Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[SD Mapman]

This is a general topic thread for South Dakota roads and highways. I don't think one exists already.

Here is an article related to traffic conditions on Colorado Boulevard in Spearfish. This is the segment that parallels Interstate 90 and US 14-85 between Exit 14 (Business 90 and US 14A) and Exit 17 (US 85).

https://www.bhpioneer.com/local_news/spearfish-reviews-traffic-study-at-colorado-blvd/article_65cfeed2-af6c-11eb-9b68-fb5e1f551bef.html

As due diligence in preparation for the 40-acre sports complex being built along with the 180-lot housing development currently under construction near Exit 17, city officials contracted with HDR, Inc. to complete a traffic impact study for the area to see what issues might need to be addressed as the sporting events center attracts more travelers to Spearfish.

The study focused on five intersection points around the development area — the Interstate — 90 on and off ramps at Exit 17; the intersection of Colorado Boulevard and U.S. Hwy. 85; the intersection of St. Onge Road and U.S. Hwy. 85; and the four-way intersection at Colorado Boulevard and Rainbow Road. The study also looked at three entry and exit points to the development area. ...

Two of the intersections would be operating at a service level of ”˜F’ by 2022 if no improvements were made.

One of those intersections is the westbound ramp terminal at Exit 17; however, that deterioration won’t be caused by the development, so those improvements will be monitored and made by the South Dakota Department of Transportation (DOT). The other issue was identified at the intersection of Colorado Boulevard and Highway 85, which the study shows, will be impacted by the development.

So I saw the results for this study the other day. The plan is to repave Colorado and add a turn lane (so it goes from 2 to 3 lanes). IMO they should just 4-lane the whole thing preemptively since Spearfish is going to fill in that valley in the next 20 years or so.

[Fredddie]

This is a general topic thread for South Dakota roads and highways. I don't think one exists already.

Here is an article related to traffic conditions on Colorado Boulevard in Spearfish. This is the segment that parallels Interstate 90 and US 14-85 between Exit 14 (Business 90 and US 14A) and Exit 17 (US 85).

https://www.bhpioneer.com/local_news/spearfish-reviews-traffic-study-at-colorado-blvd/article_65cfeed2-af6c-11eb-9b68-fb5e1f551bef.html

As due diligence in preparation for the 40-acre sports complex being built along with the 180-lot housing development currently under construction near Exit 17, city officials contracted with HDR, Inc. to complete a traffic impact study for the area to see what issues might need to be addressed as the sporting events center attracts more travelers to Spearfish.

The study focused on five intersection points around the development area — the Interstate — 90 on and off ramps at Exit 17; the intersection of Colorado Boulevard and U.S. Hwy. 85; the intersection of St. Onge Road and U.S. Hwy. 85; and the four-way intersection at Colorado Boulevard and Rainbow Road. The study also looked at three entry and exit points to the development area. ...

Two of the intersections would be operating at a service level of ”˜F’ by 2022 if no improvements were made.

One of those intersections is the westbound ramp terminal at Exit 17; however, that deterioration won’t be caused by the development, so those improvements will be monitored and made by the South Dakota Department of Transportation (DOT). The other issue was identified at the intersection of Colorado Boulevard and Highway 85, which the study shows, will be impacted by the development.

So I saw the results for this study the other day. The plan is to repave Colorado and add a turn lane (so it goes from 2 to 3 lanes). IMO they should just 4-lane the whole thing preemptively since Spearfish is going to fill in that valley in the next 20 years or so.

IMO three lanes are generally better than four just because you get the left-turning traffic out of the passing lane, but it looks like they're just matching what's on the west side of Exit 14.

[SD Mapman]

It's only going to be up to the edge of the Sky Ridge development, not all the way back to Pizza Ranch. When the state redid the 14A section of Colorado back ten years ago or so (Pizza Ranch to Dairy Queen), they had a study that said three lanes were more efficient than four, but as someone who is very familiar with that road, upgrading it to four lanes divided when they put in the roundabouts in a few years would really help traffic flow.

[roadman65]

https://goo.gl/maps/uLRR9mFiN1Mu9cCs5
What happened to SD 42 and BL I-229?

[brad2971]

https://goo.gl/maps/uLRR9mFiN1Mu9cCs5
What happened to SD 42 and BL I-229?

SDDOT, in 2006, turned over SD 42 between Ellis Rd and Six Mile Rd to the city of Sioux Falls. What you're partly seeing is SDDOT very slowly getting around to reflecting that fact at the I-229 interchange. The signage at I-29 and 12th St (Exit 79) is...its own set of issues: https://www.google.com/maps/@43.543323,-96.7796152,3a,37.5y,333.04h,88.67t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sYTSmq0L9-tEvO46PBw19mQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

[Great Lakes Roads]

https://www.siouxfalls.org/public-works/street-construction/projects/2023/benson-229-interchange

The city of Sioux Falls (in coordination with SDDOT) will be reconstructing the Benson Road/Interstate 229 interchange to a diverging diamond interchange (DDI)...

"This project will reconstruct the Benson Road and I-229 Interchange into a diverging diamond configuration, and will feature the City’s first triple left turn lane when the project is completed! West of I-229, Benson Road will be widened to 3 lanes in each direction with turn lanes and a raised median. East of I-229, Benson Road will be widened to 2 lanes in each direction with turn lanes and a raised median. Additional improvements to Benson Road include concrete pavement, new bridge installation and existing bridge deck rehabilitation, water main, sanitary sewer repairs and installation, storm drainage improvements, street light and traffic signal improvements, new accessible curb ramps, and concrete curb and gutter. The City is partnering with the South Dakota Department of Transportation on this project."

Construction just started a week ago (April 3), and it's expected to be completed in June 2025. Price tag: $36 million

[Great Lakes Roads]

Public meeting for the I-90 Exit 63 interchange in Box Elder on April 13th from 6-7:30 pm at its city hall.

https://www.i90exit63.com/events

The preferred alternative that SDDOT went with is Alternative 3B, which will reconstruct the existing interchange to a diverging diamond interchange (DDI) with auxiliary lanes being added along I-90 between exits 61 and 63.

Construction on this project will likely begin in 2027, with the completion year in 2029. Estimated project cost: $55 million

The project itself will be split up into three phases:
Phase 1 — Highway 1416 closed
Phase 2 — EB lanes closed, head-to-head traffic on Existing I-90 WB
Phase 3 — WB lanes closed, head-to-head traffic on Proposed EB I-90

Link to the presentation materials: https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5d68047e99e03b0001ed16af/t/642aed1ac7f733487c511335/1680534818859/PCN3022_PublicMeetingPowerPoint.pdf

[X99]

Public meeting for the I-90 Exit 63 interchange in Box Elder on April 13th from 6-7:30 pm at its city hall.

https://www.i90exit63.com/events

The preferred alternative that SDDOT went with is Alternative 3B, which will reconstruct the existing interchange to a diverging diamond interchange (DDI) with auxiliary lanes being added along I-90 between exits 61 and 63.

Construction on this project will likely begin in 2027, with the completion year in 2029. Estimated project cost: $55 million

The project itself will be split up into three phases:
Phase 1 — Highway 1416 closed
Phase 2 — EB lanes closed, head-to-head traffic on Existing I-90 WB
Phase 3 — WB lanes closed, head-to-head traffic on Proposed EB I-90

Link to the presentation materials: https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5d68047e99e03b0001ed16af/t/642aed1ac7f733487c511335/1680534818859/PCN3022_PublicMeetingPowerPoint.pdf

Took them long enough. Not sure what they plan to do with 1416 though, as I heard earlier plans to push the two roadways together, but with the recent configuration change at Radar Hill that doesn't really work as well as it used to.

Same goes with the new roadway on the west side of the interchange- there's currently nothing there. I once made a proposal in Fictional that extended that roadway all the way to Haines through farmland, but I'm willing to bet that will never happen.

Also, the Gisi Road rebuild is pointless- that's a private driveway that someone slapped a road sign on and somehow it became official.

[SD Mapman]

https://goo.gl/maps/uLRR9mFiN1Mu9cCs5
What happened to SD 42 and BL I-229?

SDDOT, in 2006, turned over SD 42 between Ellis Rd and Six Mile Rd to the city of Sioux Falls. What you're partly seeing is SDDOT very slowly getting around to reflecting that fact at the I-229 interchange. The signage at I-29 and 12th St (Exit 79) is...its own set of issues: https://www.google.com/maps/@43.543323,-96.7796152,3a,37.5y,333.04h,88.67t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sYTSmq0L9-tEvO46PBw19mQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

The issue is Sioux Falls still signs 11, 42 and 115 (along with BS 29 and BL 229) in city limits, so the routes are still technically "through". There are no end signs, and the city project to rebuild Minnesota Ave (115) north of downtown (last year) actually replaced the 115 reassurance shields instead of removing them. I'm planning to ask DOT about the exit signage in the greater Sioux Falls area, there's a general lack of consistency (some county routes signed and some not, road names missing, etc) that I'm curious about.

[SD Mapman]

Public meeting for the I-90 Exit 63 interchange in Box Elder on April 13th from 6-7:30 pm at its city hall.

https://www.i90exit63.com/events

The preferred alternative that SDDOT went with is Alternative 3B, which will reconstruct the existing interchange to a diverging diamond interchange (DDI) with auxiliary lanes being added along I-90 between exits 61 and 63.

Construction on this project will likely begin in 2027, with the completion year in 2029. Estimated project cost: $55 million

The project itself will be split up into three phases:
Phase 1 — Highway 1416 closed
Phase 2 — EB lanes closed, head-to-head traffic on Existing I-90 WB
Phase 3 — WB lanes closed, head-to-head traffic on Proposed EB I-90

Link to the presentation materials: https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5d68047e99e03b0001ed16af/t/642aed1ac7f733487c511335/1680534818859/PCN3022_PublicMeetingPowerPoint.pdf

Took them long enough. Not sure what they plan to do with 1416 though, as I heard earlier plans to push the two roadways together, but with the recent configuration change at Radar Hill that doesn't really work as well as it used to.

Same goes with the new roadway on the west side of the interchange- there's currently nothing there. I once made a proposal in Fictional that extended that roadway all the way to Haines through farmland, but I'm willing to bet that will never happen.

Also, the Gisi Road rebuild is pointless- that's a private driveway that someone slapped a road sign on and somehow it became official.

Looks like they might push the carriageways together at least at the interchange and they might separate again once you get to Radar Hill Rd, we'll have to see how it plays out. My issue here is why are they naming the road west of I-90 Highway 1416 when US 14 and US 16 never went that way? On Gisi Road, they have to preserve existing access, even if it was an unnamed driveway.

[X99]

On Gisi Road, they have to preserve existing access, even if it was an unnamed driveway.

I'm not suggesting removing access to Gisi Road, obviously it's still needed. I'm just suggesting putting it here instead:

This would keep the new access road from cutting through the middle of the property, and that other stub going off to the left is already linked to Bennett Road on the other end so that connection is redundant.

My issue here is why are they naming the road west of I-90 Highway 1416 when US 14 and US 16 never went that way?

Given what I've seen in some of the proposed interchange layouts, I think the plan is to somehow link the western roadway directly to Mall Drive, which would hopefully rename it to that starting at the interchange. (If it were up to me, I would run it north of Mall and Seger and call it SD 200, but it isn't up to me, so I'm hoping my other guess is right.) Mall currently ends at a T junction with Seger, with an unbuilt continuation at the top of the T, so it already removes Seger as an obstacle to link to 1416 if that really is the official plan.

[SD Mapman]

On Gisi Road, they have to preserve existing access, even if it was an unnamed driveway.

I'm not suggesting removing access to Gisi Road, obviously it's still needed. I'm just suggesting putting it here instead:

This would keep the new access road from cutting through the middle of the property, and that other stub going off to the left is already linked to Bennett Road on the other end so that connection is redundant.

My issue here is why are they naming the road west of I-90 Highway 1416 when US 14 and US 16 never went that way?

Given what I've seen in some of the proposed interchange layouts, I think the plan is to somehow link the western roadway directly to Mall Drive, which would hopefully rename it to that starting at the interchange. (If it were up to me, I would run it north of Mall and Seger and call it SD 200, but it isn't up to me, so I'm hoping my other guess is right.) Mall currently ends at a T junction with Seger, with an unbuilt continuation at the top of the T, so it already removes Seger as an obstacle to link to 1416 if that really is the official plan.

That would make sense, and then once the project is finished they'll get rid of the N I-90 Service Road since it will be no longer necessary.

[skluth]

Interesting eminent domain suit result. Taking land for highway improvements in the middle of nowhere just got more expensive.

Brookings, state lose $850,000-plus Interstate 29 Exit 130 interchange lawsuit

BROOKINGS – The new Brookings exit on Interstate 29 got considerably more expensive last week.
       
A Brookings County jury awarded a property owner whose land was taken by the city and state through eminent domain $850,000 on June 1 – nearly 23 times the original payment from the city and state.

The state of South Dakota and city of Brookings acquired the land from Renae Rohl, owner of RCS Development Inc., in 2021 through a quick take at the price of $6,000 per acre, or $37,674 in total.

At the conclusion of a two-day trial last week, a county jury ordered them to pay her $850,000 plus expert fees and trial costs. That figure represents a valuation of $138,888 per acre.

Attorney Tim Hogan of Ribstein and Hogan represented Rohl at trial, along with Clint Sargent of Meirhenry Sargent LLP of Sioux Falls.

Hogan said his client and her late husband owned 20 acres west of I-29 and south of 20th Street in the area along with the Western Estates mobile home park for years. The couple sold Western Estates in 2016 but held the parcel as an investment.

“Renae is very happy with the outcome, and I think happy to get it over with,”  Hogan said. “And I was impressed with her at trial. When asked how much she thought she should get, she just said she should get a fair price for her property.”

State statute requires property seized via eminent domain be purchased for fair market value. And because the jury decided the land was worth more than 20 percent more than the state and city offered, Rohl is entitled to collect all her costs from the litigation, including attorney’s fees.

The city is entitled to appeal the verdict.

When reached for comment, city officials confirmed the verdict for 6.12 acres of land.

The city also confirmed it does not have lawsuit insurance on the project and the costs will be included in the overall project costs of the interchange.

City Manager Paul Briseno offered: “The City has no further comment.”

Hogan said a decision to appeal would be up to the city, but added “Based on what was presented to the court, I didn’t see any grounds for appeal.”

Site preparation for the new Exit 130 interchange beganlast year and the exit is scheduled to be open next month.

Eminent domain has become a hot-button political issue in the Upper Midwest as scads of litigation has been filed over two proposed carbon dioxide pipelines through the area. Both the South Dakota and North Dakota state legislatures hotly debated bills that would have made using eminent domain for the pipelines all but impossible last session.

Original article in Brookings Register

[SD Mapman]

All that because the state paid $6000 an acre instead of $7200 per acre for a... useless gravel pit. Methinks the Brookings County jury is overvaluing nothing to drive up their own property values. You have a mix of left-leaning university types (who hate the state) and landowners who have to deal with the carbon pipeline eminent domain (who hate the state) and naturally DOT had no chance of winning this.

Eminent domain out here is a serious business, I've heard of surveyors from the firm I work at being threatened with being shot for trying to survey sewer locations.

[skluth]

All that because the state paid $6000 an acre instead of $7200 per acre for a... useless gravel pit. Methinks the Brookings County jury is overvaluing nothing to drive up their own property values. You have a mix of left-leaning university types (who hate the state) and landowners who have to deal with the carbon pipeline eminent domain (who hate the state) and naturally DOT had no chance of winning this.

Eminent domain out here is a serious business, I've heard of surveyors from the firm I work at being threatened with being shot for trying to survey sewer locations.

The jury may have overvalued the property. But it wouldn't have been a problem had the owners been given fair value for it. $6000/acre for a large, interstate-adjacent parcel is a low-ball offer even in South Dakota. There's a lot of anger as it is over eminent domain (and that anger is held by right-leaning, libertarian-types that hate the state far more than anyone on the left; the left's anger at eminent domain is usually over things like poor-people's homes being declared "blighted" and then destroyed for highway expansion). Most juries everywhere are going to be sympathetic to small landowners over the state most days.

FWIW, gravel pits are far from useless. We're actually running out of quality sand and gravel that can be used for construction. You can't use wind-blown sand like I have all around me in the desert. Construction needs washed sand like that found in Midwestern glacial deposits (moraines, drumlins, eskers, etc). You can also get the right sand out of riverbeds but most people don't appreciate their prime trout streams and other riverbanks being mined and those riverbeds are also usually subject to flooding, not ideal for extraction.