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. Sidewalks should be Impacts section of the EA. retained. Signal timing should allow pedestrians to clear the crosswalks. Plan call for cutting off McMicken Avenue for the Due to the elevation changes between the proposed Central new ramp to Central Parkway. It is important to retain a Parkway/Hopple/MLK connector road and McMicken, pedestrian sidewalk of at least 6 feet through the old connection will be provided by an ADA accessible ramp on McMicken alignment along the side of the ramp, to the Little Hopple. The ramp will connect McMicken and Central crosswalk at MLK. The diagrams show that this sidewalk Parkway just south of the new connector road intersection. extension could merge with the walk along the ramp. I have found that most existing pedestrian crossings over I-75 have been accounted for and retained or reasonably replaced. The existing pedestrian bridge connecting City Center Dr. and Section Rd., which is located north of Paddock, is an important bicycle connection to Spring Grove Ave. and Section, an important east-west bike route. I understand that it is to be replaced and just want to emphasize its need. I'm at 42 West Mitchell and really they have been very kind and they gave me a lot of information and I appreciate it. The comment has been noted. Okay. Thank you. I am requesting that the information that will either be written or verbal by a recorder can be sent to me for my review. I will not be able to attend your meeting on Tuesday, February 10, Information was provided to this individual. 2009. Thanks for giving us the opportunity to request the responses as you have in your letter. It makes it more convenient for me since I cannot attend.
3 HAM -75 -2.30 I -75 Mill Creek Expressway – Public Hearing Summary
Comment Response The water runoff from the existing and expanded I -75 negatively impacts Mill Creek. This stream is a non-attainment and does not meet its TMDL. The EA does not adequately address this important cumulative impact. There is no verifiable commitment to mitigate for the increased flow or ODOT’s BMPs will be followed. decreased quality. There needs to be a commitment to incorporate as many BMPs as possible including bioretention swales, ponds, and other measures. Off site mitigation could include the restoration of a segment to increase the assimilative capacity of the creek. Concerned that concrete pavement will not be allowed as a bidding alternative. I don’t know if that's how I want to say it. What I'm trying to say is the price - that the pavement choice is The comment has been noted. asphalt only. There's no option for concrete pavement. Have a nice day. I'm the administrator for the North Avondale Neighborhood Association, but that's not that important. I mean, that's what I do but…that's why I'm here. I'm just not happy with the Mitchell exit…northbound exit going east. Right now it's a…you can just get off and go. Now I'm going to have to go at a light and sit and wait in traffic and so I asked why, you know, what and the designers, I guess, said that will just...is what she In order to allow a continuous right hand turn from the was sort of told to do. Anyway I'm not...it's nice flowing and it's northbound I-75 ramp to eastbound Mitchell an additional going to be...I'm going to be sitting there now wasting more travel lane would be required on Mitchell. The impacts of time sitting at a light. I hate lights. Anyway. So otherwise I adding the additional travel lane were substantial and therefore thought the interchange at Seymour and Paddock looked were not recommended. Furthermore, opening and design good. I thought that, you know, increasing some of like Hopple year traffic showed that the intersection of Mitchell and the and stuff that works, looks good, so I think most of it looks ramp would operate at an acceptable level without the good but people living there they may not like it either but continuous right. Mitchell I'm not happy having to sit at a light and I can just see...I think it'll be more dangerous when you turn right on red. Hopefully they'll allow you to turn right on red. If I have to sit there I'll get ticked, but anyway, that's basically what bothers me taking that and making it straight and having to just sit there at a light. A benefit cost analysis was not performed on this project as of Has a benefit to cost study been performed on the $642.5 yet. In December 2008, ODOT’s Transportation Review million Mill Creek Expressway project, and if so, what were the Advisory Council (TRAC) approved new project scoring findings? What was the cost benefit ratio? Thank you for your criteria. The new criteria now include a B/C analysis. Existing time. projects on the current TRAC listing may require this analysis in the future. I make money off signs on the side of my house and they're talking about building a retaining wall which would cover it. They need to not cover my signs because that's part of my income and if I don’t have an income then I'm going to wind up losing my house because I need the income. That's the reason I even got the house was because it had that extra The property owner was contacted regarding the comment. income to help me pay for the house. So that's my comment. Like they need to scale it back as far as they can and try not to cover up my signs so people can see them coming up the highway and coming up and down Hopple Street. That'll cover it up. I'm just going to wind up losing my house because I won't be able to pay my bills.
4 HAM -75 -2.30 I -75 Mill Creek Expressway – Public Hearing Summary
Comment Response I am trustee for the following parcels located on Spring Grove Avenue beneath the I-74/I-75 interchange: 191-0032-0080-00, 191-0032-0081-00, and 191-0032-00125-00. I will be out of town when you hold the next informational open house The comment has been noted. February 10. This letter is to inform you that I will welcome the opportunity to participate in this improvement project and hope it moves along swiftly. I don’t see a problem with it as the way they got it showing on the map and the way they propose it, but making the street a dead end that won't really bother me or nothing like that. I think it'll be okay. I'm just concerned about people's houses, The comment has been noted. you know, down in there and I wouldn't want them to take nobody's home away from them. So basically that's about it. From what I see if it doesn't change I can be okay with it, you know. Letter written to Councilmember Roxanne Qualls (Stefan Spinosa, ODOT Project Manager received a copy) Cincinnati State greatly appreciates your leadership and City Council's efforts to keep the interchanges and exit ramps near campus accessible in the proposed redesign of the Hopple Street interchange. Your support is critical. As you know, Cincinnati State is an open access institution that plays a major role in the region's workforce preparation. More than 8,000 students Due to public and local agencies concern over the loss of the I- are enrolled each term at the College, and more than 600 74 to eastbound Central Parkway off-ramp, a suggestion was faculty and staff travel to and from the institution each day. It made to provide a two-way connector road between Beekman is important that our constituencies have easy access to our Street and Central Parkway that intersects Beekman Street at campus. Under the current ODOT proposal, Cincinnati State the I-74 eastbound off-ramp to Beekman Street. This was would lose both existing ramps to campus from the highway. shown in the Assessment of Feasible Alternatives (AFA) This would adversely affect a majority of our student and Report and carried forward for further consideration. Based employee population, who reside on the West Side of our upon public input, property impacts and cost, the proposed region. Recently the College completed a market research connector road was eliminated. The two-lane connector road project. In it we discovered that physical accessibility to our resulted in property impacts that were unacceptable to the campus is critical in selecting the College. Students want to South Cumminsville neighborhood and generally gained little get on campus easily, attend classes, and then leave campus local support. Additional information is located within the AFA for jobs, child care responsibilities, and other personal report reasons. They rely on the ease of access to I-75 from campus. If Cincinnati State is to continue to make a positive impact on the region's economic development, we must make sure that our students have ease of access to their education. We must avoid any barriers to their career aspirations. Ultimately, their success will work towards the economic well being of the tri-state. Is the wall going to be built where the fence sits now, or if I am reading this correctly is it going to be 12 ft from where the fence is now? I am still very concerned that a tractor trailer The property owner originally discussed this comment at the traveling 60 plus miles an hour will be that close to my house. Public Hearing. Follow-up took place via email. As it is today, we feel the trucks passing, what will it be like when you move the highway that close to us?
5 HAM -75 -2.30 I -75 Mill Creek Expressway – Public Hearing Summary
APPENDIX A
PUBLIC HEARING ANNOUNCEMENTS
HAM -75 -2.30 I -75 Mill Creek Expressway – Public Hearing Summary
APPENDIX B
NEWSPAPER OR OTHER MEDIA ARTICLES
HAM -75 -2.30 I -75 Mill Creek Expressway – Public Hearing Summary
APPENDIX C
PUBLIC COMMENTS
HAM -75 -2.30 I -75 Mill Creek Expressway – Public Hearing Summary
CO-David Shipps
From: CO-Susan Daniels Sent: Monday, March 16, 2009 11:01 AM To: CO-David Shipps Subject: FW: 09-0041; ODOT Project HAM-75-2.30, PID 76257, Mill Creek
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, March 09, 2009 12:09 PM To: [email protected]; CO-Susan Daniels Subject: Fw: 09-0041; ODOT Project HAM-75-2.30, PID 76257, Mill Creek
FYI
Keith Smith, P.E. Acting Planning & Environmental Engineer / Team Leader, ODOT D-8 [email protected] 1-800-831-2142 or 513-933-6590 ----- Forwarded by Keith Smith/Planning/D08/ODOT on 03/09/2009 12:05 PM ----- "Mitch, Brian" < Brian.Mitch@dn r.state.oh.us > To
ODNR COMMENTS TO Timothy M. Hill, Administrator, ODOT Office of Environmental Services, 1980 West Broad Street, Columbus, Ohio 43223
Location: The project is located along I-75 from the Western Hills Viaduct to Paddock Road interchanges in the City of Cincinnati and St. Bernard.
Project: The project involves reconstruction of I-75 at the above listed location. The project will improve interchanges on I-75 at Hopple Street, I-74, Mitchell Avenue, Norwood Lateral (SR 562), Paddock Road and the Colerain/Beekman interchanges on I-74, just west of the I-74/I-75 interchange. The partial interchange at Towne Street will be removed by the project.
1
The Ohio Department of Natural Resources (ODNR) has completed a review of the above referenced project. These comments were generated by an inter-disciplinary review within the Department. These comments have been prepared under the authority of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 661 et seq.), the National Environmental Policy Act, the Coastal Zone Management Act, Ohio Revised Code and other applicable laws and regulations. These comments are also based on ODNR’s experience as the st ate natural resource management agency and do not supersede or replace the regulatory authority of any local, state or federal agency nor relieve the applicant of the obligation to comply with any local, state or federal laws or regulations.
Rare and Endangered Species: The ODNR, Division of Natural Areas and Preserves, Natural Heritage Database contains one new record to report since our last review. It may be on the edge or just outside of the project area. The location for a record of the Maypop ( Passiflora incarnata ), potentially threatened, is shown in red on the attached map. Three patches of various sizes (largest 20 x 50 ft.) were found with flowers and fruits growing on a fence along the west edge of the former Kahn's Facility.
Our inventory program has not completely surveyed Ohio and relies on information supplied by many individuals and organizations. Therefore, a lack of records for any particular area is not a statement that rare species or unique features are absent from that area.
Fish and Wildlife: The ODNR, Division of Wildlife (DOW) has no comments regarding this project.
ODNR appreciates the opportunity to provide these comments. Please contact Brian Mitch at (614) 265-6378 if you have questions about these comments or need additional information.
Brian Mitch, Environmental Review Manager Ohio Department of Natural Resources Environmental Services Section 2045 Morse Road, Building D-3 Columbus, Ohio 43229-6693 Office: (614) 265-6378 FAX: (614) 267-4764 [email protected]
2