![]() |
Showdown Over River
Showdown over a river
Ohio 32 bridge at Little Miami hinges on court ruling BY STEVE KEMME | ENQUIRER STAFF WRITER For 105 miles, the Little Miami River snakes through five counties in southwestern Ohio before emptying into the Ohio River in Cincinnati. But it's a tiny horseshoe bend in the river, a mile north of Lunken Airport, that could delay for years a $1.4 billion regional transportation project intended to improve transportation between Cincinnati and its eastern suburbs. Three environmental groups - Rivers Unlimited, Little Miami Inc. and the Sierra Club - filed a lawsuit last month in U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C., to stop the Eastern Corridor project from moving forward because they don't want a multilane highway bridge built across the Little Miami. No one knows for certain yet whether the lawsuit will be a pothole or a chasm on the project's path to completion. "It depends on how the judge rules," said Gilbert Newman, the Ohio regional manager for Balke American, the engineering firm hired by the Hamilton County Transportation Improvement District to manage the project. "A judge could say, 'The lawsuit's premature until we know what specific highway route is proposed.' Or he could say, 'Until this lawsuit goes through the courts, all work on the project should stop.' " Brian Litmans, an attorney representing the three environmental groups, said there's no predictable timetable for a court decision. "I've handled environmental cases that are resolved in less than a year and cases that take longer," he said. "Each court is different." Until a judge says otherwise, Balke American continues to prepare for the project's second phase. That phase includes choosing a preferred route for an expanded and relocated Ohio 32 that would connect Interstate 71 in Fairfax to I-275 near the Eastgate Mall in Clermont County's Union Township. The reconstructed and relocated Ohio 32 would begin at Red Bank Road and extend south, cross the Little Miami and head east through Newtown and Anderson Township into the Eastgate area. Supporters of the Eastern Corridor project say the highway would relieve traffic congestion on such major thoroughfares as Ohio 32, I-275, Clough Pike and Ohio 125 and would trigger economic development in East Side Cincinnati neighborhoods, first-ring eastern Hamilton County suburbs and central Clermont County. The project has roots dating to the 1950s. At that time, regional planners began discussing a bypass to U.S. 50 in the East Side. But in the 1980s, that project gave way to a less disruptive option - an improved and reconstructed Ohio 32. During the past 35 years, residential and commercial growth in the eastern part of Greater Cincinnati has placed more strain on Ohio 32 and other primary east-west roads. Since 1970, Clermont County's population has doubled to 190,589, while Anderson Township's has jumped from 25,887 to nearly 45,000. Commercial development in the Eastgate Mall and the Beechmont Avenue corridor also has resulted in increased traffic. More than 18,000 vehicles per day travel on Ohio 32 through Newtown, according to the state's 2005 traffic count. To reduce traffic congestion, the Eastern Corridor project includes not only the highway, but also a 17-mile rail transit line, bus transit improvements and bike trails. Before construction can begin on any part of the project, detailed design plans must be developed and approved by federal authorities, right-of-way must be acquired and a financial plan must be developed. The funding partners in this project are Hamilton County, Clermont County, Cincinnati, the Ohio-Kentucky-Indiana Regional Council of Governments, the Southwest Ohio Regional Transit Authority and the Ohio Department of Transportation. In a best-case scenario, construction of the 13.5-mile highway - the most controversial component of the project - would begin in 2010 and be completed in 2015, said Ted Hubbard, Hamilton County deputy engineer. The three environmental groups contend that building a highway bridge across the Little Miami in the area of a horseshoe bend in Linwood would significantly and irreparably harm the aesthetic, environmental and recreational value of this nationally designated "wild and scenic river." "We don't want anything to damage that river," said Mike Fremont, president emeritus of Rivers Unlimited and a veteran canoeing enthusiast. "The crossing would be in an area that is essentially a park." The environmental groups would prefer that an existing bridge, such as the Beechmont Levee, be expanded to accommodate the new highway. "It will create an air-polluted corridor," he said. "We should be building railway corridors, not highways. I don't believe for a minute that the new highway will reduce traffic congestion." But the project's supporters say the new highway as well as the rail line and other elements of the project would alleviate air pollution by reducing the number of vehicle miles traveled and easing traffic congestion. Public officials who believe their communities would benefit from the highway and the other parts of the project are upset about the lawsuit. They point out that the Eastern Corridor's long, public planning process included the involvement of federal and state agencies. Last year, the project's initial plans received the approval of the Federal Highway Administration. "This whole region has invested a lot of time and money following federal processes for this project," said Martha Kelly, Cincinnati's acting traffic engineer. "It takes enough time as it is to build these things. To have to go back and revisit processes is very frustrating." Anderson Township Trustee Russell Jackson Jr. said he's a strong proponent of protecting the Little Miami River. But he said the lawsuit greatly exaggerates the proposed bridge's impact on the river. Columbia Township Administrator C. Michael Lemon said the environmental groups' lawsuit will delay the development of the Wooster Pike corridor in the township. Columbia Township wants to make its Wooster Pike business district more visually appealing by building a landscaped median. But the Ohio Department of Transportation won't permit that until the Eastern Corridor project has been built and reduces the traffic volume on Wooster. Lemon said the median would help attract businesses. Many commuters who regularly fight the traffic on Ohio 32 and other parallel roads want relief. Amy Willenborg, 37, of Union Township, said the new highway is long overdue. "On Ohio 32, traffic is bumper to bumper at rush hour," she said. Carl Wells, 34, said traffic congestion discouraged him from buying a house in Union Township eight years ago. Instead, he bought a house in Madisonville. He said the lawsuit shouldn't be allowed to stop or delay the construction of the highway. "I'm all for the environment," Wells said, "but the new highway would help people get to and from work." The expanded Ohio 32 would encourage more motorists from the eastern suburbs to use Red Bank Road to get to the eastern Cincinnati neighborhoods, downtown or the Mill Creek Valley instead of traveling on other city streets less able to handle a high volume of traffic. Cincinnati officials also believe it would stimulate light industrial and office development in the Red Bank Corridor and lure more businesses to Madisonville, Linwood and Oakley. "It could really help bring jobs to the city," Kelly said. The improved roadway connections with eastern Hamilton County would make daily commutes easier for Clermont County residents who work in Hamilton County. "It would improve access for the transportation of goods and would provide a boost to the economic growth in Clermont County," said Clermont County Administrator Dave Spinney. In Anderson Township, the expanded Ohio 32 could relieve traffic congestion on Beechmont Avenue and Clough Pike and provide a much needed additional route in and out of Anderson. "Anderson is somewhat of an island," Hubbard said. "If you have a problem on any bridge or a detour in Anderson, it results in lengthy and problematic delays." In Newtown, the new highway could relieve some of the traffic congestion that has plagued this stretch of Ohio 32, known as Main Street, for years and allow the village to improve the appearance of this corridor and make it more inviting to businesses and customers. Newtown Mayor John Hammon said the railway and bus station planned in the village as part of the project would draw people there and be a convenience for Newtown residents. His only concern is that the highway might take too much traffic off Main Street. "So many of our businesses depend on drive-by traffic," Hammon said. "You can't take away all the traffic. There has to be a balance. There are benefits for Newtown if the project's done right." The new highway would relieve traffic congestion on Wooster Pike in Fairfax, Mariemont, Columbia Township and, to a lesser extent, Terrace Park. Mariemont Mayor Dan Policastro said it's important to Mariemont for the highway to be built far enough away from the Little Miami River that traffic noise doesn't bother village residents living on Miami Bluff. Some public officials have been hearing about the project for so long, they're skeptical whenever a tentative completion date for the highway has been announced. "I don't think we're going to see this until we're old and on canes," Policastro said. "They tell me it'll be built in 10 or 12 years. I'll believe it when I see it." http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.d...348/1056/COL02 |
Showdown Over River
Garrison Hilliard wrote in
: Showdown over a river Firstly, I don't see what this has to do with cycling. Secondly, coping an entire article verbatim is a clear violation of copyright. Fair use would require you to quote a small amount from the article while providing some actual content of your own. (Like perhaps giving us the reason you posted this here in the first place.) Cheers, David |
Showdown Over River
Garrison Hilliard wrote: .... actually he posted an article about promoting sprawl under the guise of relieving car traffic congestion via road construction. The answer, Garrison, is not to promote more car traffic. You need only look at places like Atlanta, GA and Va. Beach, VA to see how more roads simply mean exponential increases in car traffic. The answer is to redirect the funds into light rail. |
Showdown Over River
Solvang Cyclist wrote: Garrison Hilliard wrote in : Showdown over a river Firstly, I don't see what this has to do with cycling. So you don't know about the Little Miami Bike Trail, eh? |
Showdown Over River
Solvang Cyclist wrote: Garrison Hilliard wrote in : Showdown over a river Firstly, I don't see what this has to do with cycling. So you don't know about the Little Miami Bike Trail, eh? |
Showdown Over River
Garrison Hilliard wrote:
snip quoted article Cross-posted to unrelated groups: rec.boats.paddle sci.environment rec.bicycles.misc Austin |
Showdown Over River
Will said about: Showdown Over River Garrison Hilliard wrote: ... actually he posted an article about promoting sprawl under the guise of relieving car traffic congestion via road construction. Exactly. It's worse than a case of permanant environmental degradation for mere convienience. It's a case of permanant environmental degradation for mere temporary convienience. (Roads CAUSE long term worse, deeper congestion.) The answer, Garrison, is not to promote more car traffic. You need only look at places like Atlanta, GA and Va. Beach, VA to see how more roads simply mean exponential increases in car traffic. But that's merely anecdotal evidence. Any unvested city planner worth his salt would agree with your proven known facts. This is NOT a matter of opinion. However, it sounds like the city planner in this case is not unvested. Most politicians, particularly in ignorant areas, are progrowth anti-environment, environmental lipservicers. The answer is to redirect the funds into light rail. Soome well educated cities have chosen to redirect, or even end growth. --Doug |
Showdown Over River
Doug Bashford, Fresno wrote:
Soome well educated cities have chosen to redirect, or even end growth. It's called snob zoning. It's a well-deserved name. Austin |
Showdown Over River
AustinMN wrote: Doug Bashford, Fresno wrote: Soome well educated cities have chosen to redirect, or even end growth. It's called snob zoning. It's a well-deserved name. Austin Oh I get it... telling the "developers" to extract their $$$ somewhere else is snobbery. Dunno Austin, seems like they get the money and we get the catbox. |
Showdown Over River
|
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:28 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com