Opinion: Big Picture Implications of a Small-Scale Project

If you live or work in Columbus and are even vaguely interested in local issues, you’ve likely heard about the debate over bikes and parking along Indianola Avenue in Clintonville. If you haven’t heard, here’s a TLDR version to get you caught up:

There is an opportunity to repave and reconfigure Indianola Avenue using state funds. It could be an opportunity to improve safety through design, add more marked crosswalks, and connect a one mile gap in existing bikeway facilities between Morse Road and Downtown. The Complete Streets project does not currently include funding for sidewalks upgrades or major infrastructure changes, but does allow for a redesign to improve safety and mobility while resurfacing the street – similar to another Indianola Avenue project where bike lanes were added several years ago. 

Controversy arose after the Columbus Department of Public Service responded to feedback regarding the previously proposed Alternative 4. The City collected and analyzed additional parking data, resulting in two new design options. City staff adopted a new preferred alternative known as Alternative 5b, presented at the December 2nd, 2021 Clintonville Area Commission meeting. The change in preferred designs has some Indianola Avenue business owners and residents worried about parking scarcity, and has been referred to as a “bait and switch.” Passionate testimony from all stakeholders has fueled the ongoing conversation, igniting what appears to be on the surface a debate pitting bikes against parking, calling into question the City’s actions. 

There are a spectrum of opinions ranging from none to outrage, spurring a change.org petition spearheaded by Studio 35, an open letter from Transit Columbus, an episode of All Sides with Ann Fisher, and numerous articles and letters to the editor in local media. 

Proponents of Alternative 4 view no removal of parking in the three block business district and inclusion of shared lane markings as a compromise, because Alternative 4 does include some parking removal along other sections of the corridor. Safety advocates worry the shared lanes depicted in Alternative 4 will create conflict points for bikes and drivers merging and fear a rare opportunity to connect existing facilities to incrementally improve Columbus’ bike infrastructure will be missed. Some cycling enthusiasts cite sources where bike lanes have been shown to have no impact or even positive impacts on businesses. Supporters of Alternative 5b also view the new preferred alternative as a compromise because NACTO guidelines recommend protected bike lanes for high speed, arterial roadways. Implementation of a more ideal cycling infrastructure project would include more parking removal than Alternative 5b provides for.  

To further explore why the three block gap in bike lanes proposed in Alternative 4 gave many pause, a portion of the project area is included in the City’s Vision Zero High Injury Network. Between 2016 and 2020, five crashes involving vulnerable roadway users were recorded (one pedestrian, two cyclists and two motorcyclists). Some residents and many multimodal transportation and safety advocates pointed to long-standing plans to add bike lines to Indianola Avenue, including the City’s Bicentennial Bikeways Plan (2008) and adopted Clintonville Neighborhood Plan (2009). Indianola Avenue is classified as an Urban Community Connector in the City’s Multimodal Thoroughfare Plan (2019), which calls for “configurations designed to allow pedestrian and bicycle mobility comfortable for many ages and capabilities, with facilities designed according to context.” The City’s newly adopted Climate Action Plan calls for planning strategies that manage population growth and climate challenges by encouraging carbon-free vehicle use, and support equitable mode shift by improving walking, biking, and transit infrastructure. 

So what’s next, and how do we move forward as neighbors, and as a city? What do decisions made for this project imply for our region long-term? How can local and regional needs be balanced with private investment interests of businesses? 

Stepping back from the hyperlocal debate, the Columbus area is expected to experience population growth – nearly 1 million people by 2050. Our region is poised to receive an influx of transportation and infrastructure funds. Columbus residents struggle with housing affordability, transportation costs, and options to traverse our sprawled urban form. We live in the 14th largest city, but are only ranked 78th in population density. The Columbus region is the second most economically segregated region in the U.S., behind Austin, Texas. In line with insight2050 and LinkUs planning efforts, Columbus’ zoning code is being overhauled to support growth, encourage transit oriented design, and correct inequities codified during a time where segregationist interests shaped land use policies, and in turn, transportation infrastructure. Columbus is at a crossroads where past policies that contributed to our sprawl, racial and economic disparities, and mobility challenges can be course-corrected with strategic decisions. 

Land use and transportation policy and decisions are inextricably linked and set the stage for future opportunities and challenges – such as our current car dependency. Car dependency spurred legacy roadway designs that we know result in higher vehicle speeds and crashes, while discouraging alternative modes of travel. In the context of traffic fatalities rising during 2020 despite fewer miles driven, USDOT recently released a report urging the default adoption of Complete Streets design, urging acceleration of safe, innovative, and accessible roadway design. 

An exploration of the Indianola bikes vs. parking debate in the larger context of our community, climate, and challenges suggests now is the time to leverage funding opportunities and multimodal design best practices to improve equity, mobility, climate, safety, and long-term resilience to our growing region. 

While anxiety around post-Covid business recovery and parking is valid, I fear meaningful nuance, tradeoffs, and long-term implications have been lost in headlines and emotions. Parking concerns are not new and can be eased with creative solutions. Options include adding parking areas on side streets and behind businesses, improving wayfinding, examining opportunities to add ADA accessible parking, and curbside management techniques. It should also be noted that our neighborhood has absorbed parking demand influx before for special events and festivals, and the draw to most of the businesses is the urban neighborhood setting, where existing expectations should include shared, on-street parking on side streets. South Clintonville’s mixed-use nature, walkability, and urban charm make our neighborhood unique and inviting, as well as a desirable location for business owners and patrons. 

It’s just three blocks… so how do we move forward? One option is to leverage state funds to improve safety along a portion of the Vision Zero High Injury Network by implementing Alternative 5b. We can fill a bikeway gap, slow down cars, and make Indianola Avenue better for everyone. Incrementally, we can build out our roadways more equitably and safely, in ways that promote walking, biking, and transit use, offsetting emissions and household transportation costs. We can choose to apply lessons learned from this project towards future stakeholder engagement. Parking concerns can be directly addressed with curbside management techniques and by formalizing underutilized parking areas. 

We can choose to approach conversations with empathy and understanding that change is difficult and vital – with the acknowledgement that battling change leaves Columbus ill equipped to meet mobility, safety, climate, and equity needs in the future. 

Eliza Pendexter, AICP (she/her)
Eliza Pendexter is a Senior Project Manager for COTA. She is also a former transportation planner for the City of Columbus Department of Public Service.