but we also urge the Department to assure in the procurement process that I-55 will be operated to optimize performance in the whole corridor, not just in the managed lane. Overall, we appreciate the possibilities that the I-55 managed lanes project represents for advancing GO TO 2040 regional objectives. Your team has put significant work into a complex project, and we applaud those efforts. Our hope is that these comments will be useful to you in improving the project, and CMAP looks forward to providing assistance as the project moves forward.

partnership (PPP) advisor that will assist in making informed decisions about innovative financing strategies. Any PPP strategies would be developed and based on the Public-Private Partnerships for Transportation Act (P.A. 97-502), which among other things, requires extensive coordination with stakeholders along the corridor as well as, the General Assembly, the Commission on Government Forecasting and Accountability, Illinois Tollway, the Policy Procurement Board, and the Governor's Office of Management and Budget. Information will be shared with stakeholders as appropriate. We look forward to implementing this state of the practice facility, which will improve mobility in all lanes of I-55 and benefit all users of the corridor.

5/26/2016 Metropolitan Water Reclamation

The Metropolitan Water Reclamation District of Greater Chicago (MWRDGC) has reviewed the Environmental Assessment Report of the subject project and has the following comments:

Thank you for your May 26, 2016 letter and comments provided on the Environmental Assessment (EA) document concerning the Illinois Department of Transportation’s (Department) Preliminary Engineering and Environmental (Phase I) Study of Interstate 55 (I-55) from Interstate 355 (I-355) to

District of Greater Chicago – Catherine A. O’Connor

1. Page 70 of the report contains a table indicating that some of the stormwater from the expressway east of Harlem A venue discharges to combined sewers and not to the Chicago Sanitary Ship Canal (CSSC). Although this is the case, we recommend that rate control and best management practices be used to send this flow directly to the CSSC rather than the combined sewers. Measures to reroute stormwater flow from the combined sewer to the CSSC should be explored whenever possible. 2. Page 73 includes a table which indicates that maximum chloride loads to the waterways will be increased due to the project. We request that all avenues be pursued to lessen the impact through best management practices and other means. 3. Page 83 discusses agency coordination. lDOT staff held a meeting with the MWRDGC and the City of Chicago on March 3, 2016, but there is no mention of the meeting in the report. At this meeting, amongst other topics, a concept for diverting stormwater runoff to the CSSC instead of the combined sewer system was discussed. MWRDGC is awaiting the results of lDOT's review of this concept. 4. MWRDGC has underground facilities within the project area. All facilities must be protected and 24-hour access maintained. If you need additional information, please contact Mr. Joe Schuessler, Principal Civil Engineer, at (312) 751 -3236.

Interstate 90/94 (I-90/94). As noted in your letter, the items of your concern were previously discussed at the March 3, 2016 meeting between the Metropolitan Water Reclamation District (MWRD) and the project study team. The Department has taken note of your requests and will work to implement them to the greatest extent possible. At this time the Department offers the following responses: 1. Due to the limited project scope, all proposed improvements are limited to those that can fit within the existing footprint. In terms of disconnecting the proposed sewers from the City and MWRD sewers and rerouting them to discharge into the Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal, the Proposed Drainage Plan (PDP) will identify potential locations for future disconnects to be carried out as part of a future project. This document will be shared with the MWRD upon its completion. 2. Water quality and Best Management Practices (BMPs) are also being considered in the PDP development. However, it should be noted that due to repurposing of the grass median, opportunities for natural-type BMPs will be limited. 3. The coordination meeting which occurred on March 3, 2016, will be documented in the Errata. As mentioned in item 1, potential locations for future disconnects will be identified in the PDP and will be shared with the MWRD upon the document’s completion. 4. The existing MWRD sewers located within the existing median will remain under the final build condition, and access to them will be retained.

5/28/2016 Southwest Conference of Mayors – Vicky Matyas-Smith

The Southwest Conference of Mayors is a body of duly elected officials representing twenty-one communities in southwest suburban Cook County with a population in excess of 350,000. The Southwest Conference of Mayors (SCM) commends lDOT and Governor Rauner for placing high priority on the construction of a new managed lane on the I-55 Stevenson Expressway. The SCM would like to extends its support for the I-55 Stevenson Expressway managed lane project as well as comment on the Environmental Assessment (EA). The Chicago Metropolitan Agency's (CMAP) GO TO 2040 regional comprehensive plan identified the I-55 managed lane project as one of the Chicago region's most important major capital projects. This project would address one of our region's most congested and unreliable stretches of expressway. According to CMAP's findings, compared to other candidate projects, adding a managed lane to I-55 would be a cost-effective investment in terms of regional congestion reduction and economic impact. Managed lanes also provide opportunities to enhance transit service. The EA points out how the managed lane would benefit Pace's bus-on-shoulder service. The SCM encourages IDOT to indicate in the EA that is will include transit improvements in the corridor during Phase II Engineering as an integral component of the overall project; including a financial plan for providing that service. Lastly, while a public-private partnership (PPP) should be explored as an innovative funding option, CMAP's GO TO 2040 notes the complexity of PPP arrangements and stresses that they must be

Thank you for your May 28, 2016 letter of support regarding the Illinois Department of Transportation’s (IDOT) I-55 Managed Lanes project. IDOT remains committed to supporting projects that compliment transit service in the Chicago Region, in particular along state routes. The I-55 Pace bus on shoulder program is a success, with on-time performance improving from 60% to over 90% and up to a 150% growth in ridership. We will continue to work with Pace to ensure that this project allows them to continue this success. Upon project completion, Pace buses will be able to ride in the 25 mile long managed lane of I-55 from I-355 to I-94 without the operational restrictions present in the current I-55 bus on shoulder program. It is estimated that the Express Toll Lane will provide Pace buses an additional 10 to 15 minutes in travel time savings from I-355 to I-90/94 in the year 2040. In regard to financing for this project, IDOT recently advertised and selected a public-private partnership (PPP) advisor that will assist in making informed decisions about innovative financing strategies. Any PPP strategies would be developed and based on the Public-Private Partnerships for Transportation Act (P.A. 97-502), which, among other things, requires extensive coordination with stakeholders along the corridor as well as the General Assembly, the Commission on Government Forecasting and Accountability, Illinois Tollway, the Policy Procurement Board, and the Governor’s Office of Management and Budget. Information will be shared with stakeholders as appropriate. We look forward to implementing this state of the practice facility, which will improve mobility in all lanes of I-55 and benefit all users of the corridor.

evaluated on a case-by-case basis and with a high degree of transparency and care. The SCM encourages I DOT to explore all options, both public and private, to find the best solution to implement managed lanes on I-55. The SCM applauds I DOT for all the momentous work you have put into such a complex project and we appreciate your efforts. We thank you for considering our comments.

5/19/2016

Lawrence Necheles

Please accept this submission as my public comments regarding the proposed Managed Toll lanes on I-55. As a commuter from Pontiac, Illinois to Chicago on nearly a daily basis, I am in favor of the proposed project. I believe managed lanes would improve the capacity, efficiency and safety of the roadway. I would go one step further and propose that ALL of (Illinois) I-55 be converted into an all electronic toll road, similar to the Pennsylvania Turnpike or the Illinois Tollway. I-57 would remain "toll-free." I believe tolling I-55 would make the highway safer and enable amenities to be offered. Oasis type travel plazas could be built and maintained. The road could be illuminated in rural areas, increasing visibility. A dedicated State Police force could be funded to patrol the roadway as well as motorist assist crews. In exchange for tolls, the roadway would me meticulously maintained, free of trash and potholes. Today, the North bound right lane between Pontiac and Dwight is deteriorating like a rutted wagon trail likely due to lack of funds for major reconstruction and maintenance projects. (As a side note, the Illinois Tollway, funded exclusively through road tolls and not dependent on taxes, is reconstructing I-90, building I-390 and constructing an interchange at I-57.) Further, toll funding would enable the expansion of I-55 to three and four lanes, especially around Arsenal Road at the Center Point intermodal facility. That stretch of Interstate is clogged with truck traffic and there have been several high profile fatality collisions in that area. The bridge over the Desplaines River at Arsenal Road is antiquated and unsafe. It is narrow and there are no shoulders for breakdowns or emergencies. An efficient, safe and maintained I-55 would attract good jobs and promote new businesses. The I-88 corridor in and around the Sycamour/DeKalb area is attracting new construction and businesses due to good access. The same is taking place around the newly reconstructed I-90 corridor. As an Illinois resident I am mindful that funds are limited and needs and wants are unlimited. I am also aware that Illinois is "blessed" by good centralized geography. My State is a transportation bulwark from the I/M Canal, to the rails, to O'Hare/Midway and lately, intermodal. Managed I-55 lanes will continue that leadership. Thank you for considering my public comments.

Thank you for your input. Your comment has been incorporated into the project record and has been made part of the EA document. Any changes to interstates must get Federal Highway Administration approval and follow federal regulations. As such, the I-55 managed lane project is being developed in accordance with 23 U.S. Code Section 129: Toll roads, bridges, tunnels, and ferries which allows tolls on new facilities or new lanes on interstate and non-interstate highways, bridges or tunnels. There are other federal programs that may allow tolling existing general purpose lanes however they are rather restrictive in nature and wouldn’t necessarily apply to this facility. Furthermore, by applying tolls to general purpose lanes traffic would be diverted from the existing facility to the already congested parallel roadway network, negating any potential benefits sought by this project.

Printed 6/15/2016

Illinois Department of Tr-ansportation Office of the Secretary 2300 South Dirksen Parkway I Springfield, Illinois I 62764 Telephone 2171782-5597

June 15, 2016

Mr. Joseph Szabo Executive Director Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning 233 South Wacker Drive, Suite 800 Chicago, IL 60606

Dear Director Szabo:

Thank you for your May 24, 2016 letter of support regarding the Illinois Department of Transportation's (lOOT) 1-55 Managed Lanes project. I DOT remains committed to supporting projects that complement transit service in the Chicago Region, in particular along state routes. The 1-55 Pace bus on shoulder program is a success. Pace has indicated their on-time performance improved from 60% to over 90% and has experienced up to 150% growth in ridership. We will continue to work with Pace to ensure that this project allows them to continue this success.

Upon project completion, Pace buses will be able to ride in the 25 mile long managed lane of 1-55 from 1-355 to 1-94 without the operational restrictions present in the current 1-55 bus on shoulder program. It is estimated that the Express Toll Lane will provide Pace buses an additional10 to 15 minutes in travel time savings from 1-355 to 1-90/94 in the year 2040.

In regard to financing for this project, I DOT recently advertised and selected a public-private partnership (PPP) advisor that will assist in making informed decisions about innovative financing strategies. Any PPP strategies would be developed'and based on the Public-Private Partnerships for Transportation Act (P.A. 97-502), which among other things, requires extensive coordination with stakeholders along the corridor as well as, the General Assembly, the Commission on Government Forecasting and Accountability, Illinois Tollway, the Policy Procurement Board, and the Governor's Office of Management and Budget. Information will be shared with stakeholders as appropriate. We look forward to implementing this state of the practice facility, which will improve mobility in all lanes of 1-55 and benefit all users of the corridor.

cc: John Donovan, FHWA

Sincerely,

~~~ Randall S. Blankenhorn Secretary

lOOT 1001 Template (03/15/2016)

Printed 6/15/2016

Mr. Joseph Szabo Page 2 June 15, 2016

bee: Roger L. Driskell John Fortmann

OP&P SharepoinU78212 CMAP Managed Lane/jc

I DOT 1001 Template (03/15/2016)

•

Re: Public Comments: I-SS Managed lane Project

Mr. John Baczek

c/o John E. Baldauf, P.E.

Region One/District 1

201 W. Center Court

Schaumberg, Illinois 60196

Dear Mr. Baczek:

May 19,2016

BUREAU OF PROGRAMMING RECEIVeD

MAY 2 4 2016

DISTRICT # 1

Please accept this submission as my public comments regarding the proposed Managed Toll lanes on I

SS.

As a commuter from Pontiac, Illinois to Chicago on nearly a daily basis, I am in favor of the proposed

project. I believe managed lanes would improve the capacity, efficiency and safety of the roadway.

I would go one step further and propose that All of (Illinois) 1-55 be converted into an all electronic toll

road, similar to the Pennsylvania Turnpike or the Illinois Tollway. 1-57 would remain "toll-free."

I believe tolling I-SS would make the highway safer and enable amenities to be offered. Oasis type trave l

plazas could be built and maintained. The road could be illuminated in rural areas, increasing visibility. A

dedicated State Police force could be funded to patrol the roadway as well as motorist assist crews. In

exchange for tolls, the roadway would me meticulously maintained, free of t rash and potholes. Today,

the North bound right lane between Pontiac and Dwight is deteriorating like a rutted wagon trail likely

due to lack of funds for major reconstruction and maintenance projects. (As a side note, the Illinois Tollway, funded exclusively through road tolls and not dependent on taxes, is reconstructing 1-90,

building 1-390 and constructing an interchange at 1-57.)

Further, toll funding would enable the expansion of I-S5 to three and four lanes, especially around

Arsenal Road at the Center Point intermodal facility. That stretch of Interstate is clogged with truck

traffic and there have been several high profile fatality collisions in that area. The bridge over the

Desplaines River at Arsenal Road is antiquated and unsafe. It is narrow and there are no shoulders for

breakdowns or emergencies.

An efficient, safe and maintained I-SS would attract good jobs and promote new businesses. The 1-88

corridor in and around the Sycamour/DeKalb area is attracting new construction and businesses due to

good access. The same is taking place around the newly reconstructed 1-90 corridor.

As an Illinois resident I am mindful that funds are limited and needs and wants are unlimited. I am also

aware that Illinois is "blessed" by good centralized geography. My State is a transportation bulwark

from the 1/M Canal, to the rails, to O'Hare/Midway and lately, intermodal. Managed 1-55 lanes will

continue that leadership. Thank you for considering my public comments.

Lawrence Necheles ~~~~ (312)263-4735 ....:::..------

504 S. Mill Street

Pontiac, Illinois 61764

6a mend@ sprint. blackberry. net

Appendix D: Comments Submitted via Email

Record Date Individual Comment/Question Response 4/27/2016 Angela

McGreal When will these "ballots" for voting for sound barriers be distributed?

Your comment has been incorporated into the project record and has been made part of the EA document. We would like to note that as part of this project, the Department conducted a highway traffic noise study which evaluated noise impacts within the project study limits. The traffic noise study results identified 13 proposed noise barrier walls as reasonable and feasible. Per Department policy, benefited receptors were permitted to vote in favor of or against the wall. A benefited receptor is defined as a recipient of a noticeable (five decibels or more) reduction in noise level as a result of the proposed wall. Benefited receptors are identified in blue on the Noise Barrier Location Map and Benefited Receptors – Revised exhibit which can be accessed in the Document Library on the project website at http://www.i55managedlaneproject.org/. Your property/unit is not covered by the blue area in the above referenced exhibit. Therefore, you did not receive a viewpoint solicitation letter and were not eligible to vote on the installation of the proposed noise wall. In order for a proposed noise wall to be implemented, at least 33% of the benefited receptors for that wall must respond, and more than 50% of the benefited receptors responding must be in favor of the wall. At this time the noise wall voting period has concluded. The noise wall voting results are available on the project website.

4/28/2016 William Kushner

Just wondering WHY we haven't received our ballot as yet?


4/29/2016 Elton Prestage

What is the latest news on R64 and R65? When do we get to vote on this area? Thank You.

Thank you for your comment and your vote on the proposed B18 noise wall located northeast of the I-55 and LaGrange Road interchange. At this time the noise wall voting period has concluded, and the B3 noise wall is likely to be implemented as part of the proposed improvements contingent upon more detailed engineering analysis. The noise wall voting results are available on the project website at http://www.i55managedlaneproject.org/.

5/3/2016 Marec Edgar

To whom it may concern, My family and I live in Darien along North Frontage Road between Cass and Lemont. We are completely supportive of this project, both from the perspective of traffic management and, particularly, regarding noise abatement at our property. We are happy to provide whatever support we can for this project. Please feel free to contact us regarding the same. Thank you. Marec Edgar


5/3/2016 Sandy Dybcio

I heard there was going to be a residential vote to approve/disapprove a sound wall. Is this true, if so, when will that occur?

Your comment has been incorporated into the project record and has been made part of the EA document. We would like to note that as part of this project, the Department conducted a highway traffic noise study which evaluated noise impacts within the project study limits. The traffic noise study results identified 13 proposed noise barrier walls as reasonable and feasible. Per Department policy, benefited receptors were permitted to vote in favor of or against the wall. A benefited receptor is




defined as a recipient of a noticeable (five decibels or more) reduction in noise level as a result of the proposed wall. Benefited receptors are identified in blue on the Noise Barrier Location Map and Benefited Receptors – Revised exhibit which can be accessed in the Document Library on the project website at http://www.i55managedlaneproject.org/. Your property/unit is not covered by the blue area in the above referenced exhibit. Therefore, you did not receive a viewpoint solicitation letter and were not eligible to vote on the installation of the proposed noise wall. In order for a proposed noise wall to be implemented, at least 33% of the benefited receptors for that wall must respond, and more than 50% of the benefited receptors responding must be in favor of the wall. At this time the noise wall voting period has concluded. The noise wall voting results are available on the project website.

5/15/2016 Katie Hodak

I strongly oppose the managed lane concept, it is ridiculous to pay anymore than we already do w tolls in this area! Please leave 55 as is, the back ups aren't nearly as bad as 290- and this managed lane project may clog the road for non-payers

Your comment has been incorporated into the project record and has been made part of the EA document. We would like to note that the purpose of the proposed project is to provide mobility and operational efficiency, introduce congestion management strategies and new travel choices, and promote sustainable transportation solutions while maximizing use of the existing facility. The addition of a managed lane within the existing median and implementation of active traffic management technologies will provide options to adapt to frequently changing traffic conditions across all lanes, and provide a sustainable transportation solution. While the new managed lane will be tolled, the existing general purpose lanes would remain free. Please note that the addition of a managed lane would increase the capacity of the overall roadway. As a result, the general purpose (free) lanes would also experience reduced congestion.

5/16/2016 Rosalind Rossi

Please place me on your mailing list for developments involving the I55 project. Thank you.

Thank you for your interest in the I-55 Managed Lane project. Your information has been added to the mailing list for any future project updates.

5/16/2016 Christine Krcadinac

Have not received our viewpoint solicitation letter and would like our vote to count. How do we get one since we have not received in the mail and cannot find it on your website.

Thank you for your comment and your vote on the proposed B7 noise wall located south of I-55 between Cass Avenue and Kingery Highway. At this time the noise wall voting period has concluded, and the B3 noise wall is likely to be implemented as part of the proposed improvements contingent upon more detailed engineering analysis. The noise wall voting results are available on the project website at http://www.i55managedlaneproject.org/.

5/18/2016 Bonita Quartuccio

no question, just to let you know I agree with the project

Thank you for your support. Your comment has been incorporated into the project record and has been made part of the EA document.


5/19/2016 Peter Skosey

The Metropolitan Planning Council (MPC) congratulates Governor Rauner and the Ill. Dept. of Transportation for considering using a public-private partnership to build managed lanes on I-55. MPC worked for five years in Springfield to pass 2011 legislation that enables such a project. Adding capacity on I-55 has been a regional priority for years. It’s a top priority in Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning’s GO TO 2040 regional plan. Experience shows that simply adding another regular lane will not ease congestion in the long term: once that capacity is there, it will just fill up. Putting a variable-priced toll on that lane lets you manage demand and keep it free-flowing. If you’re really in a time crunch, you have the choice to take that lane. In 2010, MPC studied adding a tolled lane to I-55 and found it would shave 22 minutes off a morning rush-hour commute from I-355 to I-90/94. Based on projected traffic levels in 2020, that drive would drop from 47 to 25 minutes. The free lanes also benefit from the added capacity of the tolled lane, seeing their travel time drop 16 minutes to 31 minutes. This new lane will also make taking the bus a more attractive choice. The current bus-on-shoulder service has been incredibly successful, but it isn’t able to use the shoulder for the whole corridor and it’s limited to 35 mph. This lane would give it a continuous path and let it go as fast as 55 mph, improving reliability and opening the door to more frequent service. Finally, the toll can be put toward the costs of constructing and maintaining the lane. With revenue from the gas tax declining and Illinois’ investment in transportation following suit, we need to look more at user fees like tolled lanes to pay for our infrastructure.

Thank you for your support. Your comment has been incorporated into the project record and has been made part of the EA document. As you stated, the I-55 corridor is in need of additional capacity given that over 90% of the corridor will fail by 2040. The introduction of a managed lane to the corridor, in this case an Express Toll Lane (ETL), will help advocate congestion relief through traffic management while continuing to support an expanded Pace bus service which would have had to be eliminated with the implementation of a general purpose lane. Currently, I-55 Bus-on-Shoulder program operates under speed restrictions and with limited shoulder access to only 15 miles of the 25 mile corridor. Upon project completion, Pace buses will be able to ride in the 25 mile long managed lane of I-55 from I-355 to I-94 without operational restrictions of the current program. As a result, the proposed managed lane will noticeably enhance transit within the corridor by further improving travel times and on-time performance of the Pace bus service along I-55. In addition, a managed lane would increase the capacity of the overall roadway resulting in reduced congestion of the general purpose (free) lanes.

5/19/2016 Lawrence Necheles

As an I-55 commuter, I am in favor of the managed lane project. I would go one step further and convert I-55 into a Toll Road similar to the Pennsylvania Turnpike. Tolls would fund an expansion of the road to Three and Four lanes in each direction, especially around the Arsenal Road/Center Point Intermodal facilities. The bridge over the Des Plaines River is antiquated, narrow and does not have shoulders. Further due to the volume of truck traffic, lane expansion would enhance safety. Recently, there have been several collisions that have involved mass fatalities. In addition to lane expansion, amenities such as Oasis Plazas, illumination in rural areas and no pot holes should be offered. The Penn Turnpike and Illinois Tollway are well funded and the ride is worry free and safe. Additionally, dedicated State Police could patrol I-55 funded through tolls.

Thank you for your input. Your comment has been incorporated into the project record and has been made part of the EA document. Any changes to interstates must get Federal Highway Administration approval and follow federal regulations. As such, the I-55 managed lane project is being developed in accordance with 23 U.S. Code Section 129: Toll roads, bridges, tunnels, and ferries which allows tolls on new facilities or new lanes on interstate and non-interstate highways, bridges or tunnels. There are other federal programs that may allow tolling existing general purpose lanes however they are rather restrictive in nature and wouldn’t necessarily apply to this facility. Furthermore, by applying tolls to general purpose lanes traffic would be diverted from the existing facility to the already congested parallel roadway network, negating any potential benefits sought by this project.

5/22/2016 John Clinnin

Our company headquarters are located at the I-55 & Lemont Road interchange. Our clients, vendors, and approximately 200 employees routinely use I-55 to conduct business. We have watched first hand how congestion has continued to grow on I-55 with traffic regularly at a standstill right outside our windows. It has become extremely difficult to plan trips on I-55, as the travel times are not consistent or can be counted on from day to day. We support the ETL preferred alternative presented at the May 17th Public Hearing which I attended, as the best choice for getting congestion relief and reliable drive times along I-55 in the near future. I learned at the public hearing that the while the tolled express lanes will experience the most reduction in travel times, the existing non-tolled lanes will also experience a significant reduction in travel times. This appears to be a fair and equitable solution to the congestion problem on I-55. Even those who cannot afford or chose not to use the tolled express lanes will benefit from this project through reduced trip times. Questions: Have the costs to benefits of dedicated exits from the express lanes to primary destination points such as Cicero Avenue for Midway Airport access been considered to eliminate weaving of vehicles across all lanes to reach the current exit points on the outside of I-55? With the pace of technology bringing information to our phones, connecting vehicles, and even operating the vehicles without a driver, have more futuristic innovative methods of ATM been considered rather than the presented overhead structures with dynamic message signs for ATM?

Thank you for your input. Your comment has been incorporated into the project record and has been made part of the EA document. We would like to note that containing improvements to the existing footprint through repurposing of the existing median is an essential part of this study; therefore dedicated exits from the managed lane were not financially feasible and considered at this time. However, egress/ingress points have been set up to allow enough room to weave along the corridor to various destination points including Cicero Avenue. In terms of active traffic management, fiber optic cables which are required by the overhead structures presently run along the I-55 corridor and will provide flexibility for implementing future technologies.

5/23/2016 Patricia Barker

Managed lanes are vitally important for this corridor. My family and I are big supporters.


5/24/2016 Fiyaz Khan First off - I think this is a great idea. Very necessary and I've found tremendous benefit in other cities with managed lanes. I would comment on two things that have yet to be settled: 1. ETL lanes are far superior when trying to benefit only local residents - as a business traveler in LA, they suck. Can't get on. However, I can see the benefit to the locals with folks like me not being able to get on. 2. Controlled lane access makes way more sense than continuous. i-355, Kingery, LaGrange Road, Cicero, Chicago. I'm 30 seconds off Cass but think the inflow/outflows at every exit makes it tough. Hard barriers are so much more efficient.

Thank you for your support. Your comment has been incorporated into the project record and has been made part of the EA document. We would like to note that both, the painted buffer separation and the concrete barrier separation were evaluated during the study. However, the analysis showed that physical barriers are not feasible due to space constraints and would require a reconstruction of a majority of the corridor. This alternative was dismissed as it was not financially viable.

5/25/2016 Gerald Sullivan

Very interested to know if sound barriers are being considered as part of this initiative.

Your comment has been incorporated into the project record and has been made part of the EA document. We would like to note that as part of this project, in conformance with FHWA requirements contained in Title 23 Code of Federal Regulations Part 772, the Department conducted a highway traffic noise study which evaluated noise impacts within the project study limits. Results of the traffic noise abatement evaluation are available on the project website at http://www.i55managedlaneproject.org/.

5/27/2016 Matt Letourneau

I would like to add my voice to those supporting managed lanes on I-55. Our region's highways are consistently at maximum capacity for many hours each day. Managed lanes will help to alleviate this congestion and provide benefits to motorists, residents, and the environment.


5/27/2016 Marybeth Szczesniak

Concerning the 10 wall between Bubbly Creek and Lowe in Chicago. Have you consulted the CFD, since their Standard operating procedures for Accidents or Fires on the Express way, they run a hose from the hydrant to the expressway. They won't get enough water if they have to go over that unnecessary wall. Since the hydrant is on the Expressway side of Archer in front of my building, that could prove harmful to the accident victims. I will be bringing this to the attention of the Chicago Fire Department.

Your comment has been incorporated into the project record and has been made part of the EA document. We would like to note that the final design and placement of the proposed noise walls along the I-55 corridor will be completed as part of contract plan preparation (Phase II). Any potential access issues will be addressed at that time.

5/30/2016 Sam Semrow

I continue to support the managed lanes project for I55 as described in the EIS. I have used similar lanes in other states and they are efficient at moving traffic. My concern is that any potential partner may require a level of tolls uncomfortable with motorists. These should be agreed upon prior to entering into any agreement. Please use iPass to collect any tolls.

Thank you for your support. Your comment has been incorporated into the project record and has been made part of the EA document. We would like to note that while the new managed lane may be tolled, the existing general purpose lanes would remain free. The managed lane toll rates will follow the concept of congestion pricing which employs fluctuating toll rates to promote an optimum travel speed in the managed lane. When calculating the toll rate, congestion pricing takes into account the driver’s willingness to pay and current traffic conditions. Toll collection would be done through existing iPass transponders to allow for easier usage.

5/30/2016 Robert Bruett

I think the idea of managed toll lanes are great. Using hov rules is probably too much. Restricting trucks would also be preferable. Having a reliable lane flow into and out of Chicago makes it better for all of us driving in the area.

Thank you for your support. Your comment has been incorporated into the project record and has been made part of the EA document. We would like to note that the Express Toll Lane (ETL) has been identified as the preferred alternative. Upon implementation of the ETL, trucks will be restricted from its use.

5/30/2016 Patricia Adamski

Making a toll lane will not solve the traffic congestion. It will cost more than it will provide revenue. My idea is that a high speed L with kiss and go stations ( no parking) limited stops between I-355 on I-55 such as stops at 355, Rte. 83, La Grange Rd., Harlem Ave. Cicero Ave., then into the City. Just a simple platform with stairs coming down from drop off point. You could move a lot of people cost effectively.

Your comment has been incorporated into the project record and has been made part of the EA document. We would like to note that the purpose of the project is to provide an effective way to improve performance of the I-55 corridor within the existing footprint due to the corridor’s limited expansion potential caused by monetary and physical constraints. A light rail passenger system along I-55 would be extremely costly as it would require significant reconstruction of the existing facility to accommodate the tracks, stations, and maintenance yards necessary for this system, and is therefore not being considered for this project. Instead, the project will build upon and enhance the existing bus transit service provided by Pace. The Pace Bus-on-Shoulder program was introduced to the I-55 corridor in 2011 as a pilot program which intended to provide efficient transit service between Chicago and the Southwest Suburbs. Currently, the Bus-on-Shoulder program operates under speed restrictions and with limited shoulder access to only 15 miles of the 25 mile corridor. Upon project completion, Pace buses will be able to ride in the 25 mile long managed lane of I-55 from I-355 to I-94 without operational restrictions of the current program. As a result, the proposed managed lane will noticeably enhance transit within the corridor by further improving travel times and on-time performance of the Pace bus service along I-55.

5/30/2016 Jerry Huang

I am in favor. I commute from Naperville to Hyde Park daily and there are times when I am running late that I would pay to use the express lane as an option.


5/30/2016 Roger Lehmann

No we should not make a toll lane on i55. Instead of a toll lane an additional lane should be added in each direction. A toll lane alongside free lanes would be confusing. I55 is and should remain a freeway. Additionally the privatization proposal means a total loss of oversight and control.

Your comment has been incorporated into the project record and has been made part of the EA document. We would like to note that addition of a general purpose lane was one of the evaluated alternatives. However, this alternative did not address the transportation problems identified in the initial stages of the study. Converting the inside median to a general purpose lane would not support public transit and would reduce travel choices since the existing Bus-on-Shoulder operations would have to be eliminated. In addition, a general purpose lane would not be able to be managed during congested

conditions. While the new managed lane may be tolled, the existing general purpose lanes would remain free. Please note that the addition of a managed lane would increase the capacity of the overall roadway. As a result, the general purpose (free) lanes would also experience reduced congestion.

5/31/2016 Jerry Reece Managed lanes exist in many other states. The method of project delivery seems to be the big hurdle in this case - if the state would stop worrying about not having control of the project, and let it as a PPP, the job could be executed with greater speed....be maintained in a budgeted fashion....and be turned over in a satisfactory state to the taxpayers of Illinois. Please show me the down side of this. My advice would be to get out of the way, and let a process work, that has been very successful in MANY other places.

Your comment has been incorporated into the project record and has been made part of the EA document. We would like to note that IDOT is evaluating various mechanisms to deliver this much needed project to the region. Currently all procurement options are still on the table as we continue to work with the Illinois tollway and/or a Public Private Partnership (P3) which could be procured in a number of different forms including a Design Build to provide the best options for stakeholders. This approach affords an opportunity to implement the improvements in a shorter timeframe rather than relying on traditional means of funding.

Date post:	11-Jun-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	lamdat
View:	213 times
Download:	0 times

Public Involvement Report For the Environmental Assessment 07 18_i-55_ea_errata... · Public...

Documents