DEL-71 Project at theUS 36/SR37 Interchange

Round Table Meeting

Ferzan M. Ahmed, P.E.- District 6 Deputy DirectorSteve Fellenger, P.E. – Project Manager

Wednesday, March 23, 2011

2

Project History

• ms consultants begin initial Safety Study and Design - Fall 2001• Existing Interchange Studies by Gresham Smith & Partners – 2004• Safety Studies by LJB Inc. - 2004 – 2006• Traffic Impact Study submitted by Northstar - 2005 • Wilson Road Constructed – 2006• Permit to Connect Wilson Road to US 36/SR 37 – Sept. 2006• Public Meeting held for Safety Project – Sept. 2007

3

• Short Term Solution - No Build Condition for the Long Term Interchange Project

• Construction Cost Estimate (Stage 2) - $4.33M

Project History

4

Project History• Early Meetings with Developers on Interchange – August 2008• Connective Roadway Network Established – October 2008• Traffic Modeling & Certified Traffic Developed – Dec. 2008 – Aug. 2009• Feasibility Studies Provided by Each Developer – 2009/2010• 2009 TRAC Application Submission – November 2009• Combined Feasibility Study – June 2010• Updated Certified Traffic – August 2010• 2010 TRAC Application Request – August 2010• Additional Modeling Completed – October 2010 & March 2011

• Safety Project Construction (No Build Condition) – Summer 2012

Interchange Project Area

6

Transportation Review Advisory Council (TRAC)

• DEL-71 project part of the 2011-2015 Draft list– Tier II Status– $5M toward Preliminary Engineering– Final List to be provided by April 2011

Schedule/Funding– Current Construction Schedule: Unknown until a preferred alternative is determined – Order of Magnitude estimate by EMH&T and ms consultants

*Includes right of way to be donated.

– Interchange – Possible Future TRAC Request - % To Be Determined– Local Road Network – Funded by Local/Developer Partnership

  TRAC Request (PE)

Detailed Design

Right of Way* Construction

Interchange $5 M $4 M $1 M $40-50 MLocal Road

Network  $4 M $22 M $40-60 M

Total   $8 M $23 M $80-110 M

7

Task Order/NEPA

• Office of Environmental Services (OES) created task order with LJB Inc.

– Develop a Purpose and Need Statement– Determine Logical Termini– Create the Existing and Future Conditions Report

– Portions of the above Information submitted; Task Order not finalized

NEPA process determines the Preferred Alternative as the project fits the Purpose and Need Statement

8

Project DevelopmentProcess (PDP)

• New PDP designed to help projects like this move faster into Construction.

• PDP will focus on established criteria for narrowing alternatives quicker.

• PDP works to ensure design is completed concurrent with detailed NEPA work.

9

ODOT’s PDP

10

ODOT’s PDP- Next Steps

• Develop Concepts/Alternatives• Evaluate options to criteria (impacts, P&N,

ROW, Utilities, cost, etc.)• Public/Stakeholder involvement.• Conduct Detailed NEPA studies/design.• IMS/IJS study part of above work.

11

Interchange Modification Study (IMS) Process

• Interchange Feasibility Studies have examined access points on Interstate 71 both north and south of US 36/ SR 37.

• The studies also examined with and with out Big Walnut interchange as not to prevent it being part of the corridor in the future.

• IMS submitted by ms consultants on behalf of NorthGate Development for a Southern Concept Interchange – September 2010

• Much of the work for the traffic analyses has been performed and can be used in future analyses.

• ODOT agrees the Southern Concept has merit but will not provide further review until the environmental process can identify a preferred alternative. The southern concept provides more traffic relief to the US 36/SR 37 corridor.

• The NEPA (PDP) process might find another viable solution or determine different termini for the project which will need to be evaluated.