Welcome. Introductions Agenda Welcome Introductions Design Phase Overview Stakeholder Interview Findings Design Options Next Steps

Welcome

Introductions

Agenda

• Welcome

• Introductions

• Design Phase Overview

• Stakeholder Interview Findings

• Design Options

• Next Steps

Public Engagement Approach

To provide stakeholders opportunities to give input and

participate in the decision-making process for Olympian Drive Extension

Design Phase

Public Engagement Approach

• Stakeholder Engagement – re-group affected community members before preliminary engineering work

• Outreach Activities – bring project team and public together to exchange information and address issues and concerns

• Communication – keep the public informed about the project and its progress

Stakeholder Roundtable Meeting

• Stakeholders invited to roundtable discussions on:

• Tuesday, July 27, 2010

• Business Representatives at 12:00 p.m.

• Property Owners and Residents at 5:00 p.m.

• Thursday, July 29, 2010

• Area officials at 3:00 p.m.

• Elected officials at 7:00 p.m.

Stakeholder Roundtable Meeting Purpose

• Review what we heard during stakeholder interviews

• Seek other issues that need to be addressed

• Discuss ways to mitigate identified concerns

Design Phase Overview

Olympian Drive Overview

What is the Olympian Drive extension? How did it Start?Not on existing

OlympianNot on existing

OlympianWider Floodplain

CrossingWider Floodplain

CrossingIntersection on curve

Intersection on curve

Not on existing Olympian

Not on existing Olympian



Curved BridgeCurved Bridge

Limits AirportLimits

Airport

Curved Farm Severance



Curved Farm Severance Curved Farm

SeveranceCurved Farm

Severance

Longer BridgeLonger Bridge

Residential Impacts

Residential Impacts

Commercial Impacts

Commercial Impacts

IDOT1989IDOT1989

Wider Floodplain Crossing

Wider Floodplain Crossing




What is the Olympian Drive extension? How did it Start?


Wider Floodplain

Wider Floodplain

Residential Impacts

Residential Impacts

Farm Severances

Farm Severances



DisplacementsDisplacementsWider

FloodplainWider

Floodplain


More Public Support

More Public Support



Recommended Alternative

Recommended Alternative


What is the Olympian Drive extension? How has development occurred?

1940

1967

1982

1993

2002

2008


What is the timeline?


What is the Olympian Drive extension? What does it look like now?


What is the Olympian Drive extension? How does it fit into the regional road plan?


• What is the Olympian Drive extension? What is the land planning?


What is the Olympian Drive extension? What are the limits of the design?

Project A Project BProject C


What is the design phase?

•Public engagement to aid in Olympian Drive design

•Limited update of Location Study, including:

• Review approved alternative’s environmental effects

• Review pedestrian and bicycle accommodations

• Design intersections for interim two-lane construction

• Review typical sections and construction staging

•Preparation of construction plans


Who is conducting the Design Phase?

• Hanson Professional Services Inc. (Springfield, IL) – Prime Design Consultant

• Vector Communications (St. Louis, MO) – Public Engagement

• Berns, Clancy and Associates (Urbana, IL) - Topographic Survey, Right-of-Way Survey and Right-of-Way plats (when necessary)

• Clark Dietz (Champaign, IL) - Traffic Signals and Lighting

• Midwest Engineering and Testing, Inc. (Champaign, IL) – Geotechnical Engineering

• Whitsitt & Associates , Inc. (Champaign, IL) – Land Appraisals (when necessary)

• James H. Webster and Associates, Ltd. (Urbana, IL) – Land Appraisal Review (when necessary)


Why is the Design Phase necessary?

•Location Study only identified roadway’s location

•Provide public opportunities to give input and participate in design decision-making process

•Review environmental effects of approved alternative verifying it is still valid

•Gives the opportunity to include enhancements to the project based on public input

•Prepare detailed designs needed to construct roadway

• Allows for the use of federal funds for construction


What is the process?

Stakeholder Findings

Stakeholder Engagement

• Interviews conducted with Urbana, Champaign and Champaign County representatives

• Elected officials (9)

• Area officials (3)

• Business community (7)

• Impacted property owners (4)

Stakeholder Interviews

• More than 20 stakeholder interviews• Eight respectfully declined

• Elected officials (3) and Property Owners (5)

• Average interview lasted 50 minutes

What are your expectations of the project and/or project team?

The project will be successful if _________________. (fill in the blank)

What concerns do you have?

What other community issues, developments or planning activities should the team consider?

Design Options

Olympian Drive DesignTypical Section Options



Typical Section Advantages Disadvantages

Open Large Median

• Safer design• Higher design speed for more capacity• Controls access• Allows for larger future facility expansion

• Requires more ROW• Higher operating speeds• Higher cost than closed median with

outside shoulder

Closed Smaller Median

• Requires less ROW• Lower speeds for safer design• Controls access• Landscaping in median• Lower cost than open median (outside shoulder)

• Lower design speed for less capacity• Smaller future facility expansion• Higher cost than open median (C&G on

both sides due to storm sewer costs)

Smallest Median

• Requires least amount of ROW• Least cost option with outside shoulders

• Costs more for left turn lanes in the future• No greenspace between roadways• No accommodations for future facility

expansion• Traffic very close together which is less

safe than the open and closed medians

What are your thoughts about the use of the grassed median, raised

curb median or small median for Olympian Drive?

Olympian Drive DesignConstruction Staging Options

• Existing land use would remain

• Property would still be acquired for corridor protection

• Land could be rented back to former property owners

Olympian Drive DesignConstruction Staging Options

Typical Section Advantages Disadvantages

Construct all Embankment

• Takes advantage of current prices and project available Federal funding

• Removes ground from existing land use for future lanes

Construct only what is

necessary for the first two

lanes

• Limits current impact on existing land use

• Will cost more in the future to build additional embankment

What are your thoughts on building the additional embankment at this

time or preserving the adjacent land use?

Olympian Drive DesignBicycle Accommodation Options



Bicycle Accommodation

Advantages Disadvantages

Separate Combined Use

Path

• Safest method to provide accommodations

• Would also include pedestrian accommodations, negating need for separate sidewalks

• Requires additional ROW• Adds additional costs to project• Adds bridge costs to railroad and stream

crossing• May not get used until development

occurs

Widened Shoulders

• Adds no additional cost to project• Adds no additional ROW to project

• Bicycle traffic close to vehicular traffic

None at this time• In line with the original study • Doesn’t take advantage of current prices

and project available federal funds

What are your thoughts on the needs for bicycle accommodations for

Olympian Drive?

Olympian Drive DesignPedestrian Accommodation Options

Olympian Drive DesignPedestrian Accommodation Options

Pedestrian Accommodation

Advantages Disadvantages

Located on back side of ditch

• Safest method of providing accommodations

• Requires additional ROW• Adds additional costs to the project• Adds bridge costs to railroad and stream crossing• May not get used until development occurs

Located behind curb and gutter

• Requires additional ROW• Adds additional costs to the project• Adds bridge costs to railroad and stream crossing• May not get used until development occurs

None at this time• In line with the original study • Doesn’t take advantage of current prices and

federal funds available for project

What are your thoughts on the needs for sidewalks for Olympian

Drive?

Olympian Drive DesignNorth Lincoln Avenue

• North Lincoln

Alternatives and

Recommended

Alternative (approved

in 1999)


Recently Publicized Alternatives Challenges:

• Does not support purpose and need (both)

• Not approved by IDOT/FHWA (both)

• Road crosses at super-elevated angle at widest portion of rail yard (Oct. 2009)

• Does not meet IDOT criteria for roadway curvature, based on Location Study (both)

• Not geometrically feasible (June 2010)

• Suggests use of Leverett Road/Ford Harris for east-west connection (both)

• Limits development potential along rail line (both)

• Cost over twice as much more with local funds with no study and built as-is

• A combination of approved plans can achieve the same goal

Olympian Drive DesignNorth Lincoln Avenue (Project X)

• How does North Lincoln fit in?

Between projects A, B, C and X, what order do you feel is best for providing access and economic development opportunity for this region?

Project A Project BProject C

Proj

ect X

Olympian Drive DesignOther Design Elements

Location Study Detention Areas

• Designed for future development needs

• Excavation used for roadway embankment

• Requires larger ROW (100 ft)

• Detention not required for first construction stage W

illow

Lin

coln


Wetland Creation vs. Detention

What are your thoughts about the construction of wetlands or detention ponds and their implementation right now?

Advantages:

• More aesthetically pleasing

• Creates additional wildlife habitat

• Better at improving water quality

Disadvantages:

• Costs more than detention

• Not necessary for project

• Ongoing maintenance


Roundabout Intersection

Advantages:

• Fewer conflict points

• Reduce start/stops, less fuel used

• No signalization costs or maintenance

• Slower speeds

• Landscaping enhancements

• Safety

Disadvantages:

• Unusual for Central Illinois

• Possible higher initial costs

• Possible more ROW

• Slower speeds

Yield at roundabout

Yield at roundabout

Proceed throughProceed through

Truck ApronTruck Apron

Landscaping in middle

Landscaping in middle

What are your thoughts on the use of roundabout intersections for Olympian Drive (Olympian/Lincoln)?


•Recreation use at Saline Branch Crossing

Would recreational use access be an important feature you would like to see in Olympian Drive design?


Landscaping

What are your thoughts on the use of landscaping for Olympian Drive?


Tree Mitigation

• Mitigation Required

• 1:1 minimum ratio

Where do you feel the best Olympian Drive tree replacement location(s) should be?

Will

ow

Linc

oln


Are there other design elements/features that we haven’t discussed that you feel would be an important part of the Olympian Drive design?

Next Steps

Questions?

Documents

Welcome. Introductions Agenda Welcome Introductions Design Phase Overview Stakeholder Interview Findings Design Options Next Steps