| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| No money |
Posted - 03/16/2009 : 9:33:46 PM
From: middletownjounal.com
Agency puts emphasis on Ohio 63 extension
By Jessica Heffner
Staff Writer
Tuesday, March 17, 2009
By emphasizing plans to extend Ohio 63 west as a potential multi-modal project, county officials hope federal funding will become more likely.
The Butler County Transportation Improvement District has passed a resolution to designate Ohio 63 as a multi-modal project. The project has the potential of opening up new transportation routes through Monroe, Trenton and Seven Mile.
It also has the possibility of connecting the county to major routes such as Interstates 75 and 70 and U.S. 127, as well as rail, said Ron Porter, TID director.
With so much emphasis at the federal level for incorporating multiple systems of transportation into projects, the prioritization could help obtain federal funding, said Bill Triick, TID board member and president of the Chamber of Commerce Serving Middletown, Trenton and Monroe.
The business community has been overwhelming in support of the project due to the lower transportation costs it would afford them by offering a more direct route, Triick said.
"That highway was never supposed to stop at Route 4. There is no major commercialization in the northern part of the county and that is due to lack of infrastructure," he said.
The extension has been a priority for the county for many years, but has had issues obtaining funding. The TID submitted the project, estimated to cost $138.2 million, to the Ohio Department of Development for potential federal stimulus funding.
The funding is still a major concern for the city of Monroe, which has yet to pass a resolution supporting the extension as requested by the TID. The roadway would reach five miles into the city, according to county engineer Greg Wilkens.
"The biggest concern is who is going to maintain that bridge across the river," said Monroe Mayor Robert Routson. "It could potentially be St. Clair Twp., Madison Twp., Trenton or Monroe. Someone has got to assume responsibility to maintain that bridge."
While Routson said he would support the project, he indicated the project would be more beneficial to the county and Trenton than Monroe.
Contact this reporter at (513) 705-2843 or jheffner@coxohio.com.
|
| 13 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| No money |
Posted - 03/17/2009 : 12:48:12 PM
It's been awhile since I have been to a meeting, just can't make it, hate to say because of a stinking job but it pays well .quote:
[i]Originally posted by Bob Kelley[/i]
[br]Fair statement but what they can't do is force us to pay for it. As long as we are not active supporters they stand little chance of gaining support for funding. Ozzee has been coming to the council meetings, he understands completely whats going on.
|
| Bob Kelley |
Posted - 03/17/2009 : 12:26:33 PM
Fair statement but what they can't do is force us to pay for it. As long as we are not active supporters they stand little chance of gaining support for funding. Ozzee has been coming to the council meetings, he understands completely whats going on. |
| No money |
Posted - 03/17/2009 : 12:08:27 PM
I am neither for or against the 63 extension but it does seem that if the county wants it they will do it.quote:
[i]Originally posted by Bob Kelley[/i]
[br]Print has said suncoke technology meets or exceeds all emission control standards. That statement could be true or false depending on the standard you use as a benchmark.
My point is the article concerning the 63 extension is a snipe hunt.
|
| Bob Kelley |
Posted - 03/17/2009 : 11:51:14 AM
Print has said suncoke technology meets or exceeds all emission control standards. That statement could be true or false depending on the standard you use as a benchmark.
My point is the article concerning the 63 extension is a snipe hunt. |
| No money |
Posted - 03/17/2009 : 11:45:13 AM
Print says he supports it, if not then retract it in the paper. |
| ozzee |
Posted - 03/17/2009 : 11:04:46 AM
This is another of Triick's tricks, heh, moreso then the Coke plant. The benefit to Monroe businesses would be negligible. Triick is pushing the 63 extension because of the inherent benefit to Middletown without the added expense of paying for the road. There's better and more sensible options, but they run through Middletown. By pushing this on us, he makes Monroe look like the opponents of progress and the bad guys and if it goes through Middletown gets something for nothing. |
| Twinstjmom |
Posted - 03/17/2009 : 10:14:59 AM
isis: you definately pointed out my concern. We live along 63 now, and the amount of traffic noise has increased greatly over the last 6 years we've lived there- if 63 were to open up- I would definately agree that noise walls would need to be installed (as like on 129/Regional Highway) for all the housing subdivisions that are built along 63. We wish we had noise walls now, I couldnt imagine it getting even worse. uggg |
| Bretland |
Posted - 03/17/2009 : 09:04:11 AM
Put it on the ballot!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.........:)
Just kidding....................... |
| ClarkWestern1 |
Posted - 03/17/2009 : 08:57:56 AM
Soooooo....
Silly Routson, Triicks are for TID'S????
 |
| Bob Kelley |
Posted - 03/17/2009 : 08:42:24 AM
I am telling you the council won't pass that resolution of support. I can tell you that Bob Routson has voted against it on several occasions. They never print the questions they ask, any statement out of context can be made to made to mean anything. The one thing I do know is that Bob would never support anything he does not believe will be in the best interest of the City. The last line they printed pretty much tells me if asked to vote today he would vote no. |
| Jane Smith |
Posted - 03/17/2009 : 08:40:16 AM
I think it's inevitable. It would benefit Monroe business more then anything else. And bring more noise, traffic, and pollution through Monroe. So, I would hope that noise walls, trees and allot more information is provided to the residents. Before anything is stamped "shovel ready" in TID's mind.
Monroe homeowners in that area should be seriously concerned. And we should make sure our home owners are paid well, for any homes needed. And I would hope that this bridge is not built over existing homes.
|
| No money |
Posted - 03/16/2009 : 11:33:03 PM
Are you saying Routson also does NOT support it? I wouldn't think that Triick forced Routson to say he supports it.quote:
[i]Originally posted by Bob Kelley[/i]
[br]The City will not pass a resolution to support this. There is no preferred route, no engineering, no EPA impact studies, nothing to work with. Triick has been trying everything he can to tie us to this. The cox road extension is in the commercial corridor and listed on about every compressive plan in existence for every government entity involved and it's not moving and they think they will get the extension funded.
|
| Bob Kelley |
Posted - 03/16/2009 : 11:06:23 PM
The City will not pass a resolution to support this. There is no preferred route, no engineering, no EPA impact studies, nothing to work with. Triick has been trying everything he can to tie us to this. The cox road extension is in the commercial corridor and listed on about every compressive plan in existence for every government entity involved and it's not moving and they think they will get the extension funded. |
