... v... ~, --·--c--·· · ., n .. CO 8 C ïi CO Q ·te .....C)... :î ~ ... C ~] ::> ''-- j < ~l 0 i~ ~~ ,. ~! ~ 'Oe 0 " ~ll - l 1. .: e E E l:s N CO " .91 C: 0 "" j g_ i 0 B ,_ _ Overview D .~, .ï:ww·tn Progress
8 ·.- _.. ' - . . . Detour t~:) :. ;_ Wlde Vehldé_Ban BIO NOTICE D Plans are currently available for the re-bîd of Fort Washington Way - Contra et 228 (Riverfront Transit Center). Bids are due on April 10 at noon.
' ~ Cantract &Ids t] Bids for the following packages will be received: Gene rai Construction, Building Work, Mechanical, Plumbing, Elevators and Fire Protection.
. -. . Newsroom· Plans are available through the City of Cincinnati Purchasing Office - 513/352- 0 3209.
General information can be obtained by contacting Jeff Wallace, of Parsons D Brinckerhoff, at 513/639-2166. ~ ~ · ' '"' ;Teâniwork 0 _ ·. Contact Us 0 . · Home
http://www.fww2000.corn/ 01-04-07 0 n nn n
0 1956 1963 1996
~ Overview .., 1 Fort Washington Way 2000
Constructed in the early 1960s, Fort Washington Way is one of a few major highway 0 connections bridging downtO'Nll Cincinnati's east and west sides. When it opened, Fort Washington Way could safely accommodate 90,000 vehicles per day. As downtown businesses and entertainment venues began to grow and floulish, so too did traffic in ~ and out of the city.
Up until July 1998, this major downtO'Nll artery was exceeding its original construction limit by supporting more than 120,000 vehicles each day. Heavy traffic congestion, 1 dangerous weaves from nearby interstate off-ramps and pedestrian safety were quickly becoming problems during rush hour and times of special dO'Nlltown events. ~---) '- Fort Washington Way reconstruction began in 1995 '-> ....., .... h"'.' r . .4JJt/-.,,~11> .. when the City of Cincinnati asked the Ohio-Kentucky a.;,
Indiana Regional Council of Governments (OKI) to 1ai6'"<11,("'V.:_,.,r 3 lr:lf':...,,,.,i:\f,J\ provide a solution. The reconstruction of Fort Washington Way became a sub-study of the OK! 1-71 MA.X)JI fNVU1'Mltlit1' $tu:&V 111:"°AY ..,f J Corrid_g_r Tran~P-ortation Stud . "' ln January 1997, OKI produced a plan for the revamping of Fort Washington Way, and the City D approved two months later. Parts of Fort Washington ..... Way have gone from concept to design and into ~ construction in a short amount of time. u Features of FWW 2000 include:
• lncreased number of lanes, v.ihile reducing the overall width of the highway; J • Eight lanes of through, direct traffic for 1-71 and U.S. Route 50; • A new Second Street and renovated Third Street as grand boulevard entrances ~ into downtown Cincinnati;
http://www.fww2000.com/infonnation/overview.htm 01-04-07 Li n nr1 D n 0 0 • Safer access ramps into downtown; • Safety for pedestrian access to, through and around the Fort Washington Way n area; • Reclamation of 250 to 300 feet of the current Fort Washington Way between Elm and Sycamore streets, making this land available for new development; and 0 • Flexibility for development south of the new Fort Washington Way.
r""l J TRAVEL BENEFIT MAP ~.. ~.~ -i 1 . d'l ,..-~ '="....! , , 1-.,.,..._,) D D These features include:
• A new intermodal transitway te accommodate parking, buses and future rail V transit. • Combined Sewer Overflow (CSO) system, a new sewage relief system, to dramatically reduce occurrences of combined se'Ner overflows into the Ohio iJ River. [J Project Goals
ln August 1998, motorists began to see and feel the first major sign of Fort Washington Way reconstruction as traffic was reduced to two lanes in each direction and exit ramps fJ were closed.
With new access points into downtown, average daily traffic on Fort Washington Way was reduced significantly. A series of temporary and permanent traffic patterns will continue to be implemented to allow continued progress on the construction of this project. Balancing closures while maintaining access to and from downtown is a necessary part of the Fort Washington Way Reconstruction. Closures are necessary as http://www.fww2000.com/information/overview.htm 01-04-07 u overv1ew ragt: J ut: J D modifications to the roadway system progress and to maintain the safety of construction crews, pedestrians, and motorists. ~(' Notification of ail detours, closures or changes to traffic patterns will be advertised n through the news media and in the detour section of this website. A new temporary bridge, known as the Roebling Suspension Extension, was completed in May 1999. This bridge is a direct connection between the Roebling Suspension G Bridge and Third Street, linking Covington and downtown Cincinnati.
Fort Washington Way westbound (lnterstate 71 southbound) traffic will be closed until early October 1999. lnterstate 71 southbound traffic through Cincinnati will be directed n ta take either 1-275, or the Norwood Lateral {S.R. 562}. Motorists may also take 1-471 southbound to 1-275 in Kentucky. By August 2000, westbound Columbia Parkway traffic will be reconnected with Fort Washington Way. The westbound Fort Washington Way Q connection tram 1-471 will be restored late in 2000.
Also in the year 2000, construction will be completed on a ramp connection between the n Clay Wade Bailey Bridge and the new Second Street and between the Taylor-Southgate Bridge and Broadway.
By August 2000, all facets of the Fort Washington Way reconstruction will be completed q with eight lanes of new roadway downtown. Direct exits to new boulevard-type Second and Third streets will provide improved access downtown. 0
. ·-,._
~:) • .. •. ·~ •: . :.~\ ::r:;!:_;-,: ..f ··a0 if"- .- -·:;i. ~~11~'~· r "4 n~~ ·· ..,,,./ _, :{ ~ ,~··-- '11~[.~ '1-~\. @ ·--~~-"- î!'~k 0 . 1~1- - - - · l-i/',rv{;,:~}~-; ------fi!':P.I~?;,. r.{(:; . :..:: .. '] .!-, •. - -1 ~.. : ç,. ü 0 ~ 0
http://www.fww2000.com/information/overview.htm 01-04-07 ~ n Current Construction View Page I cte 1
Current .. --~~ .,1. nn Construction ~ View 'P . n '1i!i!!lâ. Additional photos are available in the Photo Library. n -
- -- - 0 i'~. - -... ·.-- ~ ... n ...._.-,-,,.._"'.,.. '-_--_-- _.""_:"'a----"'-""··~"'- ·"',~ " EWW Mainline Great American BallPark 0 lJ FWvy Mainline Construction in Pro :-1 re_ss D
r->~ L-" _.,, 0 fl u 0 u D
u http://www.fww2000.com/infonnation/camera/camera.htm 01-04-07 n
n n n D
lJ [J xapu1 eJawe::> 01 )peq a6p!18 a::>uads tuaJ9 u ':JNI n simulation rage 1 oe 1 ~() F ::: 1=•h1,:,, I•·: ::;.;,d Api 7 7 (n:, 01) A/.1 2üCt1 J n 1 .::i?f·~-~~~~~ .~/~· n .· ·\~""-S.}t-'T n - · ·~ -:... ~~.P7•••i.s·•••• F n ~ J J :)
û Great American Ball Park back to camera index J J 0 u fj
01-04•07 J http://www.fww2000.com/inforrnation/camera/camera4.asp simulat20n rage 1 ae a [1 nn n n r1l~ D 0 FWW Mainline View back to camera index fl 0 p;,--) L ;,~ u u u u u
u http://www.fww2000.com/infonnation/camera/camera l .htm 01-04-07 r n
D
CJ u u 0 0
r,~i:;, .i;.i1;r LJ 6615! ,1.~-. 666~ 1•id\i u 666. lPJI?~
u n
[' C 0 C C C CJ 0 0 C [J
666l c1unr U
f.661 JIJ,j'I,' lJ 66'5L t:~Jéi,t
666, !Je:i.q";O t:.661 ~, ... ,,,.;.;1 (_)Li u n Detour n() FORT WASHINGTON WAV CONSTRUCTION UPDATE -April 6. 2001 n UPDATED ROAD CONSTRUCTION INFORMATION n 1-75 SOUTHBOUND CLOSEO AT FREEMAN AVENUE OVERNIGHT SATUROAY
[1 1-75 southbound will be closed to ail traffic at the Freeman Avenue exit from Midnight until 8:00 a.m. on Sunday, April 8 (overnight Saturday).
This traffic will be directed to use the Freeman Avenue exit and follow n Freeman to U.S. 50 eastbound (Sixth Street Viaduct) for re-connection to 1-75 southbound. n The Eighth Street entrance ramp to 1-75 southbound will also remain open during this closure. f J PETE ROSE WAY CLOSED BETWEEN SECOND STREET AND BROADWAY NEXT WEEK n Pete Rose Way will be closed to all traffic between Broadway and the ramp from Second Street on Monday, April 9. This closure will remain in [J place until approximately 4:00 p.m. on Tuesday, April 17. Pete Rose Way, east of Broadway will be restricted to one lane in each direction. Traffic on both Broadway and the Taylor-Southgate Bridge will 0 also be reduced to one lane in each direction at this intersection. Second Street traffic will be directed to use Mehring Way to reach u eastbound Pete Rose Way. This closure is necessary to reconstruct the intersection of Broadway and u Pete Rose Way. lt is our intent to keep Cincinnati motorists informed of the constantly cnanging roadway construction events involved with this [] complex project. If you have any questions or comments regarding this project, please contact the following:
Construction Information: u Jeff Wallace, Parsons Brinckerhoff (513) 639-2166 i ] Press Contact: Debra DeCourcy, Dan Pinger Public Relations (513) 564-0700
City of Cincinnati: Don Gindling, Construction Manager (513) 352-1518
John Deatrick, Project Engineer rj (513) 35?-'1;;>3;;> n nn FORT WASHINGTON WAY DETOUR MAPS n ., Click on each of the maps to view a larger version . Rrverfront Parking and FWW Access Plan Pedestrian Access Map August2000 [l Winter / Spring 2001
~~w:'Aut._,-:,:_.-:,~f'a. ~ -- §"- =-==-- ~I ~-~-.. ~~.,·:,_. ,~ n -,.:!~,.,·Î.ç=;~~ ~· ··~ \, '--····· ··~ ~ I"·""'·\ \ 0 î;..I ::::;;-=,... D ~ [l [) (] [J u 0 0 ~ 1
u .___, L.__. c.___:; [__, '~ L-: 1 ) r=:J ~ C] c::J CJ ru ' Page. ....
~ - ---····-- ___F~ ort Washington Way Access Plan ' 1-TI SOulhbotmd Exil llamp to New(làtff.,..rtom f0f Jlugust 2000 llaleston Avanue 1-J5 SoldbltDUlld and - - ftttœlns Open ror US 50 b'&lbould 10 .New bit Ram, h9m New bit Rami,s tu 111vcrrrom Access & SGcold Slreet fer 8rtnt SIience Bridge to ntlnt Street tram 181118n Dawnlon bcas flth SOetl H1 SGuttlboand tlllll ~ . lftd Columbia PM'llway t lor ~ tor oawnt1111nAccest rertront ,lf'l)ffltll etsc l4 Jl i; 3 < Il li ! i i ICIJt'.lt1ltl(( !
-llllll _ ... .. • US 50Wes&b1,nd lColu"*ia Parlnlla)IJ Connecfloo ro fort wachfntrton Wav Be-Gpued
...~:·· · :i ·~ .1. New h11PS1o2rd Street "' PmeRauwar lmR 1-75 MorttmonM Closu Bmualh 11111 etav Wade Baffe, Brtdfe 1, ';.; Clll!ffl ftel' Plaza OlllutU!tî1 • CDIIW1'tld 3111 SUeet 111 llpan by August 14 .:·i ,~,J:·.~ ...~:.'· ) ·\.. :.:..~. ;. ... -~ \. i 21d Sttett to OD• 11'1 lugld 18 ' . ..~ .. ' • • • • • ,admrtan Accus Re11la p Pertini
rw .fww2000. com/detour/FwwaccessplanAug%202000 .gif 10/( r-'"' ,- ------. i--, .-----, .___. ._. .___. ~ "--' L___. c::J C::J .::::=J '::=:l L-..J c:J (j Page i-
RIVERFRONT PARKING AND PEDESTRIAN ACCESS MAP LEGU;;:> i.r.,· l
ir;,i ''°"""""''(e.u10.,.oo• '"o..,,,, L!..ll '"'o ,,~,....t1ta,· ...... \.''4t-,.,cu'4r~,
~ SltlW'.t't":1~$:tcte)lLi.n"('C ., "' • J'«t.-:.~n.nn Aec~s -.icv:o
Greaumencan Ball P8J'k 1.. 1 ConstrUctlon Site ü ?ii .... i ~ 0'1/0~VE~ 0::.., Cl ..,i Coo111c1_Numbers_ ! Q i 1 To P\,~ehAIAI. Ftulun;t PM-:. 'Ilote:. Conl<ô
vw.fww2000. com/detour/srnall_Riverfront _Pedestrian%20Access%20Map _Winter-Spring_ 20012.jpg 10/( n nn Bid Notice Plans are currently availab!e for the re-bid of Fort Washington Way - Contract 228 (Riverfront Transit Center). Bids are 0 due on April 10 at noon. Bids for the following packages will be received: General Construction, Building Work, Mechanical, Plumbing, Elevators 0 and Fire Protection. Plans are available through the City of Cincinnati Purchasing Office - 513/352-3209. 0 General information can be obtained by contacting Jeff Wallace, of Parsons Brinckerhoff, at 513/639-2166.
0 Contractors Lists n Click on any of the following to locate a particular contractor: A-C General Contractors O.:.J. . General Contractor.s
0 K-P General Contractors 0.-2 General Contrnçtqr~ D ·1 esting Consultants Steel F abncators MBE/DBE Contractors D 0 [J D D 0
0 n Current News Articles Page 1 de 1 n(î • 0 Cincinnati Enquirer 02/24/01 • Cincinnati Post 02/22/01 • 0 Cincinnati Enquirer 02/03/01 • Cincinnati Enquirer 02/02/01 0 • Business Courier 01/26/01 • 0 Cincinnati Enquirer 01/25/01 • Cincinnati Enquirer 01/14/01 D • Cincinnati Enquirer 01/14/01 • 0 Cincinnati Enquirer 01/06/01
D News Article Archives Click on the folders below to view past articles and editorials.
rL;_-~ D October, 2000 thru December, 2000 D July, 2000 thru September, 2000 D April, 2000 thru June, 2000 0 D January, 2000 thru March, 2000 D October, 1999 thru December, 1999 0 D July, 1999 thru September, 1999 D April, 1999 thru June, 1999 D January, 1999 thru March, 1999 [J D October, 1998 thru December, 1998 D July, 1998 thru September, 1998 D April, 1998 thru June, 1998 0 D January, 1998 thru March, 1998 D January, 1997 thru December, 1997 0 D January, 1996 thru December, 1996 D D cl u http://www.fww2000.com/information/articles/news.htm 01-04-08 n Team Pagel de 2 Or; Team - n Regional Cooperation for a Stronger Community '.,, ,,,,, ·,~ ·.\ \ k'l' ,\ [1 ···.,' Click here for th_§ J çi_rJ.:the-1ob 0 Qhoto cfillfilY n Renovating Fort Washington Way by August 2000 presents a tremendous civic and engineering challenge. To meet this goal, the City of Cincinnati has partnered with government agencies, ~ business and civic organizations on an unpreœdented scale.
ln addition, the City of Cincinnati has contracted with a team of ~ local, regional, national and international firms to provide the technical capabilities to complete the project on time and on [') budget. Team Leaders J • The City of_CincinnatL{Proiect Manag_ement) • Hamiltor:,_Co1,mty • The Ohio Department of Tran~mortatlon D . • The Ohio-Kel']_tu_ç_~. -lndj~na Reqional • Council of Governments (OK!) D ,t,.i,i•l • Federal Highway Administ1:.ation • • Parsons Brinckerhoff (Project lJ Coordi nati_on l u Team Partners o ARTIMIS o BOMA u o _Cincinnati Bengs)ls o Cincinnati Reds o City of Covington o City of Newport o Downtown Cincinnati Inc. (DCI) o Greater Cincinnati Chamber of Commerce u http://www.fww2000.com/tearn/teamcontent.htm 01-04-07 n Team Page 'l.. cte 2 - ~ -- .. -~ -·····-·--==--- ~ ···-·· ..... ·-··-· o Kentucky Transportation Cabinet n\Î o National Underground Freedom Center o NAACP o Northern KentuckyJ;hamber of CJ)mmerce D o N_ort.t,ern Kentucky Convention ~ Visitor's _Byreau o .SORTALM~tro o TANK n o The Regional Ozone Coalition o U_ S. Hou~io.g & Urban Deyel_gpmen_t (HUD) D n 0 0 0 C) D 0 0 D D 0 }1 ir http://www.fww2000.com/team/tearncontent.htm 01-04-07 LJ n n,I FORT WASHINGTON WAY SUBCORRIDOR STUDY MAJQB INïE~TMENT STUDY REPORT
J Prepared for: Ohio-Kentucky-Indiana Regional Council of Governments
0 Prepared by: Parsons Brinckerhoff Quade & Douglas, Inc.
0 ln Association with: Balke Engineers Burgess & Niple, Ltd. BRWlnc. D Hogan, No/an & Stites, Inc. 0 KPMG Peat Marwick LLP
\j February 1997 0
r-,r- L"',,./ 1 0 Li 0 0 u IJ
~ n Q(", (j;ffii . S.O EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Cl S.1 INTRODUCTION S.2 PROBLEM ST A TEMENT n.. _,J S.3 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION S.4 fJ CONSIDERATlQNS SOCIOECONOMIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL S.5 ~ CONSIDERATIONS S.6 CAPITAL COST ESTIMA TES n S.7 COMPARATIVE BEN[=FI.TS AND C0ST$ S.8 PUBLIC INVO~VEMJ;NTAND n RECOMM~NDATION ~ c~\ t] û J D 0 u
Li n n() S.1 INTRODUCTION
0 The purpose of this report is to document the Major lnvestment Study (MIS) work and products prepared during the course of the Fort Washington Way Subcorridor Study. A second purpose is to summarize in a single document, the major elements and analysis of the Fort Washington Way n Subcorridor Study in support of a recommended alternative which will be included in subsequent 0 Transportation lmprovement Program (TIP) documents.
The analysis of Fort Washington Way was undertaken to focus on solutions for both the 0 transportation and community issues related to Fort Washington Way. The Fort Washington Way Subcorridor Study evaluated the need for and effects (benefits, impacts, and costs) of transportation improvement options. This study provides a basis upon which decision-makers will decide to initiale 0 more detailed studies on preferred alternative. rJ Fort Washington Way is a subcorridor within the 1-71 Corridor Transportation Study MIS. However, the study has been conducted using a separate process from the 1-71 Corridor Study, but concurrently D with and mindful of the 1-71 Corridor Study to allow for timely decisions on both studies. Both studies are being conducted by the Ohio-Kentucky-Indiana Regional Council of Governments (OKI), the C:> Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) for the Cincinnati metropolitan area. r1 ~J ] u D f] u
J n n(-, S.2 PROBLEM STATEMENT
0 Fort Washington Way, as a result of the historical development/location, increased travel demands and current roadway standards, presents both transportation and community issues, which need to be n addressed. S.2.1 Transportation Issues f1 Fort Washington Way does not meet current geometric standards. Specific problem areas are:
• Lack of lane continuity, u • lnadequate weaving distances, • lnadequate acœss spacing, • Access design of left entrances and exits do not meet standards, and 0 • lnadequate driver decision distance.
[] Ali of which compromise safety. fJ Fort Washington Way no longer serves travel demands because: • The facility is overly complex. Drivers face too many choices. • lt does not provide well-defined access by motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians c~ 1 to and from Cincinnati CBD, the riverfronts, and the bridges into northern Kentucky the relate to Fort Washington Way (i.e., Central and Roebling Suspension bridges). • The multiple functions coexisting on Fort Washington Way have compromised its 0 ability to serve the through-traffic function of 1-71. • The Brent Spence Bridge is operating over capacity. • The Central Bridge is underutilized. [] • lnterchanges are inadequate. u ln addition, the design lite of the pavement has been exœeded. These transportation issues and potential improvements were considered in relation to the 1-71 [] Corridor Transportation Study, as well as coordinated with the Eastern Corridor Study. S.2.2 Community Issues u The community issues can be summarized as follows: • Fort Washington Way, as it is currently designed, is a visual and physical barrier û between Cincinnati CBD and the riverfront. • lnadequate motor vehicle, bicycle, and pedestrian access or linkages between Cincinnati CBD and the riverfront are due, in part, to Fort Washington Way. • Consideration should be given to other transportation modes, particularly mass transit, to serve the full spectrum of community transportation needs. • Fort Washington Way's location and design constrains the ability to more fully develop the Cincinnati and Kentucky riverfronts. • Too much land is devoted to transportation in proportion to available land. LJ 0 n(J Œ -t S.3 ALTERNATlVES CONSlDERED n Alternative concepts were developed. Through an intensive process, the Fort Washington Way Subcorridor Study Subcommittee and the 1-71 Corridor Transportation Study Oversight Committee refined the alternatives. Five alternatives were carried forward for detailed study and evaluation after ~ screening and evaluation. These alternatives are summarized below and described in greater detail in Section 5.0 of this document. 0
l ALTERNATIVE GENERAL ASSUMPTIONS Full depth pavement rehabilitation and safety upgrades. n 1. No Build
trJ No Build plus TSM Alternative from 1-71 Corridor Transportation System Transportation Study. 1A. fJ Management (TSM) t-v) TSM lmprovements of Alternative 1A plus relocate Pete Rose Way 150 feet to the north and widening between -,-..... 2. Minimum Build Race and Main Streets. Fort Washington is maintained as ] U.S. 50. t1 TSM lmprovements of Alternative 1A plus relocate Pete Retain t-71 and U.S. 50 in Rose Way 250 feet to the north and widening between 3C. Narrowed Fort Washington Race and Main Streets, 1-71 and U.S. 50 maintained in Fort J Way Washington Way. Reclaim 100 feet of land. J TSM lmprovements of Alternative 1A plus, 1-71 and U.S. 50 _maintained in Fort Washington Way, new Second and Retain 1-71 and U.S. 50 in Th1rd Streets create a one-way couplet pair, improved links 5. Narrowed Fort Washington rJ to 1-471 and U.S. 50 on the east and improved links to 1-75 Way with Expanded Access and the Clay Wade Bailey Bridge on the West. Reclaim 200 u to 300 feet of land.
~ 0 Œm. n J Freeway segment capacity analysis indicates that the traffic impact differences between alternatives on the adjacent regional freeway system are minor ("Cincinnati Fort Washington n Way Subcorridor Traffic Operations Analysis" (January 30, 1997). S.4.2 Local Area Impacts û Existing Fort Washington Way includes left-side on and off ramps and a major weaving movement caused by US 50 joining 1-71 on the left and departing on the right in both directions. The weaving would not change un der Alternatives 1, 1A and 2 ("Cincinnati Fort 0 Washington Way Subcorridor Traffic Operations Analysis" (January 30, 1997). ~ ..... The weaving analysis for Fort Washington Way corridor shows that Alternatives 1A and 3C ..J' would result in unacceptable operations along both directions of Fort Washington Way (1- 71/US 50) during both the AM and PM peak hours in 2020. The same levels of operation would occur under Alternative 1 or 2 (°Cincinnatî Fort Washington Way Subcorridor Traffic J Operations Analysis" (January 30, 1997). The weaving analysis of the Fort Washington Way corridor indicates that under Alternative 5 n both the eastbound and the westbound segments would operate well (LOS B) for both the AM and PM peak hours in 2020 ("Cincinnati Fort Washington Way Subcorridor Traffic Operations ] Analysis" (January 30, 1997). Freeway segment capacity analysis indicates that Alternative 5 would result in the least l] congestion within Fort Washington Way. Alternative 3C would result in the highest level of congestion within Fort Washington Way ("Cincinnati Fort Washington Way Subcorridor Traffic Operations Analysis" (January 30, 1997). ~J The intersection capacity analysis of the key access locations into downtown Cincinnati shows that the demand volume during the 2020 AM (inbound) peak houris expected to be u significantly higher than the PM (outbound) peak hour ("Cincinnati Fort Washington Way Subcorridor Traffic Operations Analysis" (January 30, 1997}. The intersection analysis of the 2020 AM peak hour indicates that the Central Avenue/Fifth Street intersection would operate over-capacity under Alternative 5. However, ample reserve capacity should be available for incoming eastbound US 50 and southbound 1-75 vehicles via the proposed ramp to Second Street ("Cincinnati Fort Washington Way Subcorridor Traffic Operations Analysis" (January 30, 1997). 0 0 Under Alternative 5, the intersection analysis of the 2020 AM peak hour indicates that the n(, Main Street/Third Street intersection would operate over-capacity. However, there would be numerous options for diverting excess traffic away from this intersection ("Cincinnati Fort fJ Washington Way Subcorridor Traffic Operations Analysis" (January 30, 1997}. f1 1 [J 0 n 0 ] 0 u u u 0 u 0 n0 a& S.5 SOCIOECONOMIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS 0 There are no significant differences among the build alternatives for environmental impacts. None of the alternatives are expected to result in significant adverse social, economic or environmental impact. No "fatal flaws" in terms of environmental impact have been identified for any of the alternatives. n Alternative 5 would displaœ two small parks adjacent to the south side of Third Street; therefore, subsequent requirements would include completion and approval of a Section 4(f) evaluation. 1 Alternatives 2, 3C and 5 have potential impacts on historie resources and sites located north of Fort Washington Way and the Roebling Suspension Bridge itself. None of the alternatives would directly impact any of these historie resources, however more detailed study and coordination with the Ohio rJ and Kentucky State Historie Preservation Offices may reveal adverse indirect impacts, such as visual n intrusion, that could require avoidance or mitigation. fJ n v·) l.r_, ( l. J 1) l] u u D J n mm· n(1 S.6 CAPITAL COST ESTIMATES 0 Capital construction cost estimates range from a low of $26 million to a high of approximately $96 million. Alternative 5 would have the highest costs due to the most extensive set of optional ramps and land reclamation. Base costs include engineering, administration, 0 construction and equipment purchases as well as contingencies for the primary corridor work under each alternative. Optional additional ramp costs are included for the three build G alternatives. Table S-1 provides component and total cost estimates for each alternative. Table S-1 n Summary of the Estimated Capital Costs (1996 Dollars) Optional Ramp Total Estimated Alternative Base Costs Costs Cost n 1 i 1 NoBuild Il $26.ooo.ooo 1 $26,000,000 Lli 1 0 1 fJ 1 $26,000,000 0 1 $26,000,000 EJl rsM 1 Lli Minimum Build l $34,000,000 1 $14,416,000 Il $48,416.000 0 1 Retain 1-71 and U.S. 50 in Narrowed Fort Washington $48,000,000 $14,416,000 $62,416,000 C') EJ Way Narrowed Fort Washington 1 $95,928,000 rj [] Way with Expanded Access 1 $74,400,000 1$21,528,000 1} Source Balke Engineers, January 1997. Parsons Brinckerholf Quade & Douglas, Inc., January 1997. ,J ~J u l] 0 0 nn ~ .· S.7 COMPARATIVE BENEFITS AND COSTS n A trade-off analysis was completed to assess how alternatives meet the stated project goals and meet the project's defined purpose and need. No priority was established among the criteria as none were set by subcommittee. Table S-2 summarizes the trade-offs which are 0 described in more detail in section 7.0 of this report. Table S-2 n Summary of Alternatives Trade-off Analysis 11 3C. Retain 1-71 5. Narrowed and U.S. 50 in Fort Evaluation 2. Minimum 1. No Build 1A. TSM Narrowed Fort Washington Criteria Build Washington Way, Expand 0 Way Access (] Maintain Safe, Efficient Operation and Capacity Freeway minor minor impacts minor impacts minor impacts minor impacts ri Conditions impacts Regional / Corridor Trips Congestion on tJ Fort lntermediate lntermediate lntermediate Greatest Least Washington congestion congestion congestion congestion congestion i] Way lmproved LOS Weaving No Change in No Change in No Change in No Change in eastbound Analysis LOS LOS LOS LOS ~] and westbound [J 1 Local/Short Distance Trips .... 1 LOS F with. (year 2020) Alternative ! J capacity at LOSF LOS F LOSF LOSF Third St. Broadway & between lJ Sixth Street Main and Vine Streets. Fifth Street at 1 rJ CentralAvenue : LOS B LOS B LOS B LOSB LOS F 1 1 1 Il 1 \ 1mprove Access 1 J 0 New links at Third, To Cincinnati No No Loss of access Loss of access Second, Fifth nn .CBO lmprovement lmprovement from 1-71 from 1-71 and P/um n Streets New links - Broadway to No No Loss of access Loss of access T o Riverfronts Taylor lmprovement lmprovement to 1-71 to 1-71 n Southgate Bridge Transit 8 No Impact No Impact No Impact No Impact No Impact Connections [ 1 Il 1 i 1 Reclaim 200- Reclaim 100- D 300-foot foot strip. strip. Reclaim Land Sorne decking Sorne decking Sorne decking or Air Rights opportunities opportunities opportunities Greater 0 Greatest decking decking opportunities ',J opportunities Staging/ Staging/ Staging/ Staging/ Staging/ Stage/Phase Phasing Phasing Phasing Phasing Phasing Construction possible with possible with possible with possible with possible with Stadium J 1...__ Stadium Stadium Stadium Stadium C> Source: Parsons Brinckerhoff, February 1997 ( { 1 l [J J u u u n Il, t1:tffifi. \ 5.8 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT AND RECOMMENDATION 0 More than 1000 citizens participated in public workshops, meetings, presentations and events at which the Fort Washington Way Subcorridor Study was been featured. More than 40 print and broadcast news stories appeared on project. A public hearing held on January 30, 1997 .~ resulted in positive comments and stated preferences for Alternative 5. A presentation of the "Evaluation of Alternatives Report" (Parsons Brinckerhoff, January 1997) 0 and supporting technical documents was made to the Fort Washington Way Subcorridor Study Subcommittee on January 17, 1997. The subcommittee recommended Alternative 5 to the full l-71 Corridor Transportation Study Oversight Committee for environmental n documentation and engineering. The 1-71 Corridor Transportation Study Oversight Committee concurred with the Alternative 5 recommendation on January 31, 1997. Q J J C.) fJ J D [J J ] u 1v1<1g(lzmt: pra1st:s run w asmngmn w ay uverst:t:r rage L. sur .., n interests working in collaborative ways," said • Man jn Carruth Shootlng Fred Craig, project manager for Parsons Sentenced Brinckerhoff of Ohio, which managed the • Mavericks 108. Hawks 94 n,I renovation for the city. • Sharks J,J;QY.otes 0 • Mets 7, Braves 1 Mr. Deatrick said he relied as much on his • Yankees 1, Royals o n engineering background- he was the city's principal engineer before taking this position in November 1999 - as his diplomatie skills in n getting the job done. 0 Monthly CG&E bills ch1II the blood Officers strippedof~e powers 5 area churches among best in U.S. 0 Medal to honor Shuttlesworth Taft: Split off youngest offenders Taped gang rape sick... ..Qolice Sfil' Bash for Bush gets $400,000 10 DevelQpers like Luken'~goal of 1,000 new units Second-round bids lower for concrete at Reds stadium D Northern Kentuckians win ke y: posts Partisan maneuvers threaten rest of session Pool spending guestioned ~Reedway: to OQen new ticket offices J HOWARD: Neighborhood..§ MCNUTI: Winter travel Anti-heist technology lets police 'peer' into banks C Bethel building to begin Covinqton citY- leaders get ready for getaway Egg farm_to p...f!y_$1.36M ~ettlement lnfant-drQ.RQtl.J~lan becomes law J • Magazine praises Fort Washington Way overseer Man.IDl.!!!y of dn,19..,.gun charges ] National test results no surprise Oxford pJirk would be for kids on wheels Paint shooter appears in court Parents, union P-rotest move lJ Park Hills fire displaces many families Pie-face stunt falls fiat Police look to a1weal rulingJ2Y. arbitrator l] Reading police chief says he will retire Schools to keep longer hours Triple killin.9 investigation continues Kentucky News Briefs lJ Tristate A.M. Report J Apr. 6, 2001 EHQUIRER HOME LOCAL SPORTS llUSINE$$ TEMPO ENTERTAINMENT CLASSIFIEO ARCHIVE SEARCH Et®â"~'~ Cfncln"allC It is that simple! îHE CJNCTNNATI ENQUI~ Post your resurne, search job openings, find career advice. TALII TRA.fFIC . WEATHER , HOMES ' CARS JOBS . BEUGALS REOS · ENQUIRER .' CINCltlNATI COM 0 http://enquirer.com/editions/2001/01/06/loc_magazine_praises.html 2001-04-06