The Journal Herald from Dayton, Ohio • 9

July 3, 1981 JOURNAL HERALD 9 Road 1-675 issue has taken I Miami Co. I I Jl 170 i Co. 1-675 plan in months Proposed Fairborn interchanges Discussion began in the late 1950s about constructing a beltway around Dayton. Those discussions originally called for 1-675 to completely circle the center city. But traffic and population projections did not warrant construction of the western portion of a beltway.

So from about 1961, local and state elected officials and planners concentrated on developing the eastern portion of the beltway. Here Is a general chronology of I-675's history: June 1961: The Ohio Transportation Department announces plans to construct the eastern bypass and projects it will be built by 1965. January 1963: The U.S. Bureau of Public Roads, which now is the Transportation Department, says the proposed 1-675 right-of-way is too close to 1-75 almost parallel and rejects its construction. 1963 through 1967: State and local planners develop alternative rights-of-way, specifically for the portion of 1-675 south of U.S.

35. Public hearings are held to gather citizen input on those alignments. Early 1967: State officials begin acquiring right-of-way. Late 1967: A section of 1-675 north of U.S. 35 is approved for construction by federal officials and is scheduled to begin in early 1969.

Completion of the entire eaas-tern bypass is now slated for early 1973. 1972: Construction work begins on a 5.8-mile portion of 1-675 north of U.S. 35. Total 1-675 construction cost estimate is now $85 million. 1973: The Oak Creek Civic Association, a Kettering citizen group, formally objects to I-675's proposed right-of-way through a 16-acre wooded area.

Partially in' response to that objection, the Federal Highway Administration halts further construction of mittee the area's key planning agencies formally recommend 1-675 be approved, provided nine actions be taken by area businesses and governments to lessen any adverse impacts on Dayton. And negotiations begin to implement those actions. Nov. 29, 1979: U.S. Transportation Secretary Neil Goldschmidt approves construction of 1-675 only to U.S.

35, citing adverse impacts on Dayton and saying of its southern portion, "forecasts of future traffic volumes simply do not warrant a project of this scale." Dec. 1, 1979: Ohio Transportation Director David L. Weir threatens to sue the federal government over its decision. January through September 1980: Area elected officials and planners, at the direction of Goldschmidt, begin drawing up detailed alternative transportation projects to 1-675. In June, Ohio Attorney General William J.

Brown says he will not sue the federal government over its November decision because there is no legal basis for such a suit. Sept. 23, 1980: Vice presidential candidate George Bush in Dayton campaigning tells The Journal Herald he would "strongly" urge I-675's construction if Ronald Reagan is elected president. Nov. 6, 1980: The transportation committee decides to re-submit 1-675 to the new Reagan administration for reconsideration of Goldschmidt's November 1979 decision.

February 1981: The Federal Highway Administration, under Reagan, begins a review of 1-675 as requested by local and state officials. July 7, 1981: Transportation Secretary Drew Lewis telephones Ohio Gov. James Rhodes to say he has approved construction of 1-675 as originally proposed. other 1-675 segments until an environmental impact statement Is drawn up. July 1974: Because of state transportation department financial problems, completion of 1-675 is slated for 1980 and no earlier.

Meanwhile, organized citizen opposition to the proposed right-of-way continues to surface. October 1975: 1-675 from 1-70 south to North Fairfield Road in Beavercreek is now open for traffic. State officials still are buying right-of-way for yet-unapproved bypass segments. December 1976: A preliminary environmental impact statement concludes there is no workable transportation alternative to I-675 which would have less impact on the area's environment. 1977: Area jurisdictions formally support or oppose construction of uncompleted sections of the bypass.

Dayton, while under pressure from businesses, area political groups and other jurisdictions, modifies its position more than once before the year is out. 1978 through April 1979: Numerous citizen and political groups are taking formal positions on the bypass issue in light of possible adverse impacts on the city of Dayton which are surfacing. Those impacts include pulling city businesses and residents away from the center city, thus encouraging urban sprawl. March 1979: U.S. Transportation Secretary Brock Adams who is reviewing the 1-675 project cites President Jimmy Carter's urban policy to protect core cities from deteriorating and calls for more study on the effect of the bypass on Dayton.

May 197: The Miami Valley Regional Planning Commission and the Montgomery-Greene Transporation Coordinating Com I I Dayton 36 months IT Sr4 ji. Kx 0 $34.46 jo months 77 $15.64 32 months Umtedl fori A MP LT7 CIS 0 $38.78 36 months Estimated completion thebetof Jjj time in months i i v7 Cost in millions of dollars i 7-675 approved each way with round-trip purchase. Only nonstop to Los Angeles. Only nonstop to Denver. Connections to more of theWest.

(7 days for some cities) oi return on a standby basis. Travel must begin by Scpteinlxr 15 and seats are limited. Super Saver discounts do not apply to Hawaii. Canada or Mexico. For more information and reservations, call your Travel Agent Or call tinted at 461-4450.

Partners in Travel with West in Hotels. United Super Saver fare to selected Western cities is just S179 each way when you fly round-trip. Just make reservations and buy your tic kets at least 7 or 14 days in advance, depending on city. Return as soon as the first Saturday or stay up to 60 days. If you leave on a Saturday, you can return any day.

Make any changes in return reservations at least 14 davs in advance corridor" has been based on the assumption that the highway will be built, it states, and "planned development responsive to local needs and desires is not considered urban sprawl." In a subtle jab at Goldschmidt, the statement notes that 1-675 has been in the planning for several decades and adds "the federal response to planned local development should be one of long-range support and consistency, not one of periodic policy change." Critics had argued that not building the highway would save energy in part because it would encourage residents to use and expand mass transit. But the statement, without elaborating, says "a freeway facility in the 1-675 corridor has been shown to be as energy efficient as a no-build alternative." It also said the full interstate would be "slightly more efficient" than building the remaining section from U.S. 35 to 1-75 as a "lesser scale facility," such as highway with interchanges with traffic lights. On another issue, the statement acknowledged that traffic projections supplied by local transportation planners "appear to be somewhat high," but it nonetheless declares that "a freeway transportation facility in the corridor can be supported at reduced traffic levels" and that "traffic in the corridor will continue to rise as the Dayton area expands to the east." It also noted that while population in the Dayton metropolitan area has declined slightly in the past decade, "the population of the majority of the communities along the 1-675 corridor has increased and shows a strong potential, for growth." Critics had also urged that the money for the bypass should be used instead for some other transportation alternatives to 1-675, such as upgrading existing roadways in the 1-675 corridor. But the decision statement says 1-675 is the only viable use for the money simply because the bypass has been the first choice of local transportation planners and most community representatives for years.

Finally, the statement took issue with Goldsch-midt's determination that 1-675 was not an "essential" link in the interstate highway system. "While this may be true from a national perspective, the project appears very supportable based on urban and regional transportation needs," the decision statement concluded. But state Transportation Director Weir said yesterday he believes there "is a national commitment to complete the interstate system, all the essential segments of It." Yesterday's approval immediately raised the prospect of court action to block construction of the bypass. But both McGee and Roach said it is unlikely the city will go to court perhaps because the 3-2 majority on city commission which has opposed the highway will be lost with McGee's retirement next year. McGee suggested a suit might be filed by citizens whose land will be purchased for the highway.

However, Federal Highway Administration officials yesterday noted that 81 percent of the right-of-way for the project already has been acquired. Both McGee and Roach also rejected suggestions the city might have been better off to have accepted a series of so-called "mitigating actions" proposed by local business and political leaders in mid-1979 in exchange for Dayton's support for the bypass. They included such things as pledges to push for increased minority employment in the city and consideration of building high-income housing in the downtown area. "They could never deliver a one of them," McGee said yesterday, referrirg to the pledges. Roach sgrefd.

saying, "Wf would have accepted those if we thought there was any weight to them. "It was a maiter of stsu-Ji-j up to what we believed in regardless of tee ultimate cost," she said. The city did that I'm proud of what they L1 and well just have to live with the consequences." Continued from Page 1 Dayton Democratic Rep. Tony P. Hall cheered it as "a great step forward for the economy of the Dayton metropolitan area" and said it will "enhance Dayton's competitive edge for attracting new industry in the future." But longtime bypass foes, led by Dayton Mayor James McGee, ridiculed the decision.

"I don't see any justifiable basis for them to make that decision," he said. "It never has been in the best interests of the city and it's not going to be in the best interests of the city now." McGee suggested the decision may have been a "political pay-off," to Brown, Hall and Rep. Thomas N. Kindness, R-Hamilton, because all three supported President Ronald Reagan's budget resolution which sharply reduced federal spending. Dayton City Commissioner Patricia Roach said the decision is proof the administration "clearly no longer cares about cities or poor people." Those Dayton business leaders who pressed for approval of the bypass "will now have to deal with the fact that the city is in a bad financial situation and the future looks very bleak." "They have interests in the city as well as we do," she said, "and they'll have to find their own ways of addressing that." But Paul Leonard, an 1-675 supporter who is almost assured of election as Dayton mayor in November, said he believes that potential adverse impacts of the bypass on the center city of Dayton are not "real in the 1980s.

I think they were real in the '60s." "There are going to be few, if any businesses (which) will pick up and leave the inner city and build near the beltway," Leonard said, because "they can't afford to do that." Leonard said he thinks the economics will be working in favor of Dayton because of lower energy, water and property costs the center city has to offer. Yesterday's announcement was in sharp contrast to that made by Goldschmidt, who held a full-blown press conference covered by everyone from trade newsletters to television networks to explain why he would not permit the full bypass to be built. Lewis, on the other hand, made no formal statement. He made his decision known by telephoning Brown and Ohio Gov. James A.

Rhodes yesterday morning. In fact, the announcement was so low-key that his press office was prepared to go no further than merely confirming that the secretary had concurred in the highway administration recommendation that the highway be built. The actual "decision statement" was not even signed by Lewis, but rather by Federal Highway Administration administrator Ray A. Barnhirt and Judith T. Connor, assistant transportation secretary for policy and international affairs.

That four-page statement, signed Monday by Barnhart and Connor, explains the agency's position on four key issues which form the rationale for the decision approving the bypass: Under the heading of "Impact on the city of Dayton" the statement reads: "Available Information does not Indicate that the adverse economic impact on the city of Dayton is significant enough to deny the approval of the portion of 1-675 south of VS. 35. It would not be appropriate at this time to break faith with the transportation planning process that has existed for over 20 years, which resulted in the endorsement cf 1-675 by all of the governing bodies represented on fte (Miami Valley Regional Plaaaing until the late 1970s when reversed its position." On another key issue, the statement rejects the claim by critics that the bypass will cause urban sprawl and will bo encourage energy conservation. Development to date akrg the so-called "1-675 7 -0 'A jj PORTLAND 3 SAN FRANCISCO Jf I I i t'N 1 A 'O Is I (' 1 NONSTOP TO 1 TUCS01 t. 1 SANREG0 RythefnendlysldesofUnited.

Call United or yourTravjl Agcri..