|
FAQs
In this section we have provided answers to the most Frequently Asked Questions
(FAQs) about the K-61 Enhancement Project. We hope this information will help
you understand why the project developed and how it will help Kansans.
Who are the K-61 Project Sponsors, and what is their role?
A coalition of local governments came together to make an application for K-61
improvement under the System Enhancement Program. These Project Sponsors were
Reno and McPherson Counties, and the Cities of Inman, McPherson and Hutchinson.
These Project Sponsors had an ongoing, active role in the project development
of K-61 and were actively involded in the completion of the Location and Design
Concept Study. Although all final decisions must, by law, be made by the Kansas
Department of Transportation (KDOT), input from Project Sponsors and the public
has had, and will have, a significant impact on the decision-making processes
used.
What was the Community Advisory Group (CAG)?
The Community Advisory Group (CAG) was a 14-member group formed to provide
community opinions to KDOT and the Project Team. The CAG had an advisory role
in the project. They were not asked to act as decision-makers. Project Sponsors
recommended to KDOT the names of individuals to serve on the CAG. Although they
were not asked to act as decision-makers, KDOT invited the members to
participate in the discussions about the decisions being considered. The CAG
met quarterly during the planning phase. The dates they met are posted on this
web site.
Why are improvements needed to K-61?
Hutchinson is the largest city in Kansas not served by an interstate highway,
and K-61 is a direct link to I-135. When K-61 between McPherson and Hutchinson
becomes a four-lane highway, it will provide a four-lane connection to the
interstate system for southwest Kansas, U.S. 54/U.S. 400, and U.S. 50. The
Hutchinson/Reno County Economic Development Council sees a four-lane K-61 as
paramount to the future growth and development of the area. The City of
Hutchinson's updated Comprehensive Plan (1998) recommends the development of a
four-lane highway link to McPherson as a top priority.
Furthermore, over the last two decades, traffic has been growing on K-61. (See
Fig. 1 to the right.)
Current traffic analysis shows that this roadway has a vehicle count of about
7,600 near Hutchinson and a vehicle count of over 5,000 just southwest of
Inman. The engineering feasibility study conducted by Wilson and Company in
1996 showed that the estimated traffic volumes would approach the capacity of
the existing two-lane highway by early in this century with peak hour volumes
being even higher due to school traffic and usage generated by special events.
Why did you do this study? If K-61 needs to be a four-lane highway,
couldn't you just add two-lanes next to the existing two-lane K-61?
While "just adding two new lanes" always sounds reasonable, it isn't the
solution. The issues are very complex. Highway enhancements are so expensive
that any major changes have to last for years. For a major corridor like K-61,
freeway criteria had to be considered to ensure that traffic and safety
issues were addressed for now, as well as into the future, when traffic and
development along the corridor both increase. Therefore, this study examined
the tradeoffs between a freeway and an
expressway design for K-61 to determine which would serve the long-term
best interest of the traveling public and the communities along the corridor.
The study revealed that it would not be possible or practical to "just add
two-new lanes next to the existing highway". Some existing businesses, farms
and homes would be affected by the location of the highway enhancements. Part
or all of their property might need to be acquired to provide the necessary
right-of-way for the project or their access to the highway might
change. All of these impacts needed to be carefully considered before final
location decisions were made.
In addition, the close proximity of the Union Pacific Railroad to K-61 had to
be considered. The location of the Union Pacific Railroad generally parallels
K-61 between the cities of Hutchinson, Inman and McPherson.
Compared to the overall cost of constructing a four-lane K-61, the cost of
doing studies is very small. These studies ensure that the decisions made are
those that will best serve the communities and the traveling public now and
into the future.
What does it mean when you say K-61 is a System Enhancement Project?
The System Enhancement Program was included in the passage of the Comprehensive
Transportation Program (CTP) by the 1999 Kansas Legislature. System Enhancement
projects must be on the State Highway System or be logical additions to the
State Highway System. The projects must substantially improve safety, relieve
congestion, improve access or enhance economic development. The program
solicited applications for projects from local governments. Only city/county
governments or coalitions of city/county governments could submit applications.
On December 8, 1999, a coalition, which included Reno County, McPherson County,
and the cities of Hutchinson, Inman, and McPherson, submitted an application to
KDOT for the construction of a four-lane combination
expressway/freeway between Hutchinson and McPherson. As a part of that
application, the coalition volunteered to contribute $275,000 towards the
project cost and to take over maintenance of 17 miles of the existing State
Highway System in Reno County and 4.3 miles in McPherson County. By
volunteering to take over maintenance of these miles and contributing funds,
the K-61 application was awarded "extra credit " points based on a
formula established by KDOT. This "extra credit " was instrumental in
having the K-61 proposal selected ahead of competing projects.
Why have KDOT crews needed to access my property so many times?
Highway construction is a very complex process, requiring the input of experts
in several fields.. During the first part of the study, KDOT surveyors needed
to access property within, or adjacent to, the 6-miles wide by 22-miles long
study corridor to collect the data engineers needed to select the best
alignment and evaluate highway access issues.
When the survey crew asked for access to your property, it did NOT mean that
your property was going to be within the final corridor for the new highway or
that you should worry about a highway being built through your backyard. The
study corridor was almost 6-miles wide, which meant most of the property
surveyed would not be directly impacted by the K-61 Enhancement project.
When the surveyors were finished, the soil and geology crews began seeking
permission to enter property to conduct field studies, during which they
checked on soil composition, topography, surface water, underground water, and
drainage issues. Although this phase of the project is almost complete, these
experts might return to some properties, if they have additional questions that
need to be answered.
The corridor has been narrowed down to a 1000-ft. wide concept corridor and the
second round of data collection has begun. Some properties might require
additional survey and/or soil and geological assessment before the center line
for the 300' preferred highway corridor can be established and right-of-way
negotiations can begin.
Once Right-of-Way (ROW) negotiations begin, KDOT surveyors will be out again to
conduct ROW surveys and set the center line of the highway. Also, they may have
to do additional surveys to address access issues, which are refined throughout
the Design phase.
Before construction begins, contractors will have contractor (non-KDOT) crews
surveying and placing stakes marking the exact placement of the road, the
shoulder, etc. Most of the time they will be working on property purchased by
KDOT, because they will be working within the final 300 ft. wide preferred
corridor, where construction will occur. Only rarely will they need access to
your property during this phase. If they do so, they should obtain permission.
Why did KDOT award $217 million in System Enhancement funds to the
K-61 System Enhancement Project when the local project sponsors estimated the
cost to be $93 million?
Project sponsors were asked to submit their estimated project cost in
Fiscal Year (FY) 2000 dollars. In this way, all of the projects
submitted could be compared fairly. However, the System Enhancement projects
are all complex and most will not be ready to be
let to construction until the end of this decade. Consequently, the
selected System Enhancement project costs have been adjusted to FY 2009 costs
to account for inflation. Furthermore, each submitted system enhancement
project was reviewed to ensure that the appropriate design criteria and all
project components were included in the cost estimate. The K-61 project was
submitted as a combination
expressway/freeway design that added two new lanes adjacent to the
existing lanes with at-grade intersections and some interchanges. While this
design was an option that was considered, the study also examined new
alignments as well as at a
freeway design with interchanges and no at-grade intersections. The
project cost estimates were adusted to ensure that sufficient funds would be
available should a freeway design be selected. Taking all of these factors into
consideration, this is how the project cost estimate changed:
$93 Million (FY 2000 dollars) As submitted by project sponsors
$120 Million (FY 2000 dollars) KDOT revised estimate of costs as submitted by
project sponsors based on KDOT history of bid prices
$171 Million (FY 2009 dollars) KDOT revised estimate of costs as submitted by
project sponsors based on KDOT history of bid prices and adjusted for inflation
$217 Million (FY 2009 dollars) Amount awarded to K-61 under the System
Enhancement Program by KDOT based on revised estimate of costs to allow for
possible freeway design with an adjustment for inflation.
What is the difference between a freeway and an expressway?
Both a freeway
and an expressway
are multilane divided highways; the difference is the degree of
"access control" . Freeways allow access only at
interchanges while expressways allow access at public roads via
via at-grade intersections. There are tradeoffs when choosing between
an expressway and a freeway. A freeway offers increased safety, capacity and
function. An expressway offers lower initial costs to build the roadway and
more access for adjacent property owners. Expressways can be built in
anticipation of a needed freeway in the future. In those cases, additional
access control and right-of-way considerations may be part of the initial construction.
For expressways that are built without future access control considerations,
conversion to a freeway in the future can be cost prohibitive.
What was the result of the study
The study was a Location and Design Concept Study. This involved an extensive
corridor study and preliminary design planning. The outcome of this study
(Phase I) was a preferred corridor location, a recommended design concept, and
environmental documentation to identify properties which might be impacted.
Phase II will be the actual roadway design, where the roadway itself will be
designed to fit within the selected project corridor, right-of-way will be
purchased, and utilities will be moved. Phase III will be the construction.
The recommended project corridor location developed by this study was
approximately 1,500 feet wide. During the design phase (Phase II), the project
will be designed to fit within an approximate 300 foot right-of-way strip or
corridor.
One of the purposes of this study is to determine whether K-61 should be
designed as a freeway
or as an expressway.
A freeway allows access only at interchanges, while an expressway provides
access at
at-grade intersections. The decision to build a freeway or an
expressway is important because each design affects cost, safety, right-of-way
requirements, and access in different ways. The recommendation was to build a
combination freeway/expressway. You can read more about this by going to the
Study and Planning Phase of the project.
|
 |
| A stretch of K-61 in Hutchinson, Kansas. |
Fig. 1: Traffic Counts on K-61:
|
Year |
McPherson County |
Reno County |
| 1982 |
2880 |
3900 |
| 1986 |
3200 |
4500 |
| 1990 |
3700 |
5500 |
| 1994 |
4300 |
6000 |
| 1998 |
4800 |
7000 |
| 2002 |
4960 |
7165 |
| 2004 |
5265 |
7600 |
|