I-70/I-71 South Innerbelt Study Preferred Alternative Presented By - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
i 70 i 71 south innerbelt study preferred alternative
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

I-70/I-71 South Innerbelt Study Preferred Alternative Presented By - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Jan 15, 2023 292 likes •808 views

A presentation of the I-70/I-71 South Innerbelt Study Preferred Alternative Presented By Ohio Department of Transportation ms consultants, inc. engineers, architects, planners February 10, 2009 H i s t o r y I-70/71 Planned in the 1950s

slide-1
SLIDE 1

A presentation of the

I-70/I-71 South Innerbelt Study Preferred Alternative

Presented By Ohio Department of Transportation

ms consultants, inc.

engineers, architects, planners February 10, 2009

slide-2
SLIDE 2

I-70/71 Planned in the 1950s Capacity of 125,000 vehicles per day Constructed in the 1960s

H i s t o r y

slide-3
SLIDE 3

C u r r e n t C o n d i t i o n

High Crash location – on average 2 to 3 crashes per day Freeway carries 175,000 vehicles per day

slide-4
SLIDE 4

Preferred Alternative selected using input from:

A Stakeholder Committee of about 50 downtown

  • rganizations

More than 250 community meetings, and using Thousands of public comments

P u b l i c I n v o l v e m e n t

slide-5
SLIDE 5

February 2003

P u b l i c I n v o l v e m e n t

slide-6
SLIDE 6

February 2003

P u b l i c I n v o l v e m e n t

slide-7
SLIDE 7

February 2003

P u b l i c I n v o l v e m e n t

slide-8
SLIDE 8

February 2003

P u b l i c I n v o l v e m e n t

slide-9
SLIDE 9

Both alternatives:

Untangle the I-70 and I-71 overlap so motorists

don’t have to make multiple lane changes

Add lanes to accommodate traffic growth Consolidate ramps to improve safety

A l t e r n a t i v e s

slide-10
SLIDE 10

R a m p L o c a t i o n s

slide-11
SLIDE 11

R a m p L o c a t i o n s

slide-12
SLIDE 12

F u l t o n – L i v i n g s t o n A l t e r n a t i v e

slide-13
SLIDE 13

F u l t o n – L i v i n g s t o n A l t e r n a t i v e

slide-14
SLIDE 14

P r e f e r r e d A l t e r n a t i v e

slide-15
SLIDE 15

P r e f e r r e d A l t e r n a t i v e

slide-16
SLIDE 16

P r e f e r r e d A l t e r n a t i v e

slide-17
SLIDE 17

P r e f e r r e d A l t e r n a t i v e

slide-18
SLIDE 18

I – 7 0 / I – 7 1

slide-19
SLIDE 19

I – 7 0 / I – 7 1

Before – looking east from High Street

slide-20
SLIDE 20

I – 7 0 / I – 7 1

After – looking east from High Street

slide-21
SLIDE 21

I – 7 0 / I – 7 1

Before – looking east toward Third & Fourth Streets

slide-22
SLIDE 22

I – 7 0 / I – 7 1

After – looking east toward Third & Fourth Streets

slide-23
SLIDE 23

I – 7 1

slide-24
SLIDE 24

Existing view looking north toward Spring & Long Street

  • St. Paul AME

Church Before - looking north toward Spring and Long streets

I – 7 1

slide-25
SLIDE 25

One-Way Avenue view looking north toward Spring & Long Street

After - looking north toward Spring and Long streets

  • St. Paul AME

Church

I – 7 1

slide-26
SLIDE 26

A n a l y s i s R e s u l t s

The analysis showed differences in the following factors:

Impacts to historic districts* Spacing of intersections to improve traffic flow Economic development opportunities (City Study)

These factors all favor the Mound-Fulton Alternative

* Federal laws specifically protect historic resources and require agencies to avoid them when there are prudent and feasible alternatives.

slide-27
SLIDE 27

H i s t o r i c D i s t r i c t s

Brewery District – Fulton-Livingston Alternative

slide-28
SLIDE 28

H i s t o r i c D i s t r i c t s

Brewery District – Mound-Fulton Alternative

slide-29
SLIDE 29

H i s t o r i c D i s t r i c t s

German Village – Fulton-Livingston Alternative

slide-30
SLIDE 30

H i s t o r i c D i s t r i c t s

German Village – Mound-Fulton Alternative

slide-31
SLIDE 31

T r a f f i c F l o w

Fulton-Livingston Alternative

slide-32
SLIDE 32

T r a f f i c F l o w

Mound-Fulton Alternative

slide-33
SLIDE 33

T r a f f i c F l o w

Fulton-Livingston Alternative

slide-34
SLIDE 34

T r a f f i c F l o w

Mound-Fulton Alternative

slide-35
SLIDE 35

E c o n o m i c D e v e l o p m e n t

An economic analysis initiated by Columbus concluded Mound-Fulton provided more

  • pportunities to encourage higher density

development

slide-36
SLIDE 36

E n h a n c e m e n t P l a n Enhancement Vision Plan

slide-37
SLIDE 37

Long Street Crossing Today

Long Street crossing today

E n h a n c e m e n t P l a n

slide-38
SLIDE 38

Long Street crossing

E n h a n c e m e n t P l a n

slide-39
SLIDE 39

Long Street crossing with wider structure for public space

E n h a n c e m e n t P l a n

slide-40
SLIDE 40

High Street crossing today

E n h a n c e m e n t P l a n

slide-41
SLIDE 41

High Street crossing

E n h a n c e m e n t P l a n

slide-42
SLIDE 42

High Street crossing with wider structure for public space

E n h a n c e m e n t P l a n

slide-43
SLIDE 43

Comment Period - until February 24 Start Discussion of Enhancement Details – Spring 2009 Finding of No Significant Impact – May 2009

!"

N e x t S t e p s

slide-44
SLIDE 44

T i m e l i n e

slide-45
SLIDE 45

P r o j e c t C o s t

Total Project Cost is $1.69 Billion

$196 M $135 M $240 M $86 M $345 M $688 M

slide-46
SLIDE 46

P r o j e c t C o s t

Major Investment Study (December 2005)

  • Initial planning level estimate was $680 million (Year 2010

dollars)

Refinements due to engineering

  • Extensions of project and additional freeway ramps
  • Additional structure costs to minimize right-of-way impacts
  • Refined estimate of right-of-way costs
slide-47
SLIDE 47

P r o j e c t C o s t

Cost escalation due to inflation

  • Recent high inflation costs in construction industry
  • Current estimate is based on Year 2014 dollars
  • 25% of the estimate is for inflation (Year 2008 to Year 2014)
slide-48
SLIDE 48

P r o j e c t F u n d i n g

$512 million Tier I TRAC Commitment The first two phases along the east side will have priority

slide-49
SLIDE 49

www.7071study.org www.7071study.org

# #

  • !"#$%

!"#$%& &' '& &'% '% ()$ ()$& &'%% '%%& &

  • $(*#!+,+""!-

$(*#!+,+""!-