DOCSLIB.ORG

US16 Corridor Study Crash History Review (2014 – 2018) US16 Corridor Study

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
US16 Corridor Study Crash History Review (2014 – 2018) US16 Corridor Study US16 Corridor Study Crash History Review (2014 – 2018) US16 Corridor Study Pennington County, SD August 6, 2019 SDDOT | US16 Corridor Study Crash History Review Table of Contents Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 1 Methodology .............................................................................................................................. 1 US16 Corridor Existing Conditions Summary ............................................................................. 2 US16 Corridor Crash History Summary...................................................................................... 2 US16 Corridor – Crash Severity ............................................................................................. 3 US16 Corridor – Manner of Collision ...................................................................................... 4 US16 Corridor – Other Crash Characteristics ......................................................................... 5 US16 Corridor Seasonal and Daily Crash Trends ..................................................................12 US16 Corridor Median Crossing Review ...............................................................................13 US16 Corridor Segments ..........................................................................................................16 US16 Corridor Crash Segment Summary ..............................................................................16 US16 Corridor Segments Identified for Further Review .........................................................20 US16 Corridor Intersections ......................................................................................................27 US16 Corridor Intersection Summary ....................................................................................27 US16 Corridor Intersections Identified for Further Review .....................................................31 Other Study Area Intersections .................................................................................................37 Conclusions and Next Steps .....................................................................................................39 Appendix ...................................................................................................................................40 Appendices Appendix A – Crash Segment Key ............................................................................................. A Appendix B – Segment Crash Tables ........................................................................................ B Appendix C – Intersection Crash Tables .................................................................................... C List of Figures Figure 1: US16 Corridor – Crashes by Year (2014 - 2018) ......................................................... 3 Figure 2: Crash History (2014 - 2018) ........................................................................................ 8 Figure 3: Fatal and Incapacitating Injury Crashes (2014 - 2018) ................................................ 9 Figure 4: Vehicle Crash History (no vehicle-animal crashes) (2014 - 2018) ..............................10 Figure 5: Vehicle-Animal Crash History (2014 - 2018) ...............................................................11 Figure 6: Winter Weather Crashes (2014 - 2018) ......................................................................14 Figure 7: Median/Centerline Crossing Crashes (2014 - 2018) ...................................................15 Figure 8: Intersection Crashes (2014 - 2018) ............................................................................30 i SDDOT | US16 Corridor Study Crash History Review List of Tables Table 1: US16 Corridor – Crash Severity Summary (2014 – 2018) ............................................ 4 Table 2: US16 Corridor – Manner of Collision Summary (2014 – 2018) ..................................... 4 Table 3: US16 Corridor – Other Crash Characteristic Summary (2014 – 2018) .......................... 5 Table 4: US16 Corridor – Fatal and Serious Injury (F&SI) Crashes by Crash Characteristic (2014 – 2018) ............................................................................................................................ 6 Table 5: US16 Corridor – Time of Day/Month of Year Summary (2014 – 2018) ........................12 Table 6: US16 Corridor Segments – Crash Severity (North of Neck Yoke Road) ......................16 Table 7: US16 Corridor Segments – Crash Severity (South of Neck Yoke Road) .....................17 Table 8: US16 Corridor Segments – Crash Rates (North of Neck Yoke Road) ..........................18 Table 9: US16 Corridor Segments – Crash Rates (South of Neck Yoke Road) .........................18 Table 10: Horizontal Curve (east end) to Neck Yoke Road Crash Summary .............................21 Table 11: Horizontal Curve (west end) to Horizontal Curve (east end) Crash Summary ............22 Table 12: Strato Rim Drive to Busted Five Lane Crash Summary .............................................22 Table 13: US16 W Main Street/Silver Mountain Road (16 WF 55.70) to Pine Haven Drive Crash Summary (Segment 20) ............................................................................................................23 Table 14: US16 E Rockerville Road to Golden Hills Drive Crash Summary (Segment 22) ........24 Table 15: US16 E Rockerville West Ramp (16 E1 55.42) to Rockerville Road (16 EF 55.78) Crash Summary (Segment 23) ..................................................................................................25 Table 16: North of Keystone Wye to Cosmos Road Crash Summary (Segment 30) .................26 Table 17: US16 Corridor TWSC Intersections – Crash Severity (2014 – 2018) .........................27 Table 18: US16 Corridor Signalized Intersections – Crash Severity (2014 – 2018) ...................28 Table 19: US16 Corridor TWSC Intersections – Crash Rates (2014 – 2018) ............................29 Table 20: US16 Corridor Signalized Intersections – Crash Rates (2014 – 2018) .......................29 Table 21: US16 and Wilderness Canyon Road Intersection Crash Summary ...........................31 Table 22: US16 and Moon Meadows Drive Intersection Crash Summary .................................32 Table 23: US16 and Neck Yoke Road Intersection Crash Summary .........................................33 Table 24: US16 and Busted Five Lane Intersection Crash Summary ........................................34 Table 25: US16 E and Rockerville Road Intersection Crash Summary .....................................35 Table 26: US16 and US16B/Catron Boulevard Intersection Crash Summary ............................36 Table 27: Other Study Area Intersections – Crash Severity (2014 – 2018) ................................38 Table 28: Other Study Area Intersections – Crash Rates (2014 – 2018) ...................................38 ii SDDOT | US16 Corridor Study Crash History Review Introduction This memorandum documents the 2014 through 2018 crash history analysis for the US16 corridor between the Keystone Wye (south end) and Cathedral Drive/Fairmont Boulevard (north end). The crash history analysis was conducted to help identify areas that may warrant consideration of safety-related improvements in future design. Methodology Crash data for years 2014 through 2018 was provided by the South Dakota Department of Transportation (SDDOT) through a GIS geodatabase. Crashes were reviewed to identify any historical crash trends or high frequency areas to help develop potential crash mitigation measures for consideration in design. The US16 corridor was broken up into the following for analysis: Intersections Roadway segments All crashes occurring on the US16 corridor were sorted based on whether they were related to a corridor intersection or roadway segment. Low-volume crossroads and private driveways were typically not considered a primary analysis intersection. Crash rates and critical crash rates were calculated for both intersections and roadway segments. Intersection crash rates were calculated in terms of crashes per million entering vehicles (crashes/MEV). Roadway segment crash rates were calculated in terms of million vehicle miles traveled (crashes/MVMT). Critical crash rates were calculated based on the statistical populations for each crash location (intersection or segment), using methods presented in the Highway Safety Manual (American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), 2010). A critical crash rate accounts for a desired level of confidence, vehicle exposure, and similar facility types. Intersections and segments where the crash rate exceeds the critical rate should be investigated further. Weighted crash rates were also calculated for corridor segments by weighting each crash in accordance with its severity: fatal crash (12), injury crash (3), and property damage crash (1). Weights were assigned to each crash in accordance with methodology used by the SDDOT in determining statewide average crash rates. This method differs from the calculation of an average crash rate in that the weighted crash rate accounts for injury and fatal crashes through the weighting process. An average crash rate calculation reflects total crash frequency, regardless of injury severity. Intersection and segment crash rates were calculated with available daily traffic count data
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Tentative Statewide 2022-2025 Public STIP Projects Sorted by County.Pdf
    SOUTH DAKOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 2022-2025 TENTATIVE STATEWIDE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM SORTED IN ALPHABETICAL ORDER BY COUNTY Prepared by: SOUTH DAKOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DIVISION OF PLANNING\ENGINEERING OFFICE OF PROJECT DEVELOPMENT 700 BROADWAY AVENUE PIERRE, SOUTH DAKOTA 57501 South Dakota Transportation Improvement Program Tentative 2022 - 2025 Report Date 06/24/2021 By County Areawide Federal Fiscal Seq Project Number PC # County Length Route Location of Project Work Description Total Funds ¥ Year Cost(Mil $) ¥ 1 NH-P 0022(71) 06EQ Areawide 0.0 Various Locations Throughout 2022 Areawide Pipe Work 0.213 2022 0.260 the Sioux Falls Area Projects 2 NH-P 0023(55) 06EU Areawide 0.0 Various Locations Throughout 2022 Areawide Pipe Work 0.213 2022 0.260 the Yankton Area Projects 3 NH-P 0021(169) 06EY Areawide 0.0 Various Locations Throughout 2022 Areawide Pipe Work 0.213 2022 0.260 the Mitchell Area Projects 4 NH-P 0032(33) 06F2 Areawide 0.0 Various Locations Throughout 2022 Areawide Pipe Work 0.213 2022 0.260 the Mobridge Area Projects 5 NH-P 0032(35) 06F4 Areawide 0.0 Various Locations Throughout 2022 Areawide Pipe Work 0.213 2022 0.260 the Mobridge Area Projects 6 NH-P 0033(30) 06FA Areawide 0.0 Various Locations Throughout 2022 Areawide Pipe Work 0.213 2022 0.260 the Winner Area Projects 7 NH-P 0033(32) 06FD Areawide 0.0 Various Locations Throughout 2022 Areawide Pipe Work 0.213 2022 0.260 the Winner Area Projects 8 NH-P 0011(120) 06WA Areawide 0.0 Various Locations Throughout 2022 Areawide Pipe Work 0.427
    [Show full text]
  • Impulse Jerome J
    Impulse Jerome J. Lohr College of Engineering South Dakota State University Spring 2017 IMPROVING INSPECTIONS Dear alumni anD FrienDs, Build it and they will come? ince groundbreaking for the Crothers Engineering Hall addition in 2001 through the dedication of the Architecture, Mathematics and Engineering Building in 2015, the Jerome J. SLohr College of Engineering has been placarded with “under construction” signs. While the college still has renovation plans for Crothers, our major building needs are satisfied. As I review enrollment reports from the fall, I can’t help but remember that line from “Field of Dreams”—“Build it and they will come.” Enrollment numbers have steadily been moving up the last five years with a particularly big jump this year (9.95 percent). Our improved and expanded facilities are certainly a part of that growth. But that’s not the only one, and part of the reason for our increased enrollment is our climbing international student population. Rich Reid, our associate dean, has been spending a lot of time going through international airports the last couple of years. He’s not the only one advocating for our college. Oftentimes, you, our alumni, are our best recruiters. In this issue, we take a look at our recruiting efforts and why students are choosing the Lohr College of Engineering for their undergraduate and graduate degrees. New programs, new scholarships? Other attractions for the Lohr College of Engineering are its quality programs and people. One of the exciting developments within the college is in the Department of Agricultural and Biosystems Engineering, where a partnership with the College of Agriculture and Biological Sciences created the nation’s first precision ag major.
    [Show full text]
  • Governor Daugaard FROM: James D. Hagen, Secretary Department of Tourism DATE: December 9, 2013 RE: November 2013 Monthly Status Report
    TO: Governor Daugaard FROM: James D. Hagen, Secretary Department of Tourism DATE: December 9, 2013 RE: November 2013 Monthly Status Report By the Numbers October Numbers o Unique Web Visitors: up 17.3% o Tourism Tax (1%): $685,333, up 1.8% o Tourism Tax (.5%): $214.696, up 1.8% o Gaming Tax: $312,844, down 1.5% o Hotel Occupancy: down 2.3% o Hotel Overnights (Demand): down 0.8% o Hotel Rates (ADR): up 1.2% Media & Industry Relations November Earned Media o Impressions: 7,132,110 o Ad Value: $191,042 o Number of Clips: 15 FY14 Totals o Impressions: 123,650,745 o Ad Value: $3,695,283 o Number of Clips: 43 Press Releases posted to www.MediaSD.com and the State News Web: Joan Jett and the Blackhearts to Perform on ‘Mount Rushmore’s American Pride’ Float and South Dakota Businesses Recognized for Outstanding Customer Service. Fielded inquiries from media regarding the Macy’s float talent. Posted two visitor industry releases to MediaSD.com. Reviewed four releases for History. Worked with KSFY to make arrangements for a reporter to follow our team while in New York City for Macy’s street team effort; took Presidential mascots to Family Fun Day at Macy’s; visited with people regarding South Dakota’s travel opportunities; helped with filming for our “Monumental Love” social media outreach; and assisted in making arrangements for the Fox & Friends news segment where the mascots appeared on November 26. Distributed Tourism’s November e-FYI to 1,301 list members via Listrak.com and to 2,077 email addresses on Tourism’s industry database on November 21.
    [Show full text]
  • Mountain Pine Beetle Response Project Draft Environmental Impact Statement
    MOUNTAIN PINE BEETLE RESPONSE PROJECT DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT USDA Forest Service Black Hills National Forest Custer, South Dakota Commonly Used Acronyms and Abbreviations ARC At-Risk-Community HFRA Healthy Forests Restoration Act BA Basal Area ID Team Interdisciplinary Team BF Board Foot MA Management Area BHNF Black Hills National Forest MBF Thousand Board Feet BMP Best Management Practices MIS Management Indicator Species CCF Cubic Hundred Feet MMBF Million Board Feet CDA Connected Disturbed Area MPB Mountain Pine Beetle CEQ Council on Environmental Quality MPBRP Mountain Pine Beetle CF Cubic Feet Response Project CFR Code of Federal Regulations MVUM Motorized Vehicle Use Map CMAI Culmination of Mean Annual NEPA National Environmental Policy Act Increment NFMA National Forest Management Act CPUA Concentrated Public Use Area NFS National Forest System CWD Coarse Woody Debris NFSR National Forest System Road CWPP Community Wildfire Protection OHV Off Highway Vehicle Plan ROD Record of Decision DBH Diameter Breast Height S&G Standard(s) and Guideline(s) DEIS Draft Environmental Impact SDGF&P South Dakota Game, Fish and Parks Statement SHPO State Historic Preservation Officer EIS Environmental Impact Statement SOLC Species of Local Concern EPA Environmental Protection T&E Threatened and Endangered Agency TMP Travel Management Plan FEIS Final Environmental Impact TSI Timber Stand Improvement Statement USDA United States Department of FRCC Fire Regime Condition Class Agriculture FS Forest Service USFWS United States Fish and
    [Show full text]
  • PENNINGTON COUNTY BOARD of COMMISSIONERS Meeting of June 19, 2018
    PENNINGTON COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Meeting of June 19, 2018 The Pennington County Board of Commissioners met at 9:02 a.m. on Tuesday, June 19, 2018, in the Commission Chambers in the County Administration Building, Rapid City, South Dakota. Chair Lloyd LaCroix called the meeting to order with the following Commissioners present: Ron Buskerud, Mark DiSanto, George Ferebee and Deb Hadcock. REVIEW AND APPROVE AGENDA MOVED by DiSanto and seconded by Hadcock to approve the agenda as presented. Vote: Unanimous. CONSENT ITEMS MOVED by Hadcock and seconded by DiSanto to approve the Consent Agenda as presented with the removal of Item 6. Vote: Unanimous. 6. Removed for separate consideration. 7. Acknowledge the filing of petitions signed by at least 25% of the eligible voters within the district and set an election on the question of formation and/or reaffirmation of the Cedar Gulch Sanitary and Water District to be held on July 24, 2018. 8. Acknowledge disinterment permit #1220716. 9. Continue authorization to purchase two 2018 JD 772 GP Motorgraders off the Minnesota State Bid to the 7/3/18 BOC meeting. 10. Recognize and thank the volunteers for the month of May 2018. 11. Approve Board Chair’s signature on the SD DOT Railroad Right-of-Way Joint Powers Agreement for weed spraying services. End of Consent Agenda 6. Minutes of the regular meeting – June 7, 2018: MOVED by DiSanto and seconded by Buskerud to correct the regular meeting minutes from June 7, 2018 to read “the motion carried 3-1 with DiSanto voting no and Ferebee not responding” regarding the Primary Election Canvass.
    [Show full text]
  • Connecting the Dots
    M A Y 2 0 2 1 Connecting the DOTs Fallen Hero Bridge Naming Program INSIDE THIS ISSUE: The Fallen Hero Bridge Naming Program was created to honor and remember South Dakota’s fallen veterans by S E C R E T A R Y ' S C O R N E R - P A G E 2 naming bridges on the state highway system for those who were either killed or are still missing in action while F A L L E N H E R O E S T O B E H O N O R E D - P A G E 3 defending our country in any armed conflict. M A Y M E N T O R I N G M I N U T E - This year, the Committee (comprised of Department of P A G E 4 Military and Department of Veterans Affairs personnel) chose to honor 13 heroes on 12 bridges. The Committee strives to G I S - P I C T U R E P E R F E C T - P A G E 5 annually award heroes from each era. As many WWII T R A I N I N G T I P S A N D L O G O veteran's family members are part of an aging population, L A U N C H - P A G E 6 the Committee wanted to honor as many WWII veterans as possible this year. I N D U S T R Y P A R N E R S H I P S - S D D O T & A G C - W O R K Z O N E The Transportation Commission approved the designation of A W A R E N E S S B I L L B O A R D S - the 12 bridges in honor of the 13 fallen heroes at their April P A G E S 7 & 8 meeting.
    [Show full text]
  • Public Involvement Meetings #1 Summary, July 23, 2019 Pennington County, South Dakota September 9, 2019
    Public Involvement Meetings #1 Summary, July 23, 2019 Pennington County, South Dakota September 9, 2019 US 16 Corridor Study Contents 1.0 Public and Stakeholder Meetings Overview ...................................................... 1 1.1 Overarching Themes to Transportation Need Comments and Discussion ........... 2 2.0 Written Comments ................................................................................... 3 3.0 Public Meeting Notes ............................................................................... 21 4.0 Stakeholder Meeting Notes ........................................................................ 23 4.1 US16/US16B/Catron Boulevard Intersection Stakeholder Meeting .................. 24 4.2 US16/Neck Yoke Road Intersection Stakeholder Meeting ............................ 28 4.3 US16 Corridor South of Neck Yoke Road Stakeholder Meeting ...................... 33 5.0 Additional Outreach ................................................................................ 37 September 2019 i US 16 Corridor Study 1.0 Public and Stakeholder Meetings Overview Tuesday, July 23, 2019 BLACK HILLS ENERGY, EVENT CENTER RAPID CITY, SD US16/US16B/CATRON BOULEVARD INTERSECTION: 10 A.M. US16/NECK YOKE ROAD INTERSECTION: 1:00 P.M. US16 CORRIDOR SOUTH OF NECK YOKE ROAD: 3:00 P.M. PUBLIC MEETING: 5:30 P.M. – 7 P.M. Study Website: www.US16corridor.com September 2019 1 US 16 Corridor Study 1.1 Overarching Themes to Transportation Need Comments and Discussion Safety Intersection conflicts Roadway departure Vehicle-animal conflicts
    [Show full text]
  • Rapid City Area Transportation Improvement Program (Fiscal Years 2013-2017)
    Rapid City Area Transportation Improvement Program (Fiscal Years 2013-2017) Final Report August 2012 Prepared By: The Cities of Rapid City, Box Elder, Summerset, Piedmont, Meade County and Pennington County, Rapid City Regional Airport, Ellsworth Air Force Base Rapid City Area School District, the Rapid City Long Range Planning Division, and the South Dakota Department of Transportation In Cooperation With: Rapid City Public Works Department Pennington County Highway Department Meade County Highway Department City of Box Elder South Dakota Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration and the Federal Transit Administration of the United States Department of Transportation Adopted by: The Executive Policy Committee of the Rapid City Area Metropolitan Planning Organization The Rapid City Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) provides services without regard to race, color gender, religion, national origin, age or disability, according to the provisions contained in SDCL 20-13, Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, the Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990 and Executive Order 12898, Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations, 1994. Any person who has questions concerning this policy or who believes they have been discriminated against should contact the Rapid City Area MPO at 605-394-4120. “The preparation of this report has been financed in part through grant[s] from the Federal Highway Administration and Federal Transit Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, under State Planning and Research Program, Section 505 [or Metropolitan Planning Program, Section 104(f)] of Title 23, U.S. Code. The contents of this report do not necessarily reflect the official views or policy of the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Arneson Auction Larry 10-26
    CONSTRUCTION Industry Center WEEKLY BULLETIN Your Builders Exchange Serving the Construction Industry Of the Greater Black Hills Services Offered to our Members ➣ Comprehensive Weekly Bulletin ➣ Estimating Area ➣ Notary Service ➣ FAX Service ➣ AIA Documents ➣ Plotting Service ➣ Blueprint & Spec. Copying ➣ Meeting & Conference Room ➣ Major Medical Insurance ➣ Dental Insurance Program ➣ Safety Videos & Materials A Reference Library Consisting of ➣ Sweets Catalogs ➣ Thomas Registers ➣ OSHA Documents/Publications ➣ F.A.R.’s (Federal Acquisition Regs) CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY CENTER Rapid City, South Dakota P.O. Box 1227 ♦ Zip 57709 ♦ 2771 Plant Street ♦ 57702 Phone: (605) 343-5252 ☎ FAX: (605) 343-4591 e-mail: [email protected] Web Site: www.constructionindustrycenter.com Construction Industry Center members who advertise in the C.I.C. Weekly Bulletin are wholly responsible for composition, content and layout of their advertisement. Any material content reflects solely on the member firm and does not represent the ideas or viewpoint of the Construction Industry Center. SALES • RENTALS • SERVICE • CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT • TOOLS • SUPPLIES Where You Always Do Business With An Owner 348-6440 3030 NORTH PLAZA DRIVE (800) 658-5437 www.bierschbach.com 1543 Deadwood Avenue • Rapid City, SD 57702 Ph: (605) 343-3733 www.mybrickstore.com Fax: (605) 343-2303 Masonry Supply & Fireplace Sales Sales of the Midwest’s Finest Brick Manufacturer A Concrete Approach to Quality STANLEY J. JOHNSEN CONCRETE CONTRACTOR, INC. Our specialists prepare ready COMMERCIAL, RESIDENTIAL & PAVING CONCRETE WORK mixed concrete to your exact speci- fications. Radio equipped trucks CONCRETE PAVING • CURB & GUTTER • FOUNDATIONS assure timely delivery. CONCRETE FLOORS • SIDEWALKS RED-E-MIX CO. Office Location: 1671 Rand Road (605) 342-7453 255 E.
    [Show full text]
  • Structural Geology and Tectonics of the Paleoproterozoic Rocks of the Mount Rushmore Quadrangle, Black Hills, South Dakota ______
    STRUCTURAL GEOLOGY AND TECTONICS OF THE PALEOPROTEROZOIC ROCKS OF THE MOUNT RUSHMORE QUADRANGLE, BLACK HILLS, SOUTH DAKOTA ______________________________________ A Dissertation presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School University of Missouri-Columbia ______________________________________ In Partial Fulfillment Of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy ______________________________________ By JOSEPH CHRISTOPHER HILL AUGUST 2006 Dr. Peter I. Nabelek, Advisor Dr. Robert L. Bauer, Co-Advisor To my son, Aidan Christopher You gave me the reason to persevere… And my wife, Kristin Leigh You gave me the strength. Nothing is so firmly believed as what we least know. - Michel de Montaigne ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS It has been a long, bumpy ride over a long, long road and yet somehow I have arrived at the end of it – definitely a different person from when I started. As Henri-Frédéric Amiel said: “All appears to change when we change.” I have learned a lot, been given the opportunity to receive an excellent education, and in the process learned a lot about myself. I didn’t enjoy every minute of it, I regret some of it, and I understand a little better now that it is all over why kismet chose this path. To paraphrase Thomas Jefferson, the harder I work the luckier I get. I have lots of people to thank for guiding me, pushing me, and suffering me. First I would like to thank the members of my committee: Drs. Glen Himmelberg (emeritus), Erik Loehr, Kevin Shelton, and Alan Whittington and especially my co-advisors Drs. Robert Bauer and Peter Nabelek. I’m sure we would all agree that we wouldn’t want to do it all over again.
    [Show full text]
  • Public Involvement Meetings #2 Summary, December 10, 2019 Pennington County, South Dakota January 21, 2020
    Public Involvement Meetings #2 Summary, December 10, 2019 Pennington County, South Dakota January 21, 2020 US 16 Corridor Study Contents 1.0 Public and Stakeholder Meetings Overview ...................................................... 1 1.1 Overarching Themes to US16/US16B/Catron Boulevard Intersection and US16/Neck Yoke Road Intersection Build Options ...................................... 2 2.0 Written Comments ................................................................................... 3 3.0 Stakeholder Meeting Notes ........................................................................ 19 3.1 US16/US16B/Catron Boulevard Intersection Stakeholder Meeting .................. 20 3.2 US16/Neck Yoke Road Intersection Stakeholder Meeting ............................ 23 3.3 US16 Corridor South of Neck Yoke Road Stakeholder Meeting ...................... 25 4.0 Additional Outreach ................................................................................ 27 January 2020 i US 16 Corridor Study 1.0 Public and Stakeholder Meetings Overview Tuesday, December 10, 2019 BLACK HILLS ENERGY, EVENT CENTER RAPID CITY, SD US16/US16B/CATRON BOULEVARD INTERSECTION: 10 A.M. US16/NECK YOKE ROAD INTERSECTION: 1:00 P.M. US16 CORRIDOR SOUTH OF NECK YOKE ROAD: 3:00 P.M. PUBLIC MEETING: 5:30 P.M. – 7 P.M. Study Website: www.US16corridor.com January 2020 1 US 16 Corridor Study 1.1 Overarching Themes to US16/US16B/Catron Boulevard Intersection and US16/Neck Yoke Road Intersection Build Options US16/US16B/Catron Boulevard Intersection Build Options Single Point Interchange Support for US16 northbound/southbound free movements over US16B/Catron Boulevard Interchange familiarity (both for tourists and locals). Safety benefits of the interchange (no signal for US16 mainline, fog concerns). Required closure of Addison Avenue was noted as a drawback. The potential for higher speeds (compared to the DLT) was noted as a benefit and a drawback. Displaced Left-Turn Intersection Support for this intersection often centered on the potential for access at Addison Avenue.
    [Show full text]
  • Current Fire Record Black Hills National Forest Year ___2004_____
    CURRENT FIRE RECORD BLACK HILLS NATIONAL FOREST YEAR ___2004_____ FIRE FOREST COMBINED BL CU EM HA NH PA Size SPECIFIC ACRES TOTAL TOTAL SO # FIRE NAME D1 D3 D4 D6 D8 D9 DATE Class CAUSE T R S LAT LONG ACRES Firecode HC LTG HC LTG 29 November 9 3-Jul A Lightning T2S R5E 3243 49 55 103 32 48 0.10 18.45 20.40 AVL7 30 Butte Creek 4 3-Jul B Lightning T5N R4E 2744 21 55 103 37 08 0.75 19.20 21.15 AVL7 31 Beaver Creek 10 4-Jul B Lightning T4S R4E 2443 41 16 103 35 13 0.25 19.45 21.40 AVL7 32 Tenderfoot 11 4-Jul B Lightning T2S R4E 3343 50 15 103 38 43 0.25 19.70 21.65 AVL7 NS Crazy Horse 29-Jun A Lightning T2S R4E 3343 49 56 103 38 48 0.10 19.80 21.75 AVL7 33 Kelly Gulch 8 3-Jul A Lightning T2N R4E 2544 05 53 103 35 37 0.10 19.90 21.85 AVL7 34 Pilger Mtn 2 6-Jul B Lightning T7S R2E 843 28 07 103 53 34 1.50 21.40 23.35 AVL7 35 Burno 5 9-Jul A Lightning T5N R2E 244 25 29 103 50 11 0.10 21.50 23.45 AVL7 36 Lindsley 12 8-Jul B Lightning T8S R4E 1343 20 26 103 35 20 0.30 21.80 23.75 AVL7 37 Tepee 3 11-Jul A Lightning T6N R2E 1243 42 08 103 53 25 0.10 21.90 23.85 AVL7 38 Empress 9 11-Jul B Lightning T1N R5E 544 03 36 103 32 36 0.50 22.40 24.35 AVL7 39 Crook 7 11-Jul B Lightning T53N R62W 2044 33 43 104 19 22 0.25 22.65 24.50 AVL7 40 Misty 6 12-Jul A Lightning T3N R5E 1944 12 06 103 33 16 0.10 22.75 24.60 AVL7 41 Minnesota 7 12-Jul B Lightning T2N R4E 1744 00 47 103 39 46 2.00 24.75 26.60 AVL7 42 White Elephant 13 14-Jul B Lightning T5S R4E 143 38 36 103 35 20 0.50 25.25 27.40 AVL7 43 Antelope 4 15-Jul B Lightning T1S R1E 2743 55 07 103 59 10 0.50
    [Show full text]