Daniel F. Lewis -----Original Message----- From: zieglerl@xxxxxxxx [mailto:zieglerl@xxxxxxxx] Sent: Tuesday, April 28, 2009 5:03 PM To: Rob Neel; Daniel Lewis; John Stork Subject: Public Hearing on Brent Spence Alternatives May 12 FYI: Send it on. > Subject: Public Hearing on Brent Spence Alternatives May 12 > Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2009 17:20:07 -0400 > From: "Qualls, Roxanne" <Roxanne.Qualls@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > To: "O'Donnell, Jennifer" <Jennifer.O'Donnell@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Friend, > > > > The reconstruction of the Brent Spence Bridge and related > improvements to the I-75 corridor from the river to the Western Hills > Viaduct will have a profound impact on transportation, quality of life > and economic investment in our region. > > > > The Ohio Department of Transportation and the Kentucky > Transportation Cabinet have just released their study of conceptual > alternatives for the segment - a critical step in the process of > replacing this vital piece of infrastructure. > > > > That's why I'm inviting you to attend a public hearing on > the new proposed alternatives for the bridge > replacement/rehabilitation project on: > > Tuesday, May 12 > > 6 p.m. > > Queensgate Quality Inn > > 800 W. 8th St. > > 12th floor Banquet Room > > > > We will have drawings of the proposed alternatives on > display for viewing from 5:30 to 6 p.m., a presentation about the > alternatives from 6 to 6:30 p.m., and will take public testimony from > 6:30-8 p.m. Comments will be limited to three minutes; written > testimony may also be submitted. > > > > The full report will be available online after May 4 at > www.brentspencebridgecorridor.com. > > > > The report recommends further study of two alternatives > that would add a new bridge just west of the existing span. Traffic > from I-71 would be routed over the existing bridge, while I-75 traffic > would travel over the new bridge. These alternatives (Alternative E > and a combination of Alternatives C and D) would be designed to > provide three lanes in each direction on I-75. The report also > recommends incorporating design elements of another alternative, which > was rejected because of its cost, into the two alternatives that will > advance for further consideration. > > > > The report recommends that the "Queensgate Alternative" be > eliminated from further consideration. City Council passed a motion > opposing this alternative last year because of the significant > economic losses it would cause for businesses in Queensgate, held a > public hearing to take testimony from Queensgate businesses, and the > City submitted a report to the state and federal governments last year > documenting the impact of the alternative on the area. > > > > While it is encouraging that the report recommends > eliminating the Queensgate Alternative, the report must still be > approved by the Federal Highway Administration to officially eliminate > of the alternative. > > > > That's why it is so important for residents, business > owners and community stakeholders to attend and offer comments during > the public comment period for this phase of the project. > > > > I hope to see you on May 12. > > > > Warm regards, > > > > Roxanne Qualls > > > > > > > > > -- I am using the free version of SPAMfighter. We are a community of 6 million users fighting spam. SPAMfighter has removed 195 of my spam emails to date. Get the free SPAMfighter here: http://www.spamfighter.com/len The Professional version does not have this message
Attachment:
image001.png
Description: PNG image
Attachment:
image006.jpg
Description: JPEG image
Attachment:
image002.png
Description: PNG image
