DOCSLIB.ORG

Appendix C: Existing and Future Conditions

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read 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 2.1. Interchange 03850, Gilbert Avenue/Reading Road /Liberty Street .......................5 2.2. Interchange 03860 WH Taft Road /McMillan Street..............................................5 2.3. Interchange 03870, Montgomery Road /Duck Creek Road ..................................5 2.4. Interchange 03880, Dana Avenue.........................................................................6 3. Demographic Characteristics ................................................................................7 3.1. Population .............................................................................................................7 3.2. Employment ..........................................................................................................7 3.3. Land Use...............................................................................................................7 3.4. Environmental Justice ...........................................................................................8 3.5. Economic Development ........................................................................................9 3.6. Regional Travel Patterns.....................................................................................10 4. Environmental Characteristics.............................................................................11 4.1. Natural Environment............................................................................................11 4.2. Cultural Resources..............................................................................................11 4.3. Community Facilities ...........................................................................................11 4.4. Geotechnical Characteristics...............................................................................12 4.5. Highway Traffic Noise .........................................................................................12 4.6. Air Quality............................................................................................................13 4.7. Hazardous Materials ...........................................................................................14 5. Existing Plans and Projects.................................................................................15 5.1. OKI Plans and Projects .......................................................................................15 5.1.1. OKI 2030 Long Range Transportation Plan ....................................................15 5.1.2. OKI Transportation Improvement Plan............................................................16 5.2. ODOT Plans and Projects ...................................................................................17 5.2.1. HAM 75 2.30 Mill Creek Expressway ..............................................................17 5.2.2. HAM 71/75 0.000.22 Brent Spence Bridge ....................................................18 5.2.3. Miscellaneous Maintenance Projects ..............................................................18 5.3. Community Plans and Projects ...........................................................................18 5.3.1. Community Tax Increment Financing Districts................................................18 5.3.2. The Clifton Heights Urban Renewal Plan........................................................18 5.3.3. Evanston 5-Points Urban Renewal Plan .........................................................19 5.3.4. Corryville/University Village Urban Renewal Plan...........................................19 5.3.5. Avondale Vision Plan 2005 .............................................................................19 5.3.6. Burnet Avenue Urban Renewal Plan...............................................................19 5.4. Institutional Plans ................................................................................................20 5.4.1. Uptown Crossings ...........................................................................................20 Uptown Transportation Study iii URS Corporation July 2006 Existing and Future Conditions Report Part B: I-71 Access Improvement Study, PID 77628 5.4.2. Uptown Consortium Strategic Opportunity Plan..............................................20 5.4.3. Uptown Consortium Research Park ................................................................21 5.4.4. University of Cincinnati Campus Masterplan...................................................21 5.4.5. SORTA MetroMoves Plan ...............................................................................21 5.5. Private Plans and Projects ..................................................................................22 5.5.1. Keystone Parke ...............................................................................................22 6. Roadway Network ...............................................................................................23 6.1. I-71 ......................................................................................................................23 6.1.1. Geometric Design Exceptions .........................................................................23 6.1.2. Pavement Condition Ratings...........................................................................26 6.1.3. Bridge Rating Reports .....................................................................................26 6.1.4. Signage ...........................................................................................................28 6.2. US-42 ..................................................................................................................29 6.3. US-22/SR3 ..........................................................................................................29 6.4. Local Roadway Network......................................................................................30 7. Traffic Analysis....................................................................................................31 7.1. Traffic Volume Data.............................................................................................31 7.1.1. Field Counts ....................................................................................................31 7.1.2. Adjustment Methodology.................................................................................33 7.2. 2005 Level of Service (LOS) ...............................................................................35 7.2.1. Basic Freeway Segments................................................................................35 7.2.2. Ramp Junctions...............................................................................................36 7.2.3. Intersections ....................................................................................................37 7.3. 2030 LOS ............................................................................................................38 7.3.1. OKI Regional Travel Demand Model Forecasts..............................................38 7.3.2. Basic Freeway Segments................................................................................39 7.3.3. Ramp Junctions...............................................................................................41 7.3.4. Intersections ....................................................................................................42 8. Accident Analysis ................................................................................................43 8.1.1. ODOT Congestion Rankings...........................................................................43 8.2. I-71 ......................................................................................................................43 8.2.1. ODOT Highway Safety Program (HSP) ..........................................................44 8.2.2. Ohio Department of Public Safety Crash Data................................................45
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Case Studies of Urban Freeways for the I-81 Challenge
    Case Studies of Urban Freeways for The I-81 Challenge Syracuse Metropolitan Transportation Council February 2010 Case Studies for The I-81 Challenge Table of Contents OVERVIEW................................................................................................................... 2 Highway 99/Alaskan Way Viaduct ................................................................... 42 Lessons from the Case Studies........................................................................... 4 I-84/Hub of Hartford ........................................................................................ 45 Success Stories ................................................................................................... 6 I-10/Claiborne Expressway............................................................................... 47 Case Studies for The I-81 Challenge ................................................................... 6 Whitehurst Freeway......................................................................................... 49 Table 1: Urban Freeway Case Studies – Completed Projects............................. 7 I-83 Jones Falls Expressway.............................................................................. 51 Table 2: Urban Freeway Case Studies – Planning and Design Projects.............. 8 International Examples .................................................................................... 53 COMPLETED URBAN HIGHWAY PROJECTS.................................................................. 9 Conclusions
    [Show full text]
  • FINANCING REGIONAL RAIL TRANSIT WITHOUT RAISING TAXES April 2018
    FINANCING REGIONAL RAIL TRANSIT WITHOUT RAISING TAXES April 2018 SLIDE 1: Title Slide Let me first take this opportunity to thank you for inviting me to speak to you. When I first introduced the idea of financing rail transit lines without raising taxes to Mayor Cranley 18 months ago, he of course expressed dubious skepticism, but then said “Who could be against that?” Since then, I have launched a new website, growsmartplanet.org, to encourage cities like ours to plan transit-oriented, sustainable growth throughout their regions and finance the new rail and bus rapid transit lines that make it possible – without raising taxes or waiting years for scarce federal funds. I hope you will find this idea compelling and will help me spread the word to everyone needed to help make this new funding approach feasible here. Cincinnati once had 222 miles of streetcar lines that were built much faster – with local funds - than the short downtown streetcar line opened in 2016. If we look closely at why voters did not support the 2002 MetroMoves regional rail and bus transit plan, you will see why I think we should try again now with an even better plan that provides fast, frequent service to all parts of the region. SLIDE 2: Questions that Impact Transit Plans Public officials and transportation planners should seek consensus from diverse groups on questions like these when planning transportation systems. Their answers all impact what modes of transportation they will most likely support. Most people easily agree on just two things: they want someone else to pay for new highways or public transit lines, and they want lower taxes.
    [Show full text]
  • Directions to Cleveland Operations
    Directions to Cleveland Works 1600 Harvard Avenue Cleveland, OH 44105 Please note that there are no sleeping areas at this facility. You must stop at a rest area or truck stop. From Interstate 71 th North bound: Take 1-71 North to Exit 247A, W. 14 St. and Clark Ave. Make a right at the end of the exit ramp. nd Then take route 176 south, approx. ¼ mile on your left. Harvard Ave. will be your 2 exit. At the end of the rd ramp take a left. Gate 6 will be at the 3 traffic light on your right. ¾ Closest Rest Area Exit 209, Lodi From Interstate 77 North bound: Take 1-77 North to exit 159A (Harvard Ave). At the end of the ramp take a left. Gate 6 will be about 1 mile on your left. ¾ Closest Rest Area Exit 111, North Canton From Interstate 80 East East or West bound: Exit 11 / 173 to I-77 North. Take I-77 North to exit 159A (Harvard Ave). At the end of the ramp take a left. Gate 6 will be about 1 mile on your left. ¾ Closest Rest Area East Bound between exits 10 / 161 and 11 / 173 West Bound between exits 14 / 209 and 13A / 193 From Interstate 480 East bound: Exit 17 onto Route 176 North. Exit onto Harvard Ave. Take a right onto Harvard Ave. Gate 6 will rd be at the 3 traffic light on your right. ¾ Closest Rest Area None West bound: Exit 20B onto I-77 North. Take 1-77 North to exit 159A (Harvard Ave).
    [Show full text]
  • 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]
  • City of Brunswick Location in the NOACA Region
    C I T Y O F B RUNSWICK T HE C ITY OF B RUNSWICK R OADWAY P AVEMENT M AINTENANCE R EPORT T ABLE OF C ONTENTS 1. Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................................................... 2 2. Background .................................................................................................................................................................................... 3 3. PART I: 2016 Pavement Condition ................................................................................................................................................ 8 4. PART II: 2018 Current Backlog .................................................................................................................................................... 13 5. PART III: Maintenance & Rehabilitation (M&R) Program ........................................................................................................... 14 6. PART IV: Comparative Analysis .................................................................................................................................................. 16 7. Appendix ...................................................................................................................................................................................... 20 M APS 1: City of Brunswick Location in the NOACA Region ...........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Location/Directions FRIDAY, JANUARY 10, 2020
    OHIO DIABETES CONSORTIUM STATEWIDE PLANNING SUMMIT Location/Directions FRIDAY, JANUARY 10, 2020 For additional directions, visit: https://www.quest-centers.com/location/ North Follow Interstate 71 South to Gemini Parkway exit. Turn left onto Gemini Parkway. Turn right onto Orion. Go across Polaris Parkway and turn right after Mr. Tire (about 100 yards). Quest Conference Center is the first building on your left. South Quest Conference Center is located 14 miles from downtown Columbus, Ohio. Follow Interstate 71 North to Exit 121, is Polaris Parkway. Turn right onto Polaris Parkway. On your right hand side you will see a sign that reads, “The Offices at Polaris”. This is Pulsar Place. Turn right onto Pulsar Place. Quest Conference Center 8405 Pulsar Pl, Columbus, OH 43240 East Quest Conference Center is located 12 miles north of downtown Columbus. Follow Interstate 270 North to Hampton Inn & Suites Interstate 71 North. The first exit on I-71 is Exit 121, Polaris 8411 Pulsar Pl, Columbus, OH 43240 Parkway. Turn right onto Polaris Parkway. On your right hand side you will see a sign that reads, “The Offices at Polaris”. This is Pulsar Place. Turn right onto Pulsar Place. West Follow Interstate 70 East to Interstate 270 North/Cleveland (This is a loop around Columbus). Exit onto the 270 loop and follow this to Interstate 71 North. Exit onto I-71 North. The first exit on I-71 is Exit 121, Polaris Parkway. Turn right onto Polaris Parkway. On your right hand side you will see a sign that reads, “The Offices at Polaris”. This is Pulsar Place.
    [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]
  • S.E. Johnson Companies, Inc., Docket No. 01-0456
    United States of America OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION 1924 Building - Room 2R90, 100 Alabama Street, SW Atlanta, Georgia 30303-3104 Secretary of Labor, Complainant, v. OSHRC Docket No. 01-0456 S. E. Johnson Companies, Inc., Respondent. Appearances: Paul G. Spanos, Esq., Office of the Solicitor, U. S. Department of Labor, Cleveland, Ohio For Complainant Jack Zouhary, Esq., S. E. Johnson Companies, Maumee, Ohio For Respondent Before: Administrative Law Judge Nancy J. Spies DECISION AND ORDER S. E. Johnson Companies (S. E. Johnson) is a general contractor specializing in heavy construction, such as bridges and highways. On September 18, 2000, an employee of S. E. Johnson’s subcontractor fell 17 feet from an elevated work platform and was severely injured. On October 18, 2000, as part of its local fall emphasis program, Occupational Safety & Health Administration (OSHA) compliance officer Steven Medlock investigated the circumstances surrounding the accident (Tr. 21-22). As a result of the inspection, OSHA issued S. E. Johnson a serious citation on February 16, 2001. The Secretary alleges that S. E. Johnson insufficiently pre-planned for adequate fall protection in violation of § 1926.502(a)(2) (item 1). She further asserts that a section of guardrail had only one railing and that it was not anchored to withstand 200 pounds of force in violation of §§ 1926.502(b)(2) (item 2) and 1926.502(b)(3) (item 3). S. E. Johnson denies the allegations and asserts that if any violation occurred it was the result of the misconduct of the subcontractor’s employee. For the reasons that follow, the Secretary failed to prove a violation for oversight and fall protection planning (item 1).
    [Show full text]
  • Driving Directions to the OSU Specialty Clinic at Central Ohio Primary Care (COPC)
    Driving Directions to the OSU Specialty Clinic at Central Ohio Primary Care (COPC) From the North (Sandusky, Delaware and Cleveland) 33 Take any major highway to Interstate 270 west 270 Take Interstate 270 west to State Route 315 south Take State Route 315 south to the Bethel Road Exit 62 Turn right onto Bethel Road 315 71 Turn left onto Olentangy River Road OSU Specialty Clinic at Central Ohio Primary Care will be on the right 70 670 From the South (Circleville, Chillicothe and Cincinnati) Take any major highway to Interstate 71 north 71 70 Take Interstate 71 north to State Route 315 north Take State Route 315 north to the Henderson Exit 270 33 Turn left onto West Henderson Road Take the first right onto Olentangy River Road 23 OSU Specialty Clinic at Central Ohio Primary Care will be on the left From the East (Newark, Zanesville and Pittsburgh) North Not to scale LINW Take any major highway to Interstate 70 west ORTH R Take Interstate 70 west to Exit 99C toward Rich Street /Town Street Merge onto State Route 315 north D Take State Route 315 north to the Henderson Road Exit Turn left onto West Henderson Road BETHEL RD Take the first right onto Olentangy River Road O 23 L E OSU Specialty Clinic at Central Ohio Primary Care will be on the left N P T H A I N 315 G G H Y D (Springfield, Dayton and Indianapolis) From the West KNIGHTSBRIDGE BLV S R T I V E R Take any major highway to Interstate 70 east R D Take Interstate 70 east to State Route 315 north W HENDERSON RD Take State Route 315 north to the Henderson Road Exit COOKE RD Turn left onto West Henderson Road Take the first right onto Olentangy River Road OSU Specialty Clinic at Central Ohio Primary Care will be on the left OSU Specialty Clinic at Central Ohio Primary Care (COPC) 4895 Olentangy River Rd Suite 150, Columbus, OH 43214 For directions assistance call 614-293-8000 i wexnermedical.osu.edu The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center is committed to improving people’s lives.
    [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]
  • Cincinnati: Many Rivers Run Through It
    Cincinnati: Many Rivers Run Through It Susan Paddock Attendees at ICMA’s 86th Annual Conference 2000 in September, held in Cincinnati/ Hamilton County, will see that the Ohio River is a fascinating local asset. Downtown and riverfront development means that more attractions are yet to come. Cincinnati always has been defined by its relationship to the Ohio River. This enviable river location symbolizes the success Cincinnati enjoys as an ever- changing place to live, work, and play. Cincinnati’s early development was a direct result of its access to the river because commerce thrives in a location with a transportation advantage. Growth and development in the downtown and on the riverfront reflect the “rivers” that now flow through the city, as well as next to it. Cincinnati’s rivers of vitality, tradition, information, creativity, and opportunity demonstrate the city’s advantages not only in transportation but also in quality of life, historic preservation, technology, the arts, and development. River of Vitality Streams of people living, working, and playing in Cincinnati contribute to its urban environment. In particular, the city’s broad-ranging, well-planned housing options create a 24-hour city full of vitality. Eugenie Birch, professor and chair of the department of city and regional planning at the University of Pennsylvania, has compared housing trends in 40 cities from 1990 to 1999. She found in her 1999 study “Downtown Living: A Deeper Look” that Cincinnati had one of the more robust markets in downtown housing in the United States. “Cincinnati is one of the brighter stories,” Ms. Birch says.
    [Show full text]
  • Urban Design Master Plan
    urban design associates Central Riverfront Urban Design Master Plan 33 Urban Design Master Plan urban design associates Central Riverfront Urban Design Master Plan i Urban Design the cincinnati central riverfront Urban Design Master 34 Plan is the result of a public participation planning process Master Plan begun in October 1996. Hamilton County and the City of Cincinnati engaged Urban Design Associates to prepare a plan to give direction in two public policy areas: • to site the two new stadiums for the Reds and the Bengals • to develop an overall urban design framework for the development of the central riverfront which would capitalize on the major public investment in the stadiums and parking A Riverfront Steering Committee made up of City and County elected officials and staff was formed as a joint policy board for the Central Riverfront Plan. Focus groups, inter- views, and public meetings were held throughout the planning process. A Concept Plan was published in April 1997 which identi- fied three possible scenarios for the siting of the stadiums and the development of the riverfront. The preparation of a final Master Plan was delayed due to a 1998 public referendum on the siting of the Reds Ballpark. Once the decision on the Reds Ballpark was made by the voters in favor of a riverfront site, Hamilton County and the City of Cincinnati in February 1999 appointed sixteen promi- nent citizens to the Riverfront Advisors Commission who were charged to “recommend mixed usage for the Riverfront that guarantees public investment will create sustainable develop- ment on the site most valued by our community.” The result of that effort was The Banks, a September 1999 report from the Advisors which contained recommendations on land use, park- ing, finance, phasing, and developer selection for the Central Riverfront.
    [Show full text]