Emerald Parkway Phase 8
The City of Dublin has nearly completed the design of the last segment of Emerald Parkway. This final phase will extend the parkway from Riverside Drive to just north of Bright Road, at a new bridge over Billingsley Creek.
The proposed project will be the completion of a long term goal of creating an alternative route to I-270 in the area. The construction of this project is currently programmed to occur in 2011 as recently adopted in the City’s 2011 - 2015 Capital Improvements Program.
The City held a public information meeting on Wednesday, Oct. 27. A presentation was given at the beginning of the meeting and a question and answer session followed. Click to download the presentation. If you were unable to attend or have questions or comments please post them in the comment box below.
Emerald Parkway Phase 8 detailed map.
Emerald Parkway Phase 8 Public Meeting Questions and Answers
Q. What is the City’s plan for improvements for Bright Road between Emerald Parkway and Sawmill Road?
A. The City is aware of the volume of traffic on this segment of roadway. During the Community Plan, travel demand modeling identified that this roadway needs to be four lanes – two lanes in each direction – with a turn lane in the center. The construction of this size of roadway was reviewed at the beginning stages of the design of this last phase of Emerald Parkway. Due to the construction and right-of-way costs, this improvement is not included in the current project. Staff will monitor this section when Emerald Parkway is complete to evaluate the need to program the widening in a future Dublin Capital Improvements Program.
Q. How will the additional traffic that comes from development be handled?
A. When a property is rezoned to a different zoning use than it currently has, a traffic impact study (TIS) is required during the rezoning process. The TIS identifies the improvements needed for the roadway system to mitigate the additional traffic created by the development. These improvements can range from turn lanes, to changes to traffic signal timing, to roadway widening.
Q. Can the signal at Bright and Sawmill roads be adjusted?
A. While the City understands the frustration with this intersection, the signal and the Sawmill Road corridor are under the jurisdiction of the City of Columbus.
Q. Will the impact of additional noise be mitigated by this project?
A. When the most recent widening of I-270 occurred, the Ohio Department of Transportation performed noise studies for many areas and determined that noise walls were appropriate for several locations. The area at Grandee Cliffs Drive and Jenmar Court were included in that evaluation. At that time, it was determined that noise mitigation due to the ODOT project was not necessary. This study provides a reliable base on which to compare the conditions at the completion of this project. This situation will be evaluated once the construction is complete and the new roadway is open to traffic.
Q. Is it for certain that development levels shown in the Bright Road Area Plan will be built?
A. The Bright Road Area Plan is a guidance document for the public review process of any development that may be proposed in this area. Unless otherwise permitted in the current zoning on the property, any new development proposals will be reviewed by staff, Dublin’s Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council.
Q. Will sewer and water be extended to the areas adjacent to the project?
A. Public sewer and water extensions along Emerald Parkway are provided in the scope of the project. Further extensions to other properties in the area will either be performed with the development that may occur in the area or by individual property owners. Dublin City Council plans to address the level of participation the City will provide to existing un-served properties in the near future.
Q. Will a tunnel be installed under Riverside Drive, similar to Dublin Road, for pedestrian access?
A. A tunnel at this location was evaluated at the beginning of the project. Due to the bedrock present in this location, the construction cost for this amenity was significant. Pedestrians will have the use of the traffic signal to appropriately cross in any direction at this intersection.
Q. Will there be a pedestrian connection from Jenmar Court/Grandee Cliffs Drive to the new paths on Emerald Parkway?
A. Yes there will be a pedestrian connection to the new multi-use paths along Emerald Parkway.
Q. Why is a cul-de-sac on Bright Road at Riverside Drive included in this project?
A. Since 2007, twelve vehicular crashes have occurred at this location. The types of incidents at this intersection are typically severe and many result in an injury. Staff believes this is mainly due to left turning traffic from either southbound Riverside Drive or westbound Bright Road. The construction of a cul-de-sac just east of Riverside Drive on Bright Road will remove this intersection and the left turns will then occur at signalized intersections (at Hard Road or Emerald Parkway). This will significantly improve safety along Riverside Drive and will further emphasize the neighborhood character of the area along Bright Road, and around Grandee Cliffs Drive, MacBeth Drive, MacDuff Place.
Q. What is the City’s plan for the property the City recently purchased on Bright Road?
A. The goal of the City’s purchase of 4279 Bright Road (Holder property) was to preserve the Holder-Wright Works, a ancient man-made landform that has significant archeological importance. The property will have deed restrictions in place that require it to be a passive, open space, public parkland. To achieve this, the farming of the property will be discontinued. The City will be seeding the property and providing on-going maintenance. Please contact the City’s Park and Open Space staff with any additional questions or concerns.
Give us your feedback
11 Comments
Linda K. Edwards Posted on October 29, 2010
Could you provide a map that is larger so I can see the effect on the properties adjacent to the construction. It is very difficult to see from the presentation.
Paul W. Bennett Posted on October 31, 2010
I certainly feel the elimination of the Bright Rd/Riverside intersection is a tremendous plus. Turning from Bright So onto Riverside requires too much patience and at the best of times it is a poor visibility turn. So the cul-de-sac makes much more sense.
Bicycle access to this area of the city would be a boon for all. One concern I have is the drawings I saw showed bicycle lanes integral with the traffic lanes. This is different than the rest of Emerald parkway and less safe than having a dedicated bike/pedestrian path (which I would encourage).
But the big unaddressed problem is the Sawmill Rd gridlock that already occurs from Hard to Bright to I-270. The way this problem is re-engineered will be make or break for the whole plan. Sawmill is already gridlocked here and the completion of Emerald Parkway will only make it worse unless better flow in this area is effected.
The rest of the plan looks good.
Paul Bennett
Garry Bergman Posted on November 02, 2010
I have to agree with Paul Bennet. Making the extension of Emerald Pkwy a viable alternative to Sawmill and 270 will only serve to exacerbate the Sawmill problems. There's no way, during rush hour, you'll be able to exit 270 westbound, to Sawmill northbound, and be able to get over to Emerald Pkwy. Turning south onto Sawmill from Bright is already difficult, adding traffic will probably make it impossible. I'd love to see direct access to Emerald Pkwy west from 270.
Deb Allard Posted on November 04, 2010
Please do your best to have good quality homes built anywhere between Emerald Parkway & Bright Rd.. We do not need any more condos nor apartments built on this side of the river!!!!
At the Oct. 27th meeting, we were told that the land is currently zoned for single family homes with one to two homes per acre.
Meaning, no apartments nor condos.
Steve Barnhardt Posted on November 04, 2010
I feel though the closing of Bright rd. at Riverside Drive probably will deter traffic accidents. I also believe it denies emergency vehicle access to this area. During rush hour times the roundabout is going to be backed up in all directions leaving myself the feeling of being trapped in my area at these times. This area has a few elderly citizens that would need this help fairly quickly but with the backups that will certainly happen I feel their needs will not be met. Why would the city not widen Bright Road to four lanes to disperse this traffic more quickly? The comment that the city of Columbus controls the traffic lighting at Sawmill and Bright Road is unsatisfactory and thus you have no control over it needs to be addressed. For the city of Dublin to bring all this traffic to a certain point and then wash their hands of the problems this will occur is unacceptable. Go back to the drawing board and come up with a more sensible and viable solution.
ken klare Posted on November 16, 2010
Regarding the western segment of Bright Road, new direct access to Bright Road should only be given to new contained residential developments and its intersection with Emerald Pkwy should be de-emphasized. Left turns from Bright onto Riverside should be prohibited.
It makes no sense to build a new super arterial while looking to upgrade the status of Bright Road…particularly when declaring its access points, Riverside and Sawmill, are already problems. Widening Bright and putting a light at Riverside might address traffic, but such action ignores the area’s residential nature and will only foster its decline (something the City may be hoping for). The round-a-bout is ridiculous, unnecessary, and counters the objective of a parkway arterial. Additionally, its design is bad and counter intuitive.
Direct connection from Emerald Pkwy to Sawmill should be eliminated; either by dead ending Bright, limiting access, or utilizing speed bumps – at least until such time as redevelopment of this eastern segment can insure such non-connection.
Michael Madsen Posted on January 17, 2011
I have been going over and over this map and keep coming back to the same conclusion. All you are really doing is take the exact same traffic that uses Bright Road @ Riverside and dumping into right back onto Bright, just closer to Sawmill. In fact, you are probably going to add a lot of traffic for those who do not like the 25MPH on Bright.
What is the point?
It seems to me that exploring a feeder entrance ramp onto Westbound 270 from Emerald parkway would go a long way to actually improving the area for your residents and businesses.
The goal should be to improve the whole area, not just make it a more pleasant trip to an eventual traffic Jam.
Brad Posted on January 26, 2011
The final phase of Emerald parkway is going to add additional traffic at the intersection of Emerald Parkway and Riverside Drive. This is going to cause additional waiting time at this intersection. I still would like to see the bridge at Memorial Drive across the river. You can add as many lanes as you want to both sides of Emerald Parkway but the bottle neck will always be at the Emerald Parkway Bridge over the Scioto River. The Memorial Bridge would also solve some of the congestion on Glick Road over the river.
Rocci Primavera Posted on December 15, 2011
We are at the end of 2011 and nothing has happened yet on this important and vitally needed project. What is the latest projection on timing for construction?
Barb Posted on April 19, 2012
When will the work begin on Emerald Pkwy Phase 8? Any word on an updated time table?
City of Dublin Engineering Posted on April 23, 2012
Construction is now scheduled to begin in 2013. It is a large project, therefore, construction will take about 18 months.
11 Comments
Linda K. Edwards Posted on October 29, 2010
Could you provide a map that is larger so I can see the effect on the properties adjacent to the construction. It is very difficult to see from the presentation.
Paul W. Bennett Posted on October 31, 2010
I certainly feel the elimination of the Bright Rd/Riverside intersection is a tremendous plus. Turning from Bright So onto Riverside requires too much patience and at the best of times it is a poor visibility turn. So the cul-de-sac makes much more sense. Bicycle access to this area of the city would be a boon for all. One concern I have is the drawings I saw showed bicycle lanes integral with the traffic lanes. This is different than the rest of Emerald parkway and less safe than having a dedicated bike/pedestrian path (which I would encourage). But the big unaddressed problem is the Sawmill Rd gridlock that already occurs from Hard to Bright to I-270. The way this problem is re-engineered will be make or break for the whole plan. Sawmill is already gridlocked here and the completion of Emerald Parkway will only make it worse unless better flow in this area is effected. The rest of the plan looks good. Paul Bennett
Garry Bergman Posted on November 02, 2010
I have to agree with Paul Bennet. Making the extension of Emerald Pkwy a viable alternative to Sawmill and 270 will only serve to exacerbate the Sawmill problems. There's no way, during rush hour, you'll be able to exit 270 westbound, to Sawmill northbound, and be able to get over to Emerald Pkwy. Turning south onto Sawmill from Bright is already difficult, adding traffic will probably make it impossible. I'd love to see direct access to Emerald Pkwy west from 270.
Deb Allard Posted on November 04, 2010
Please do your best to have good quality homes built anywhere between Emerald Parkway & Bright Rd.. We do not need any more condos nor apartments built on this side of the river!!!! At the Oct. 27th meeting, we were told that the land is currently zoned for single family homes with one to two homes per acre. Meaning, no apartments nor condos.
Steve Barnhardt Posted on November 04, 2010
I feel though the closing of Bright rd. at Riverside Drive probably will deter traffic accidents. I also believe it denies emergency vehicle access to this area. During rush hour times the roundabout is going to be backed up in all directions leaving myself the feeling of being trapped in my area at these times. This area has a few elderly citizens that would need this help fairly quickly but with the backups that will certainly happen I feel their needs will not be met. Why would the city not widen Bright Road to four lanes to disperse this traffic more quickly? The comment that the city of Columbus controls the traffic lighting at Sawmill and Bright Road is unsatisfactory and thus you have no control over it needs to be addressed. For the city of Dublin to bring all this traffic to a certain point and then wash their hands of the problems this will occur is unacceptable. Go back to the drawing board and come up with a more sensible and viable solution.
ken klare Posted on November 16, 2010
Regarding the western segment of Bright Road, new direct access to Bright Road should only be given to new contained residential developments and its intersection with Emerald Pkwy should be de-emphasized. Left turns from Bright onto Riverside should be prohibited. It makes no sense to build a new super arterial while looking to upgrade the status of Bright Road…particularly when declaring its access points, Riverside and Sawmill, are already problems. Widening Bright and putting a light at Riverside might address traffic, but such action ignores the area’s residential nature and will only foster its decline (something the City may be hoping for). The round-a-bout is ridiculous, unnecessary, and counters the objective of a parkway arterial. Additionally, its design is bad and counter intuitive. Direct connection from Emerald Pkwy to Sawmill should be eliminated; either by dead ending Bright, limiting access, or utilizing speed bumps – at least until such time as redevelopment of this eastern segment can insure such non-connection.
Michael Madsen Posted on January 17, 2011
I have been going over and over this map and keep coming back to the same conclusion. All you are really doing is take the exact same traffic that uses Bright Road @ Riverside and dumping into right back onto Bright, just closer to Sawmill. In fact, you are probably going to add a lot of traffic for those who do not like the 25MPH on Bright. What is the point? It seems to me that exploring a feeder entrance ramp onto Westbound 270 from Emerald parkway would go a long way to actually improving the area for your residents and businesses. The goal should be to improve the whole area, not just make it a more pleasant trip to an eventual traffic Jam.
Brad Posted on January 26, 2011
The final phase of Emerald parkway is going to add additional traffic at the intersection of Emerald Parkway and Riverside Drive. This is going to cause additional waiting time at this intersection. I still would like to see the bridge at Memorial Drive across the river. You can add as many lanes as you want to both sides of Emerald Parkway but the bottle neck will always be at the Emerald Parkway Bridge over the Scioto River. The Memorial Bridge would also solve some of the congestion on Glick Road over the river.
Rocci Primavera Posted on December 15, 2011
We are at the end of 2011 and nothing has happened yet on this important and vitally needed project. What is the latest projection on timing for construction?
Barb Posted on April 19, 2012
When will the work begin on Emerald Pkwy Phase 8? Any word on an updated time table?
City of Dublin Engineering Posted on April 23, 2012
Construction is now scheduled to begin in 2013. It is a large project, therefore, construction will take about 18 months.