1. Clinton Street Bridge over the Maumee River ODOT Project DEF-15-14.77 April 1, 2015 Stakeholder’s Meeting

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

3.  Address deteriorated condition of existing bridge  Improve pedestrian and bicycle accommodations  City of Defiance Strategic Plan  Improve Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) access to the bridge  Improve vertical sight distance at Fort Street Project Purpose

4. Deteriorated condition of existing bridge

6. Improve Pedestrian and Bicycle Accommodations

7. Improve Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) access to the bridge

8. Improve vertical sight distance at Fort Street

9.  Possible 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. Congestion Area?

13. Southbound Left Turn at River Drive

14. Cause of Accidents?

15.  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

16. Study Area (Yellow Outline)

17.  Underground storage tanks (current and former)  Pontiac and Fort Defiance Parks  Maumee River and mussels  Several structures 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

18.  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

19.  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

20.  Roundabout at Clinton Street and River Drive  Flatter horizontal curve at south end of bridge  Neither a true feasible alternative Also studied….

21.  Reusing the existing piers as part of the new bridge was studied.  Concrete chloride contamination and the potential for active corrosion of reinforcing steel are estimated.  Piers can be reused, but…  Repair might last 20 years (or less)  Future repair likely  Conclusion: Reusing existing piers is not feasible. Re-Use of Existing Piers

22.  Goal: 75 year design life for new bridge construction  Wider sidewalks than the existing bridge  Dedicated bike lanes (5 feet wide) adjacent to each sidewalk  ADA compliant crossings off bridge  Improves vertical sight distance at Fort Street Feasible Alternative 1 Entirely New Four-Lane Bridge

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

25. Feasible Alternative 1 Actual appearance (including lighting) to be determined later in design process

26.  Same 75 year design life goal  Same sidewalk, bike lanes, vertical sight distance 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

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

29. Feasible Alternative 2 Actual appearance (including lighting) to be determined later in design process

30.  Construction cost  Traffic safety  Environmental impacts  Adjacent property impacts (public and private)  Utility impacts (public and private)  Maintenance of traffic during construction  How well do they address project purpose? Factors Affecting Feasible Alternative Evaluation

31.  Why?  Less construction and R/W cost ($8.7M) than Alternative 2 ($9.9M)  Less impact to Circle K parcel than Alternative 2  Essentially the same intersection level of service (a measurement of vehicle delay at traffic signals) as Alternative 2 Preferred Alternative – Feasible Alternative 1 (Entirely New Four-Lane Bridge)

32. Feasible Alternative 2 - Entirely New Five-Lane Bridge (Circle K Impacts )

33. Feasible Alternative 2 - Entirely New Five Lane Bridge (Circle K Impacts)

34.  Congestion – Signals for both alternatives operate at an acceptable level of service (LOS) and with acceptable queues for the 2039 design year traffic  Accidents in area are less than statewide averages  Wider bridge and vertical curve improvement will help driver visibility at south end Feasible Alternatives - Traffic Summary

35.  Alternative 1 has either the same or fewer environmental impacts as Alternative 2.  Alternative 2 does have more underground storage tank and commercial property impacts than Alternative 1.  Both have approximately the same impacts to existing utilities in the project area. Feasible Alternatives – Environmental and Utility Impacts Summary

36.  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)

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

38.  Goal - maintain at least local traffic during construction.  Preferred Alternative - one lane of vehicular traffic to be maintained in each direction  Pedestrian and bicycle access may be temporarily suspended  Two construction seasons likely (maintain traffic or detour) Maintaining Traffic During Construction

39.  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

40.  Funding will be secured when Preferred Alternative is finalized.  ODOT has several funding options.  Right-of-way acquisition anticipated to begin in 2016 or 2017. Project Funding

41.  Additional stakeholder meetings will be held  The initial public involvement meeting will be held May 14, 2015 at Defiance High School (6:00 pm)  Comments, concerns, or any information you can provide are appreciated! Stakeholder Concerns/Input

42.  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 (http://www.dot.state.oh.us/districts/D01/PlanningProgra ms/Projects/defiance15/Pages/default.aspx)http://www.dot.state.oh.us/districts/D01/PlanningProgra ms/Projects/defiance15/Pages/default.aspx Stakeholder Concerns/Input