DOCSLIB.ORG

Public Hearing Summary I-75 Mill Creek Expressway HAM-75-2.30 PID # 76257

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Public Hearing Summary I-75 Mill Creek Expressway HAM-75-2.30 PID # 76257 Public Hearing Summary I-75 Mill Creek Expressway HAM-75-2.30 PID # 76257 Prepared for: Ohio Department of Transportation (ODOT) March 9, 2009 EXPERIENCE | Transportation Public Hearing Summary A Public Hearing for the Environmental Assessment (EA) was held on February 10, 2009, from 4:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. at the St. Bernard Municipal Building. Representatives from the Ohio Department of Transportation (ODOT) District 8, ODOT Central Office, ODOT Real Estate Southwest Region, and TranSystems Corporation were available to answer project-specific questions and to address comments concerning the I-75 Mill Creek Expressway project. There were 186 people who signed the provided sign- in sheet at the entrance, including 167 members of the public, 16 public officials/employees, and 3 members of the media. The announcement of the Public Hearing from January 26, 2009 and February 2, 2009 Cincinnati Enquirer can be found in Appendix A, and other newspaper or online media articles are located in Appendix B . The hearing was held in an “open house” style and no formal presentations were made, allowing the visitors to peruse the exhibits and past documents at their leisure. Exhibits included two sets of mounted boards displaying the Preferred Alignment. Maps, drawings, and other pertinent information, including the Environmental Assessment and previous project documents, were available for public inspection. A court stenographer was also present to record verbal comments. A list of each written comment received before, during, and after the hearing is located in the table that follows. Responses from the project team are listed after each comment. Copies of the comments are provided in Appendix C . Comments received before, during, and after the February 10, 2009 Public Hearing Comment Response Cincinnati Preservation Association is pleased that there will According to the Noise Analysis Report, with the level of noise be no adverse effects to historic properties, and that only reduction that this barrier wall would provide, the noise barrier minor property impacts are expected to 3 of these properties. wall would meet the ODOT feasibility criterion. The State We do question the need, however, for a sound wall in front of Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) accepted on June 2, 2008 one of the subway tunnel portals, and whether this might that there was No Adverse Effect to the subway tunnel portals. constitute an unnecessary impact. I commute to the Mt Auburn/Clifton area from Middleton for my work. There is currently a large construction down to I-275 and the I-275 interchange. Traffic is already terrible. Since I exit at the Norwood lateral, I understand the need to improve I- The comment has been noted. 75 in this area. I would ask that this project be delayed until the other 2 construction projects are completed. Starting this project on top of the other two will potentially make the southbound commute in the mornings even worse. Thanks for your past attention to our issues. It is possible to The comment has been noted . The amount of top soil to be preserve more top soil for the Mt. Storm replanting? Could preserved was discussed with and agreed to by the Cincinnati you please send us future updates about the amount of Park Board. The project team will continue to coordinate with material you will remove from the park? Park Staff in the development of the landscaping plan. Install sound walls on Central Pkwy side of the I -75 near intersection of Clifton Hills Ave. to dampen sound for The Noise Analysis did not warrant a noise wall in this area. Concordia Church and school, Cincinnati State, and nearby Clifton residences. 1 HAM -75 -2.30 I -75 Mill Creek Expressway – Public Hearing Summary Comment Response As a resident of Spring Grove Village (formerly Winton Place), I use Mitchell Ave, Kenard Ave & the Mitchell Ave exits #6 quite frequently. Two things jumped out at me. 1) The South bound ramp to Mitchell (a continuous lane) causes many accidents. Drivers either stop (not yield) in order The proposed layout of the interchange at Mitchell Avenue to cut across 2 lanes of traffic to get into the far left lane in should alleviate the existing backups that occur on eastbound order to turn left onto Kenard. Or they do not stop at all. Mitchell to the northbound I-75 on ramp. Traffic continuing on 2) From Mitchell turning left to NB 75 there are 2 lanes that go Mitchell should not be blocked by backups in the left turn lane. straight and one that is a left turn lane. There is not enough width between the left turn lane and the "middle" lane to allow the continuous flow of traffic going straight on Mitchell to Vine St. The I -75 Mill Creek Expressway project will not preclude the development of any future light rail or other fixed guide way Why not Light Rail - Stop I-75 - Why do the construction on I- transit. A transit alignment study was done by the project 75 before we know where the new I-75 bridge is going to be? team. Roadway improvements as a part of the I-75 Mill Creek Expressway will not hinder the development of the Brent Spence Bridge project. I like the redesign of the Hopple street interchange, the only problem is that it leaves the mainline of North I-75 at 3 lanes Based upon the high volume of traffic (opening and design from the new location of the I-74 exit ramp to when the end of year) exiting to and entering from I-74, three lanes were ramp from I-74 comes on to N I-75. This will create a sufficient to handle the opening and design year traffic on this bottleneck of 3/4 mile on N I-75. Therefore I wish that the segment of I-75. original Hopple St Design would be considered. Place is much better because Mt. Storm Park is more intact. Need sign improvement at I-75/275 North & South. I'll be glad The comment has been noted. to discuss this with interested persons. Please send me aerial view of Paddock Rd interchange abating Paddock/Seymour Ave. Extremely informative & Information was provided to this individual. representative answered all questions presented to her - and understood about new interchange at Paddock Rd. The roadway that was part of the plan for the Cumminsville area I feel should be named "Cincinnati Ave" or boulevard, since there is not a street with this name currently. As far as The comment has been noted. St. Bernard is concerned, expanding to the north side of the roadway is preferable. We don’t want to lose any parkland or homes. I live on W McMicken near the w estern hills viaduct. I'm interested in the plans for that interchange as it relates to I-75, noise abatement (c-walls/trees etc.) and its impact on the The comment has been noted. residents of my neighborhood. One suggestion is to reinstate the ban on trucks not stopping in town, making use of 275 mandatory. Thank you. Tony The only solution is a Dayton, OH Cinc OH NKY Reason one. Only delays Gridlock without inclusion of a 5- OH county 3- state (tax supported) mass transit and a North/South bypass that makes sense to long haul trucking & auto traffic. (Plus The comment has been noted. incentives for Rail transport to replace long distance trucking from north of Dayton OH to south of the i-71/i_75 split in Kentucky this amounts to a band aid that will come unstuck before its completion date. 2 HAM -75 -2.30 I -75 Mill Creek Expressway – Public Hearing Summary Comment Response Thanks to ODOT & the consultant team for the work completed to date. Please get this project constructed as soon The comment has been noted. as possible. It will be a tremendous benefit to our region. The existing partial interchange serves a low traffic volume Why are you taking away exits that prove beneficial when and interferes with the effective, safe operation of the Norwood there are wrecks or backups? For example Towne Street and Lateral interchange. The closure of Towne will be necessary Central Parkway. The developers need to drive the current under any improvement scenario for Norwood Lateral. This roads during rush hour, sun delays, and radar times. Lack of safety improvement also was recommended by the NSTI exits prevents drivers from having alternate routes. Let us not study. Additional information is available in the Conceptual have another Galbraith Road fiasco. Alternatives Solutions Report and the Assessment of Feasible Alternatives Report. Keep Towne Street exit and entrance. See previous response. I’m writing about the closing of the on and off ramp to 75 north. Elmwood needs these ramps for businesses and the people of See previous response. Elmwood Place. Although t his is primarily an interstate highway project it is important to accommodate bicyclists and pedestrian travel through the interchanges. This is the policy for both the state and federal transportation departments and the federal highway funding may be used for any related improvements including sidewalks, bike lanes, and related trails. The Western Hills and Hopple Street interchanges are of particular importance for bicycle traffic between the Uptown activities All current bike and pedestrian connections or pathways are and the western parts of Cincinnati and Spring Grove Avenue, being replaced in the same location or in close proximity and important N-S bicycling route. Bike lanes, wide curb lanes throughout the project. All of the bike and pedestrian or shared lane markings should be included in the roads impacts/improvements are listed within the Community crossing through these interchanges.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • I-75 in Hamilton County Project Termini
    I-75 in Hamilton County Project Termini Introduction As part of the North South Transportation Initiative (NSTI), capacity improvements were recommended for the I-75 corridor through Hamilton County from the Brent Spence Bridge on the south, where I-75 crosses into Kentucky, to I-275 on the north. The NSTI was a planning study conducted by the Ohio-Kentucky-Indiana Regional Council of Governments (OKI) that evaluated overall transportation needs at a broad level and considered substantial public input. ODOT has also recognized the need for capacity, access, and safety improvements on the I-75 corridor. ODOT’s Highway Safety Program and the Congestion and Safety Initiative both identified major portions of the I-75 corridor for study to address capacity issues and high accident rates. Improvements to the I-75 corridor and its interchanges would be extremely expensive and unlikely to be pursued in entirety within the typical planning horizon of twenty years. According to the OKI Travel Demand Model, of the roughly 160,000 vehicles per day utilizing I-75 in Hamilton County, only about 25,000 (16%) are truly through-trips, with both the origin and destination north of I-275 or south of the Brent Spence Bridge. Therefore, ODOT believes that benefits may be provided to the majority of motorists even if only portions of the corridor are improved at any given time. In other terms, well- defined projects on I-75 within Hamilton County would have independent utility even if the entire corridor were not improved. The NSTI planning study considered the corridor only at a broad level, which did not allow for any detailed examination of needs or the impacts or benefits of any proposed solutions.
    [Show full text]
  • Mill Creek Watershed Scenario Project Report
    Comprehensive Planning Workshop Spring 2010 Niehoff Urban Studio 2008-2010 Mill Creek Watershed Scenario Project Spring 2010 Executive Summary This report is a collective presentation of the studio process undertaken by the University of Cincinnati’s School of Planning 2010 Spring Comprehensive Workshop. The focus of the workshop was the Mill Creek Watershed, a 166 square mile area in southwestern Ohio. The Watershed has reached a critical state due to a multitude of both internal and external factors including industrial flight, environmental degradation, building vacancies, unemployment, auto dependence, and a worsening national economy. While numerous organizations construct and implement plans for the future of the Watershed, a lack of regional collaboration often results in little progress. Over the past century, the Mill Creek brought industry and increased population to the Watershed area. Today, the Mill Creek still remains a valuable natural asset. Urbanization has taken its toll, however, and both water quality and riparian corridor health have suffered. Another area of concern is the loss of population in the City of Cincinnati, and corresponding redistribution to the suburbs. Limited transportation options have worsened this outmigration by encouraging auto dependence. Social and environmental justice issues coincide with declining economic and environmental conditions in the Mill Creek Watershed. Due to its uncertain future, planning in the Mill Creek Watershed requires the consideration of multiple possibilities for how the area will transform. This Workshop used the scenario planning approach to establish four plausible outcomes for the Watershed. Scenario planning seeks to open discussions about how things may unfold, providing the opportunity for individuals and organizations to look beyond their individual plans and concerns for the future.
    [Show full text]
  • Revive Cincinnati: Lower Mill Creek Valley
    revive cincinnati: neighborhoods of the lower mill creek valley Cincinnati, Ohio urban design associates february 2011 STEERING COMMITTEE TECHNICAL COMMITTEE Revive Cincinnati: Charles Graves, III Tim Jeckering Michael Moore Emi Randall Co-Chair, City Planning and Northside Community Council Chair, Transportation and OKI Neighborhoods of the Lower Buildings, Director Engineering Dave Kress Tim Reynolds Cassandra Hillary Camp Washington Business Don Eckstein SORTA Mill Creek Valley Co-Chair, Metropolitan Sewer Association Duke Energy Cameron Ross District of Greater Cincinnati Mary Beth McGrew Patrick Ewing City Planning and Buildings James Beauchamp Uptown Consortium Economic Development PREPARED FOR Christine Russell Spring Grove Village Community Weston Munzel Larry Falkin Cincinnati Port Authority City of Cincinnati Council Uptown Consortium Office of Environmental Quality urban design associates 2011 Department of City Planning David Russell Matt Bourgeois © and Buildings Rob Neel Mark Ginty Metropolitan Sewer District of CHCURC In cooperation with CUF Community Council Greater Cincinnati Waterworks Greater Cincinnati Metropolitan Sewer District of Robin Corathers Pat O’Callaghan Andrew Glenn Steve Schuckman Greater Cincinnati Mill Creek Restoration Project Queensgate Business Alliance Public Services Cincinnati Park Board Bruce Demske Roxanne Qualls Charles Graves Joe Schwind Northside Business Association CONSULTANT TEAM City Council, Vice Mayor City Planning and Buildings, Director Cincinnati Recreation Commission Urban Design Associates Barbara Druffel Walter Reinhaus LiAnne Howard Stefan Spinosa Design Workshop Clifton Business and Professional Over-the-Rhine Community Council Health ODOT Wallace Futures Association Elliot Ruther Lt. Robert Hungler Sam Stephens Robert Charles Lesser & Co. Jenny Edwards Cincinnati State Police Community Development RL Record West End Community Council DNK Architects Sandy Shipley Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • H:\TMDL\Program Development\Projects\Mill Creek
    Appendices Total Maximum Daily Loads for Mill Creek in Butler and Hamilton Counties prepared by Ohio Environmental Protection Agency Division of Surface Water with contributions by Butler County Department of Environmental Services Metropolitan Sewer District of Greater Cincinnati Mill Creek Restoration Project Mill Creek Watershed Council Office of Environmental Management, City of Cincinnati Ohio Kentucky Indiana Regional Council of Governments September 2004 Appendix Mill Creek TMDL report TABLE OF CONTENTS Appendix A. Modeling ........................................................1 A.1 GWLF Model Inputs .................................................2 A.1.2 Rainfall and Runoff Input Data and Parameters .....................5 A.2 Development of CSO and SSO Nutrient Loads for the Mill Creek Basin TMDL . 19 A.2.1 Approach for Developing CSO Nutrient Loadings ..................19 A.2.2 Approach for Developing SSO Nutrient Loading ...................23 Appendix A References......................................................25 Appendix B. Summary of Point Sources .........................................27 Appendix C. Summary of Non Point Source ......................................36 Appendix D. Public Notice Comments and Responses ...............................63 Appendix E. Notes from Public Meetings ........................................104 September 30, 2004 Appendix Mill Creek TMDL report List of Tables and Figures Table 1. Land uses in Mill Creek watershed, 1989-1994 ...............................2 Figure 1. Mill Creek
    [Show full text]
  • Cover, 10.05.08 [Compatibility Mode]
    I-75 Mill Creek Expressway Environmental Assessment HAM-75-2.30 (PID 76257) Prepared for: The Ohio Department of Transportation and The Federal Highway Administration December 16, 2008 Environmental Assessment HAM-75-2.30 (PID 76257) Executive Summary This document summarizes impacts and consequences of the improvements to I-75 between the Western Hills Viaduct and Paddock Road within Hamilton County, Ohio, referred to as the I-75 Mill Creek Expressway project. Furthermore, the document presents the appropriate measures to reduce adverse effects and augment the positive benefits of the project. This report details the preliminary development and alternatives evaluation process conducted to carry forward the Preferred Alternative, identified as the alternative that best satisfies the purpose and need for the project. A summary of the expected environmental impacts by the Preferred Alternative includes: • The project is estimated to require residential relocations of 22 buildings/67 households. Commercial relocations are anticipated to 15 properties. No substantial concerns are associated with relocations. • Park impacts are expected to include: o Mt. Storm Park – 0.28 acres permanent, 1.64 acres temporary, impacts to vegetation, will be re- vegetated o Camp Washington Recreation Center – approximately 140 square feet permanent, grassy area and trees impacted o Massachusetts Avenue Park – 0.11 acres impact (total site) including play equipment and benches, park to be relocated o Tot Lot Park – approximately 17 square feet of grassy area impacted o Elmwood Place Memorial Park (Maple Street Park) – impacts to trees only, which are within existing highway right-of-way, no impacts to park, retaining wall to be constructed and ballfield fence extended to wall o Bank Avenue Park – 0.36 acres permanent and no impacts to facilities except for walking path which will be replaced during construction o Valley Park – 0.03 acres temporary to reconstruct sidewalk and curb return to access drive • No adverse effects are anticipated on cultural resources.
    [Show full text]
  • Odot District 8 2021 Construction Program
    ODOT DISTRICT 8 2021 CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM SERVING BUTLER, CLERMONT, CLINTON, GREENE, HAMILTON, PREBLE AND WARREN COUNTIES MIKE DEWINE, OHIO GOVERNOR | JACK MARCHBANKS, PH.D., ODOT DIRECTOR | TAMMY CAMPBELL, P.E., DISTRICT DEPUTY DIRECTOR ODOT DISTRICT 8 2021 CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM ODOT DISTRICT 8 2021 CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM 2021 CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM hio’s highways are essential to keeping and creating new jobs. With a mission to provide easy movement of people and goods from place to place, the Ohio Department of Transportation (ODOT) is responsible for maintaining one of the largest transportation networks in the nation. Guided by ethical principles and accountability, ODOT works to improve safety, enhance travel and advance economic development. O The following summary outlines those projects which are currently under construction or programmed for the 2021 construction season in ODOT District 8. With an estimated funding commitment of more than $760 million in construction costs, District 8’s construction program will consist of approximately 95 new and ongoing preservation, maintenance and safety improvement projects to be sold and/or constructed through FY2021 and the first quarter of FY2022. Due to production and planning variables, however, not all projects may be sold as proposed, and projects are subject to funding availability. Any cost estimates, sale dates or schedules cited in this document are subject to change, and estimated costs are the construction cost estimates established by District 8’s Planning & Design staff prior to bid letting; these do not include any preliminary engineering or right of way acquisition costs as applicable to the project. Projects listed as Local-Let are those which are being administered by the Department of Transportation; additional information about these and other local projects can be obtained from the respective sponsoring agency.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix C: Existing and Future Conditions
    Planning Study Report APPENDIX C EXISTING AND FUTURE CONDITIONS REPORT Uptown Transportation Study URS Corporation November 2006 Existing and Future Conditions Report Part B: I-71 Access Improvement Study, PID 77628 Prepared For: Ohio Kentucky Indiana Regional Council of Governments and the Uptown Implementation Partners Prepared By: URS Corporation July 12, 2006 Uptown Transportation Study i URS Corporation July 2006 Existing and Future Conditions Report Part B: I-71 Access Improvement Study, PID 77628 Implementation Partners (IP): Ohio Kentucky Indiana Regional Council of Governments (OKI) City of Cincinnati Southwest Ohio Regional Transit Authority Ohio Department of Transportation Amos Project Tri-Health Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center Cincinnati Zoo & Botanical Garden Health Alliance University of Cincinnati Uptown Transportation Study ii URS Corporation July 2006 Existing and Future Conditions Report Part B: I-71 Access Improvement Study, PID 77628 Table of Contents 1. Introduction............................................................................................................1 1.1. Project Organization..............................................................................................1 1.2. Project History.......................................................................................................2 1.3 Study Area Overview.............................................................................................2 2. Study Area.............................................................................................................4
    [Show full text]
  • FISCAL YEARS 2021 – 2024 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (TIP) Executive Summary
    FISCAL YEARS 2021 – 2024 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (TIP) Executive Summary April 9, 2020 1 TIP Overview OKI is designated as the Metropolitan Planning Organization (“MPO”) by the Governors of Ohio, Kentucky and Indiana acting through the Ohio Department of Transportation, the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet and the Indiana Department of Transportation in cooperation with locally elected officials for the Counties of Butler, Clermont, Hamilton and Warren in the State of Ohio; Boone, Campbell and Kenton in the Commonwealth of Kentucky; and Dearborn in the State of Indiana. As the MPO, OKI is required under Titles 23 and 49 of the U.S.C. to conduct the continuing, cooperative, and comprehensive urban transportation planning process. One product is this TIP that considers all surface transportation modes and supports regional development goals. The TIP is a four year listing of surface transportation projects planned for federal, state and local funding within the OKI region. The TIP is a prerequisite for the use of federal funds and represents the short‐range programming document to complement the OKI’s Metropolitan Transportation Plan, also referred to as the “Plan”. Projects in the TIP are considered to have committed funding, with the specific amount of funds identified by Fiscal year, funding type and phase. The last major update to the TIP was in May 2019, however, this is the first TIP that includes new ODOT projects beyond FY21. This TIP will become part of the statewide TIP (STIP) in Ohio, Kentucky and Indiana. The OKI FY 2021‐2024 TIP includes projects for improving highways that are accompanied by recommendations for improving bus service; advanced technologies to move traffic more efficiently; projects to help reduce drive‐alone commuting including; ridesharing; bicycle and pedestrian projects; upgrading highway operating efficiency and projects that improve freight operations in the region.
    [Show full text]
  • OVERVIEW Progress Made Highway Projects
    List of Roadway Projects Completed Since July 1, 2012 Project ID Date Facility Location Description Status Ohio Bridge sealing contract 84515 8/12/2012 District-wide Awarded for Fiscal Year 2013 Rehabilitation of various 83049 10/25/2012 District-wide bridge size corrugated Awarded metal pipes Provide battery backups to all district maintained 92959 11/15/2012 District-wide Awarded signals that do not have battery backups Preventive maintenance 75909 5/31/2013 District-wide on the priority system for Awarded Fiscal Year 2013 Crack sealing on the 75911 5/16/2013 District-wide priority system for Fiscal Awarded Year 2013 Bridge maintenance 84528 5/16/2013 District-wide contract for Fiscal Year Awarded 2013 Preventive maintenance 83823 6/7/2013 District-wide on the general system for Awarded Fiscal Year 2013 Install traffic signals at 87024 6/7/2013 District-wide Awarded various locations Guardrail repair and 94602 6/12/2013 District-wide upgrade contract for Awarded Fiscal Year 2014 Guardrail repair and 94602 6/12/2013 District-wide upgrade contract for Awarded Fiscal Year 2014 Crack sealing on the 82963 4/3/2014 District-wide priority system for Fiscal Awarded Year 2014 Provide tyre grip or micro surfacing friction 96444 4/3/2014 District-wide Awarded treatment on various routes Bridge sealing contract 84517 9/25/2014 District-wide Awarded for Fiscal Year 2015 List of Roadway Projects Completed Since July 1, 2012 Project ID Date Facility Location Description Status Minor work on culverts 86457 10/23/2014 District-wide Awarded for Fiscal Year 2015 Bridge maintenance 75625 12/4/2014 District-wide contract for Fiscal Year Awarded 2015 Butler County SR 129/I- Various locations in Butler TIP Project 15693 7/27/2012 75/Union Awarded County Reimbursements Centre Beckett Ridge, Install sidewalks, improve Beckett 90897 8/30/2012 Lakota SRTS Project sight distance, upgrade Awarded Station, Spruce school signing Rd.
    [Show full text]
  • Oasis Phase I History/Architecture Reconnaissance
    Phase I History/ Architecture Reconnaissance Survey HAM/CLE – Oasis Rail Corridor Commuter Rail Project (PID 86463) June 05, 2013 Phase I History/ Architecture Reconnaissance Survey HAM/CLE – Oasis Rail Corridor PID 86463 April 2013 Prepared by: Mary Anne Reeves, M.A. Principal Investigatory Andrew Schneider, M.A. Amber Taylor, M.A. RPA TranSystems Corporation 1105 Schrock Road, Suite 400 Columbus, Ohio 43229 (614) 433-7800 Lead Agency Federal Highway Administration EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TranSystems Corporation conducted a Phase I History/Architecture survey for the proposed HAM/CLE – Oasis Rail Corridor commuter rail project (PID 86463). The project initiates in downtown Cincinnati and follows the existing rail infrastructure along the Ohio River and to the Milford Interstate 275 interchange. The project will also evaluate alternatives for new station locations in conjunction with the proposed commuter rail service. The study area is an irregularly shaped area encompassing approximately 8.7 miles through Cincinnati beginning downtown south of the Great American Ballpark off Mehring Way and ending at the interchange of Interstate 275 in Milford (Figures 1A- 1AE). The Area of Potential Effects (APE) for history/architecture is defined as structures located on adjacent parcels or within 50 feet of existing rail infrastructure, starting at the Roebling Suspension Bridge to Wooster Pike and from Broadwell Road to I-275 (Appendix A, Figure 1). In addition, the APE includes several ‘station location study areas’ developed by the stakeholders. With the proposed project located near downtown Cincinnati, a majority of the study area consists of urban, commercial and residential development. A literature review conducted at the Ohio Historic Preservation Office (OHPO) indicates that 50 properties in the APE are listed on the National Register of Historic Places, including 47 buildings, two cemeteries (NR# 79002706 and 79002709), and a set of brick arches from the 1872 Newport and Cincinnati Bridge (NR#01000363).
    [Show full text]
  • Executive Summary Stand Alone Version.Pdf
    1 Executive Summary The OKI region is a major link in America’s freight transportation network. More than 323 million tons of freight flow into, out of and through the region annually. About one-third of this freight is inbound, destined for major businesses in the region such as General Electric, AK Steel, Toyota, and Schwan Food Company. For these and hundreds of other businesses, transportation is their lifeblood. Fortunately from an economic development standpoint, the OKI region provides a powerful nexus for truck, rail, barge, and air transportation. More than 80 percent of the region’s freight moves by truck, so major highways and local roads are vital to regional commerce. Interstate 75, running north-south through the region, is one of the heaviest truck corridors in America. The region is also home to major railroad facilities including three intermodal terminals, three train classification yards and numerous industrial sidings. Together, the region’s three railroad companies handle almost 100 trains per day. Barge terminals are critical to the region’s heavy industries. While just 10 percent of the region’s freight moves by barge, its low cost is essential to shipping bulk commodities such as chemical products for DuPont and scrap metal for AK Steel. For time sensitive cargo, the Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky International Airport (CVG) offers service from major parcel carriers such as FedEx and also serves as the North American hub for DHL. The DHL hub at CVG employs more than 1,800 people and total freight has increased 190 percent since 2009. For many years, transportation planning has focused on moving people by automobile or public transit.
    [Show full text]
  • Transportation Options in Greater Cincinnati Every Day, Most of Us Get
    November 2014 Study Pages – Transportation Issues 1 WHAT MOVES YOU? Transportation Options in Greater Cincinnati Every day, most of us get to work, run by the grocery store or meet friends without ever thinking twice about how we arrive at our destination. For many, travelling through our community is as routine as hitting a light switch. Transportation is about moving people and goods from one point to another – point A to point B – safely and easily. Transportation in the Greater Cincinnati area can be described as auto-centric. Many people rely on cars to get to work, school, appointments, recreation and other activities of daily living. To get around in the region, in addition to private automobiles, other means of transportation include: public transit, bicycles and walking. Each has advantages and disadvantages, upsides and downsides, benefits and detriments. How well each method functions and how well it connects with other forms of transportation can influence the area’s economic, environmental and community health and vitality as well as its land use and development. Each transportation mode uses infrastructure funded with public money. The interstate system is funded primarily with federal money from the Federal Highway Trust Fund; transit buses may be purchased with federal dollars and local match but are operated with local money. Communities make decisions about how much to invest in these various modes of transportation and what is the appropriate or desirable balance, that is, how much of each mode ought to be available. Travelers make decisions about which mode to use and/or purchase. Providers of goods and services make decisions about which mode to use and/or purchase based in part on cost and time.
    [Show full text]