The following comments for the Draft Regional Bicycle Transportation Plan were received through the Intergovernmental Review and Consultation (IGRC) process: Lake County Engineer The Lake County Engineers Office has been leading the SR44 Transportation Corridor Study for over a year. Bike/Ped transit is one of the components to this study. LMP scoped the Greenway Corridor component to establish the best, fastest, and most economical way(s) to get from the north end of Girdles/44 terminus to the southerly existing terminus. The consultant has met with Lake Metro Parks relative to alternatives for this task. At this time we would like to make comment that the I-90 corridor (within the LA, south side) from SR44, east to the “Rail to Trails” intersection (just east of Ravena Rd.) is a preferred alternative for one leg of a connecting trail. Cuyahoga County Engineer The Cuyahoga County Engineer's office is in support of NOACA's Regional Bicycle Transportation Plan. However we have the following comment: We believe that setting a rate of 20% of the construction cost for bike facilities for all types of projects is too high (Appendix F page F-1). Twenty percent might be acceptable for small projects, but for some of the big bridge projects it has the potential of increasing the project cost substantially. in those cases it would make it harder to fund the projects. the same would apply to large roadway project like the Boston Road widening. we think the percentage should vary depending on the size of the project. you may want to consider three classes of projects small, medium and large with differing percentages. Thanks City of Shaker Heights comments are available as PDF file. Cleveland MetroParks comments are available as PDF file. Cuyahoga County Planning Commission comments are available as PDF file. Lorain County Engineer The Lorain County Engineer is in support of the NOACA Regional Bicycle Transportation Plan as a guideline for the future growth of bicycle transportation in the region. Our one comment would be that the data and mapping be updated. This would include the new Lorain County’s 2008 Bicycle Transportation Map which will be completed shortly. We would be happy to share with you the mapping and offer our services to help with any further mapping updates. In addition, we believe it would also be beneficial to have a representative from the Lorain County Metro Parks involved in the planning process and future mapping. Thank you for the opportunity to review plan and for the great job NOACA has done in preparing the Regional Bicycle Transportation Plan. Traffic Office of Mentor City Engineer: The City of Mentor is in general support of the NOACA Regional Bicycle Transportation Plan. Construction of bike lanes on most federal aid roadways would provide transportation alternatives and would improve the quality of life for citizens of Mentor. One thing to note regarding the plan is that the Lake County map improperly lists Jordan Drive as Lordan Road. The City requests that this change be made to the priority plan. It is also noted that the maps reflect conditions as of 2005. Since 2005, additional bicycle facilities have been constructed in the City. Ultimately maps need to reflect the current field conditions. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Lorain County Administrator: I have had an opportunity to review the proposed NOACA Regional Bicycle Transportation Plan. Ms. Hanley and her committee did an admirable job. The document itself was full of wonderful information. I have minor concerns with the vision statement and the wording of the five goals, but overall the document is great. I find it difficult to serve as a critic, if I was not part of the document’s preparation. Therefore, I apologize in advance for my following comments. GENERAL COMMENTS: In my opinion use, design, identification or operation of a bicycle (whether on a lane, path or routes) is similar to a watershed; neither stop at a geographic or political boundary. My point, it is unnecessary to constantly identify this as “NOACA region” or NOACA’s Goals, etc. Reading the document, I had the sense that the cycling public is not to ride a route, lane or path if it crosses over NOACA’s boundary. It is understood the document was written for and about the NOACA region, therefore it is a redundant to keep reminding the reader of the artificial boundary known as NOACA. Bicycling facilities should be free of boundaries, so should the favor of this report. One person in Lorain County that operates and has constructed more bike path miles than anyone is Dan Martin of the Lorain County Metroparks District. I believe you should check with Mr. Martin and his staff they most likely have accident number and additional bike routes not included in your study for Lorain County. Then both Cuyahoga and Lorain County information could be provided. As a member of TAC, we have been asked on several occasions to consider and approve wider pavements and pavement marking, so additional bike routes are available. These recommendations are made by BAC. One such project was State Route 162 in southern Lorain County. The pavement was completed this summer. My concern is either the TAC recommendation was not followed or no one has marked or signed the road so the cycling public knows that this is now wide enough for bicycling. The road is wider. It is easier to get around the occasion Amish buggy, it now has a rather imposing and much steeper drop-off into the road ditch, but few users of the roadway know it was widened for bicycle route. Someone should visit our recommendations following construction. VISION: A quick rewrite could be: By the year 2030, we envision bicycling will increase greatly and must be fully integrated into our transportation system. The traveling public will require a wider variety of safe and convenient facilities for commuting and recreating, daily. Better authors than I can make clearer your desired Vision. The Vision is a road map. As such it needs to be crisp, clear and concise. The draft vision fails you. I feel you should take this opportunity to modify the vision statement and have it reflect 2008 not 1999. In 1999 the price of crude oil was less than $35 a barrel and much has happened since. The price of oil is now at $100 per barrel. We as nation need to reduce energy consumption. The air quality is poorer and global warming has much greater acceptance than in 1999. Clarity is critical and you need clarity in your vision statement. I have spent a great deal more time trying to understand the vision than I or any other reader should have to spend. I still am not sure I understand your view. The statement contains 57 words. It is redundant. I counted seven preposition phrases within this one run-on sentence. Above are 37 word and two sentences. In is nice to be nostalgic, but not in a report. GOALS: Could these five goals be stated: 1. Create a regional network of safe bicycling facilities. 2. Provide local bicycle facilities through increased planning. 3. Increase regional bicycle ridership as a means of transportation. 4. Promote safe bicycling resulting in fewer accidents. 5. Encourage public, private and non-profit supportive services for bicyclists, thus creating a dynamic transportation and recreation system. Personally, I would shorten #3 to “Increase regional bicycle ridership” and #4 to be “Promote safe bicycling”. #1 I do not see the benefit of stating “Safe” in the goal after all who among us is attempting to create an “unsafe” bicycling facility? The goals should be to create a network it is assumed it will be safe. I would rewrite page “i” Executive Summary. Brevity is needed. I appreciate the opportunity to comment on this report. The content is great. Everyone should be congratulated for an outstanding job. Some tweaking could be considered. Lake County Commissioner: I certainly concur with the comments of Lake County Engineer Gills. City of Oberlin: Page 2, last sentence, under Table A. I believe this is supposed to read "Lake and (delete Lorain) Medina Counties...." Please note also that the "Kipton-Elyria path" is known officially as the North Coast Inland Trail. 3.1 miles is owned and operated by the City of Oberlin, 10 miles is owned and operated by Lorain County Metroparks. If I'm not mistaken the actual length is 13.1 miles. Page 4. The City constructed a 3,100' spur (multi-purpose path) from the North Coast Inland Trail to the City's Recreation Complex in 2004. This path was constructed north along a former railroad R/W owned by the City to W. Hamilton St. and then east on the edge of the Recreation Complex to the main entrance drive. This extension would factor into some of the subsequent tables. Total cost was $218,890. ODNR NatureWorks program paid $68,562. Page 20 and Maps 5 and 6(?). Please note that the City of Oberlin has a funding commitment from NOACA for the adaptive re-use of an historic industrial facility (Gasholder House). The intent is that the building will be adapted for use as an Underground Railroad Visitor Center. The site will be transformed into a multi-modal transportation center. It is located on the City's section of the North Coast Inland Trail; Lorain County Transit Authority has indicated that it will re-locate its bus stop facilities to the site; and its adjacent to SR58. We currently have a design contract with an architectural firm. This project is currently at Tier 1 status although I've been trying to get a response from John Hosek on what progress NOACA needs to see to elevate it to the TIP. Page 22. The City of Oberlin has a plan to extend the previously mentioned spur an additional 1,300' +/- to connect the City's Recreation Complex to the Lorain County Metroparks Splashzone Facility. This is proposed as a joint project between the City and Metroparks. Local funding tentatively scheduled for 2009. Estimated cost is $170,500. Page 23. Table F + Map 6. The City has a long term conceptual plan to extend the multi-purpose path from W. Hamilton south to US20 on the Ramsey R/W (see above). This extension would add approximately 5,000' to the City's trail system. Page 23. Table F + Map 6. The City also has a conceptual plan to establish bike lanes on S. Professor and E. College Streets from their respective intersections with the North Coast Inland Trail to the Central Business District. Implementation would result in approximately 5,630' of bike lanes. Page 25. Goal 3. Is there a way to reach out to employers to develop incentives for their employees to ride to work? If you'd like I can provide mapping which could be adapted for Map 10 showing the existing, planned and conceptual improvements in Oberlin. If there's other information you'd like, please let me know. The draft plan obviously represents alot of work. Good job to all involved! Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority (GCRTA): The GCRTA has reviewed the NOACA Regional Bicycle Transportation Plan Draft dated July 2007 and supports the goals, strategies, and priorities for increasing bicycle transportation in the region. We look forward to continuing to work with NOACA and other regional partners in enhancing bicycle access with our transportation improvement projects to further alternative transportation options for our riders. With the recent announcement that bicycles will be allowed at all times on our trains and the full implementation of bicycle racks on our busses, we anticipate continuing to see growth of multi-modalism through bicycle use by our riders as further education and information is disseminated on the opportunities for the use of public transit to transport bicycles. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. City of Chardon: We want to report an error on page 21 of the draft bike plan. Under "Geauga County", the "Geauga County Bikeway" should be changed to "Maple Highlands Trail" and "Park Avenue in Chardon Township" should be changed to "South Street in the City of Chardon. Ohio Department of Transportation (ODOT)-District 12: Following are some comments from ODOT District 12: Eliminate southern Geauga Bike path along abandoned RxR corridor as it had to many negative environmental issues. This is the section south of the East Branch Reservoir dam at SR-608/Durkee road. In general we have concerns on showing bike routes as shared facilities along high speed(55 mph) state routes in rural areas with 2 ft. berms such as US-322. We do not desire anyone on bikes to be on these roads. Especially on the sections with the higher ADT's. Thanks for the opportunity to provide comment. Lorain County Community Development Department: The Lorain County Planning Commission is in support of the NOACA Regional Bicycle Transportation Plan. Cleveland City Planning Commission: Overall the NOACA Regional Bicycle Transportation Plan is a solid proposal that has sound recommendations. We strongly support its goals of increasing bicycle planning, expanding the network of bicycle facilities, increasing bicycle ridership and promoting safer cycling. We believe that a serious bicycle transportation plan will enhance the region’s economic viability by providing better multi-modal transportation choices, improving the air quality and the environment and reducing health care costs associated with sedentary lifestyles. The Goals and Strategies section fails to mention lobbying efforts to increase funding for bicycle and pedestrian facilities by working with Federal, State and local elected officials. There is no mention of working to implement “Complete Streets” policies of individual jurisdictions within the NOACA region. Cleveland Metroparks planned and proposed bikeways need to be incorporated into the Regional Bicycle Transportation Plan. Long-distance national and regional trails that move beyond the NOACA region need to be supported and prioritized. The Planned or Proposed Bike Facilities section shows 53 miles for Cuyahoga County while the City of Cleveland’s Master Bikeway Plan alone shows 180 miles of planned or proposed bicycle facilities. Some facilities must have been omitted. NOACA’S 2000 Bicycle Friendly City’s campaign lists Avon Lake, Mentor and Oberlin as BFC recipients. That is no longer accurate. In general, the maps in the NOACA plan are difficult to read. Using maps from 2005 and 2006 means they are already dated. Many of the proposed projects have already been completed. Crash data analysis ends in 2004. More current data would be preferable. Map 4 (potential 3-mile bicycle trips to selected attractors) is illegible. We request that the following street segments be added to the map that displays the Cuyahoga County Bicycle Facility Priority Plan. Rocky River Drive / Riverside Drive (Lakewood city limit to Brookpark Rd.) Lorain Avenue (Triskett Ave. to Lorain / Carnegie Bridge) Triskett Avenue (Berea Rd. to W.117th St.) Ridge Road (Denison Ave. to Memphis) Franklin Blvd. (W. 85th St. to W. 25th St.) Scranton Road West 25th St. (from Lorain Ave. to Main Ave.) Lakeside Avenue (W. 3rd to E. 40th St.) Addison Road (St. Clair Ave. to E. 79th St.) E. 79th Street (Addison Rd. to Union Ave.) Quincy Avenue Harvard Avenue (E. 116th St. to Eastern city limit) E. 152nd Street (Lake Shore Blvd. to St. Clair Ave.) Medina County Park District: Please accept my comments on the bicycle plan. 1.The plan does a thorough review of the issues relating to safe bicycling in our region. 2.The list of planned projects could be better in some communities. 3. I realize the planning process is lengthy. In 2007, the Medina County Park District has constructed an additional five miles of multi-purpose trails that are shown as planned on the map. Comments not related to the plan. 1. How does an entity have a project entered into the system. It has never been clear to me how to proposed a bicycle project to NOACA. 2. A representative from one of the park districts on the bicycle planning committee would be helpful to NOACA as well as the park districts in the region. Thanks for the opportunity to comment. Geauga County Engineer's Office: Regarding the Geauga County Bikeway Facility Priority Map: Our main comment is that the section of Bikeway Priority System that parallels the Maple Highlands bike trial along State Route 608 and Chardon Windsor Road does not make sense as being a priority. The bike trail is open from Durkee Road up to the City of Chardon. Please visit this link. We request the Chardon Windsor Road outside the City of Chardon be removed from the priority map. We would think that ODOT D12 may want SR 608 north of Durkee removed also. Otherwise, the priorities in Geauga County make sense to us except that some of the routes have long steep hills, but you will find that in Geauga County. Lake County Engineer's Office: The proposed bike route planned for Vrooman Road is unacceptable as we are rerouting the road. We will have a high level bridge which over the past 2 years has jumped from $13,000,000 to $23,000,000 and the construction costs are going up - will be $30,000,000 by 2010. When we improve Vrooman Road, it will have a minimum of 3 foot berms and the bridge is planned to have 3 foot berms, however all will depend on cost. Madison Avenue is questionable because it is an urban area with some sidewalks. It will be difficult to obtain additional R/W and probably not cost effective. It is also curbed at this time which means you cannot widen it to accommodate bikes. Contact us for assistance or questions.