US 24 & SR 66 Interchange Modification and Corridor Improvement Project Public Involvement Meeting December 5, 2007

Transcription

1 US 24 & SR 66 Interchange Modification and Corridor Improvement Project Public Involvement Meeting December 5, 2007 Sponsored by: The Ohio Department of Transportation and The City of Defiance

2 Project Consulting Engineers The Mannik & Smith Group MSG Partner in Charge C. Michael Smith, P.E. Project Manager Jean Hartline, P.E. Transportation Planner Patrick Etchie, A.I.C.P. Chief Roadway Designer Christopher Beaulieu, P.E. Chief Structural Designer Christopher Homan, P.E.

3 Ohio Department of Transportation Project Manager Kirk Slusher, P.E. Bridge Engineer - James Clark, P.E. Engineering Administrator - Dan Kaseman, P.E. Environmental Engineering Clark Nash P.E. Real Estate Administrator - Michelle Miller Public Information Rhonda Pees

4 Project Overview

5 Local Highway Planning

6 Our Purpose Today 1. Review Project History 2. Review and Refine Project Objectives 3. Identify Project Schedule and Funding Sources 4. Obtain Public Input

7 Project Background Identified by Local Leaders as an area of concern due to congestion, safety, and continued land developments. On ODOT s Hot Spot Listing for Crashes Sandwiched between two segments of the multi-million dollar US 24 Fort to Port Projects

8 Project History ODOT SR 66 Corridor Capacity Study 2000 City Strategic Plan 2003 Interchange Modification Study 2004 Received Federal Earmark 2005 Highway Bill Commencement of Preliminary Engineering

9 Why are we doing this project? 1. Provide Structural Upgrade of Bridge 2. Improve Traffic Flow 3. Improve Safety 4. Improve US 24 Pavement

10 1. Structural Upgrade of the Bridge Bridge has poor structural rating Inadequate clearance (14 3 with 17 preferred) 2-lane width is not adequate for the traffic demands

11 2. Improve Traffic Flow Poor Traffic Flow due to: 2 Lane Bridge pinch point Volume of Traffic Several Traffic Signals Private Drive Access

12 3. Improve Safety Safety Hot Spot List Crash Rate of 5.55 crash rate (per 100 million vehicle miles traveled) is higher the state average of 1.21 Crashes Rear End Right Angle Turning Other

13 4. US 24 Pavement Performance Pavement Evaluation noted need to for pavement rehabilitation by 2010 Provide pavement structure consistent with adjacent Fort to Port projects

14 Proposed Project 1. Bridge Improvements 2. Interchange Improvements 3. Improve US 24 Pavement 4. Increase Safety and Reduce Congestion 5. Aesthetic Improvements

15 Improvement Scenario 1. Bridge Improvements 2. Interchange Improvements 3. US 24 Pavement Improvements Corridor Improvements 4. Safety and Congestion Improvements 5. Aesthetic Improvements

16 1. Bridge Improvements Improve bridge structure with bridge rehabilitation or replacement Widen bridge to five lanes to eliminate pinch point Improve bridge clearance to US 24 from existing 14 3 inches to 17 feet (raise SR 66, lower US 24 or a combination of both) Aesthetic Theme to Benchmark the SR 66 Corridor as a Gate Way

17 Sample Bridges Findlay Tuttle Crossing Columbus Findlay Possible Defiance Theme

18 Sample Bridges

19 2. Interchange Improvements Capacity Improvements with Lane Additions to Off Ramps at SR 66 to provide 2 lane off ramps Signal Improvements Provide required 600 foot Limited Access Right-of-way at interchange Signing Improvements

20 3. US 24 Pavement Reconstruction/Rehabilitation Reconstruct US 24 pavement between the two adjacent Fort to Port Projects

21 4. Corridor Improvements Updating the Character of North Clinton Street (SR 66) Through: Safety and Congestion Improvements Widening to 5 lanes Turn Lane Improvements Corner Radii Improvements Signal Improvements Signing Improvements Aesthetic Improvements Gateway Theme Concrete Treatments Interchange Area Landscaping Mast Arm Signal Poles

22 5. Corridor Aesthetics Color and Texture Landscaping Gateway Theme Improving the Character of the N. Clinton St. Signals and Sign

23 Project Schedule Preliminary Engineering Detailed Engineering Right of Way Acquisition Project Bidding Construction Project Completion May 2006 Feb 2007 March 2007 Dec Early 2010 Spring 2010 Fall 2010

24 Project Funding Interchange Modification and Bridge Widening 80% State/Federal & 20% Local US 24 Pavement Replacement 100% State/Federal Corridor Improvements Small City and Safety Funds with 10-20% Local match Preliminary Project Cost estimate is between $12 Million and $14 Million

25 Public Involvement = Project Success 1. Stakeholder Meeting December Public Open House December 2007

26 Comment Sheet Provided in your handout Include your name and address (we can t respond to your questions/comments without it) Form can be left with us today, mailed, faxed or ed. Comments required by December 13th

27 What we want to know. Have we given you enough information? Is there additional project needs that we should address with this project? Do you need more information on the Alternatives? Is there a project impact to your business that we should be aware of? Do you have a business operational need that we should be aware of?

28 Thank you! Questions?