The Bicentennial Bikeways Plan of Columbus, Ohio

T H E B I C E NTENNIAL BIKEWAYS P L A N O F COLUMBUS, OHIO

Contemporary Planning for Two Wheels

Bryan Rodda

City Planning 540 Introduction to City Planning: Past, Present, Future Professor Eugenie L. Birch The University of Pennsylvania School of Design Fall 2008

Table of Contents Introduction A Brief Profile of Columbus The Plan Development

1 2 5 5

History of Bicycle Planning in Columbus

5

A New Comprehensive Approach

7

Contents

10

Existing Conditions Inventory and Needs Analysis

11

Plan Recommendations

16

The Goal: Ten Percent in Ten Years

19

Analysis: How the Plan Works

20

The Plan as Agenda

20

The Plan as Vision

22

Conclusion

24

Appendix A: Interview Transcripts

27

Works Cited

33

Rodda 1

Introduction The Columbus Bicentennial Bikeways Plan, adopted by the City of Columbus, Ohio, in May, 2008, represents the city’s first exhaustive, comprehensive approach to planning for its bicycle infrastructure. The plan is both a detailed analysis of immediate infrastructure needs and a fullyarticulated vision for the future of bikeways and greenways in Columbus for the next twenty years. In fulfilling these dual roles, the plan builds upon the city’s ad hoc history of bicycle planning while simultaneously supplanting it with a new, modern document and vision. It argues for aggressive development of both on-street and off-street bicycle facilities to create an extensive and interconnected bikeways network. Most dramatically, it aims for ten percent of all of the city’s trips to be made by bicycle in ten years; a mode-share comparable to the most bikefriendly communities in the United States. If successful, the Bicentennial Bikeways Plan may serve as a national model for what bicycle planning in a large American city can accomplish.

This paper examines the plan in several ways. After a brief profile of the City of Columbus, the first section of the paper discusses two aspects of the plan: its formation and development, and its contents. For its formation and development, the central questions is: Why did Columbus undertake the bikeways plan, at this particular time, to address the specific needs of bicycle transportation? Next, the paper delves into the plan document to consider its contents. Here the questions center on: What are the goals and objectives of this plan? What data and information constitute the plan? What problems does the plan identify, and what recommendations does the plan make to ameliorate these problems?

Rodda 2

The second section of this paper analyzes the plan using Lewis Hopkins’ article, “How Plans Work,” as a guide. In this section the goal is to place the plan in context. In light of Hopkins’ description of the different plan types, the analysis concludes that the primary roles of the bikeways plan are as an agenda and a vision. Each of these roles is then dissected to determine if the plan represents a successful agenda, vision, or both.

Finally, I consider whether I think the plan is a good plan––which Hopkins defines as a plan with valid and worthwhile benefits for society. I also contemplate the potential implications of the plan in the future, not only for Columbus and its metropolitan area, but also for other American cities formulating strategies to invest in city amenities and transportation networks for the 21st Century.

A Brief Profile of Columbus Columbus, Ohio is the capital and largest city in the State of Ohio. The city’s population was 711, 470 people at the time of 2000 Census. This represented a growth of 78,560 people, or 12.4 percent, from the city’s 1990 Census population of 632,910.1 The growth trend has continued, and the 2007 Census population estimate for Columbus was 747,755 residents, ranking the city as the 15th largest in the United States.2 Columbus consistently represents approximately 45 percent of the overall population of its Metropolitan Statistical Area, a proportion well above that of other large cities in Ohio–– Cleveland, for example, represented only 21 percent of the population of the Cleveland MSA in

1 “Columbus Population Profile.” City of Columbus Department of Development. Available at: http://development.columbus.gov/Bizdevelopment/Demographics/Columbus/ Colpopulation.asp

2 U.S. Census Bureau Population Finder. Available at: http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/SAFFPopulation?_submenuId=population_0&_sse=on

Rodda 3

2000.3 Growth in the MSA and the city itself is forecast to continue over the next 15 years, according to the Ohio Department of Development. 4 Nationally, Columbus may be best known as the home of The Ohio State University, which is consistently among the largest institutions of higher education in the country with an enrollment of over 50,000 students. Founded in 1812, the city was always envisioned as the state capital, and government has formed the backbone of its economic base throughout its history. In addition to education and government, the insurance industry has formed an important part of the city economy. Five insurance companies, including Nationwide Insurance, are headquartered in Columbus.5 Geographically, the city is large, encompassing 225.9 square miles, and centrally located in the State of Ohio.6 The map of the city on the next page demonstrates the city’s expanse and somewhat checkerboard appearance (Figure 1). Several one-time suburbs are now completely surrounded by the city, which has annexed immense quantities of land in the postwar era.

Though it’s unclear from the map, the city has a relatively flat topography, which is beneficial from a cyclist’s perspective, and also boasts three important riparian (river) corridors that have been utilized as bicycle pathways. These waterways are (left to right across the map) the Scioto River and Olentangy River, which merge immediately north of downtown, and Alum Creek, which merges with two other creeks before flowing into the Scioto south of Columbus.

Together, these waterways provide an immense opportunity for recreational uses, while also

3 2000 Decennial Census. Available at: www.factfinder.census.gov 4 “Ohio County Indicators, July 2008” Report, Ohio Department of Development, pp. 22-26. Available at: http://www.odod.state.oh.us/Research/files/s101.pdf

5 Columbus Comprehensive Plan, adopted December, 1993. pp. 1-2. Available at: http://assets.columbus.gov/development/planning/complan.pdf 6 City of Columbus Department of Development Information. Available at: http://td.ci.columbus.oh.us/Bizdevelopment/Demographics/Columbus/index.asp

Rodda 4

creating natural boundaries in the city that can impede bicyclists, cars and other vehicles that desire to move east-to-west through the city.

Figure 1. Map of Columbus

Map of Columbus, highlighting in shades of blue the city’s main waterways ("om le#) the Scioto River, Olentangy River, and Alum Creek.

Source: Ohio Department of Transportation.

* * *

Rodda 5

The Plan: Development While the Bicentennial Bikeways Plan signifies Columbus’ first comprehensive approach to planning for the needs of cyclists, it builds upon a 40-year history of planning and constructing cycling facilities. This section briefly traces these precursor efforts and catalogues the motivations that drove Columbus to undertake the development of its bikeways plan.

History of Bicycle Planning in Columbus Formal bicycle planning in Columbus began with the city’s Recreation and Parks Department, which built off-road shared-use paths7 along the Scioto and Olentangy Rivers in the 1960s. These paths laid the foundation for the future development of recreational trails along the two rivers and additional off-road shared-use paths have been built along Alum Creek and in the right-of-way of Interstate 670. In sum, the city owned 46 miles of recreational trails in 2007.8 However, the city has lagged in developing on-street bicycle facilities, such as bike lanes.9 In fact, its first on-street lanes, established in the 1970s on High Street near The Ohio State University campus, were later removed because of difficulties with traffic. Other paths have been added more recently to sections of arterial roadways, but always piecemeal, and so the city currently has only 6.3 miles of bicycle lanes on its streets.10

7 A shared-use path is a paved surface, usually at least 8 feet wide, that is appropriate for walking, running, rollerblading, biking and similar activities and accommodates all these users simultaneously.

8 Columbus Bicentennial Bikeways Plan, Prepared for the City of Columbus, Ohio, by Burgess & Niple and Alta Planning + Design. March, 2008. Section 1-1, pp. 16-18. Available at: http://www.altaprojects.net/columbus/ 9 A bike lane is a strip on a roadway, usually at least 4 feet wide, that is designated for bicycle use.

10 Ibid. Section 1-1, pg. 17

Rodda 6

The city undertook further formal bicycle planning efforts in the early 1990s. For example, it established a new Bikeways Advisory Committee and hired a Bikeway Coordinator, whose goal was to develop and on-street bikeways network.11 The administrator devised a system of numbered routes using existing streets and roads considered favorable for cyclists. These routes remain, but with a preference for using the existing street network, the program did not produce new dedicated bike lanes. The bikeways plan notes that the Bikeways Advisory Committee ceased regular meetings in late 2005 and that the Bikeway Coordinator position was unfilled in 2007.12 While the plan recommends re-hiring a coordinator, it is unclear––from the plan, from my interview with a city official, and from the city’s own website––whether or not this position has been reinstated, nor even exactly why the position has been left vacant. Regardless, the creation of the bikeways plan shows that interest in developing the bicycling network remains.

Early 1990s bicycle planning efforts were also bolstered by the inclusion of bikeways in the 1993 Columbus Comprehensive Plan, which notes: “The infrastructure systems of the City of Columbus––streets and highways, public transit, pedestrian facilities, bikeways, sanitary and storm sewers, water system, and street lights––represent a tremendous public investment and...provision for and maintenance of these systems is one of the primary functions of local government.” 13 The inclusion of bikeways as a fundamental public provision provided the rationale for the establishment of the Bikeways Coordinator position and for a more concerted effort to develop bicycle networks. Indeed, explicit recommendations of the comprehensive plan included, “...that

11 Ibid. Section 1-2, pg. 17 12 Ibid. Section 1-2, pg. 17 13 Columbus Comprehensive Plan, pp. 23

Rodda 7

the Public Service Department develop a bikeways plan for the city of Columbus and represent bicycle interests to both government and private sector,” and that, “...the city of Columbus...provide bicycle parking at all its government buildings.”14 However, a bikeways plan never materialized in the 1990s, and Columbus did not adopt any bicycle parking requirements for its public buildings. Thus, while planning for cycling and the development of paths and trails continued, it also continued to lack a cohesive strategy and organization.

Most recently. the Mid-Ohio Regional Planning Commission prepared its 2006 Regional Bicycle Transportation Plan, which included broad goals for the region’s transportation network and specifically recommended that future plans accommodate bicyclists in the design of any transportation project.15 In 2005, Columbus Mayor Michael B. Coleman launched “Get Green Columbus,” a city-wide initiative based upon stated “green principles,” with a goal to make Columbus into an environmentally sustainable community. As part of this effort, Coleman has directed new resources toward biking due to its environmental benefits relative to oil-based forms of transportation.16 A New Comprehensive Approach From this checkered history of mostly ad hoc bikeways planning, the need for a comprehensive approach to bikeways planning was clear. Mayor Coleman led the push to develop the Bicentennial Bikeways Plan. Asked to explain the rationale behind investing in the plan, Eric Brandon, a policy advisor for Coleman, wrote: 14 Columbus Comprehensive Plan, pp. 34-35 15 2006 Regional Bicycle Transportation Facilities Plan, Mid-Ohio Regional Planning Commission, June 2007. pp. 4-8. Available at: http://www.morpc.org/ trans/BikePedRegionalBicycleTransportationFacilitiesPlan.pdf 16 Bicentennial Bikeways Plan, pg. 31. See also the Get Green Columbus website at: http://getgreencolumbus.com/

Rodda 8

“Mayor Coleman has been promoting active living, biking in particular, since his days on Columbus City Council over a decade ago. Besides being very health conscious Mayor Coleman has been a progressive thinker in terms of ways to reduce the carbon footprint and finding transportation alternatives. Mayor Coleman is also Columbus' biggest cheerleader and looks for ways to promote the City's natural characteristics. Columbus is very flat which makes biking a great way to highlight our City while addressing the aforementioned items of active/ healthy living, environmental consciousness, transportation alternatives, and having a vibrant City…” 17 Clearly, Coleman believes the plan addresses several goals simultaneously for the city, including benefits for health, transportation and recreation for residents. Lauren Buckland Ledbetter, a consultant who helped design the plan, concurs that Coleman was the leading force behind it. But she also proffers a political motivation for the plan, saying, “Coleman was the pushing and driving force behind this plan somewhat for political reasons––he wanted the plan set up and underway before the [November 2007] elections...” presumably because Coleman wanted to use the in-progress bikeways plan as a political asset in his re-election campaign.18 Ledbetter also cites Coleman’s existing green initiatives––such as “Get Green Columbus”–– and his belief that developing a bikeways network would serve as a public amenity that would attract residents and employers to locate in the City of Columbus as additional motivation spurring the bikeways plan.19 For his part, Coleman is quoted in the media as saying that he was personally committed to the project because, “...it is the right thing to do for Columbus,” and that cyclist safety would be a primary consideration of the plan, “Too many people have been hurt or killed by walking or 17 Personal interview with Eric Brandon. Transcript found in Appendix A. 18 Personal interview with Lauren Ledbetter Buckland. Transcript found in Appendix A. 19 Ibid.

Rodda 9

biking, and the city is refocusing our neighborhood and traffic planning to be bike and pedestrian-friendly.”20 The city developed the plan in a relatively short window of time. The process from beginning to end took approximately one calendar year. Coleman officially announced the plan on July 26, 2007, though the planning process had already been underway for about two months at that time. According to a news report covering the public announcement, Coleman and City Councilwoman Maryellen O’Shaughnessy successfully lobbied Columbus City Council to appropriate $255,000 to hire two firms: Burgess & Niple, from Columbus, and Alta Planning + Design, from Portland, Ore.21 Alta performed the design and planning work, while Burgess & Niple orchestrated the public input process and assisted with local coordination of the planning process.22 The public input process denotes one more way in which the Bicentennial plan is comprehensive in scope. Burgess & Niple conducted three open forum public meetings and also ran an open online survey to solicit public input.23 The online survey was open for public comment from July through December of 2007, and over 900 responses were received in this manner.24 This input is of particular significance since my research found no evidence that formal public input from cyclists or about cycling facilities had been solicited in any previous

20 McIntyre, Melanie. “Coleman announces plan for new bike paths in Columbus.” The Daily Reporter, July 27, 2007. Available at: http:// www.altaprojects.net/columbus/mayorspressrelease073007.pdf 21 Ibid.

22 Personal interview with Brian Moore. Transcript found in Appendix A. 23 Bicentennial Bikeways Plan, Section 4-5, pp. 80-82 24 Ibid. Section 3-1, pg. 44

Rodda 10

bicycle planning efforts. As Daniels, et. al. notes when discussing comprehensive plans, “...the more that people become involved in creating the town plan, the more likely they are to support it and to want to see it succeed.”25 All three people interviewed in this report also saw the level of public input as positive. Brandon said that, “There were many public forums and opportunities for public input for the occasional rider as well as the enthusiast and bike club member,” and he echoed Daniels’ sentiments as well, noting that “...implementation of the plan will require community buy-in and support.” Thus, asking for that input––and further, listening to it––helps insure the future success of the plan and provides it with a firmer foundation grounded in the public interest. * * *

The Plan: Contents With this understanding of the Bicentennial Bikeways Plan’s formation, the discussion turns to the substance of the document. This section highlights the components of the plan, including its goals, objectives and recommendations.

The plan has four broad sections. First, the plan catalogues the existing conditions of Columbus bikeway networks and performs a needs analysis to identify potential future developments. The identified conditions and needs then serve as the basis for the infrastructure and bicycling education improvements recommended in the second part of the plan. Third, an implementation and action strategy is given, consisting of costs estimates, suggested funding sources, and prioritized listings of projects. These three sections constitute the bulk of the

25 Daniels et. al. The Small Town Planning Handbook. pg. 20

Rodda 11

Columbus plan and my discussion. The last section serves as a reference for elected officials and the public, and includes design guidelines for bicycle facilities and draft language for recommended bike-friendly policies that the city could adopt.

Existing Conditions Inventory and Needs Analysis This section of the plan constitutes the essential information upon which all the plan’s recommendations are based. The catalog of existing conditions begins by identifying several bike-friendly characteristics of Columbus, such as flat topography and the three separate riparian corridors that are already home to shared-use paths.26 As mentioned previously, these are the Scioto and Olentangy Rivers and Alum Creek, which form excellent north-south greenway corridors, but also act as barriers to easy east-west transportation. The plan notes that the need for better east-west connections has existed for years. 27 The existing conditions summary determines that under the current situation, “Columbus’ roadway network supports local bicycling within residential neighborhoods, but does not provide adequate longer cross-town facilities for bicyclists who are not comfortable riding on roads with heavy traffic volumes, high motor vehicle speeds, or multiple lanes.”28 The extremely limited number of existing on-street facilities is displayed on the existing conditions map in the plan (Figure 2).

Notice the green pathways, which indicate the existing shared-use paths in the riparian corridors, which are reasonably well developed. However, notice the complete lack of 26 Bicentennial Bikeways Plan, Section 3.3, pg. 46 27 Ibid. Section 3-1, pg. 44 28 Ibid. Section 3.6, pg. 57

Rodda 12

Figure 2. Existing Bikeways in Columbus

Map of the existing conditions of the Columbus bikeways network before proposed plan interventions.

Source: Bicentennial Bikeways Plan

Rodda 13

integration of any on-street network; the three existing segments of bike lanes are not even geographically proximate. Another challenge illustrated on the map is the lack of pathways across the rivers, rather than along them.

One final difficulty that impedes the easy development of a bikeways plan is the way in which Columbus has developed, and particularly how it has annexed land. As mentioned in the Columbus profile above, the city has vastly expanded its land area since World War II, with the result being that several suburban communities have been surrounded by the city even while maintaining their legal independence. 29 Ledbetter had a colorful way to capture this aspect of Columbus’ geography, calling the city’s boundaries “like paint splattered on a wall.”30 In the map, every time a roadway passes from the darker shade to a lighter shade, it changes jurisdictions––a challenge for building continuous on-street networks.

The needs analysis approaches the bikeways planning problem from the other side: rather than cataloging what facilities or amenities currently exist, it assesses what facilities and amenities should exist based on the needs and demands of both current and future riders. The chapter largely employs statistical data to infer the needs and demands of a variety of riders. The plan identifies differences between casual or experienced cyclists, and utilitarian or recreational trips. A casual cyclist, for example, is defined as someone who usually bikes in neighborhoods and for short distances, usually no more than five miles, while an experienced cyclist rides frequently, often for much longer distances, up to as much as 100 miles.31 Similarly, a trip for

29 Ibid. section 3.9, pg. 61.

30 Interview with Ledbetter. Included in Appendix A. 31 Bicentennial Bikeways Plan, Section 4-1, pg. 67

Rodda 14

the purpose of recreation, exercise and enjoyment differs from one for utility, such as commuting or running errands.32 The needs analysis attempts to determine the demand for these various uses with statistical data. For example, census commute to work data is coupled with national data about children who ride bikes to school to estimate utilitarian trip demand.33 Additional data is used to help localize the report, such as estimates about bike ridership among Ohio State University’s immense student population, and usage data from the bike racks on the Central Ohio Transit Authority’s public buses.34 Additionally, the report describes the geographic distribution of bicycling demand. The planners assessed potential biking destinations by analyzing land use patterns around the city.

For example, the locations of shopping malls, cultural sites, neighborhood parks, entertainment venues and school and church locations were catalogued. The resulting map (Figure 3, next page) shows the relative density of biking destinations with a simple color gradient to demonstrate the areas with the most attractions. By this evaluation, the best locations for future bikeways development is along the corridors with high concentrations of destinations, or between unserved city areas and these destination hotspots.

32 Ibid. Section 4.1, pp. 66-68 33 Ibid. Section 4-2, pg. 70 34 Ibid, Section 4.2.1, pp. 70-71

Rodda 15

Figure 3. Density of Bicycling Destinations

This map shows the location and relative density of bicycling destinations in Columbus.

Source: Bicentennial Bikeways Plan

Rodda 16

Plan Recommendations The plan recommends that Columbus implement a wide variety of new bicycle facilities, make improvements to existing infrastructure, and refocus on community bicycling education programs. In the broadest terms, the plan recommends the implementation of a citywide interconnected network of bicycle paths, trails, on-street bike lanes and “share the lane” signage, and additional facilities such as bike parking, bicycle-activated traffic signals, bike boulevards, and a downtown bike parking and cyclist showering and changing facility.35 Other recommendations include providing some element of the bikeway network within one mile of all residential households in the city, and within one-half-mile of citizens living in the city’s traditional core.36 In an interesting strategy aimed at keeping the plan in the public eye as it is implemented, the planners selected thirteen “demonstration projects” that were chosen: “...based on three characteristics: 1) their ranking in the overall prioritization scheme...2) to represent all quadrants of the city, 3) to represent a variety of bicycle improvements, including bicycle lanes, bicycle boulevards, and educational and encouragement programs.”37 Each of these projects then receives a more in-depth analysis in the plan, complete with preliminary design guidelines of the new infrastructure and a cost estimate.38 The thirteen

35 Bicentennial Bikeways Plan, section 5.1-5.3, pp. 84-93. A bike boulevard is a regular city street that, while remaining open to automobile traffic, is redesigned to favor its usage by cyclists and to discourage automobile usage. A bike-activated traffic signal allows a cyclists to trigger a light change at an intersection by installing a special sensor in the stop bar of the roadway.

36 The “core” is generally defined as the 1950s boundary of Columbus, which was its boundary before undergoing rapid growth via land annexation in the last half of the 20th Century. It represents approximately one-fourth of the current land area of Columbus. It also corresponds to some of the densest areas of the city that were developed before the rise of the automobile.

37 Bicentennial Bikeways Plan, pg. 87 38 Ibid. The detailed section on the demonstration projects runs from pp. 103-127.

Rodda 17

projects purposefully include highly-visible investments throughout the city, and could serve as a concrete way to measure the plan’s achievements during its twenty-year planning horizon.

The recommendations section is also bedecked with maps and graphics to illustrate where the elements of the proposed bikeways network would go. The most essential map in the entire plan is the map showing the proposed bikeways network (Figure 4, next page). This map diagrams the proposed location of nearly every infrastructure recommendation made in the plan. It is the plan’s equivalent of the zoning map in a zoning ordinance: crucial. Notice the attention to resolving the problems enumerated above, such as the vast increase in total on-street lanes, the provision of east-west connections across the city, and linkage points between on-street facilities and the existing recreational shared-use paths. This visual imagery conveys the comprehensive nature of the plan’s approach at a glance, and illustrates in a powerful way how the plan encompasses the entire city.

Rodda 18

Figure 4. Proposed Bikeways Network

The fundamental map of the plan, i%ustrating the proposed network of Columbus’ future bicycle in"astructure.

Source: Bicentennial Bikeways Plan

Rodda 19

The Goal: Ten Percent in Ten Years The foremost goal for the future of biking in Columbus––the plan’s vision––is to have ten percent of all trips made by bicycle in ten years. Ledbetter, the Alta Planning + Design associate, discussed how the ten percent goal arose: “The percentage goal was mostly limited by money, and an estimate about what would or could actually get built...but it would be ambitious, because a ten percent mode-share for bikes would be higher than the current modeshare in Portland or San Francisco.”39 She said that current mode-share for bicycles in these leading American bike-friendly cities is around six percent. In a separate but related goal, the plan aims for the city to increase its recreational bicycle usage by ten percent per year over the next ten years. The goal here is to continue to build on the strength of the existing recreational network while developing the interconnected bikeways network.40 The contents of the Columbus plan are all orchestrated around achieving these goals, which, if realized, would make Columbus into one of the leading cities for bicycling in the county.

Rather than trumpet this fact, though, the Coleman policy advisor I interviewed, Eric Brandon, more concerned with reaping other, more direct benefits of an active cycling public. He says: “More citizens outside enjoying bike friendly and walkable communities make neighborhoods safer and boost retail activity. Additionally, the City of Columbus has high rates of Type 2 Diabetes and obesity among juveniles. Mayor Coleman, a diabetic, is committed to encouraging biking, an accessible and inexpensive way to healthier living to our youth.”41

39 Interview with Ledbetter. Included in Appendix A. 40 Bicentennial Bikeways Plan, Section 2.2.2, pp. 35 41 Interview with Brandon. Included in Appendix A.

Rodda 20

So why a bikeways plan, why now? Public health, safety and welfare––the same essential themes that have driven the field of planning from its beginning––are the benefits that Coleman and Columbus believes it will enjoy from its planning for two-wheel transportation. * * *

Analysis: How the Plan Works The second section of this paper considers the Bicentennial Bikeways Plan through the prism provided by Lewis Hopkins in his article, “How Plans Work.” In this seminal writing, Hopkins argues that plans work––that is, they affect current and future actions––in any of five ways: as agendas, policies, visions, designs or strategies. He states that, “Any one plan can work in one or several ways, which means that these are not categories for classification of plans but different mechanisms through which plans affect the world...”42 In his estimation, a plan should be evaluated according to how it creates change and affects the world around it.

The Columbus plan certainly has elements of all five of Hopkins’ plan types, but two types predominate: the plan as an agenda, and the plan as a vision. The agenda is represented by the list of recommendations, policies, and projects that policy makers can follow, while the vision is found in the goals and beliefs that imagine a different trajectory for the future. The analysis to follow considers whether the plan is successful as an agenda, vision, or both.

The Plan as Agenda Hopkins defines an agenda as a list of things to do. He considers an agenda one way a plan might affect the world because, “[An agenda] is one way to focus the attention of decision 42 Hopkins, Lewis D. “How Plans Work,” from Urban Development, The Logic of Making Plans, excerpted in The Urban and Regional Planning Reader.

Eugenie Birch, Ed. Routledge. Forthcoming.

Rodda 21

makers on some decisions rather than others.”43 This is surely at work in the Bicentennial Bikeways Plan––the very creation of a plan explicitly addressing bikeways and bicycle transportation concentrates attention upon this mode as opposed to other modes. In the broadest sense, then, the agenda pursued in making this plan, as opposed to others, encourages the public to continue to pay attention to this plan’s goals and to commit to solving its problems, as opposed to others. The agenda to undertake this plan affects the public debate in favor of the plan’s issues. But this is not the only way in which the plan works as an agenda. It also functions as an enumerated list of specific infrastructure projects and recommended policies that the City of Columbus could implement or adopt. As the city completes infrastructure projects or adopts new policies, it can proceed to the next project from the plan’s agenda. The agenda makes city actions purposeful and links them together; it also is yet another effective method for keeping the plan’s aims and objectives before the public. This is also the plan as agenda––a literal list of actions to be accomplished.

This plan works well both as a way to shape overall public debate and as a way to accomplish very specific tasks. For example, an editorial in The Columbus Dispatch, the city’s major daily newspaper, written shortly after the plan’s adoption, focuses on the plan’s large-scale agenda: “The city’s ambitious plan to make Columbus a bike-friendly town could reduce central Ohio’s summer smog, not to mention Columbus’ unwanted status as one of the nation’s fattest cities. Biking hasn’t been easy in this car-orientated city...[but]...the first major development, dubbed the Bicentennial Bikeways Plan, could be completed by 2012...More

43 Hopkins, pg. 3

Rodda 22

alternatives for commuting and recreation would make Columbus a healthier city and better place to live.”44 Here the big, broad themes of the bikeways plan are what the newspaper editorial board found most important, and in particular the board cites the potential public health benefits of implementing the plan’s agenda. But other media focused on the plan’s smaller, project-byproject agenda. An article in ThisWeek News–New Albany, a local community newspaper, discussed nearly a half-dozen proposed improvements planned for a particular neighborhood in Columbus. The article read in part, “As part of the [bikeways] plan, the city also would improve the railroad crossing west of Sinclair Road...the city also plan [sic] to consider paving 4-foot shoulders on Lincoln Avenue between Sinclair Road and Indianola Avenue.”45 Here the writing centers on specific agenda items as they relate to a specific geographic area. The communication of possible future adjustments and changes because of the plan’s agenda is at least as clearly communicated in this piece as in the Dispatch editorial. The bikeways plan as agenda works at both levels simultaneously and effectively.

The Plan as Vision The plan is also a vision. Hopkins says, “A vision is an image of what should be. Visions compel actions. Visions work by changing beliefs about how the world works...”46 In a sense, visions start at the finish: the vision is the completed bike lane, path, or interconnected cycling facilities network, not the strategy or methods that will achieve it. The bikeways plan has at least two clear, grand visions: first, that Columbus will gain:

44 “Short Takes,” Editorial. The Columbus Dispatch, May 26, 2008, Sec. A8 45 Nesbitt, Jennifer. “Bikeways plan includes east-west connector” ThisWeek News––New Albany, June 5, 2008, sec. A10.

46 Hopkins, pg. 4

Rodda 23

“...a new legacy as the city moves forward towards a sustainable future: a future in which Columbus is a world-class bicycling city, where people of all ages and skill levels can easily bicycle to work, to shop, for fun, for exercise, and where people will choose to bicycle rather than drive.”47 This statement is truly the large-scale grand vision of a different future. A future that is more than just somehow different in practice; this projects a future that is different in culture. The second expression of vision doubles as the goal discussed above, “By implementing the [plan], Columbus can shift 10 percent of the city’s transportation to bicycling, walking, transit and other transportation options.”48 Both of these visions intrinsically imply a different Columbus.

Putting aside the details––the existing conditions, needs, opportunities, threats and more––the vision makes the plan’s intentions manifestly clear. Aspirational phrases such as “world-class bicycling city” and “choose to bicycle rather than drive” engage the reader, inviting her to picture what such a Columbus would look like. These two vision statements may be as powerful as the sum total of all the other content in the plan––which is exactly the purpose of a plan as vision.

Since the plan is still new, it is difficult to assess whether the bikeways plan is successful as a vision. Change in central Ohioans’ beliefs and actions when it comes to bicycles will occur slowly and over time. Hopkins asserts that measurement of changes in beliefs or attitudes in the “target audience” is the only way to determine if a plan is working effectively as a vision, and for Columbus it is still too early to judge.49 Items such as the favorable news reports are as yet only anecdotal evidence of an acceptance of the plan’s vision and it will likely be years before the true success or failure of the plan as vision will be known.

47 Bicentennial Bikeways Plan, Sec. 1-1, pg. 16 48 Ibid. Executive summary, pg. 3 49 Hopkins, pg. 8

Rodda 24

Conclusion Is the Columbus Bicentennial Bikeways Plan a good plan? Is it successful? Is it both?

These are separate ideas: a “good” plan is a normative statement about the document that affirms that its aims were valid, valuable and of benefit to society. But a plan could be considered “successful” if it’s implemented––without any compunction over whether its effects were good or desirable. Ideas about what constitutes a good, successful plan probably proliferate as much as the plans themselves, but two criteria are pertinent to this analysis. First, Hopkins argues that plans “work” when they adjust decision-making, actions or outcomes.50 Success is measured through implementation. Under this rubric, while the long-term success of the plan is not assured, early indications are that the bikeways plan will succeed. A bond issue that provides essential funding for the first phase of the plan––the part to be completed by 2012, Columbus’ bicentennial year––passed in the 2008 November elections. Further, Brandon highlighted early successes: “Tomorrow (Oct. 29, 2008), Columbus will open its first Bike Boulevard.

It will bridge a gap in the Olentangy Trail, the most utilized mixed use trail in the State...This is the first of more to come. The City has implemented a bike sharing program where many City offices now have bikes rehabbed from the Police property room…A bike rental program is being explored, and a bike facility with showers, bike lockers and bike repair shop is also in the conception stage with many more ideas in the pipeline.”51

50 Hopkins, pg. 7 51 Interview with Brandon. Included in Appendix A.

Rodda 25

Moore noted, as well, that Columbus’ bike boulevard––a roadway that remains open to automobiles but on which bicycles are the preferred mode of transportation––is likely the first of its kind in the State of Ohio.52 So despite the economy––for now, at least––the bikeways plan is off to an auspicious beginning.

Another way to measure the success of a plan came from one of the planners involved in the design process. As relayed through an interview with Ledbetter, Alta Planning + Design Principal Jeff Olson says that from his perspective, a plan is successful when it has, “Public support, city agency support, and political support...”53 By this accounting as well, the Columbus plan is a success. The public passed the bond issue to support future bikeways construction, while Mayor Coleman and Councilwoman O’Shaughnessy ardently backed the plan from the start, and, as excerpted above, The Dispatch supports the plan.

Hopkins also provides a way to assess whether a plan is good. His feels that a good plan will satisfy at least the following criteria: it will be internally consistent, it will provide a net benefit that more than recoups the cost of making the plan, and it will be externally consistent with a standard of ethics and values. 54 Internally, the Bikeways Plan scores high marks on Hopkins’ rubric: it follows the logic of how plans work, particularly in relation to affecting change as an agenda and a vision. The net benefit is still unclear since the level of implementation, and the future level of bicycle ridership, is still unknown and unknowable with any certainty. The most challenging aspect of a good plan is judging it in comparison to an external set of ethics or

52 Interview with Moore. Included in Appendix A. 53 Interview with Ledbetter. Included in Appendix A. 54 Hopkins, pg. 9

Rodda 26

values. As Hopkins lucidly puts it, “Without elaborating ethical claims here, it is clear that a plan can affect decision-making, actions, and outcomes, yield benefits sufficient to compensate its costs, be internally consistent in its logic, but still be a bad plan because of the goals it pursues or the means it employs.”55 External validity calls the plan’s goals to account against the standards (and perhaps against the future standards) of a society or ethic. It is a subjective measure, but an essential and necessary one to the planning process. We cannot plan in a vacuum.

In the conventional wisdom of the early twenty-first century America, the goals and objectives of the Bicentennial Bikeways Plan dovetail nicely with what appears to be a resurgent emphasis on pedestrian- and bicycle-oriented urban places. These are values I consider essential to a dynamic urban life, and with its embrace of these values, I consider this plan to be a good plan. But it is still not clear that the pendulum has shifted fundamentally away from the autocentric development that dominated twentieth century America, and because of this I firmly believe that the ultimate success of the bikeways plan rests more on its vision than its agenda.

That vision––of a place where people will choose to bicycle rather than drive––is the plan’s statement of change and challenge to the status quo. It is a statement that implies a change in culture, a shift in perspective. Columbus, Ohio embodied the auto-centric 20th Century; its new bikeways plan is perhaps its most cogent statement yet that it wants to break from the automobile’s shackles. If successful, the Bicentennial Bikeways Plan might accomplish its vision and more: a bicycle-friendly Columbus may serve as a model for how a large American city can reinvent itself using two feet and two wheels.

55 Hopkins, pg. 9

Rodda 27

APPENDIX A

Interview Transcripts 1.

Lauren Buckland Ledbetter, Associate, Alta Planning + Design

2.

Eric Brandon, Policy Advisor, Mayor Michael Coleman’s Office

3.

Brian Moore, Transportation Engineer, Burgess & Niple, Inc.

Rodda 28

1. Interview with Lauren Buckland Ledbetter Alta Planning + Design Associate. Worked with Jeff Olson, an Alta Principal, on the Columbus Bicentennial Bikeways Plan.

Interview Notes: Interview conducted via phone on Oct. 10, 2008. The following constitutes the notes taken by the author during the interview and are therefore not necessarily in complete sentences.

Q. Can you briefly describe what your role was in making the plan?

A. Employed with Alta Planning + Design, a small (ca. 50-person) planning firm. Ledbetter works ] in Berkeley, California. She was an associate on the bikeways plan. Alta’s principal on plan was Jeff Olson, who works out of New York.

The firm is unique in that it only works on non-motorized transportation projects. She believes it is probably only one of three firms in the country who do all of their business in this speciality. She considers nonmotorized transportation to be an up and coming planing area, and the firm is still experiencing definite growth this year. The firm has not yet felt any effects of the economic situation (but most contracts are done 1-2 years in advance/funded 1-2 years in advance, so it may hit later for them).

Burgess & Niple, of Columbus, were primes/lead contractor on the Columbus project, and Alta served as subcontractors.

However, Alta did significant work on the project. Burgess & Niple did most of the inventory and research and was also mostly in charge of public outreach, such as orchestrating public meetings. The two firms did phone teleconferences at least every other week during the project to stay in touch.

Alta focused on the contents of the plan––where the physical routes for bikes would go, etc., and on putting together the actual final document.

Q. What was Alta’s overall role in developing the plan?

A. Ledbetter considered Alta’s role to be “probably above and beyond what a normal consultant would do.” For example, part of above and beyond was that the Alta principal Jeff Olson met personally with Mayor Coleman and was deeply involved.

She sees him as a “connector of people,” and she said he brought advocacy groups into the public meetings, created a public momentum for the plan, and incorporated lots of what the mayor was saying for “Greening Columbus” into the planning document. She saw Olson as sort of an advocacy planner, an activist planner (he saw the opportunity with the size of this city and the size of the project and became deeply involved.

Olson’s opinions, relayed through Ledbetter, about what makes a plan successful: “Public support, city agency support and political support––these are the needs for successful plan.”

Ledbetter notes that Coleman had a brilliant political plan to tie the bikeways plan to the bicentennial–– quick easy timeline to see when parts of things should be done; provided an impetus to the plan.

She said that Olson was focused on getting the plan to be implemented; he was closely inline with the city on their goals––again, unusual how directly involved he was, and he was acting as an advocate more than just a disinterested consultant.

Online survey process––900 responses-- “get an idea of the state of what needs to happen, what needs to change” from this info....used data from MORPC. She said that Coleman was pushing/driving force behind this plan somewhat for political reasons––he wanted the plan set up and working before the election and was pushing hard for it for political reasons.

Q. Is there anything “unique” about the plan? That is, is Columbus breaking any new ground with any ideas not tried or implemented elsewhere? It seemed that the plan mostly referenced existing facilities in other places.

A. Unusual––MORPC (the region’s MPO) was very involved, almost co-managing the process; level of regional involvement Yes some innovative things- but cities rarely want to be first, so they instead look at the models of Davis, Calif., Portland.

Q. Did you find Columbus to present particular challenges? opportunities? As far as I know, this was the first time Columbus had ever attempted a master plan for bicycling--was that more challenging, having a “blank slate”?

A. A challenge: condensed timeline––how to prioritize and how to deal with massive overlapping jurisdictions? implementation plan was difficult; firm had to develop methods to prioritize projects One strategy they used: general rule of thumb about how far away any bike facilities should be from one another: outside core city center--attempt to but a bike facility within every mile; 1/2 within city core

Rodda 29

Previous bicycle planning included: there was a Bicycling advocacy committee––had done lots of initial work; served somewhat as advisors to this plan; sorta a draft plan had existed, numbered plan of bikeway routes–– Alta took this and worked on signposts defined by destinations, better for actual way finding.

She noted that the plan was “definitely exciting and challenging” because this plan could be made out of whole cloth––much more exciting than plan updates/revisions that the firm often does for California or other western cities Another challenge––Columbus has so much land area, so big and laid out “like paint splattered on the wall” One strategy: include specific goals with the master planning process because specific goals help to raise money/control the call for funding, gain public support. Idea is to have a master plan plus specific proposals Another challenge––short timeline with the city; Mayor Coleman really wanted to get this plan out before the election in 2007.

Q. What’s your impression of why Columbus made this plan---that is, why bike planning, why now? What was motivating Columbus/Mayor Coleman to make this plan, according to what they told you?

A. Answered above––Coleman’s election, greening columbus initiatives, etc. plus the ability to attract residents and jobs and employers who want active cities Q. How much time did you/the firm spend in Columbus when doing inventory of existing conditions, public meetings or other data collection?

A. My general impression on this answer was that the firm actually spent limited time in columbus because of the tightness of the timeline; “didn’t even drive all the streets” and yet got extensive feedback from public meetings; also, got good information from MORPC (crash data, bike counts at particular intersections, COTA/MORPC had data for number of bikes being used by transit riders) Q. This plan is incredibly detailed; there’s lots of material here. Lots. Who did you, as planners and designers, see as your audience for the plan? Elected officials, general public, cyclists? All of the above?

A. My general impression here was that this plan is definitely a plan for the public, but is also designed to win political support and to be given to elected officials. I wouldn’t consider the current plan document to be easily readable in whole by the general public; yet at the same time it definitely is accessible in sections and could easily be distilled out for the public Q. To me, the plan seems at once ambitious (10% of trips by bike in 10 years) and limited (only 10% of trips by bike, only 50+ miles of new bikeways in the immediate 5 year window) at the same time. Compared to other plans your firm has done would you consider the Columbus plan ambitious? Living in Columbus back when this plan was released, it seemed to be received by the media as pretty ambitious and pretty comprehensive. It also seemed to be well-received by fellow cyclists that I talked to. How do you, as the planners, measure your success?

A. She noted that the percentage “goal” if you will was mostly limited by money, by a estimate of what would or could actually get implemented.

But this plan is ambitious: why? She notes that aiming for 10 percent mode share would be above current mode share in San Francisco and Portland––both somewhere around 6% mode shares currently. Consulting secret–– put in the specific projects to try to get repeat business.

Is this a national trend? “Bike planing is totally on the uptick.” This is a growing area. Cities were looking at this even before gas prices spiked.

Why? “Columbus wants to attract the type of people who would work in high-tech jobs;” Paraphrase: this plan is part of seeing biking as a community resource--this is what is driving communities to this--as an attraction mechanism for employers, residents, etc. Plus new push to have safe routes to school, which is an element in this planning.

Rodda 30

2. Interview with Eric Brandon Policy Advisor for Columbus Mayor Michael B. Coleman.

Interview Notes: Interview conducted via e-mail. Responses received on Oct. 30, 2008.

Q. What led the City of Columbus to undertake a bikeways master plan? What was the motivation(s) behind the plan? Was Columbus responding to other cities who have drafted similar plans, or did this idea come from within the city itself?

A. Mayor Coleman has been promoting active living, biking in particular, since his days on Columbus City Council over a decade ago. Besides being very health conscious Mayor Coleman has been a progressive thinker in terms of ways to reduce the carbon footprint and finding transportation alternatives. Mayor Coleman is also Columbus' biggest cheerleader and looks for ways to promote the City's natural characteristics. Columbus is very flat which makes biking (walking, roller-blading, etc.) a great way to highlight our City while addressing the aforementioned items of active/healthy living, environmental consciousness, transportation alternatives, and having a vibrant City where citizens are visible biking/walking as they enjoy their communities. More citizens outside enjoying bike friendly and walkable communities make neighborhoods safer and boost retail activity. Additionally, the City of Columbus has high rates of Type 2 Diabetes and obesity among juveniles. Mayor Coleman, a diabetic, is committed to encouraging biking, an accessible and inexpensive way to healthier living to our youth. Thus, has committed to provide the infrastructure and safe biking facilities to support this effort.

Q. I talked to a planner from Alta Planning and Design and she mentioned that it was a short planning timeline.

How long did it take to do the plan? Could you highlight a few of the major dates associated with the plan?

A. The plan took about a year to develop. There were many public forums and opportunities for public input for the occasional rider as well as the enthusiast and bike club member. The most significant date would be would be May 12, 2008 where the bike plan was made public during National Bike to Work Week. Mayor Coleman, myself and many other City staff participated in this special date as we rode our bikes into work stopping at the Statehouse which was the location of the reception and official roll-out of the plan. City Council adopted the plan a week later.

Q. What will make the bikeways plan a "success" for Columbus? How would you/the Mayor define success for the plan?

A. Simply, implementation of the plan which will require community buy-in and support. Funding the plan will be a challenge, so securing the support of private and corporate funding to add to City dollars would also be considered a success. This will be a process, not an event. As it stands the plan is at least 20 years, successful funding campaigns would expedite project schedule predictions. More people biking and utilizing on-street facilities as well as mixed use trails, less aggression and more tolerance on behalf of motorized vehicle operators, and reduction in injuries and deaths from accidents with motorized vehicles would all be considered successes.

Q. What is your ultimate goal for how people think of Columbus as a bike-friendly city? Can Columbus morph into one of the most bike-friendly cities in the country?

A. For a large Midwest City we are fairly environmentally conscious, this will help our transition. We are also a conservative community with a heavy dependence on our cars. As a result, we've struggled with accepting and patronizing mass transit or even other forms of public transportation such as taxis and buses. Its somewhat of a class issue here. However, with Mayor Coleman's leadership, educating the public on being safer bikers while simultaneously encouraging vehicle operators to be more conscious drivers through our Share The Road Campaign I think we can make a huge shift in our thinking. We're committed to developing the proper infrastructure to support a bike-friendly environment. We also have the largest student enrollment of any campus in the nation here at OSU which is feeding into our growing community of conscious young professionals.

Q. Is the Bicentennial Bikeways Bond issue on the Nov. 4 ballot? If yes, does it look like it will pass?

A. There is no Bicentennial Bikeways Bond issue per se. The bond package is divided into 6 issues, each of them listed and voted on separately on the ballot. Public Service and Recreation & Parks Departments both have a stake in the bikeways plan. Public Service related items are on the ballot as Streets and Highways and there is funding for bikeways in that category. Recreation & Parks is a stand-alone issue on the ballot and there is funding in that issue for greenways which are multi-use trails. For example, it is possible for Streets & Highways to fail, and Recreation & Parks to pass. Obviously, this would limit what we would be able to do moving forward. In addition to the cash on hand that each dept. may have already committed to related projects, Mayor Coleman has included another $18M

Rodda 31

between the two departments in this bond package cycle. While it is very volatile we feel very strong about it passing.

Q. Building off that, will the current economic problems cause you problems as you look to raise and borrow money to fund the capital outlays in the bikeways plan? Is the economic situation a threat to the implementation of the plan?

A. Sure. The economic picture will impact our project wish list. The bikeways plan was never designed to be solely funded by the public. It will be difficult to raise funds via private and corporate entities as they are struggling through this crisis as well. This is the reason why having a plan is so crucial. If we allocate/generate more funds than projected then we simply expedite the plan. We can move phase II projects into phase I. Likewise, financial challenges may delay or limit some projects, but we will not simply abandon the plan. We are one of 50 communities nationally that were invited to pursue $50M in the 2010 Campaign for Active Transportation. Please view this site for more info and to look at Columbus' Case Statement. It is an example of creative ways we can and must utilize to fund the plan and keep it moving. http://www.railstotrails.org/whatwedo/trailadvocacy/ case_statements.html Q. I read on a Columbus-area transit blog (xingcolumbus) that the city has installed over 60 new bike racks in the past few months. Any other parts of the bike plan already being implemented?

A. Tomorrow, 10/29/2008 Columbus will open its first Bike Blvd. It will bridge a gap in the Olentangy Trail, the most utilized mixed use trail in the State. There will be a media event with partners such as Metro Parks, Mid Ohio Regional Planning Commission (MORPC), Franklin County Engineer, Rails to Trails Conservancy, Consider Biking and many other stakeholders. This is the first of more to come. The City has implemented a bike sharing program where many City offices now have bikes rehabbed from the Police property room. City employees are encouraged to use these bikes as transportation between meetings as well as recreation/exercise on their lunch breaks. A bike rental program is being explored, and a bike facility with showers, bike lockers and bike repair shop is also in the conception stage with many more ideas in the pipeline.

Q. And finally, anything else you would like to share that I haven't asked about?

A. This past summer Mayor Coleman launched his first annual Tour De Columbus through the Institute for Active Living. It is a family bike ride designed to promote active living through biking while highlight the City's urban neighborhoods.

Rodda 32

3. Interview with Brian Moore Transportation Engineer for Burgess & Niple, Inc., which was the lead consultant on the Columbus Bicentennial Bikeways Plan.

Interview Notes: Interview conducted via e-mail. Responses received on Nov. 13, 2008.

Q. I understand that Burgess and Niple were the lead consultants/engineers for the project. Can you briefly describe the overall role of your firm in the project?

A. Contractually, we were the lead consultant. However, Alta Planning and Design did the majority of the planning.

Our role was to provide local coordination, meeting with various stakeholders, organize public meetings and provide field work as necessary.

Q. What is your sense for why Columbus undertook this plan? Why bikeways, why now? What was motivating the city to create this plan?

A. This is something that the City should answer. I believe they understand the need for a shift in transportation modes from vehicular to cycling. Also, our geography lends itself well to bikeways. We have three major rivers running through the city and most of the topography is flat. Lastly, the City wants to accommodate all forms of transportation and felt that having a bikeway plan would allow them to better plan their future projects.

Q. If Columbus implements the plan as laid out, the stated vision is to get 10 percent of all trips by bicycle in 10 years. As I understand it, that sort of mode-share for bikes would move Columbus into a leading bike city in the country. Is Columbus trying to become a nationwide leader in bike usage and commuting?

A. According to Mayor Michael B. Coleman, he wants Columbus to be a leading city for bikeways.

Q. Were there any particular challenges you confronted when trying to find ways to make Columbus a more bikefriendly community? On the flipside, were there unique opportunities presented by Columbus that you tried to exploit in the plan?

A. Most of the bikeways in Columbus are separated facilities. The challenge is to get those individuals, outside the biking community, comfortable with the various on-street facilities. The bike plan addresses the many encouragement and education programs that are needed to make this happen.

Q. As far as I can tell, this plan represents the first comprehensive plan focusing on bikes and bikeways that Columbus has ever done. Did that make it easier or harder to develop the plan, or did it not really affect how you approached the project?

A. Our project team is used to starting with very little. Fortunately, we have a very active advocacy group that was able to participate in several meetings to help determine connections that are needed within the city.

Q. From your perspective, what made, or what will make, the Bicentennial Bikeways plan successful? So far, is it being implemented well?

A. Having the mayor behind the project is definitely the key. He has committed the funding. In addition, the citizens of Columbus recently passed a bond package that will provide funding for many of the projects outlined in Phase I of the plan. To-date, one project outlined in the plan has been complete. This is a bike boulevard, which we believe is the first in the state. In addition, several more projects are under design for construction to commence prior to the City's bicentennial celebration in 2012.

Q. Anything else that you'd like to share that I didn't ask about?

A. Although there was a lot of disagreement in the cycling community as to what types of facilities to provide, we all came to a consensus to provide a plan that the vast majority of the public was behind. In addition, we had quite a bit of press coverage (television and paper) to make the public aware that the project was taking place.

Rodda 33

Works Cited 2000 United States Decennial Census. Available at: www.factfinder.census.gov Bicentennial Bikeways Plan of the City of Columbus, Ohio. Burgess & Niple, Inc. and Alta Planning + Design.

March, 2008. Available at: http://www.altaprojects.net/columbus/ Brandon, Eric. E-mail interview with the author. Oct. 30, 2008. Interview transcript included in Appendix A. Buckland Ledbetter, Lauren. Phone interview with the author. Oct. 10, 2008. Interview notes included in Appendix A. Columbus Comprehensive Plan, 1993. The City of Columbus, Gregory S. Lashutka, mayor. December, 1993.

Available at: http://assets.columbus.gov/development/planning/complan.pdf Columbus Population Profile. City of Columbus Department of Development. Available at: http:// development.columbus.gov/Bizdevelopment/Demographics/Columbus/Colpopulation.asp Daniels, Tom, et. al. The Small Town Planning Handbook, 3rd Ed. American Planning Association Planners Press, Chicago. 2007 Hopkins, Lewis D. “How Plans Work,” from Urban Development, The Logic of Making Plans, excerpted in The Urban and Regional Planning Reader. Eugenie Birch, Ed. Routledge. Forthcoming, Spring 2009 Nesbitt, Jennifer. “Bikeways plan includes east-west connector.” ThisWeek News–New Albany, June 5, 2008, Sec. A10.

“Short Takes,” editorial. The Columbus Dispatch May 26, 2008. Home final edition, Sec. A8.

McIntyre, Melanie. “Coleman announces plan for new bike paths in Columbus.” The Daily Reporter, July 27, 2007.

Available at: http://www.altaprojects.net/columbus/mayorspressrelease073007.pdf Moore, Brian. E-mail interview with the author. Nov. 13, 2008. Interview transcript included in Appendix A. Ohio County Indicators, July 2008 Report, Ohio Department of Development, pp. 22-26. Available at: http:// www.odod.state.oh.us/Research/files/s101.pdf Regional Bicycle Transportation Facilities Plan, 2006. Mid-Ohio Regional Planning Commission, June 2007. pp. 4-8.

Available at: http://www.morpc.org/transBikePedRegionalBicycle TransportationFacilitiesPlan.pdf U.S. Census Bureau Population Finder. Available at: http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/SAFFPopulation? _submenuId=population_0&_sse=on