The bicycle subcommittee had an organizational meeting last Wednesday, June 30. The members of the subcommittee are Jeff Stephens (chair), Aaron Schill (Stantec), Brian Moore (Burgess & Niple), Christine Green (Columbus Public Health) and myself. I’m attaching the agenda and two projects we reviewed: the downtown connector and the Olentangy to Alum Creek connector. We plan to ride both routes before our next meeting, which is July 28.

During the meeting, Nick Popa presented an overview of the Bicentennial Bikeway Plan (BBP) and we were given a spreadsheet of all the recommendations of the plan with the status of each project. We were also given a document with the phase 1 implementation (2008-2013), which is currently being updated for 2011-2016. We looked at the roadway projects, but we will also review the Parks & Recreation projects (i.e. multi-use paths) at a future meeting.

Nick told us that approximately 200 bike racks have been placed in the city and about 60 racks remain. He talked about the projects currently in design & implementation, including the sharrows on High St.

The connector projects are currently in design and will be implemented by Oct 31. It is undecided which types of signs will be used – the engineers are looking at the Greenways trails signs and the Ohio to Erie Trail signs. It is also undecided whether bike route numbers will be used, as is currently done on the routes from Clintonville to downtown and the Morse Rd bike lanes. The engineers stated that they did not expect to use the colors that were recommended in the BBP (red for OSU, purple for Nationwide arena, etc).

We were told that the 2011-2016 capital improvement plan allocates $2M per year for bikeway projects, $2M in 2011 for pedestrian projects, and $4M per year in 2012-2016 for pedestrian projects.

Bill Lewis presented the current plans for bike lanes and sharrows on W. Broad St. There were some changes which were recommended by ODOT, such as 9′ parking lanes and 5′ bike lanes, rather than the orginal plan of 8′ and 6′. From what I understand, there will be bike lanes on both sides of the street, except between Harris & Wheatland Ave, where the bike lane will only be on the south side. Parking will stay the same as it is now, with south side parking from Harris to Clarendon, north side parking during restricted hours from Harris to Wheatland. no north side parking from Wheatland to Clarendon. And I’m sure you’ve all heard about the bike route which will be marked from Wheatland to Westgate utilizing Steele Ave.

I asked if we’ll ever place our Bicycle Friendly Community signs and Randy Bowman told us that the LAB signs are not legal according to MUTCD (due to the purple color?) and that LAB is redesigning them, at which point we’ll put some up.

Brent Nimmo requested that the city place “Bicycle May Use Full Lane” on Alum Creek Dr because he has been stopped 3 times by county sheriffs. He told us that he did get one ticket but the prosecutor threw it out after Brent spoke with him prior to his hearing.

Jeff Stephens asked if the engineers are looking at bikeway facilities when streets are resurfaced. Bill Lewis told us that they are looking at the BBP for each street in the resurfacing plans and determining the overlaps. I noticed that all the streets planned to be resurfaced are listed on the Columbus Transportation website:

http://pubserv.ci.columbus.oh.us/transportation/PROJECT_OVERVIEWS.htm

I don’t know about other cyclists, but I’m just pleased as punch at all the repaving that’s going on. It makes it a heck of a lot easier to share the road.

The documents from the June 30 meeting.

Agenda – June 30, 2010.pdf

Downtown Bikeway Connector Overview.pdf

Olentangy to Alum Creek Connector.pdf

I recommended that the Downtown connector use Naughten to Cleveland heading east because you can’t turn left from McCoy onto Cleveland, but Bill Lewis said they are planning to designate the sidewalk on the west side of Cleveland between Jack Gibbs and McCoy as a bikeway. I think that will be dangerous. Brian Moore and Aaron Schill thought it would be good if the bike route went past Columbus State.

I also suggested an alternate to the Olentangy to Alum Creek connector (posted in a separate forum) to avoid Cleveland and Westerville Rds.

If you post comments on this forum, I’ll relay them to the subcommittee. Or you can attend the next meeting.

I whole-heartedly agree:  the “Bicycles May Use Full Lane” signs should be added.

Is that possible, or are we dreaming?

Why wasn’t the public informed of the meeting?  It seems that there was a lot more than organization going on.  I hope the committee will be more forthcoming with future meeting dates so those of us who wish to attend can.

There was some discussion about whether Columbus would use the “Bicycles May Use Full Lane” signs. They are approved in the 2009 MUTCD (Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices), but are not included in the O-MUTCD (Ohio version), which runs a couple years behind the federal MUTCD. The Columbus engineers said that it would need to be in the O-MUTCD before they would be able to use them. But I seem to recall that Mike Andrako (Gahanna engineer) told me that he could use MUTCD signs even if they weren’t in the O-MUTCD. I’ll have to get clarification on that. I had suggested that Columbus use BMUFL rather than the Share the Road signs on High St (and I think others did too), because I had heard at a conference that the Share the Road signs were “falling out of favor”. But personally, I think the message of both signs is the same, and the Share the Road signs are more visible – which is good and bad (sign clutter).

Regarding the organizational meeting of the bicycle subcommittee. I was under the impression that the meeting was not open to the public, because it would be more organizational in nature. I would have posted it here if I thought otherwise. There were a couple other cyclists at the meeting, so I’m sorry I didn’t let everyone know about it. I forgot to ask if we will be posting meeting minutes anywhere or if things will just be summarized at the regular T&PC meetings.

I would be interested in knowing when the rides to inspect the connectors will be held, especially in the case of the Olentangy-Alum Creek connector, which I believe would affect me.  I think I have some ideas about the connector, and I’d like the opportunity to discuss them.  Incidentally, has a connector in the vicinity of Hudson Street and Mock Road been discussed?  I’ve scouted a route from Hudson and Pontiac to Argyle and Sunbury which may be useful (Just out of curiosity, was John Gideon one of the cyclists at the meeting?).

I’ll let you know when I hear about riding the connector.

I think”share the road” signs get read as “share the lane” by drivers – me included.   BMUFLis a lot more clear.

Thanks so much for sharing the information here.

I noticed on the Olentangy-Alum Creek Connector that a lot of Cleveland Avenue and Westerville Road was used, as well as taking a lot of roads which result in a much longer route.  I suggest Broadmeadows to High to Meadowlark Lane to Foster to Lincoln to the freeway bridge to Vinewood To Redwood to Sandalwood to the Circle to Teakwood to Cleveland Avenue, SHORT jog to Wildwood to Minerva Lake to Westerville, SHORT jog to Corporate Drive, across private property to Alum Creek Bikeway; or, slightly longer, Westerville to Old 161 to Alum Creek Bikeway.  Again, would be VERY INTERESTED in knowing when connectors will be ridden (who designed the Olentangy-Alum Creek Connector in the first place?).  Another possible routing(and this would involve purchasing land) would be through Woodward Park to Ilo Drive to Norma to Tamarack to Coghill to Brittany to Northtowne to Waldorf or Edmonton to Edmonton to Bretton Woods through Soccer Park to Westerville Road to Westerville Woods to Mautino to Wingfield to bikepath to Alum Creek.

Rod, The route you described is the route that I also suggested to the subcommittee (the one through Minerva Park and Corporate Dr). Nick wants to sign the route before the access to Waltham Woods Park (soccer park) will be available. Besides, even if we could get access to Waltham Woods Park, there is no trail and the gravel road and driveway in the park are in poor condition. ScottNorthSide also liked the route and he’s very familiar with the roads. I haven’t heard any feedback from the subcommittee or engineers.

In a previous post, you asked who else attended the organizational meeting. Brent Nimmo and David Roseman.

Thanks, Tricia, for the information about the meeting and the update on your input on the connector.  While I have no objection as such to the two cyclists mentioned attending the organizational meeting (would that the meeting have been open to all), I note that David is a member of Consider Biking, and an officer of that organization, I believe (I do not know about Brett).  My concern is that no one individual or organization should dominate the agenda, since all cyclists in Greater Columbus will be affected by the subcommittee’s decisions.  I am sorry that the subcommittee was not made larger to accommodate more points of view, and perhaps some day it will be made larger.  As I understand it, many interested parties, some with credentials, some without, but otherwise well qualified to serve on the subcommittee, were excluded from the subcommittee.  That’s all right, the selection process I believe was fair, and I realize that the number of places on the subcommittee are limited, and the subcommittee as constituted is well-qualified.  Just the same,  I appreciate your service on the subcommittee and your updates on the workings of the subcommittee, and I hope that the future meetings are open to the public, since I believe that the more people included in the decision process the better.

I didn’t know the first meeting was open to the public. The rest of the meetings are open to the public. Last Wednesday of every month. July 28, 5-7PM, 109 N Front St, room 100. Public comments welcome, but you have to fill out a form, just like at the T&PC. Sorry, I hate the formality, too.

I purchased a Bikes May Use Full Lane sign.  Should the engineers drop the requirement that the sign has to be in Ohio’s manual and become willing to put it up on Alum Creek Drive where I got my ticket, I will gladly donate it to the city…  A city that truly wanted to be “Bike City USA” would not wait 2 years while ODOT redoes its manual.   It would listen to Heather Bowden of ODOT who said “ODOT will not stand in the way of Columbus putting the sign up.”.  It is in te Federal Manual, it will be in the Ohio Manual, it is just a matter of time.  I am confident our Mayor will find a creative way to cut through the red tape and somehow get the sign up.   Passing out tickets for cycling legally is not what Coleman had in mind when he was promoting “Bike to Work Week” .    But that is exactly what happened to me. Mayor Coleman has a long hard road between reality and “Bike City, USA”, a road filled with deputies giving tickets to law abiding cyclists, and motorists that yell Get the f%&*(k off the road” while sidewiping me into a ditch, but he is not a wimp that will accecpt the status quo.
I see a bright future for biking in Columbus, filled with Bikes May Use Full Lane signs, and public service announcements featuring our Mayor eplaining  2173.04 to all, including law enforcement officers. We have good people working hard.  These people have experience cutting red tape.  Support these good people as they fight for us and put up with my never ending rants about unacceptable conditions….

Hey Rod, I learned of the mettings through Nick Popa.   Ever since the deputy issued me a ticket for taking the lane in a narrow lane on Alum Creek Drive, I have not let anyone who is even remotely in any position to correct that situation have a moments rest.  The city said Nick was the one to speak with about my concerns.  It was up in the air for a while as to if the meetings would be open to the public.    My English teacher in High School said I tended to use sledge hammers to drive in tacks.   Rod, my agenda is fairly simple and straightforward.  I want the option of riding my bike to work without being told to “get the f@#(k off the road and being sideswiped of into a ditch by motorists or being threatend by the Franklin County Sheriffs and their deputies.  “If I catch you riding your bike on this road again, I will ticket you.” Not an empty threat either.  I had to take my own vaction time to go to court to prove I was innocent.   The prosecutor understood the law much better than the deputy and had the magistrate throw the ticket out.   No one in authority is going to get any rest for their ears until I can get to work without being ticketed.   If the city chooses to wait two years to put up the Bikes May Use Full Lane signs, they better stock up on earplugs!