Cyntheanne Road Transportation Planning Study - Indianapolis ...

Cyntheanne Road 

Transportation Planning Study 

This transportation planning study was funded in part through a grant from the 

Indianapolis Metropolitan Planning Organization 

Prepared By:

Contents 

Executive Summary 

1.0 Project History 

1.1 Project Description 

1.2 Limits of Study Area 


2.0 Purpose & Need 

2.1 Traffic Capacity & Congestion Needs 

2.1.1 Field Inspection 

2.1.2 Existing Traffic Volumes 

2.1.3 Alternative Alignments 

2.1.4 Projected Traffic Volumes & Level of Service Summary 

2.2 Land Use 

2.3 Economic Initiatives 

3.0 Alternative Analysis 

3.1 Description of Alternative Typical Sections 

3.2 Estimate of Probable Construction Costs 

3.3 Right-of-way Impacts 

3.4 Analysis of Alternatives 

4.0 Environmental Assessment 

4.1 Introduction 

4.2 Affected Environment 

4.3 Summary 

5.0 Project Summary 

Appendix: 

Existing Peak Hour Traffic Volumes 

Projected Peak Hour Traffic Volumes – Alt. 1 



Typical Cross Sections 

Alternative Cost Analysis Summary 

Alternative Right-of-Way Impacts 

Cyntheanne Road Planning Study 2

Alternative 1 Cost Estimate 



Environmental Features 

Exhibits: 

4 - Projected Peak Hour Traffic Volumes – Alt. 3 


Executive Summary 

Transportation is the key to economic development in the Town of Fishers and 

this can be achieved by improving Cyntheanne Road to create a primary northsouth 

corridor. The goal of this planning study is to examine the traffic demand 

needs, review environmental impacts, improve safety and evaluate new roadway 

alignments along Cyntheanne Road to connect the two sections. The northern 

section is from Interstate 69 to SR 238, which is approximately 2.5 miles south of 

I-69. The southern section extends from south of Fall Creek to 96 th Street. 

Cyntheanne Road is located in Hamilton County on the east side of the Town of 

Fishers. Fishers has been experiencing new development and traffic growth in 

recent years, which is creating significant demand increases along existing 

roadways. Additionally, Hamilton County is currently the fastest growing county 

in the State of Indiana, which is heavily influenced by the Town of Fishers’ 

significant growth of more than 51% in the past five years. 

The purpose of this study is to prepare a transportation plan on how to transform 

Cyntheanne Road into a continuous north-south corridor from I-69 to 96 th 

Street. This corridor will service potential development within the eastern limits 

of Hamilton County and the Town of Fishers. Currently, Cyntheanne Road 

begins north of I-69 and extends south to terminate at SR 238. A short segment 

also exists from Connecticut Avenue to 96 th Street. 

The goal of the Cyntheanne Road project is to accommodate and encourage a safe 

and balanced network of roads, bicycle and pedestrian systems within the larger 

metropolitan area. This project will: 

• evaluate new road alignments along Cyntheanne Road 

• review future traffic demand and recommend improvements to meet the 

future needs 

• evaluate provisions for bicycles and pedestrian connectivity 

• create town and neighborhood streets that are efficient and safe 

• preserve corridor mobility within the context of environmental and land 

use issues 

KEY FINDINGS 

In summary, the existing Cyntheanne Road corridor is not adequate to handle an 

increase in traffic because of safety, operating capacity, and connectivity issues. 

Improving this north-south corridor is important because it should handle the 

traffic demand without causing traffic to use the parallel routes and creating 

congestion on the other existing north-south corridors. With the addition of 

residential development, such as the Del Webb community and other planned 

residential developments in the area, traffic will dramatically increase. 

Additionally, a vital quality of life characteristic in the Town of Fishers is its 

pedestrian and bicycle friendly systems. Upgrades to Cyntheanne Road will

further solidify this pedestrian and bicycle system, while also providing a 

continuous north-south link to parallel facilities. 

Listed below are the key findings and design recommendations derived from 

traffic data review, field inspections, public meeting comments and comparison 

of alternatives. 

Safety: The existing roadway design has safety issues due to narrow lanes, lack 

of shoulders and lack of lane striping. To improve safety, new typical roadway 

sections have been analyzed. These sections include wider lanes, medians to 

protect turning vehicles and new bicycle and pedestrian pathways. 

Mobility: Connecting Cyntheanne Road to 96 th Street improves mobility to 

create a north-south corridor located on the east side of Town. The future traffic 

demand will increase along this corridor, but two lanes will be sufficient as an 

interim design. However, additional right-of-way should be purchased during 

the initial construction so that four lanes could be accommodated when new 

development occurs and volumes increase. 

Three alternative routes were analyzed to connect Cyntheanne Road. A fourth 

route was developed as a result of comments raised during meetings with the 

Town Council. 

An abridged summary of the findings is shown in the table below. More detailed 

analysis is located within the body of the report as well as in the Appendix. 

Alt. 1 

Central Alt. 

Alt. 2 

Eastern Alt. 

Alt. 3 

Western Alt. 

Alt. 4 

Modified Alt 3 

Construction Cost $24.2 – 2 lane 

$35.4 – 4 lane 

$13.6 – 2 lane 

$19.5 – 4 lane 

$12.7 – 2 lane 

$18.3 – 4 lane 

$12.5 – 2 lane 

$18.4 – 4 lane 

Right-of-Way 

57 acres 

$4.7 

66.78 acres 

$5.5 

55.93 acres 

$4.6 

62.66 acres 

$5.2 

Total Length 

4.50 miles 

23,500ft 

5.46 miles 

28,800ft 

4.75 miles 

25,030ft 

5.15 miles 

27,180ft 

- New Alignment 7,700ft 3,200ft 7,650ft 8,900ft 

- Existing 

15,800ft 25,600ft 17,380ft 18,280ft 

Alignment 

Environmental 

High Low Medium Medium to High 

Concerns 

Soil Concerns High Low to Medium Medium Medium to High 

Note: All costs are reflected in 2006 dollars. Dollar figures are in millions of 

dollars. 


Figure E-1 

Summary of Alternatives 



1.1 Project Description 

Population growth throughout the Town of Fishers, Indiana has increased 

traffic demand on the existing roadway system dramatically. This growth 

is continuing to the east where property is still available for development. 

Hamilton County is currently the fastest growing county in the State of 

Indiana. The increase in population can be partially attributed to the 

Town of Fishers and its growth of more than 51% in the past five years. 

This growth has created the need to analyze the demands on the Town’s 

transportation system. The Indianapolis Metropolitan Planning 

Organization (MPO) and Town of Fishers have initiated a transportation 

planning study to improve north-south access in eastern Hamilton County 

by evaluating several roadway alternatives for Cyntheanne Road. 

The purpose of this study is to prepare a transportation plan which will 

transform Cyntheanne Road into a continuous north-south corridor from 

I-69 to 96 th Street. Currently, Cyntheanne Road extends from north of I- 

69 and ends at SR238. There is a second section of the road, which 

extends from Connecticut Avenue to 96 th Street. 

The goals of this study are to accommodate and encourage a safe and 

balanced network of roads, bicycle and pedestrian systems within the 

larger metropolitan area. This project will: 

• evaluate three new road alignments along Cyntheanne Road 

• review future traffic demand and recommend improvements to 

meet the future needs 

• evaluate provisions for bicycles and pedestrian connectivity 

• create town and neighborhood streets that are efficient and safe 

• preserve corridor mobility within the context of environmental and 

land use issues 

Recommendations will be made to identify which project alternatives need 

a more detailed evaluation. 

1.2 Limits of Study Area 

The Town of Fishers is located about 15 miles northeast of Indianapolis, 

Indiana. As shown in Figure 1.1, the Cyntheanne Road study area is 

located in Fishers, Indiana between 96 th Street and I-69. A section of this 

roadway between SR 238 and Connecticut Avenue was never constructed. 

Therefore, vehicles driving along Cyntheanne Road are forced to divert to 


oads that parallel Cyntheanne Road to reach the second segment of the 

roadway. 96 th Street is the southern project limit and is also the southernmost 

intersection within the Town of Fishers along Cyntheanne Road. 

136 th Street is the northern project limit since it is the northern-most 

intersection within the Town of Fishers along Cyntheanne Road. 

Figure 1.1 

Town of Fishers Road Map 


Cyntheanne Road has yet to experience significant development as it 

consists primarily of agricultural land and single-lot single family homes. 

The middle section consists of forest and environmentally sensitive areas 

that serve as a flood plain area. Residential development by Pulte Homes 

for their Del Webb community has started along the northern section of 

Cyntheanne Road near I-69. Approximately 1,000 homes are planned to 

be built in the first phase with more residential development expected. 

Even though the traffic volumes are currently below capacity, this corridor 

must be able to accommodate increased future traffic loads. This study 

will prepare a transportation planning report with recommendations on 

how to connect and improve existing sections of the roadway while also 

providing for future traffic operating capacity along Cyntheanne Road. 


2.0 Purpose & Need 

2.1 Traffic Capacity & Congestion Needs 

2.1.1 Field Inspection 

The existing Cyntheanne Road is a two-lane rural road from 96 th Street to 

I-69. The roadway has a typical right-of-way of 20 feet from the 

centerline. The north section (I-69 to SR 238) of Cyntheanne Road is 

classified as a primary arterial. The south section (Connecticut Avenue to 

96 th Street) is classified as a collector. There are currently four signalized 

intersections and three unsignalized intersections along the project 

corridor. Additionally, there is a total of 40 private driveways and access 

points to Cyntheanne Road. Finally, right and left turn auxiliary lanes do 

not exist along Cyntheanne Road. 

Figure 2.1 

Cyntheanne Road Study Area 


2.1.2 Existing Traffic Volumes 

The Town of Fishers updates its traffic count data every five years. The 

most recent existing traffic volumes were collected in 2002 and have been 

used for this analysis. The 2002 traffic volume data was provided by A&F 

Engineering. The traffic volumes analyzed were calculated during the 

peak hour, which includes one-hour peak periods (rush hours) in both the 

morning and evening. Graphic representations of the peak hour 

intersection turning movement data within the study area is shown in 

Appendices 1 to 4. While the existing Cyntheanne Road traffic volumes 

are below capacity and congestion is minimal, future growth plans in this 

area will have a significant impact on traffic volumes along the 

Cyntheanne Road corridor and the surrounding road network. This 

impact on surrounding roadways will be even more significant should 

Cyntheanne Road not be enhanced as a major north-south corridor. 

2.1.3 Alternative Alignments 

As shown in Figure 2.2, three alternative roadway alignments were studied 

to connect Cyntheanne Road into a continuous north-south corridor: 

• Alternative 1: direct and straight connection. This alternative 

provides the most direct connection at 4.3 miles in total length. It 

requires one new bridge crossing, but it appears to have the greatest 

environmental impact. 

• Alternative 2: eastern connection – SR 238 connection with 

Connecticut Avenue. This alternative utilizes existing roadways 

along the eastern side of Cyntheanne Road, but it requires a new 

section of roadway to provide overall route continuity. This route is 

approximately five miles in length. 

• Alternative 3: western connection – Florida and Georgia Roads. 

This alternative uses existing roadways along the western side of 

Cyntheanne Road requiring new sections of new roadway to provide 

overall route continuity. This route is approximately five miles. 

More details highlighting each alignment will be discussed in the following 

sections. The alignments will be evaluated based upon the impacts created 

with each alternative. The analysis includes evaluation of residential 

impacts, right-of-way impacts, environmental impacts, phasing and cost. 


Figure 2.2 

Cyntheanne Road Alternative Alignments 


2.1.4 Projected Traffic Volumes & Level of Service Summary 

Future peak hour traffic volumes were provided by A&F Engineering for 

2022. The new Cyntheanne Road traffic volumes were reassigned to the 

three alternative routes and the increase in cumulative traffic has been 

studied. A summary of the data is shown for each alternative route in the 

Appendix. 

The future traffic demand along Cyntheanne Road shows a significant 

increase in travel because of new developments planned along the 

corridor. This increase in demand required further study to determine if 

the current roadway design has enough capacity to handle this additional 

traffic safely and efficiently. Based on the existing roadway conditions and 

design, both capacity and geometric improvements will be required. 

Specific design details are discussed in the Alternatives Section. 

Level of Service (LOS) was reviewed at all of the intersections along the 

three routes to determine the current operating capacity of each 

intersection. LOS ratings have been developed to rank the effectiveness of 

roadways and intersections at accommodating the volume of traffic that 

travels along them. Since traffic volumes are currently below capacity, the 

existing level of service is at a “B” level or better, which indicates minimal 

delays. As traffic volumes increase in the future, the intersection 

congestion increases and LOS ratings will drop to C, D or E. LOS C and D 

are characterized by congestion and continuous lines of vehicles waiting at 

intersections. LOS E represents a failure of the transportation system to 

accommodate the vehicles using it, which results in heavy congestion and 

stopped traffic. Deteriorating LOS ratings can be overcome with proper 

intersection design and potential signalized improvements. All upgraded 

intersections could operate at acceptable service levels with a two-lane 

roadway with these design improvements. The LOS results were obtained 

from A&F Engineering provided in the report “Traffic Impact Fee 

Analysis” from December 2004. 

2. 2 Land Use 

The land use on Cyntheanne Road is primarily agricultural land and natural 

areas. The future land use of the south section of Cyntheanne Road (96 th Street 

to Connecticut Avenue) is currently projected to be primarily residential 

developments while the north section (I-69 to SR 238) is to be developed as 

single family residential and small commercial development. The north section 

also plans to include a recreational park between SR 238 and 126 th Street. 


2. 3 Economic Initiatives 

Hamilton County and Fishers have become popular locations for many employers 

and families. Money Magazine ranks Hamilton County eighth in quality of life 

over all counties in the United States and it also ranks the Town of Fishers as one 

of the top 100 places to live. As shown in Table 2.1, Hamilton County added more 

than 125,000 new residents between 1990 and 2005. Population growth is 

projected increase to almost 400,000 residents by 2025. As a result of the rapid 

population and employment growth in Fishers and Hamilton County, there is a 

desire to make Cyntheanne Road a primary north-south corridor. 

Fishers and Hamilton County are experiencing significant growth, but Fishers is 

experiencing a far greater percentage of change. Between 1990 and 2005, Fishers 

experienced a growth of about 50,000 residents, an increase of 88%. The Fishers 

“Approved Lots & Estimated Future Population Growth” map from July 2006 is 

included to provide a better understanding of where the growth is expected to 

occur over the next 20 years. This information is also available on the Town of 

Fishers website. Significant residential developments have been approved or are 

in the process of being approved along the Cyntheanne Road corridor. 

Table 2.1 

Population 

1990 2000 2005 

% 

Change 

Proposed 

2025 

State of Indiana 5,554,890 5,987,900 6,271,973 12% 6,546,000 

Hamilton 

County 108,936 182,740 240,685 55% 394,025 

Town of Fishers 7,149 37,835 57,220 88% 124,713 

Source: Town of Fishers 2005 Annual Report and www.stats.indiana.edu 

Figure 2.3 

Population Growth 

State of 

Indiana 

8% 

Town of 

Fishers 

57% 

Hamilton 

County 

35% 

Source: Town of Fishers 2005 Annual Report and www.stats.indiana.edu 


Employment opportunities (Table 2.2) in Fishers and Hamilton County continue 

to grow and are another important factor of this project. Fishers currently 

accounts for 23% of Hamilton County’s employment. By 2025, the Town of 

Fishers is expected to have almost 70,000 jobs, 34% of the county’s total, and 

Hamilton County is expected to have almost 200,000 jobs. The new development 

is projected to occur to the north, near the Cyntheanne Road corridor. This 

growth potential illustrates the need to study the corridor to determine how the 

growing demand will be accommodated throughout this area. 

Table 2.2 

Employment 

% 

Change 

Proposed 

2025 

1990 2000 2005 

State of 

Indiana 2,628,695 2,965,174 3,641,302 28% N/A 

Hamilton 

County 57,985 95,694 137,839 58% 200,000+ 

Town of 

Fishers 4,391 22,600 31,900 86% 70,000+ 

Source: Indiana Workforce Development and U.S. Census 

Figure 2.2 

Employment Growth 

State of Indiana 

16% 

Town of Fishers 

50% 

Hamilton County 

34% 

Source: Indiana Workforce Development and U.S. Census 


3.0 Alternative Analysis 

In order to conduct a proper alternative analysis of enhancing Cyntheanne Road, it is 

important to study the number of lanes required, which is known as a typical section, 

and to also determine which is the preferred route to be used in transforming 

Cyntheanne Road into a continuous north-south corridor. 

3.1 Description of Alternative Typical Sections 

Two typical roadway cross section designs have been considered along 

Cyntheanne Road. These sections depict the number of lanes needed and 

additional design features. Cross sections have been evaluated on the basis of cost 

effectiveness, traffic demand, bicycle and pedestrian connectivity, efficiency, 

safety, and the ability to preserve corridor mobility within the context of 

environmental and land use issues. 

3.1.1 No Build Alternative – Existing Two-Lane Roadway 

The No Build Alternative involves leaving Cyntheanne Road in its current 

state as a two-lane roadway. As traffic continues to increase in this area, 

this alternative would not be able to accommodate the increase in traffic, 

which would cause congestion to occur along Cyntheanne Road as well as 

the east-west roadways. East-west roadways would be particularly 

impacted by this alternative as traffic would be forced to divert from 

Cyntheanne Road to another route. In addition, there are no sidewalks or 

bikeways located along the current corridor. The Cyntheanne Road 

corridor must be upgraded to ease travel on east-west corridors and to 

accommodate residential traffic movement throughout the Town. The 

roadway must also be upgraded to accommodate safety as the existing 

roadway design may lead to an increase in accidents as traffic increases. 

The No Build alternate does not meet the needs and purpose of this project 

or the community. 

3.1.2 Typical Section A – Two Lanes with Median 

Typical Section A includes two lanes with raised grass median, which 

would be used for left turn lanes at intersections. The section also includes 

two five-foot wide tree lawns, an eight-foot wide multiple use path, a fivefoot 

wide sidewalk, and 120 feet of proposed right-of-way. Typical Section 

A is considered the interim typical section as it allows for future growth. 

This section is an interim solution since it requires the purchase of the 

120-foot wide right-of-way while providing a roadway design that will 

improve the overall usability of the roadway while meeting the Town’s 

needs. Open graded ditches are used to reduce the overall project cost 

while allowing for future expansion. 


Figure 3.1 

Typical Section A 

3.1.3 Typical Section B – Four Lanes with Median 

Typical Section B includes four total lanes with new curb, gutter, and 

raised grass median, which would be used for left turn lanes at 

intersections. This section designed to be the typical section that will best 

accommodate future growth. The section also includes two five-foot wide 

tree lawns, an eight-foot wide multiple use path, a five-foot wide sidewalk, 

and 120 feet of proposed right-of-way. This section is the standard section 

currently applied by the Town of Fishers on major arterial corridors such 

as 116 th Street and 126 th Street. 

Figure 3.2 

Typical Section B 

3.2 Project Cost Estimates 

Construction costs have been estimated based upon the magnitude of each 

construction alternative. Both two-lane and four-lane typical sections have 

been considered for the three roadway alternative routes in order to 

develop construction and right-of-way costs. Depending upon the route 

and number of lanes, the approximate construction costs range from $10.8 


to $35.3 million. More information concerning the alternatives and their 

associated costs can be found in the Appendix. 

3.3 Right-of-Way Costs 

Right-of-way costs have been determined for each alternative throughout 

the project corridor as shown in the Alternative Right-of Way Summary in 

the Appendix. Right-of-way costs were based on 120 feet width for both 

typical cross sections. Data, including right-of-way and parcel information, 

has been collected from a variety of sources, which include: the United 

States Geological Survey (USGS); Geographic Information System (GIS) 

Mapping from Hamilton, Hancock and Marion Counties; and the 

Indianapolis Mapping and Geographic Infrastructure System (IMAGIS). 

Right-of-way costs are included in the Project Cost Estimates, as described 

in the Appendix. 

Several parcels of land are actively being used as agricultural fields. The 

corridor, however, is zoned to allow for single family residential 

development. As such, land acquisition costs have been evaluated based 

on the higher cost to acquire residential properties. 

3.4 Analysis of Alternative Routes and Recommendations 

The overall focus of this study is to determine the best route and roadway 

design for Cyntheanne Road so that it can function as a primary northsouth 

corridor. Figure 3.3 illustrates the new routes being analyzed. As 

the future traffic projections indicate, there will be a need to improve this 

rural roadway in order to provide additional north-south capacity. The 

nearest continuous north-south roadway in the area is Olio Road, which is 

located approximately two and a half miles to the west. 


Figure 3.3 

Route Alternatives 


3.4.1 Alternative 1 – Central Alternative 

• The existing Cyntheanne Road to the north would be connected to 

the existing Cyntheanne Road to the south. Currently, there is 

about 7,500 feet of missing roadway. 

The Central Alternative provides the most direct path between 96 th Street 

and I-69 and forms a new total length of approximately 4.4 miles for the 

Cyntheanne Road Corridor. This alternative would severely impact the 

wetlands between the two segments of Cyntheanne Road as it will pass 

directly through the wetlands and require the construction of a bridge. 

Furthermore, a federal environmental law states that if there are wetland 

impacts then alternative routes need to be studied and used, if possible. A 

minimum of a new 1,100 foot bridge will need to be constructed at a 

significant cost. This is the costliest alternative as it will cost $24.1 million 

for two lanes and $35.3 million for four lanes. 

The new section of roadway between the existing portions of Cyntheanne 

Road will be subject to poor soil conditions, which will require costly 

solutions. These solutions include fill materials, removal of the organic 

material through excavation, or lengthening of the bridge structure. The 

exact limitations of the site’s soil have not been determined at this time. 

Soil samples from nearby bridges suggest poor building conditions, which 

result in significant risk to the project budget and the finished product. 

This alternative is the most direct solution, but should be considered for 

further environmental study prior to selection. 

3.4.2 Alternative 2 – Eastern Alternative 

• The existing Cyntheanne Road would connect with SR 238 and 

Connecticut Avenue to the east and then tie into the existing 

Cyntheanne Road to the south. 

The Eastern Alternative would be approximately 5.5 miles in length, of 

which approximately one mile can be milled and resurfaced. The 

remaining portion of the roadway would need to be reconstructed to 

replace the existing pavement to match the typical section of choice while 

also fixing alignment issues. This alternative provides a more winding 

route to I-69 from 96 th Street, but uses existing right-of-way for most of 

the length. 

This alternative utilizes two recently reconstructed bridges, which would 

need to be widened to accommodate a sidewalk and multi-use path for 

Typical Section A, or additional travel lanes for the Typical Section B. 

While bridge widening is not mandatory, the safety of pedestrians would 

be compromised due to the relatively narrow bridge as compared to the 


overall roadway width. The route would also need significant wayfinding 

signage to accommodate drivers not familiar with the area. 

The right-of-way costs for this alternative are significant because a large 

amount of residential development currently exists along this alignment. 

A more detailed analysis of the right-of-way costs would be required if this 

alternative is chosen for further study and development. 

3.4.3 Alternative 3 – Western Alternative 

• The existing Cyntheanne Road would connect to the west at Florida 

and Georgia Roads. This alternative uses existing roadways and 

requires two small sections of new roadway. 

The Western Alternative is approximately 4.8 miles in length, and the 

existing roadway has two lanes. This alternative provides a compromise 

between using existing alignments and developing a new terrain roadway. 

It also provides a more direct route to I-69 from 96 th Street as it 

terminates farther west on 96 th Street than Cyntheanne Road. In addition, 

the costs are less because the amount of new roadway is shorter. There is 

one new bridge proposed with this alternative that would need to be 

widened to safely accommodate a multi-use path and sidewalk for Typical 

Section A and additional travel lanes for Typical Section B. Although the 

bridge widening is not mandatory, it is recommended in order to increase 

safety along what will be an increasingly busy roadway. 

The approximate cost is $12.7 million for a two-lane section, which 

includes bridge widening to accommodate bike and pedestrian paths. For 

Typical Section B at four lanes, the estimated costs increase to $18.3 

million. It is anticipated that the existing pavement surface will need to be 

replaced as part of this design solution. Further engineering regarding 

reuse of the existing pavement would be needed to further reduce the 

overall project cost should this alternative be recommended for further 

study and development. 

3.4.4 Public Information Meeting 

A public information meeting was held on Wednesday, November 8, 2006, 

at the Hamilton Southeastern Junior High School in Fishers from 6 to 8 

pm. Though turnout was less than desired, the three design alternatives 

were presented to the public. However, several local residents in 

attendance were able to provide valuable input. These residents suggested 

that an internet site, email updates, or an additional public information 

meeting would be helpful in facilitating the public input, knowledge, and 

participation. 

The most influential comment that resulted from the meeting was to 

consider the 126 th Street extension along with this project. It was 


suggested that the connection from existing Cyntheanne Road north of the 

White River be shifted further north to allow use for the 126 th Street 

extension. Additionally, this option would result in no impacts to the 

potentially historic structure that sits at the northwest corner of SR 238 

and Cyntheanne Road. 

3.4.5 Versions of Alternative 3 further Evaluated 

Alternative 3A 

As a result of input obtained at the public meeting to discuss the project, a 

hybrid of Alternative 3 has been developed to shift the crossover from the 

northern portion of Cyntheanne Road to Florida Road further to the north. 

This alternative suggested allowing the following: 

• Eliminate any potential impacts to the historic school building at 

the intersection of Cyntheanne Road and SR 238. 

• Serve as connection between the discontinuous sections of 126 th 

Street. 

The total construction cost for this alternative is similar to Alternative 3 as 

is the amount of required right-of-way. The benefits of this alternative are 

similar to that of Alternative 3 and should be considered simultaneously 

with the alternative to select the best choice for the community. 

The overall project cost, right-of-way requirements, and new roadway 

requirements are similar to Alternative 3 and were therefore not further 

evaluated at this time. 

Alternative 4 

As a result of input obtained at a town council meeting to discuss the 

project, a further refinement of Alternative 3 was considered for 

development. This alternative, using either Alternative 3 or 3A as a base, 

shifts the end of the roadway from Georgia Road back to Cyntheanne Road 

as shown in Figure 3.4. This alignment is accomplished by curving the 

roadway to the west and threading the proposed roadway between existing 

residential homes and the proposed subdivision north of 104 th Street. 

Since Cyntheanne Road is further away than Georgia Road, this alternative 

will be longer than Alternative 3 by 0.4 miles and will require 

approximately 900 feet of new roadway. The right-of-way in this area 

appears to have been platted, but not developed, as of July 2006. 

A review of the soils data as provided by Hamilton County for the bridge 

structure over Fall Creek, reveals a high level of organic material in the 

area. This could further increase the overall project costs if this alternative 

is selected for further study and development. Soil borings of the land 


along the route as well as coordination with proposed development would 

be required to provide the most economical location for the roadway. 

The cost and right-of-way requirements would be dependent upon further 

planning and engineering for the exact route if this alternative is 

recommended for further study and development. 

Figure 3.4 

Alternative 4 


Figure 3.5 

Alternative Corridor Alignments 


Environmental Assessment 

4.1 Introduction 

RW Armstrong has completed a preliminary environmental assessment of 

the three alternatives for the changes proposed for Cyntheanne Road from 

the Hamilton County Line to approximately 2,000 feet north of I-69. The 

study areas for this assessment include the three alternatives developed to 

provide a connection from 96 th Street to I-69. The purpose of this 

assessment is to identify environmental features that exist within these 

study areas and to provide information on the process of mitigating 

potential impacts to these features as a result of the changes proposed for 

Cyntheanne Road in compliance with the National Environmental Policy 

Act (NEPA) of 1966. 

The Cyntheanne Road study area includes the three alternative routes 

developed to provide a connection from 96 th Street to I-69 in Hamilton 

County, Indiana. The location of each alternative is described below. 

Existing Cyntheanne Road: 

• The southern section Cyntheanne Road is located in Sections 

5, 6, 7, and 8, Township 17 North, Range 6 East on the USGS 

McCordsville, Indiana Quadrangle, in Fall Creek Township, 

Hamilton County, Indiana. 

• The northern section of Cyntheanne Road is located in 

Sections 19, 20, 29, 30, 31 and 32, Township 18 North, 

Range 6 East on the USGS McCordsville, Indiana 

Quadrangle, in Fall Creek Township, Hamilton County, 

Indiana. 

Alternative 1: direct connection – This will connect the existing south 

and north section of Cyntheanne Road. In addition to the location of the 

existing roadway described above, the connection will be in the following 

location: 

• Sections 5 and 6, Township 17 North, Range 6 East on the 

USGS McCordsville, Indiana Quadrangle, in Fall Creek 

Township, Hamilton County, Indiana. 





Alternative 2: eastern connection – Enhanced connection between SR 

238 and Connecticut Avenue. This alternative requires a new section of 

roadway. In addition to the location of the existing Cyntheanne Roadway, 

Alternate 2 will be in the following location: 

• Section 8, Township 17 North, Range 6 East on the USGS 

McCordsville, Indiana and the Ingalls, Indiana Quadrangles, 

in Fall Creek Township, Hamilton County, Indiana. 


McCordsville, Indiana and the Ingalls, Indiana Quadrangles, 

in Fall Creek Township, Hamilton County, Indiana. 


Ingalls, Indiana Quadrangle, in Fall Creek Township, 

Hamilton County, Indiana. 

Alternative 3: The existing Cyntheanne Road would connect to the west 

at Florida and Georgia Roads. This alternative uses existing roadways and 

requires two small sections of new roadway. In addition to the location of 

the existing Cyntheanne Roadway, Alternate 3 will be in the following 

location: 

4.2 Affected Environment 







During the preparation of this report, research was conducted which 

included a field investigation of the study area and a review of available 

maps and internet resources including topographic maps, aerials, National 

Wetland Inventory (NWI) maps, Federal Emergency Management Agency 

(FEMA) floodplain maps, the Marion County Interim Report, the 

Hamilton County Interim Report, the National Register Information 

Services (NRIS), the Indiana Department of Natural Resources (IDNR), 

and the Division of Historic Preservation and Archaeology (DHPA) 

website. No coordination with any state or federal agencies having 

jurisdiction over the environmental features and sites described in this 

document was performed. Should the proposed improvement occur, 

coordination with the appropriate agencies and the preparation of the 

appropriate National Environmental Policy Act environmental 


documentation would be required prior to any construction activities to 

determine impacts on environmental resources. 

4.2.1 Natural Areas & Nature Preserves: 

A preliminary field investigation did not locate the presence of any natural 

areas or nature preserves within the study limits. 

4.2.2 Flood Plain Encroachments, Stream 

Channel, Waterway Groundwater, & Water Table: 

Flood plain limits exist within the study areas at stream crossings, 

particularly Flat Fork Creek, Fall Creek, and Thorpe Creek. Modifications 

to existing structures or the addition of new structures spanning these 

waterways will require analysis to ensure capacity of replacement 

structures are adequate and will not affect flood heights and flood limits. 

All replacement structures should have an effective capacity such that 

surface elevations will not significantly increase. As a result, there should 

be no significant adverse impacts on natural and beneficial flood plain 

values; there will be no significant change in flood risks; and there will be 

no significant increase in the potential for disruption of termination of 

emergency service or emergency evacuation routes. The encroachment 

resulting from the structure replacements will be determined to be 

insignificant. 

4.2.3 Relocations: 

At this time, relocations as a result of the planned improvements cannot 

be anticipated. Should relocations be necessary, the acquisition and 

relocation program should be conducted in accordance with 49 CFR 24 

and relocation resources should be made available to all residential and 

business without discrimination. 

4.2.4 Historic Resources: 

The Hamilton County Interim Report and the Marion County (Pike and 

Lawrence Townships) Interim Report indicated nine structures and four 

cemeteries near the study areas. The following is a complete list from the 

interim reports: 

- Fall Creek Township District No. 1 School – East 136 th Street 

- Kinnaman House – Cyntheanne Avenue 

- Cyntheanne Christian Church – Cyntheanne Avenue 

- S. Moon Farm – Cyntheanne Avenue 

- Fall Creek Township District No. 7 School - S.R. 238 

- Helms Cemetery – Florida Road 

- Kinnaman Cemetery – Florida Road 


- Farm – Florida Road 

- Arnett Cemetery – Florida Road 

- House – East 113 th Street 

- Jacob Fausset Farm – East 104 th Street 

- Fausset-Farr Farm – Connecticut Avenue 

- Fort Cemetery – Connecticut Avenue 

The structures listed above may be included in the Area of Potential Effect 

(APE) for any planned improvements, depending on the alternative 

chosen for this project. These properties will need to be evaluated during 

the Section 106 process and coordination with the Indiana Department of 

Natural Resources, Division of Historic Preservation and Archaeology 

(IDNR, PHPA) will be necessary to determine the impacts of any project 

on the structures deemed eligible for inclusion on the National Register of 

Historic Places. Coordination with the IDNR, DHPA may also reveal 

additional structures within the study area that are eligible, but are not 

listed in the county interim reports. Acquisition of right-of-way from these 

properties may constitute a 4(f) use, depending on the effect finding issued 

by the Federal Highway Administration. Should the project come within 

100 feet of the cemeteries listed above, a cemetery plan will be necessary 

to ensure no adverse impacts will occur to the cemetery as a result of the 

project. 

4.2.5 Section 4(f): 

Section 4(f) properties include publicly owned parks, recreation areas, 

wildlife or waterfowl refuges, and historic properties. Geist Park is located 

on the west side of Florida Road, north of 104 th Street adjacent to Fall 

Creek. The park is owned and operated by Hamilton County and is, 

therefore, publicly owned and will be considered a Section 4(f) property. 

All efforts to minimize or avoid impacts to the park should be considered. 

No other publicly owned parks or recreational areas or any wildlife or 

waterfowl refuges were located in the study areas. However, the Hamilton 

County Interim Report does indicate the presence of potentially historic 

structures within the study areas. The use of these properties, either for 

temporary use or permanent right-of-way, would be considered a 4(f) use 

and need to be evaluated to determine the extent of impact to the 

property. 

4.2.6 Air Quality: 

Hamilton County is included in the nine-county area of Central Indiana 

classified as a basic non-attainment area under the eight hour ozone 

standard, as designated by the US Environmental Protection Agency 

(EPA) in June 2004. Any improvements associated with the 

aforementioned alternates will require new roadway alignment and will 

increase capacity, and thus will require documentation to illustrate that 


the project will not lessen the air quality of the area. If a proposed project 

has not been included in the MPO Transportation Plan and the 

Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) approved by the Federal Highway 

Administration, then an air analysis will be required to ensure the project 

conforms to the State Implementation Plan (SIP). Projects considered 

non-major in scope (bridge replacement on the essentially the same 

alignment, road resurfacing, intersection reconstruction, traffic signal 

modernizations, etc.) will not generate additional traffic volumes and will, 

therefore, be exempt from an air analysis. 

4.2.7 Noise: 

A noise analysis was not completed for the existing roadway as part of this 

study. Any improvements involving the addition of travel lanes or new 

roadway alignment will require a noise analysis to determine the impact 

on adjacent commercial and residential receivers. 

4.2.8 Wetlands: 

The National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) Maps issued by the United States 

Fish and Wildlife Service for the McCordsville and Ingalls Quadrangles 

indicate the presence of wetlands within the study area. Potential wetland 

impacts exist at the crossing of Fall Creek for all alternates. These maps 

are based on aerial photography and have not been field verified. Prior to 

any construction activities, a wetland determination should be performed 

to confirm the existence of the aforementioned wetlands. If jurisdictional 

wetlands exist within the project area, a wetland delineation should be 

performed to determine the amount of impact as a result of the project. A 

report should be generated and submitted to the United States Army 

Corps of Engineers and the Indiana Department of Environmental 

Management for their concurrence. A permit and, depending on the 

amount of impact, mitigation may be required. 

4.2.9 Sole Source Aquifers: 

There are no Sole Source Aquifers located near the study area. 

4.2.10 Threatened & Endangered Species/Flora & Fauna: 

The proposed project is within the range of the Federally endangered 

Indiana Bat (Myotis sodalis) and the Federally threatened bald eagle 

(Haliaeetus leucocephalus). The area surrounding the Geist Reservoir 

contains adequate habitat for the Bald Eagle. Bald Eagles nest in tall trees 

and cliffs near seacoasts, rivers and lakes feeding mainly on fish. The 

Indiana bat utilizes wooded riparian areas and adjacent woodland uplands 

for summer nursery habitat. Maternity colonies roost under loose bark of 

trees and feed along stream corridors. Adult female Indiana bats exhibit 


strong site fidelity to summer roosting and foraging areas; that is, they 

return to the same summer range annually to bear their young. The mix of 

wooded riparian corridors, primarily around stream crossings, upland 

woods, brushland, forested and scrub shrub wetlands, wooded fence rows, 

undeveloped farmland, plus developed residential and commercial areas 

have been known to contain Indiana bats. Therefore, the potential that 

these species may exist within the study areas cannot be eliminated. 

4.2.11 Agriculture: 

Numerous agricultural fields are located adjacent to the alternatives 

discussed in this document. Coordination with the Natural Resource 

Conservation Service and the completion of the AD-1006 form will 

determine, based on a point scale, if the farmland located along the 

alternates is considered prime, unique, or of state or local importance. If 

the farmland to be converted by the roadway improvements is considered 

prime, unique, or of state or local importance, then a discussion of 

mitigation to reduce the impacts of the loss of prime farmland will be 

required. 

4.2.12 Socioeconomic: 

Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the subsequent legislation 

require Federal Agencies to ensure that none of their programs 

discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, gender, 

handicap, disability, or religion. The President’s Executive Order 12898 

on February 11, 1994 and the President’s Memorandum on Environmental 

Justice on the same date underscore these provisions with respect to 

Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low Income 

Populations. The intent is to ensure that the federal departments and 

agencies identify and address any disproportionately high and adverse 

human health or environmental effects resulting from their policies, 

programs and activities on minority populations and low income 

populations. 

The Federal Highway Administration is committed to ensuring nondiscrimination 

in its federally funded activities and to comply with the 

intent of the Executive Order and the Memorandum on Environmental 

Justice, though the continuous public involvement process. No public 

information meetings have been offered during this study. 

It is not anticipated that alternatives for the improvement of Cyntheanne 

Road will result in disproportionately high and adverse human health or 

environmental effects on minority or low income populations. No specific 

minority populations or low income populations have been identified 

within the study area’s communities and neighborhoods. The 

improvements should not affect any known social groups. Specifically, it 


shall not affect any racial, ethnic, religious, or linguistic minority groups. 

Motorists will experience the inconvenience of lane closures and lane 

constrictions during construction. This will only be a temporary effect. 

Special consideration should be taken to ensure access to adjacent 

businesses is maintained throughout the project. There will be no 

permanent adverse effect to the established community. Beneficial effects 

will be an improved and safer transportation facility linking 96 th Street to 

I-69. 

4.2.13 Section 6(f): 

Section 6(f) properties are those that have been improved or developed 

using Land and Water Conservation Funds (LWCF). Any conversion of a 

Section 6(f) property must be replaced with property of equivalent value, 

usefulness, and location. A preliminary field investigation of the study 

area did not locate the presence of any land improved or developed with 

LWCF. 

4.2.14 Other Construction Projects: 

Improvements to 96 th Street from I-69 to the Hamilton County line are 

also in the early planning stages of development. Coordination between 

the improvements to Cyntheanne Road and the 96 th Street corridor should 

occur to ensure adequate traffic maintenance during construction. No 

other known projects will require coordination with the planned 

improvement. 

4.2.15 Permits/Mitigation: 

A Rule 5 Notice of Intent to the Indiana Department of Environmental 

Management will likely be required. A Department of Natural Resources 

Construction in a Floodway Permit will be required construction within 

the floodway. An Indiana Department of Environmental Management 

401/ Army Corps of Engineers 404 Regional General Permit or an Army 

Corps of Engineers 404 Individual Permit will likely be required, 

depending on the extent of construction within jurisdictional waterways. 

A United States Coast Guard permit will not be required for this project 

4.2.16 Karst/Topography/Geology: 

The study area is not located within the state’s known karst region. No 

unusual and/or problem geographic, geological, geophysical, or 

topographic features are anticipated to exist within the project limits. No 

existing or potential mineral resources or any active or abandoned mineral 

extraction sites are anticipated to be located within the study area. 


4.2.17 Hazardous Waste: 

A preliminary investigation of the project area did not locate the presence 

of any known hazardous materials. Should further investigation 

determine the presence of a hazardous site within the area of planned 

improvement, a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment should be 

performed to determine if the potential for hazardous conditions exists in 

the project area or in an area of new permanent right-of-way acquisition. 

4.2.18 Secondary/Cumulative Impacts: 

The addition of travel lanes or new alignments will likely increase capacity 

to the area. This may cause additional development in areas that would 

remain unchanged otherwise. However, a considerable amount of 

development is occurring in the area now, and will likely continue with or 

without the planned improvements to the area. A detailed analysis of 

secondary/cumulative impacts should be completed when planned 

improvements are determined. 

4.3 Environmental Summary 

As per state guidelines, all roadway projects that receive state funding are 

required to complete an environmental review prior to construction 

bidding and/or land acquisition. The level of environmental review, based 

on the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), is dependent on the 

predicted level of impact. 

An improvement of the Cyntheanne Road facility would likely require the 

completion of an EA. This document would include a detailed assessment 

of the impacts associated with each of the previously mentioned resource 

categories. The EA would also require a noise analysis, air quality 

assessment, and secondary and cumulative impacts analyses. Finally, the 

completed EA would be placed on display for public review at multiple 

public venues (i.e. public library, town offices, etc.). As yet, there are no 

environmental issues that would prove to be problematic. 


5.0 Project Summary 

In summary, the existing Cyntheanne Road corridor is not adequate to handle an 

increase in traffic due to safety, operating capacity, and connectivity issues. 

Listed below are the key findings and design recommendations derived from 

traffic data review, field inspections, public meeting comments, and comparison 

of alternatives. 

Safety: The existing roadway design has safety issues due to narrow lanes, lack 

of shoulders, and lack of lane striping. To improve safety, new typical roadway 

designs have been analyzed in order to include wider lanes, medians to protect 

turning vehicles, and new bicycle and pedestrian pathways. 

Mobility: Connecting Cyntheanne Road improves mobility by providing a 

continuous north-south corridor located on the east side of Fishers. With the 

addition of the Del Webb residential development, traffic will dramatically 

increase. Additionally, the future commercial and residential traffic this corridor 

is planned to develop will cause increased demand along this corridor. The use of 

two lanes will be sufficient as an interim design; however, additional right-of-way 

should be purchased so that four lanes could be constructed when new 

development occurs and volumes increase. 

Cost: Construction and right-of-way costs have been derived for the four 

alternative routes and include two different typical sections, which involve the 

use of two or four lanes of traffic. Safety and mobility were included in the 

comparison and evaluated to determine if the cost of the roadway design is 

justified. 

Environmental: Each of the alternatives has been ranked according to the 

alignment’s environmental impact. A ranking of high means that there is a 

significant potential for the need to develop a full environmental impact 

statement. A ranking of low to medium indicates conformance to the NEPA 

regulations will be required, but impacts resulting from the construction of this 

alternative can potentially be mitigated. The medium to high ranking assigned to 

Alternative 4 results from concern stemming from wetlands and the unknown 

soil conditions in this area near Fall Creek. 


Table 5.1 

Proposed Alternative Cost 

Alt. 1 

Direct Alt. 

Alt. 2 

Eastern Alt. 

Alt. 3 

Western Alt. 

Alt. 4 

Modified Alt. 

Construction Cost $24.2 – 2 lane 

$35.4 – 4 lane 

$13.6 – 2 lane 

$19.5 – 4 lane 

$12.7 – 2 lane 

$18.3 – 4 lane 

$12.5 – 2 lane 

$18.4 – 4 lane 

Right-of-way 

57 acres 

$4.7 

66.78 acres 

$5.5 

55.93 acres 

$4.6 

62.66 acres 

$5.2 

Total Length 

4.50 miles 

23,500ft 

5.46 miles 

28,800ft 

4.75 miles 

25,030ft 

5.15 miles 

27,180ft 

- New Alignment 7,700ft 3,200ft 7,650ft 8,900ft 

- Existing 

15,800ft 25,600ft 17,380ft 18,280ft 

Alignment 

Environmental 

High Low Medium Medium to High 

Concerns 

Soil Concerns High Low to Medium Medium Medium to High 

Note: All Costs are reflected in 2006 dollars. Costs listed in millions of dollars. 

The construction costs assigned to each of the alternatives are expressed in 2006 

dollars for purposes of comparison against known construction cost data. With 

the recent volatility in the construction industry, 12-15% inflation has been 

realized resulting from the instability in oil prices and the demand in the world 

market for concrete and steel. To provide a level of contingency to reflect a 

growing inflation rate of four percent a year going forward, we would recommend 

utilizing a 35% adjustment to the cost data to reflect a 2011 construction year for 

the project costs, should it proceed. 

Table 5.2 

Inflation Rate Index 

Year Inflation Rate Rate 

2006 1 0.0% 

2007 1.15 15.0% 

2008 1.04 19.6% 

2009 1.04 24.4% 

2010 1.04 29.4% 

2011 1.04 34.5% 

Table 5.3 

Cost Adjusted for Inflation 

Alt 1 Alt 2 Alt 3 Alt 4 

$ million $ million $ million $ million 

2 lanes $32.67 $18.36 $ 17.15 $ 16.88 

4 lanes $47.79 $26.33 $24.71 $24.84 

Note: 2011 assumed as the construction year 


Appendix 1 


Appendix 2 


Appendix 3 


Appendix 4 


Appendix 5 


Appendix 6 


Appendix 7 


[ 

scale: 1" = 2,000' 

Alt. Southern 

Project Terminus SHEET 1 

Segment A 

Southern Project 

Terminus 

Segment D 

Segment B 

Segment E 

Source: USGS 7.5 Minute Series Topographic Maps 

McCordsville, IN, & Ingalls, IN Quadrangles 

Segment C 

SHEET 2 

Northern Project 

Terminus 

ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES: SHEET INDEX 

Cyntheanne Road Transportation Plan 

Hamilton County, Indiana 

Indianapolis Metropolitan Planning Organization

L E G E N D 

SYMBOL DEFINITION SOURCE 

Ý 

RWA 

USGS 

HLFI 

USFWS 

FEMA 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

Segment A 

Segment B 

Segment C 

Segment D 

Segment E 

Future Interchange 

New Road 

Stream 

Project Termini 

Current Development 

Historic "Contributing" 

Historic "Notable" 

NWI Wetland 

Field Observed Wetland 

100-Year Floodplain 

Cemetery 

ABBREVIATIONS 

RWA 

RWA 

RWA 

RWA 

RWA 

RWA 

RWA 

USGS 

RWA 

RWA 

HLFI 

HLFI 

USFWS 

RWA 

FEMA 

RWA 

RW Armstrong 

United Stastes Geological Survey 

Historic Landmarks Foundation of Indiana 

United States Fish and Wildlife Service 

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[ 

scale: 1" = 1,000' 

Farmstead 

"Contributing" 

Florida Rd 

INDIANA 

Æÿ 238 

Segment D 

Geist Park 

Ý 

Twp School 7 


Ý 

Segment B 

INDIANA 

Æÿ 238 

Current 

INDIANA 

Æÿ 238 

Proposed 

ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES: SHEET 1 




Fall Creek 

INDIANA 

Æÿ 238 

Substation 

Greenfield Ave 

113th St 

113th St 

INDIANA 

Æÿ 238 

Current 

Current 

Development 

Geist Ridge Dr 

Florida Rd 

Lin Rd 

Flat Fork Creek 

Segment E 

Connecticut Ave 

Current 

Development 

Fausset-Farr Farm 

"Notable" 

Current 

Residential 

Aerial Source: USDA 

Current 

Residential 

104th St 

Georgia Rd 

Alt. Southern 

Project Terminus 

Current 

Development 

Fawcett Farm 


Segment A 

Cyntheanne Rd 

Southern Project 

Terminus 

101st St 

96th St

[ 

scale: 1" = 1,000' 

Mud Creek 

Northern Project 

Terminus 

146th St 

ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES: SHEET 2 




136th St 

Thorpe Creek 

Florida Rd 

Segment D 

Segment B 

Segment E 

INDIANA 

Æÿ 238 

Twp School 7 


Cyntheanne Christian 

Church "Contributing" 

Current 

Development 

Segment C 

Kinnaman House 


Twp School 1 


Aerial Source: USDA 

!"#$ 69 

Potential Future 

Interchange 

Cyntheanne Rd 

S. Moon Farm 


126th St

Appendix 8

Cyntheanne Road Transportation Planning Study - Indianapolis ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?