Project Overview
Project Details
This project would widen and reconstruct SR 92/Dallas Acworth Highway from Hiram Acworth Highway/Cedarcrest Road to US 41/SR 3/Cobb Parkway from a two-lane undivided roadway to a four-lane divided roadway with a twenty-foot raised median, curb and gutter, and sidewalks and from East Paulding Drive to CR 473/Old Burnt Hickory Road (see project location map). SR 92 is currently a two-lane facility consisting of two 12-foot lanes with auxiliary left and right turn lanes intermittent throughout the corridor. Traffic projections show that SR 92 will not be able to operate efficiently in the future. In order to alleviate the projected congestion, the proposed project would provide operational improvements throughout the corridor which would include widening SR 92 to a four-lane facility with a 20 foot raised center median, 23.5 foot urban shoulder on the west side, and 18.5 foot urban shoulder on the east side. Total project length is approximately 6.0 miles. Proposed ROW would be required and would be approximately 150 feet.
Case Results
State: Indiana (Marion County)
Case Type: Road projects
Initial Offer: $46,160
Sever Walker Padgitt Result:
$2,400,000
State: Indiana (Johnson County)
Case Type: Road projects
Initial Offer: $301,200
Sever Walker Padgitt Result:
$3,800,000
State: Indiana (Vigo County)
Case Type: Road projects
Initial Offer: $1,186,000
Sever Walker Padgitt Result:
$4,475,000
State: Indiana (Hamilton County)
Case Type: Road projects
Initial Offer: $79,200
Sever Walker Padgitt Result:
$3,000,000
State: Georgia (Union County)
Case Type: Road projects
Initial Offer: $454,250
Sever Walker Padgitt Result:
$1,500,000
State: Illinois, Sangamon County
Case Type: Road projects
Initial Offer: $125,600
Sever Walker Padgitt Result:
$1,191,950
Contact Us
Before you go up against Illinois alone, let us give you our opinion. We pledge to provide a free case review for any individual or business facing eminent domain or condemnation. Contact us now at 888-318-3761.
* Disclaimer: Form submission doesn’t constitute a client-attorney relationship/contract.
