Comments on the Scioto Bikeway Connector.

 

Interest in Bikeway:

I am a cyclist and a member of COBAC and President of the Fairfield Heritage Trail Association.

 

General Comments:

 

I prefer Alternative D1. Here are the reasons:

 

  1. It takes advantage of the natural beauty of the Scioto River. Several months ago I had the pleasure of attending the Trails and Greenways Conference in Minneapolis and took tours in both St. Paul and Minneapolis. Both cities have used the waterways (most notably the Mississippi) to great advantage in their trail systems. The view along the northwest curve of the river should be excellent both towards downtown and Grandview. Yes, there are some potential waterways and wetland impacts and some trees may go. But, trees can be replaced with new plantings, which I observed talking a walk with the naturalist at Three Creeks park this afternoon. The issue of potential crime along the river was overheard by me at the public meeting. If that is the case, Columbus has far more serious problems than can be addressed by trails. Such potential criminal activity has not deterred countless communities, both larger and smaller than Columbus, from providing a trail system along their waterfronts.
  2. The cost is one of the lowest presented at $2.02 million. Only one alternative was lower.
  3. It utilizes the existing segment that currently dead ends at the Water Treatment Plant. As a taxpayer, I do not want my tax dollars thrown away on a new route that does not utilize what I have already paid for.
  4. Taking the additional time to traverse the curve into consideration, it provides a good, direct shot into Grandview for tourists and commuters. To me, the tradeoff of an additional 55 seconds from the lowest travel time to traverse the segment is more than balanced by both the route’s beauty and reduction in the stress-causing I-670 freeway noise (which would be a problem with alternatives B1 and B2, C, E, F, G, and H).
  5. Vis-à-vis option D2, it provides priority access to Grandview commuters. Grandview is a suburb very supportive of cycling and one that wants to be more involved. From my notes from the Grandview Heights presentation at the CENTRAL OHIO GREENWAY & TRAIL FORUM, Thursday, November 3rd, 2005, Grandview Heights:
    1. Strongly supports bicycling, including bike races
    2. Looking at internal bikeways
    3. At crossroads of trails
    4. Sees problem of how to get to trails

We should be supportive of their commitment to cycling and Alternative D1 provides good access to this community. The trail extends southwest from the Grandview Avenue connector to continue a route along the river going west.

  1. It does not need a tunnel or bridge to cross under or over I-670 with the inherent costs and security considerations inherent with either of those.
  2. I prefer the continuation of a trail solution in this circumstance rather a bikeway such as is proposed in Alternative I. Alternative I also has the least connectivity to fishing and other trail systems and to me, in an area with COTA buses traversing it, an on-road route would not be the safest!
  3. It has the potential for providing access to the Main Post Office and City of Columbus Utilities Complex for cyclists and pedestrians through a crosswalk that can utilize the existing traffic signal at the Post Office entrance.