1. Clinton Street Bridge over the Maumee River ODOT Project DEF-15-14.77 May 14, 2015 Public Meeting

2.  Review the project and why it’s happening  Share the results of the Feasibility Study  Identify concerns  Obtain input Purpose of Public Meeting

3.  Address deteriorated condition of existing bridge  Improve bicycle accommodations per City of Defiance Strategic Plan  Improve pedestrian access to the bridge per Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) guidelines Project Purpose

4.  ODOT engaged services of Burgess & Niple (B&N) in June 2014  B&N performed bridge inspection, traffic studies, and survey work in the summer and fall of 2014  B&N developed alternatives and prepared feasibility study  ODOT has held two stakeholder meetings for input Progress to Date – How we got here

5. Deteriorated condition of existing bridge

7. Improve Pedestrian and Bicycle Accommodations

8. Improve Pedestrian Access (ADA) to the bridge

9.  Possible traffic congestion issues  Accident history  Southbound left turn from Clinton Street to River Road (City of Defiance request)  Rear-end accidents at south end of bridge Investigate…

10. Southbound Left Turn at River Drive

11.  Includes the bridge and the next two intersections north and south of bridge  Engineering and environmental studies are performed within the study area  Larger than the actual project work limits  Why? Actual project work limits have not yet been determined. Study Area

12. Study Area (Yellow Outline)

13.  Underground storage tanks (current and former)  Pontiac and Fort Defiance Parks  Maumee River and mussels  Several buildings over 50 years old (none eligible for the National Register of Historic Places)  One archaeological site (southwest corner; destroyed according to State Historic Preservation Office)  Concerns? Environmental Concerns on the Project

14.  Alternatives are first studied  Feasible Alternatives are then determined  A Preferred Alternative is then identified  Draft Feasibility Study was submitted to ODOT in December 2014  Revised Draft version available at this meeting and on District 1 website Alternatives Evaluation

15.  New four-lane bridge on existing piers (similar to existing bridge)  New five-lane bridge on existing piers  Allows southbound left turn from Clinton Street to River Drive.  New four (or five) - lane bridge on new piers DEF-15-14.77 Study Alternatives

16.  Reusing the existing piers as part of the new bridge was studied.  Existing steel in concrete is deteriorating.  Piers can be reused, but…  Repair might last 20 years (or less)  Future repair likely  Conclusion: Reusing existing piers is not prudent. Re-Use of Existing Piers

17.  Goal: 75 year design life for new bridge construction  Wider sidewalks than those on the existing bridge  Dedicated bike lanes (5 feet wide) adjacent to each sidewalk  ADA compliant curb ramps off bridge Feasible Alternative 1 Entirely New Four-Lane Bridge

18. Feasible Alternative 1 - Entirely New Four-Lane Bridge

20. Feasible Alternative 1 Note the dedicated bike lanes and wider sidewalks.

21.  Same 75 year design life goal  Same sidewalk and bike lanes improvement as Feasible Alternative 1  Difference: Wider bridge to accommodate new lane north of bridge to allow southbound left turn at River Drive Feasible Alternative 2 Entirely New Five-Lane Bridge

22. Feasible Alternative 2 - Entirely New Five-Lane Bridge

24. Feasible Alternative 2 Note the striped lane, bike lanes and the wider sidewalks.

25. Next Step – Selecting a Recommended Preferred Alternative

26.  Alternative 1 (New Four-Lane Bridge) Recommended Preferred Alternative –

27.  Construction cost  Traffic safety  Environmental impacts  Adjacent property impacts (public and private)  Utility impacts (public and private)  Maintenance of traffic during construction  How well does it address project purpose? Factors Affecting Recommendation

28.  Construction cost - Less construction and R/W cost ($8.7M) with Alternative 1 than with Alternative 2 ($9.9M)  Traffic - No improvements to traffic delay at intersections (Level of Service) with Alternative 2 Factors Affecting Recommendation

29.  Environmental impacts - Alternative 1 has either the same or fewer environmental impacts as Alternative 2  Adjacent property impacts (public and private) - Less commercial property impacts with Alternative 1 than with Alternative 2 (primary impacts is to Circle K underground storage tanks) Factors Affecting Recommendation

30. Alternative 2 - New Five-Lane Bridge (Impacts to Circle K)

31.  Utility impacts (public and private) - Both have approximately the same impacts to existing utilities in the project area.  Maintenance of traffic during construction  Both alternatives maintain at least local traffic during construction.  Anticipate maintaining one sidewalk for pedestrians  Two construction seasons likely for either alternative (whether local traffic is maintained or detoured) Factors Affecting Recommendation

32.  Final appearance not yet determined  Construction costs are currently based on standard ODOT bridge type  City preference is current bridge lighting  Stakeholder and public comments will be sought Bridge Aesthetics (How the new bridge will look)

33. US 24 Bridge over the Maumee River (West of Defiance)

34.  Construction in 2019 (preliminary estimate)  Depends on funding, environmental concerns, right- of-way acquisition, and completion of construction plans  Project schedule updates will be provided as changes in the schedule are known. Current Project Schedule

35.  Funding will be secured when preferred alternative is finalized.  Funding for the preferred alternative will be through state and federal sources  Right-of-way acquisition anticipated to begin in late 2016 or early 2017. Project Funding

36.  Preferred alternative selected by July 1, 2015  Preferred alternative announced through letters and media Next Steps

37.  Comments, concerns, or any information you can provide are appreciated!  Comments after the meeting should go to:  Jenn Gasser, ODOT District 1, (419) 999-6871, jennifer.gasser@dot.state.oh.us or jennifer.gasser@dot.state.oh.us  Jeff Griffin, Burgess & Niple, (614) 459-2050, jeff.griffin@burgessniple.com jeff.griffin@burgessniple.com  Future project information – go to District 1 website, Construction Projects & click on DEF SR 15 Clinton Street Bridge www.transportation.ohio.gov/dist1www.transportation.ohio.gov/dist1 Public Meeting Concerns/Input