2030 Regional

Transportation Plan

May 2005

Akron Metropolitan Area Transportation Study 806 CitiCenter Bldg.

146 S. High St./Akron, Ohio 44308-1423 Phone: (330) 375-2436 FAX: (330) 375-2275

E-mail: amats@ci.akron.oh.us Website address: http://www.ci.akron.oh.us/AMATS

Table of Contents

I Introduction ................................................................................................... 1 Preface .............................................................................................. 2 What is AMATS? ............................................................................... 3 Regional Characteristics .................................................................... 3 II Regional Transportation Planning Process .................................................. 9 Systems Design Criteria .................................................................... 10 Mission Statement and Regional Goals and Objectives .......... 10 System Preservation ............................................................... 13 Congestion Management ........................................................ 14 Safety and Security ................................................................. 14 Freight Planning ...................................................................... 15 Environmental Justice ............................................................. 15 Data Collection and Forecasting ........................................................ 16 Planning and Evaluation .................................................................... 17 Federal Planning Priorities ................................................................. 19 Air Quality Conformity ............................................................. 19 Financial Resources Forecast ................................................. 20 Public Involvement ............................................................................. 20 Recommendations ............................................................................. 21 III 2030 Regional Transportation Plan Recommendations ............................... 23 Introduction ........................................................................................ 24 Highways ................................................................................ 24 Public Transportation .............................................................. 25 Transportation Enhancements ................................................ 30 Identification of Transportation Needs ............................................... 32 Identification of Highway Needs .............................................. 32 Identification of Public Transportation Needs .......................... 33 Identification of Transportation Enhancement Needs .............. 34 Financial Forecast ............................................................................. 35 Recommendations ............................................................................. 36 Highway Recommendations ................................................... 36 Public Transportation Recommendations ............................... 47 Transportation Enhancement Recommendations ................... 53 Summary ........................................................................................... 62 Appendices A. Regional Goals and Objectives .......................................................... A-1 B. Environmental Justice Analysis ......................................................... B-1 C. Social, Economic and Environmental Factor Scan ............................ C-1 D. Air Quality Conformity Analysis .......................................................... D-1 E. Financial Resources Forecast ........................................................... E-1 F. Public Involvement ............................................................................. F-1 G. Unfunded Transportation Needs ........................................................ G-1

i

List of Maps

Map I-1: AMATS in Northeastern Ohio ............................................................ 5 Map I-2: AMATS Minor Civil Divisions ............................................................. 5 Map III-1: Federal Functional Classification of Highways ................................... 27 Map III-2: 2030 Highway Recommendations ..................................................... 39 Map III-3: 2030 Transportation Enhancement Recommendations ..................... 55 Map B-1: Percent Low Income Households by Traffic Analysis Zone ............... B-5 Map B-2: Percent Minorities by Traffic Analysis Zone ....................................... B-7 Map C-1: Social, Economic and Environmental Characteristics of the Area ..... C-2

List of Tables

Table III-1: Forecasted Transportation Funding by Category ............................... 35 Table III-2: Prioritization of Highway Needs ......................................................... 36 Table III-3: Highway Recommendations .............................................................. 41 Table III-4: Primary Public Transportation Recommendations ............................. 48 Table III-5: Secondary Public Transportation Recommendations ........................ 49 Table III-6: Transportation Enhancement Recommendations .............................. 57 Table III-7: Total Expenditures by Travel Mode ................................................... 63 Table B-1: Potential Impacts of Projects ............................................................. B-11 Table B-2: Highway Accessibility Analysis .......................................................... B-14 Table B-3: Transit Accessibility Analysis ............................................................. B-15 Table B-4: Transportation Investment in Low Income and Minority Areas .......... B-16 Table D-1: Cleveland-Akron Air Quality Analysis ................................................ D-2 Table D-2: AMATS 2006 Network ....................................................................... D-3 Table D-3: AMATS 2010 Network ....................................................................... D-4 Table D-4: AMATS 2020 Network ....................................................................... D-5 Table D-5: AMATS 2030 Network ....................................................................... D-7 Table E-1: Forecasted Funding by Funding Category ......................................... E-12 Table E-2: Forecasted Total Funding by Funding Category ................................ E-13 Table G-1: Unfunded Highway Needs ................................................................. G-2 Table G-2: Unfunded Public Transportation Needs ............................................. G-3 Table G-3: Unfunded Transportation Enhancement Needs ................................. G-4

List of Figures

Figure I-1: AMATS Area Growth 1990-2030 ....................................................... 4 Figure II-1: AMATS Regional Transportation Planning Process .......................... 11 Figure III-1: Expenditures by Travel Mode ............................................................ 63 Figure III-2: Expenditures by Project Type ............................................................ 64

ii

Glossary AMATS Akron Metropolitan Area Transportation Study AQ Air Quality AVL Automatic Vehicle Locator BR Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation Program BR-C County Bridge Program CAAA Clean Air Act Amendments CAC MIS Canton-Akron-Cleveland Interregional Travel Corridor Major

Investment Study CBD Central Business District CBS Kent State University Campus Bus Service CEAO County Engineers Association of Ohio CIC AMATS Citizen Involvement Committee City BR City Bridge Program CM/AQ Congestion Mitigation/Air Quality Program CMS Congestion Management System CSXT CSX Transportation CVSR Cuyahoga Valley Scenic Railroad EPA Environmental Protection Agency FHWA Federal Highway Administration FTA Federal Transit Administration GIS Geographic Information System HC Hydrocarbons HSP Highway Safety Program I-76 MIS Interstate 76 Major Investment Study IM Interstate Maintenance Program ISTEA Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 ITS Intelligent Transportation Systems JARC Job Access Reverse Commute LOS Level of Service METRO RTA METRO Regional Transit Authority MIS Major Investment Study MPH Miles per Hour MPO Metropolitan Planning Organization

iii

Glossary NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards NEFCO Northeast Ohio Four County Regional Planning and

Development Organization NEOTEC Northeast Ohio Trade and Economic Consortium NHS National Highway System Program NOACA Northeast Ohio Areawide Coordinating Agency NOx oxides of nitrogen NS Norfolk Southern Railroad Corp. ODOT Ohio Department of Transportation ODOT D4 Ohio Department of Transportation District Four OEPA Ohio Environmental Protection Agency PARTA Portage Area Regional Transportation Authority SCAT METRO RTA’s door-to-door transit service SIP State Implementation Plan for Air Quality STP Surface Transportation Program STP-C County Surface Transportation Program TAC AMATS Technical Advisory Committee TAZ Traffic Analysis Zone TDP Transit Development Plan TEA-21 Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century TEP-A AMATS Transportation Enhancement Program TIP Transportation Improvement Program TMA Transportation Management Area TRAC Transportation Review Advisory Council US DOT United States Department of Transportation V/C ratio Volume to Capacity ratio VHT Vehicle Hours Traveled VMT Vehicle Miles Traveled W&LE Wheeling and Lake Erie Railway

iv

v

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

1

PREFACE A transportation system can be a valuable asset or a serious handicap to an area. To provide the groundwork for a high quality transportation system, proper planning is essential. This planning should identify existing transportation problems, anticipate future problems, and recommend improvements that are consistent with the goals and objectives of area residents and elected officials. A primary responsibility of the Akron Metropolitan Area Transportation Study (AMATS) is to prepare and maintain a regional transportation plan that meets the needs of the Akron metropolitan area between now and 2030. Updated every three years, the Regional Transportation Plan supports orderly development by ensuring that regionally significant transportation improvements are coordinated among local communities. Projects must be consistent with the Plan in order to be eligible to receive federal funding. The purpose of the 2030 Regional Transportation Plan is to identify the transportation needs of the area, to prioritize those needs, and to recommend financially constrained highway, public transportation, and transportation enhancement improvements that are consistent with the goals and objectives set forth by the AMATS Policy Committee. The 2030 Regional Transportation Plan contains three chapters and a set of appendices. Chapter I of the report is the introduction, discussing the purpose of the regional transportation plan, the geographic area covered by the plan, the organization of AMATS and the regional characteristics of the area. Chapter II discusses the regional transportation planning process, the goals and objectives used in the development of the Plan, and the issues and considerations that must be addressed throughout the planning process. Chapter III of the report contains the plan recommendations. Transportation improvements are recommended based on regional transportation needs and the availability of funds. The 2030 Regional Transportation Plan recommends $2.4 billion in highway improvements, $295 million in public transportation improvements and $43 million in bicycle and pedestrian improvements. These recommendations fall within the level of funding forecasted to be available through 2030. The report includes the following appendices augmenting the information contained in previous portions:

Appendix A: Regional Transportation Goals and Objectives Appendix B: Environmental Justice Analysis Appendix C: Social, Economic, and Environmental Factor Scan

2

Appendix D: Air Quality Conformity Appendix E: Financial Resources Appendix F: Public Involvement Appendix G: Unfunded Transportation Needs

WHAT IS AMATS? AMATS is one of 17 regional transportation planning agencies, known as Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs), in Ohio. These organizations, along with their counterparts throughout the United States, were established as a result of the 1962 Federal Aid Highway Act. One of the provisions of this piece of legislation was to require urbanized areas with more than 50,000 residents to establish a continuing, cooperative, and comprehensive (or "3-C") transportation planning process in order to receive federal funding for transportation improvements. The Metropolitan Transportation Policy Committee of the Akron Metropolitan Area Transportation Study (AMATS) is designated by the Governor of Ohio, acting through the Ohio Department of Transportation (ODOT), as the MPO for Summit and Portage counties and Chippewa Township in Wayne County. It is comprised of mayors, county officials, regional transit authority chairmen, and regional and state agency representatives. As the MPO, the Policy Committee is responsible for directing the 3-C transportation planning process in the Akron metropolitan area, and for making decisions on regional transportation policies, plans, and programs.

REGIONAL CHARACTERISTICS The Akron metropolitan area is located in Northeast Ohio (Map I-1) and encompasses Summit County, Portage County, and the Chippewa Township area of Wayne County. It is comprised of 16 cities, 17 villages, and 28 townships (Map I-2). The area is home to a large number of manufacturing facilities, trucking terminals, two major universities, a regional airport, and a wide variety of historic, cultural, and recreational attractions. According to the 2000 U.S. Census, the population of the Akron metropolitan area is approximately 705,000. It is an important part of a larger region, which contains the adjacent metropolitan areas of Cleveland, Canton, and Youngstown. Together, these four areas are home to over four million people. Because of the proximity of these major urban centers, Akron area highways carry a large amount of intercity commuter traffic and a high volume of intrastate and interstate freight traffic.

3

In order to serve regional transportation needs, the Akron metropolitan area contains approximately 165 centerline miles of freeways and expressways. These include I-76, I-77, I-80 (Ohio Turnpike), I-271, I-277, I-480, and portions of US 224, SR 8, SR 21, and SR 59 (Akron Innerbelt). The METRO Regional Transit Authority and the Portage Area Regional Transportation Authority (PARTA) are the major public transportation providers serving Summit County and Portage County, respectively. Major freight railroads in the area include Norfolk Southern, CSX, Wheeling & Lake Erie, and the Akron-Barberton Cluster Railway. The rapidly growing Akron-Canton Regional Airport serves the area with several major commercial airlines. The population of the Akron metropolitan area is expected to increase an additional 4.4 percent, to 737,000, by 2030 (Figure I-1). Associated with this population growth, the area can expect an estimated 24,000 additional housing units and 43,000 new jobs. The changing economic structure and continued suburbanization will result in further dispersal of population and employment. A declining household size (persons per household) and increases in auto ownership are expected to have an impact on travel patterns, increasing traffic congestion. Recent growth near freeway interchanges and areas with good access to freeways has also affected changing travel patterns.

Figure I-1

AMATS Area Growth 1990 - 2030

0100,000200,000300,000400,000500,000600,000700,000800,000

Population Housing Units Automobiles Employment

1990 2000 2030

Most of the population and housing growth is anticipated to take place outside of the established central cities. The largest part of this growth is expected in Northern Summit County. Suburban portions of Portage County, as well as Chippewa Township, are also forecasted to see continued growth in population and housing.

4

STARK COUNTYWAYNE COUNTY

ASHTABULA COUNTY

TRUMBULL COUNTYLORAIN COUNTY

PORTAGE COUNTYMEDINA COUNTY SUMMIT COUNTY

COLUMBIANA COUNTY

GEAUGA COUNTYCUYAHOGA COUNTY

MAHONING COUNTY

LAKE COUNTY

Akron

Canton

Cleveland

Youngstown

AKRON

GREEN

HUDSON

AURORA

STOW

NORTON

NEW FRANKLIN

STREETSBORO

KENT

CUYAHOGA FALLS

TALLMADGE

TWINSBURG

BARBERTON

RAVENNA

MACEDONIA

RICHFIELD

FAIRLAWN

CLINTON

PENINSULA

BOSTONHEIGHTS

WINDHAM

MUNROEFALLS

MANTUA

LAKEMORE

GARRETTSVILLE

HIRAM

SILVERLAKE

REMINDERVILLE

MOGADORE

DOYLESTOWN

NORTHFIELD

BRADYLAKE

SUGAR BUSH KNOLLS

Chippewa Twp

Paris TwpBath Twp

Hiram Twp

Mantua Twp

Randolph Twp

Nelson Twp

Ravenna Twp

Palmyra Twp

Atwater TwpSuffield Twp

Copley Twp

Deerfield Twp

Rootstown Twp Edinburg Twp

Freedom TwpShalersville Twp

Windham Twp

Brimfield Twp

Charlestown Twp

Boston Twp

Franklin Twp

Springfield TwpCoventry Twp

Richfield TwpRichfield Twp

Sagamore Hills Twp

Twinsburg TwpNorthfield Center Twp

Map I-2AMATS MINOR CIVIL DIVISIONS

Map I-1AMATS IN NORTHEASTERN OHIO

May 2005

IncorporatedUnincorporated

Major CitiesAMATS Study AreaUrban Areas

6

Back of Maps I-1 and I-2

Remove this page before copying

The largest increase in employment is expected to be in service-related businesses. The Akron metropolitan area is forecasted to see a 35% increase in service sector employment. Retail employment is also forecasted to continue growing, 20% between now and 2030. Most of this growth will occur outside of the established central cities. Additional transportation and utility infrastructure will be needed to meet the demand of this growth. Manufacturing employment is expected to continue a declining trend (a decline of 16% from 2000 to 2030 in the area as a whole), with exceptions in certain suburban areas. Historical areas of the manufacturing base in the central cities will continue to decline. As the region grows over the next 25 years, it is clear that transportation improvements must be made to accommodate this growth. This influx of new residents, households, and jobs will require improvements to existing highways, a restructuring of public transportation services, and the construction of new pedestrian and bicycle facilities. The challenge of long-range transportation planning is to accommodate this growth while maintaining the long-term social, economic, and environmental well-being of the area.

7

8

CHAPTER

II

REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION

PLANNING PROCESS

9

THE REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLANNING PROCESS A regional transportation plan reflects the ways in which local communities perceive that transportation facilities and services should be developed and programmed in the future. Due to ever-changing transportation needs, it is important that the regional transportation plan be updated on a regular basis. As such, federal metropolitan planning regulations require that the regional transportation plan be updated every three years and that it extend at least twenty years into the future. The process to develop the regional transportation plan is a continuing, cooperative, and comprehensive effort of planners, local officials, and citizens. The regional transportation planning process contains six general phases: 1) Systems Design Criteria; 2) Data Collection and Forecasting; 3) Planning and Evaluation; 4) Federal Planning Priorities; 5) Public Involvement; and 6) Recommendations. Figure II-1 illustrates the AMATS regional transportation planning process and outlines the schedule of work products used to complete the 2030 Regional Transportation Plan. This process and the plan development schedule are described in more detail in the following sections.

1) SYSTEMS DESIGN CRITERIA The first phase of the planning process is to identify and develop Systems Design Criteria. Systems design criteria provide the framework within which transportation planning is to take place. Systems design criteria include a mission statement, goals and objectives, state and local policy considerations, and federal planning considerations. Mission Statement And Regional Goals And Objectives AMATS maintains both a Mission Statement and a set of Regional Transportation Goals and Objectives. The Mission Statement provides a broad overview of how AMATS pursues its planning responsibilities. The Regional Transportation Goals and Objectives provide AMATS with guidelines for conducting the transportation planning process and establish criteria for gauging the effectiveness of transportation improvements. To this end, the AMATS Policy Committee in cooperation with the Citizens Involvement Committee has developed 10 goals, each with a set of objectives that guide the development of the regional transportation plan. Public comment was sought during the development of the goals and objectives. The Mission Statement and Regional Transportation Goals and Objectives were finalized and approved by the Policy

10

Figure II-1

AMATS REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLANNING PROCESS

1. SYSTEMS DESIGN CRITERIA 4. FEDERAL PLANNING PRIORITIES

Goals & Objectives 2030 RTP Air Quality 2030 Financial Forecast(January 2004) Conformity (April 2005) (December 2004)

2. DATA COLLECTION 3. PLANNING AND EVALUATION 6. RECOMMENDATIONS AND FORECASTING

2030 External Forecast Existing Congestion Study (May 2003) Highway System Preservation Report(May 2003) (May 2004) Draft 2030 Regional Transportation Plan

Intersection Crash Report (Sept 2003) (March 2005)Review of Projects Enhancement Needs Report (October 2004)

Included in Local Plans Arterial Crash Report (October 2003)(February 2004) Public Transportation Needs Report

Freeway Crash Report (February 2004) (October 2004)2003 E+C Network

(March 2004) Future Congestion Study (July 2004)

Future Traffic Assignment(April 2004)

2030 Planning DataForecast (December 2004)

2030 Trip Generation(February 2005)

AQ Traffic Assignment(February 2005)

5. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT

Freight Needs Report (December 2004)

Additional Highway Needs Memorandum

(December 2004)Congestion Management System Report

(December 2004)

AMATS MISSION STATEMENT,

GOALSAND

OBJECTIVES

STATE AND LOCAL POLICY

CONSIDERATIONS

FEDERALPLANNING

CONSIDERATIONS

INVENTORIES,FORECASTS,ANALYSIS &SURVEYS

IDENTIFYTRANSPORTATION

PROBLEMS ANDOPPORTUNITIES

IDENTIFYALTERNATE

TRANSPORTATIONIMPROVEMENTS

EVALUATEALTERNATE

TRANSPORTATIONIMPROVEMENTS

IDENTIFYLONG RANGE

TRANSPORTATIONNEEDS

2030REGIONAL

TRANSPORTATIONPLAN

(May 2005)

AIRQUALITY

CONFORMITYFINANCIAL

RESOURCES

CITIZENSINVOLVEMENTCOMMITTEE

(CIC)

SPECIAL PUBLIC

INVOLVEMENTMEETINGS

Committee in January 2004. See Appendix A for a detailed discussion of each goal and its accompanying objectives.

AMATS Regional Transportation Goals

• Goal 1: The transportation system should reflect and support the values and planning objectives of area communities and neighborhoods.

• Goal 2: The transportation system should encourage desirable development patterns.

• Goal 3: The transportation system should be safe and secure. • Goal 4: The transportation system should minimize adverse environmental

impacts. • Goal 5: The transportation system should provide mobility for all persons. • Goal 6: The transportation system should be economically sound. • Goal 7: The transportation system should provide for efficient travel. • Goal 8: The transportation system should function in a fully integrated manner. • Goal 9: The existing transportation system should be preserved, maintained

and enhanced. • Goal 10: The transportation system should support the economic vitality of the

metropolitan area. STATE AND LOCAL POLICY CONSIDERATIONS Policy considerations are established by the Policy Committee and reflect the basic attitudes and preferences of the residents of the Akron metropolitan area with regards to land use patterns, government policies, commuting patterns, traffic congestion, and mode of travel. Because the tastes and preferences of area residents are not homogenous, policy considerations are developed with the consensus of local residents and elected officials. Local community plans; METRO and PARTA’s transit development plans (TDPs); and ODOT’s policies and plans are all considered as the Regional Transportation Plan is developed. FEDERAL PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS Federal planning considerations are based upon the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21), a transportation bill enacted by Congress, and signed into law by President Clinton in 1998. This six-year piece of legislation originally authorized highway, highway safety, transit and other surface transportation programs through 2003, but has been extended into 2005. TEA-21 identified seven planning factors that MPOs, like AMATS, must consider during the transportation planning process. The TEA-21 planning factors state that the planning process should:

12

• Support the economic vitality of the metropolitan area, especially by enabling

global competitiveness, productivity and efficiency. • Increase the safety and security of the transportation system for motorized and

non-motorized users. • Increase the accessibility and mobility options available to people and for freight. • Protect and enhance the environment, promote energy conservation, and

improve the quality of life. • Enhance the integration and connectivity of the transportation system, across

and between modes, for people and freight. • Promote efficient system management and operation. • Emphasize the preservation of the existing transportation system.

The following federal planning considerations are discussed in greater detail below:

System Preservation • • • • •

Congestion Management Safety and Security Freight Planning Environmental Justice

System Preservation Maintaining the existing transportation system is a priority of the transportation planning process. As such, federal funding is reserved in the Regional Transportation Plan for this purpose. Highway system preservation needs fall into three categories: 1) resurfacing, 2) reconstruction, and 3) bridge rehabilitation and replacement. The Highway System Preservation Needs Report, completed by AMATS, documents regional highway system preservation needs and documents the cost of maintaining the system between now and 2030. Although the 2030 Regional Transportation Plan is concerned primarily with federal funding sources, these are not the only sources of revenue for maintaining the existing highway system. The Ohio Department of Transportation (ODOT), municipalities, counties, townships, and regional transit authorities also initiate transportation improvements with funding derived from state and local sources. The services operated by the area’s two transit authorities, METRO and PARTA, are also an important part of the region’s transportation system. Their services provide basic mobility and an alternative to auto usage for many area residents, some of whom have no other means of transportation. The Public Transportation Needs Report, completed by AMATS, discusses transit system preservation needs and documents the cost of maintaining the system between now and 2030.

13

The maintenance of METRO’s and PARTA’s services requires more than just the federally funded projects identified in this Plan. Their services also require continued operating expenditures that are funded by several non-federal sources. These sources include passenger fare revenues, grants from the State of Ohio, and local transit sales taxes. Congestion Management Traffic volumes have continued to increase over the years because of population growth, increases in the length and frequency of trips, and the continued dispersal of land use. Traffic congestion occurs when traffic volumes exceed the capacity of a roadway. Congestion is a serious problem that wastes time, wastes fuel, and reduces safety. Currently, about 13.4% of the total freeway mileage and 6.8% of the total arterial mileage is congested within the AMATS area during the peak hour of travel. By 2030, if no major improvements are made to these roadways, these percentages will increase to 21.7% and 16.7%, respectively. In order to reduce traffic congestion in the Akron metropolitan area, AMATS has completed the Congestion Management System Report. This report: 1) evaluates the overall performance of the transportation system by identifying areas of existing and future traffic congestion; 2) identifies congestion management alternatives; 3) evaluates congestion management alternatives; and 4) recommends transportation improvements for managing traffic congestion. These recommendations are considered regional transportation needs. Safety And Security Highway safety is an important consideration in the planning and design of an efficient transportation system. According to the National Center for Statistics and Analysis, in 2003, 42,643 people were killed and 2,889,000 were injured in traffic crashes nationally. Fortunately, much progress has been made in reducing the number of deaths and serious injuries on our nation’s highways. Although the number of licensed drivers and vehicles on the highways is increasing, the 2003 fatality rate per 100 million vehicle miles of travel fell to a new historic low of 1.48. Ten years earlier, and with less drivers and vehicles, that same rate was 1.75.

According to the Ohio Department of Public Safety, in 2003, there were 24,761 reported crashes in the Akron metropolitan area. These traffic crashes are studied by AMATS in order to identify high crash locations on freeways, arterials, and at intersections. The 2030 Regional Transportation Plan incorporates the results of these crash studies when prioritizing highway projects that are eligible for federal funds. The prevention of crashes, recovery from natural disasters, and the safe handling of hazardous materials have been traditional transportation safety and security concerns. However, since September 11, 2001, possible terrorist attacks on vital transportation

14

facilities have become a much larger threat. A safe, secure and efficient transportation system is vital in the event of terrorism or a natural disaster. AMATS has integrated security into its Regional Transportation Plan in a way that complements other transportation goals. For example, cameras located along highways as part of the Akron-Canton Freeway Management System can also serve as a security tool. Security, as it relates to public transportation, is essential to ensure passenger safety and security. Whether real or perceived, crime undermines the value and potential of transit. Ridership drops, revenue decreases, equipment is damaged, and costs increase. Security investments, such as cameras on buses, work on a daily basis to prevent crimes such as disorderly conduct, assault, and theft. AMATS works with METRO and PARTA to identify and fund security projects needed for safe transit operation. Freight Planning Freight transportation is defined as the movement of goods from one location to another. The freight transportation system is comprised of the highway, railroad, aviation, waterway and pipeline networks, along with intermodal connectors. Freight transportation, in contrast to passenger transportation, tends to be multimodal, meaning that goods frequently change modes of transportation on their way from origin to destination. Freight transportation also has a greater negative impact on the transportation infrastructure than passenger transportation due to the heavier vehicles needed to transport goods. Freight and passenger transportation also differ on the typical length of trip. Freight trips tend to be interregional, and thus longer than passenger trips. Planning for freight transportation is important because it affects economic vitality and competitiveness. An efficient freight transportation system can help a region attract new businesses, especially in the manufacturing sector. On the other hand, an inefficient or underdeveloped freight transportation system can be a hindrance to a region as it tries to market itself to businesses. The Freight Transportation Needs Report, completed by AMATS, discusses freight transportation issues, identifies impediments to freight movement in the area, and recommends strategies to address those impediments. Environmental Justice

The transportation system should reflect and support the values and planning objectives of area communities and neighborhoods, by ensuring that the planning process is conducted in conformance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the environmental justice requirements of Presidential Executive Order #12898 of 1994. Environmental justice means that agencies, such as AMATS, that use federal funds, must make a meaningful effort to involve low-income and minority populations in the

15

decision-making process regarding the use of federal funds. It also means that they must attempt to identify and address any disproportionately high and adverse human health and environmental impacts on low-income and minority populations expected to result from the implementation of their plans and programs. In keeping with these requirements, AMATS conducts public involvement activities that ensure that low-income and minority individuals and community groups have the opportunity to participate in the transportation planning process. In order to assess the impact of regional transportation projects on low-income and minority populations, an environmental justice analysis was included in the 2030 Regional Transportation Plan. This analysis is documented in Appendix B.

2) DATA COLLECTION AND FORECASTING The second phase of the planning process is Data Collection and Forecasting, which consists of technical activities geared toward identifying and collecting relevant transportation planning data for the area. These data include: 1) inventories of existing land use, social, economic, and environmental characteristics; 2) information on the physical features and characteristics of the existing transportation system; and 3) information on the usage of the existing transportation system, such as highway traffic counts and transit ridership surveys. Forecasting entails using existing data to forecast future land use patterns, demographic characteristics, and travel patterns. It can also include the completion of surveys soliciting the opinions of citizens, local officials, and businesses on emerging transportation issues of regional importance. AMATS completed the following work products in this phase of the planning process:

The 2030 External Station Forecast, completed in May 2003, forecasts the number of trips that will enter or exit the Akron metropolitan area at eighty-three roadway locations in 2030. This forecast is used as an input in the development of future traffic forecasts. A review of projects included in local plans was completed in February 2004, in order to inventory transportation improvements planned by local communities, ODOT District 4, and the regional transit authorities. The 2003 Existing Plus Committed Network, completed in March 2004, establishes a baseline travel model network consisting of all existing and committed transportation improvements. This network is used as the "no-build" scenario in future traffic forecasts.

16

The Future Traffic Assignment, completed in April 2004, forecasts the volume of traffic on roadways in the Akron metropolitan area in 2030. This traffic assignment is produced by assigning a 2030 trip table (an estimate of the origins and destinations of all vehicle trips) to the 2003 Existing Plus Committed Network. This traffic assignment estimates the level of traffic congestion on roadways in the area in 2030. The 2030 Planning Data Forecast, approved by the Policy Committee in December 2004, establishes a forecast of population, dwelling units, vehicles, employment (by sector), land area (by use), and non-residential floor area (by use), at the traffic analysis zone level in 2030. This forecast serves as an input to the 2030 Trip Generation. The 2030 Trip Generation technical memorandum, completed in February 2005, estimates the number of trips that will be produced in and attracted to each traffic analysis zone in the Akron metropolitan area in 2030. This forecast serves as an input to the traffic assignment needed for the air quality conformity analysis of the 2030 Regional Transportation Plan. The Air Quality Traffic Assignment, completed in February 2005, forecasts the volume of traffic on roadways in the Akron metropolitan area in 2030, so that the air quality conformity of the 2030 Regional Transportation Plan can be established.

3) PLANNING AND EVALUATION The third phase of the planning process is Planning and Evaluation. In this phase, the systems design criteria that have been established and the data that have been collected are used to identify transportation problems and opportunities for improvement. AMATS completed the following work products in order to identify transportation problems:

The 2003 Existing Highway Congestion Study, approved by the Policy Committee in May 2003, determines the level of existing traffic congestion on freeways, arterials, and at major intersections in the Akron metropolitan area. The Intersection Crash Report, approved by the Policy Committee in September 2003, identifies the high crash intersections in the Akron metropolitan area. The Arterial Crash Report, approved by the Policy Committee in October 2003, identifies the high crash arterial segments in the Akron metropolitan area. The Freeway Crash Report, approved by the Policy Committee in February 2004, identifies the high crash freeway segments in the Akron metropolitan area.

17

The 2030 Future Highway Congestion Study, approved by the Policy Committee in July 2004, was produced to determine the level of traffic congestion on freeways and arterials in the Akron metropolitan area in 2030.

Transportation alternatives are then developed to address the problems that have been identified. Transportation alternatives are typically identified by: 1) reviewing plans, major investment studies, and reports completed by local communities, ODOT District 4, regional transit authorities, and regional planning agencies, and 2) by conferring with citizens, planners and elected officials. Transportation alternatives can include any combination of capital improvements, operational improvements, or policy actions intended to solve an identified transportation problem. Once identified, the alternatives are evaluated based upon their effectiveness, political feasibility and consistency with the Goals and Objectives established by the AMATS Policy Committee. The end result of the evaluation process is an inventory of regional transportation needs. AMATS completed the following work products in order to identify long-range transportation needs:

The Highway System Preservation Needs Report, completed in May 2004, documents the cost of maintaining (resurfacing, reconstructing, and rehabilitating) the existing regional network of highways in the Akron metropolitan area. The Transportation Enhancement Needs Report, approved by the Policy Committee in October 2004, identifies the regional transportation enhancement needs of the Akron metropolitan area. These needs include bicycle and pedestrian improvements, as well as historic, archaeological, scenic, and environmental transportation enhancement projects. The Freight Transportation Needs Report, approved by the Policy Committee in December 2004, discusses freight transportation issues, identifies impediments to freight movement in the area, and recommends strategies to address those impediments. The Public Transportation Needs Report, approved by the Policy Committee in October 2004, identifies the regional transit needs of the Akron metropolitan area. This report examines the cost of both preserving and expanding the existing transit system. The transit development plans completed by METRO and PARTA are used to assist the AMATS staff in identifying regional transit needs. The Congestion Management System Report, approved by the Policy Committee in December 2004, is developed to quantify the level of existing and future traffic congestion and to identify and evaluate alternatives for alleviating congestion on freeways, arterials, and at major intersections in the Akron

18

metropolitan area. Transportation improvements recommended for managing traffic congestion are considered regional transportation needs. The Additional Highway Needs Memorandum, approved by the Policy Committee in December 2004, identifies additional highway projects that focus on improving areas not related to traffic congestion. These projects may accomplish one or more of the following objectives: 1) preserve the existing transportation system; 2) improve regional accessibility and mobility; 3) improve poor highway design characteristics; or 4) enhance economic development opportunities.

4) FEDERAL PLANNING PRIORITIES Federal planning priorities are established by the U.S. Department of Transportation. Federal regulations require that the projects recommended in the regional transportation plan do not exceed the amount of federal funding expected to be available over the life of the plan; and that they do not degrade the air quality of the region beyond what is acceptable under federal standards. Air Quality Conformity

Summit County and Portage County are part of the eight-county Cleveland-Akron Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical Area (CMSA). Based on air quality readings, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) has designated this area as a moderate non-attainment area for ozone. In order for the Cleveland-Akron area to show air quality conformity, the overall level of air pollution resulting from the implementation of projects recommended in the 2030 Regional Transportation Plans of AMATS, and its Cleveland counterpart, the Northeast Ohio Areawide Coordinating Agency (NOACA), must be analyzed. This air quality conformity analysis has to demonstrate that emissions of hydrocarbons (HC) and oxides of nitrogen (NOx) from mobile sources will not exceed those established in the budget contained in the State Implementation Plan (SIP) for ozone, which sets the allowable limits for each pollutant. The analysis must then be approved by the United States Department of Transportation (USDOT), by means of a formal transportation conformity determination, before any federal transportation funds can be spent on the projects included in the Regional Transportation Plan. AMATS assisted NOACA and ODOT in completing the following work product in order to ensure the air quality conformity of the regional transportation plan:

19

The 2030 Regional Transportation Plan Air Quality Conformity Analysis, completed in April 2005, documents that the projects recommended in the 2030 Regional Transportation Plan are in conformity with the State Implementation Plan (SIP) for improving air quality. This means that they will not degrade the region's air quality beyond what is acceptable under federal standards.

A complete discussion of the region’s air quality conformity analysis for the 2030 Regional Transportation Plan is documented in Appendix D. Financial Resources Forecast

The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21) requires that the regional transportation planning process include a forecast of financial resources expected to be available from both public and private sources to carry out the planned transportation improvements. This financial plan demonstrates that the improvements identified in the Regional Transportation Plan can be implemented in a fiscally sound manner. To this end, AMATS has developed a forecast of federal funds. AMATS completed the following work product in order to ensure that the projects included in the regional transportation plan are fiscally constrained.

The 2030 Financial Forecast, approved by the Policy Committee in December 2004, forecasts the total amount of federal transportation dollars expected to be available to the AMATS area between now and 2030. All highway, public transportation, and transportation enhancement projects recommended in the 2030 Regional Transportation Plan fit within this financial forecast.

The 2030 Financial Resources Forecast is included in Appendix E.

5) PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT The transportation planning process includes more than just technical evaluation. It also includes Public Involvement and input. Citizen involvement in transportation planning is important because it provides planners and the local officials that they advise with valuable information regarding public attitudes and preferences. This helps local officials to make better decisions regarding transportation policies and projects. Many people are skeptical as to whether they can truly influence the outcome of a transportation project. Others feel that transportation plans are too abstract, incomprehensible, and long-term to warrant attention. The AMATS Public Involvement Policy seeks to allay these concerns by providing an opportunity for members of the public to review and comment on the regional transportation policies, plans, and projects that are under consideration. This policy also addresses environmental justice

20

concerns by reaching out to community groups in low-income and minority neighborhoods. Public input regarding the regional transportation planning process is obtained at regularly scheduled Citizens Involvement Committee (CIC) meetings, held every month that the Policy Committee meets. It is also obtained at special public involvement meetings that pertain to the Regional Transportation Plan and Transportation Improvement Program. Meeting notices are provided to the local news media, officials, and a wide variety of neighborhood and community organizations. Two rounds of public involvement meetings were scheduled in order to give the public the opportunity to influence the direction of the 2030 Regional Transportation Plan at various points in its development. The first set of five meetings, which focused on identifying regional transportation needs, was held between September 28 and October 5, 2004. The second set of five public involvement meetings, focused on the draft 2030 Regional Transportation Plan, and were held between April 5, 2005 and April 7, 2005. During the 30-day public comment period that began March 30, 2005 and ended April 29, 2005, the draft Plan was available for review at the AMATS office in Akron, the ODOT District 4 office in Coventry Township, and on the AMATS web site at http://www.ci.akron.oh.us/AMATS. Summaries of the comments obtained at the public involvement meetings were provided to the Policy Committee for its consideration prior to its adoption of the regional transportation plan. Appendix F documents the public involvement process and includes copies of all written comments regarding the 2030 Regional Transportation Plan.

6) RECOMMENDATIONS Recommendations are the culmination of the planning process, and once adopted by the Policy Committee, become the official regional transportation plan for the Akron metropolitan area. Projects must be consistent with the Plan to be eligible for inclusion in the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) and in order to receive federal funds. The approval of the 2030 Regional Transportation Plan takes place in the final phase of the planning process. The total cost of the projects recommended in the Plan does not exceed the amount of funding that is expected to be available between now and 2030. The projects are also analyzed in conjunction with projects from the Cleveland area for air quality conformity, made available for public comment, and submitted to the Policy Committee for final action. The AMATS Policy Committee granted final approval of the 2030 Regional Transportation Plan on May 11, 2005. The project recommendations are described in detail in the following chapter.

21

22

CHAPTER III

2030 REGIONAL

TRANSPORTATION PLAN

RECOMMENDATIONS

23

2030 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS

INTRODUCTION This chapter presents the 2030 Regional Transportation Plan recommendations for highway, public transportation, and transportation enhancement improvements. They have been developed to meet the travel needs of the Akron metropolitan area in a fiscally sound manner that is consistent with regional goals and objectives. The chapter is divided into the following five sections:

• Introduction • Identification of Transportation Needs • Financial Forecast • Recommendations • Summary

The regional transportation system accommodates a variety of modes of travel such as driving, public transportation, bicycling, and walking. Understanding the role that each mode of transportation plays in the overall system is critical when planning for future transportation improvements. In order to maximize the accessibility, flexibility, and efficiency of the regional transportation system, the 2030 Regional Transportation Plan integrates three categories of transportation infrastructure: 1) Highways; 2) Public Transportation; and 3) Transportation Enhancements (primarily bicycle and pedestrian facilities.)

Highways Highways are an integral component of the regional transportation system. Every vehicle trip that is made in the Akron metropolitan area uses the highway system to arrive at its final destination. A well-planned and well-maintained highway system enhances the economic vitality of the entire region by providing for the efficient movement of goods and people. The Akron metropolitan area is well served by the existing highway system. The local interstate system was completed in the 1970s and no new interstates are anticipated to be constructed in the area between now and 2030. The Akron metropolitan area contains 4,157 miles of roadways. Each roadway is categorized in accordance with its federal functional classification. The federal functional classification system includes the following seven categories:

• Interstates • Freeways/Expressways • Principal arterials • Minor arterials

24

• Urban collectors/Major rural collectors • Minor rural collectors • Local roadways

These roadways are shown on Map III-1. Interstates, freeways, expressways, arterials, and most collectors are eligible for federal funding. Local roadways are not eligible for federal funds and are the sole responsibility of the local jurisdiction in which they are located. The roadway categories are described below: Interstates, freeways, and expressways are divided highways with limited access to abutting properties and intersecting highways. They provide a high-speed option for passenger vehicles and trucks traveling long distances. The Akron metropolitan area contains 165 miles of these roadways, including: I-76, I-77, I-80 (Ohio Turnpike), I-271, I-277, I-480, and portions of SR 8, SR 21, SR 59 (Akron Innerbelt), and US 224. Arterials primarily serve longer through trips at a moderate speed. They provide access to the major commercial and business areas and serve as a connection between the freeway system, collectors, and local streets. The Akron metropolitan area contains 558 miles of these roadways. Collectors serve as a connection between arterials and local roadways. They usually have lower speed limits than arterials and serve shorter trips. Collectors provide direct access to residential, commercial, and industrial areas. They also help to divert traffic from local roadways. The Akron metropolitan area contains 574 miles of these roadways. Local roadways primarily serve residential neighborhoods and rural areas. Through traffic is discouraged on local roadways by maintaining low speed limits and limiting the number of direct connections to collectors. The Akron metropolitan area contains 2,860 miles of these roadways. Public Transportation Public transportation service comprises an important element of the transportation system in the region. It helps to meet the needs of area residents by:

1) Providing basic mobility for those persons who, due to age, disability, income, or other circumstances, have inadequate access to an automobile to meet their travel needs.

2) Providing an effective means of transportation for many people who want an alternative to driving a car to meet their travel needs.

Public transportation service also helps contribute to many regional goals including energy conservation, improved air quality, and reduced levels of traffic congestion.

25

26

AKRON

GREEN

HUDSON

AURORA

STOW

NORTON

NEW FRANKLIN

STREETSBORO

KENT

CUYAHOGA FALLS

TALLMADGE

TWINSBURGMACEDONIA

RICHFIELD

BARBERTON

RAVENNA

FAIRLAWN

CLINTON

PENINSULA

MANTUA

BOSTON HEIGHTSWINDHAM

MUNROE FALLS

LAKEMORE

GARRETTSVILLE

HIRAM

SILVER LAKE

REMINDERVILLE

MOGADORE

DOYLESTOWN

NORTHFIELD

BRADY LAKE

SUGAR BUSH KNOLLS

8

8

5

8

5

4344

82

8244

14

82

91

88

91

14

21 43

43

59

18 44

21

82

59

14

21 4491

59

43 44

88

14

2194

93

94

18

44

57

305

8077

80

77

76

77

80

76

77

76

76

76

306

303 303

176

282

261

261

303

162183 225

303

532

764

700

183241

619

619

585

604 241

261

225

236

480

271

271

480

277

422

224 224224224

224224

Tallmadge Rd

Waterloo Rd

New

Milfo

rd Rd

Infirm

ary R

d

Hartv

ille Rd

Old Forge Rd

Frost Rd

Bisse

ll Rd

Rock

Spri

ng R

d

Ravenna Rd

Mennonite Rd

Diago

nal R

d

Wayla

nd R

d

Center Rd

S Chil

licoth

e Rd

Hudson Rd

Page

Rd

Cable Line Rd

S Water St

E Mennonite Rd

Newton Falls Rd

Mantu

a St

Garfield East Rd

Pros

pect

Rd

Lake StFairchild Ave

Treat Rd

Cong

ress L

ake R

d

E Main StW Main St

Hayes Rd

Wellman Rd

Peck

Rd

Hartvi

lle Rd

Waterloo Rd

Newton Falls Rd

Peck Rd

Stow

Rd

Medin

a Line

Rd

Arlin

gton R

d

State

Rd

Darro

w Rd

Copley Rd

W Market St

Killian Rd

Hudson

Dr

SR 8

Bath Rd

Ira Rd

Waterloo Rd

Main

St

Newton St

Britta

in Rd

Main st

Brow

n St

East A

ve

Broadview Rd

E Market St

Mass

illon R

d

Eastwood Ave

Kelly

Ave

Middleton Rd

Brec

ksvil

le Rd

Fish Creek Rd

State St

Valley View Rd

Northeast A

ve

Medina Rd

N River Rd

Valleyview Rd

Barbe

r Rd

Home

Ave

Cleveland Massillon Rd

Johnson Rd

Eastern Rd

N Ma

in St

Wyoga Lake Rd

Howe Ave

Greenwich Rd

Caston Rd

Albrecht Ave

Wooster

Rd NRo

mig R

d

Bailey RdGhent Rd

E Aurora Rd

E Exchange St

Mull Ave

Garman Rd

Aurora Rd

Turkeyfoot Rd

S Main

St

W North St

Yellow Creek Rd

Geo W

ashin

gton B

lvd

Cannon Rd

Ira Ave

Thirty

First

St N

W

Ridgewood Rd

Riverv

iew Rd

East Ave

Riverview Rd

Cleveland Massillon Rd

Main

StDa

rrow

Rd

Medin

a Line

Rd

Mass

illon R

d

InterstateFreeway / ExpresswayPrincipal ArterialMinor ArterialUrban Collector / Major Rural CollectorMinor Rural Collector

Urban AreaRural Area

Map III-1FEDERAL FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION

OF HIGHWAYS

May 2005

0 1 2 3 4Miles

±

28

Back of Map III-1

Remove this page before copying

The existing public transportation system in the Akron metropolitan area is comprised of the METRO Regional Transit Authority (METRO), which operates service in Summit County, and the Portage Area Regional Transportation Authority (PARTA), which operates service in Portage County. The Akron Metropolitan Area Transportation Study also plays a supporting role in the region’s public transportation system by administering the Specialized Transportation Program (FTA Section 5310) and the RIDESHARE! Program. METRO currently operates 22 local bus routes, 2 neighborhood circulator routes, 5 town center routes, and 3 express bus routes. METRO also provides service under contracts with the Akron Board of Education and the University of Akron. METRO’s SCAT service provides a comprehensive set of demand responsive services including: 1) door-to-door service for the elderly and disabled; 2) ADA complementary paratransit service; 3) enhanced medical transportation; and 4) contract paratransit service for several social service agencies. METRO also contracts with the Cuyahoga Valley Scenic Railroad (CVSR) to operate seasonal roundtrip service from downtown Akron to the Cuyahoga Valley National Park. METRO’s bus fleet is currently comprised of 135 large buses and 71 small buses. METRO’s operations are supported by a permanent 0.25 percent countywide sales tax. PARTA currently operates seven fixed bus routes under its County Division and six additional bus routes under the Campus Division that were formerly operated by Kent State University’s Campus Bus Service (CBS). PARTA also operates three general categories of demand responsive service: 1) general purpose door-to-door paratransit service; 2) ADA complementary paratransit service; and 3) contract paratransit service for various social service agencies. PARTA’s fleet is currently comprised of 39 large buses and 55 small buses. This number far exceeds PARTA’s current peak vehicle requirements. This is due, however, to a high average vehicle age for the buses acquired from CBS. PARTA’s operations are supported by a countywide 0.25 percent sales tax, and by service contracts with Kent State University and several social service agencies. PARTA’s sales tax was approved in November of 2001. It is not, however, a permanent levy, and it currently must be renewed every five years. The Specialized Transportation Program is administered by AMATS, and exists primarily to assist non-profit social service agencies in procuring FTA Section 5310 funds. These funds are to be used for the purchase of equipment to support transportation services for the elderly and disabled where existing transportation is unavailable, inappropriate, or insufficient. The RIDESHARE! Program in Portage, Summit, and Wayne counties is also administered by AMATS. This program helps commuters find potential carpool or vanpool partners and encourages people to use public transportation. Approximately 1,800 people are currently registered as active participants in the program.

29

Transportation Enhancements Bicycle and pedestrian facilities and other transportation enhancements are an important part of the transportation system in the Akron metropolitan area. Bicycle and pedestrian travel provide increased independence for children and are economical forms of transportation for adults making short trips. Bicycling and walking also continue to increase in popularity as recreational activities in the region. This is evidenced by recent projects such as the completion of additional portions of the Ohio & Erie Canal Towpath Trail through Summit County. The Towpath Trail will eventually run for 110 miles from Cleveland to New Philadelphia. The Portage Hike and Bike Trail is another example of a regional bikeway underway. This trail will serve as an east-west link through central Portage County to connect the major hike and bike trails in Summit and Trumbull counties. Pedestrian and bicycle travel also offer many alternatives to driving for short distances, especially in congested environments. The pedestrian system is the primary transportation mode for short trips within a Central Business District (CBD). A downtown’s ability to succeed as a multi-functional center of activity is affected by the quality of the pedestrian environment. Pedestrian facilities also provide improved access for pedestrians in urban, suburban, and rural areas. They promote neighborhood cohesion, reduce travel time and distance, and play a role in reducing traffic congestion, and improving air quality. Pedestrian facilities include more than just the traditional sidewalk. These facilities also include walkways, crosswalks and pedestrian signals; curb cuts and wheelchair ramps which provide access to people with disabilities; bus stops and other transit loading areas; bridges and tunnels; and stairs and escalators. In accordance with federal regulations, transportation enhancements are divided into three categories, which contain 12 subcategories:

Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities

• Provision of facilities for pedestrians and bicycles • Provision of safety and educational activities for pedestrians and bicycles • Preservation of abandoned railway corridors for the use thereof for

pedestrian and bicycle trails

Historic and Archaeological Enhancements • Historic preservation • Rehabilitation and operation of historic transportation buildings, structures,

or facilities (including historic railroad facilities and canals) • Archaeological planning and research • Establishment of transportation museums

30

Scenic and Environmental Enhancements

• Acquisition of scenic easements and scenic or historic sites • Scenic or historic highway programs (including the provision of tourist and

welcome center facilities) • Landscaping and other scenic beautification • Control and removal of outdoor advertising • Environmental mitigation of water pollution due to highway runoff or

reduce vehicle-caused wildlife mortality while maintaining habitat connectivity

31

IDENTIFICATION OF TRANSPORTATION NEEDS AMATS developed the following series of reports in order to identify regional transportation needs between now and 2030:

• Congestion Management System Report • Highway System Preservation Needs Report • Additional Highway Needs Memorandum • 2030 Public Transportation Needs Report • 2030 Transportation Enhancement Needs Report

As these reports were developed, transportation plans from local communities, regional transit authorities, and the Ohio Department of Transportation were considered. The needs identified in the Congestion Management System Report, the 2030 Public Transportation Needs report, and the 2030 Transportation Enhancement Needs report were presented at a series of five public involvement meetings held in September and October 2004. Public comments received at these meetings were considered as the 2030 Regional Transportation Plan was developed. The process by which the highway, public transportation, and transportation enhancement needs were identified is discussed in the following subsections. Identification of Highway Needs Highway needs are identified in three reports: the Congestion Management System Report, the 2030 Highway System Preservation Needs report, and the Additional Highway Needs memorandum. The Congestion Management System Report identifies transportation improvements that reduce congestion. This report analyzes freeways, arterials, and intersections in order to assess the level of existing and future congestion. The Congestion Management System Report also reviews the information contained in the most recent AMATS crash reports in order to identify locations of incident-related traffic congestion. A variety of congestion management system strategies were identified in the Congestion Management System Report. These strategies were evaluated as to their effectiveness and political feasibility. Certain strategies were judged to be ineffective or infeasible from a social, economic, or environmental standpoint and were eliminated from further consideration. The remaining strategies were linked with previously identified congestion problems on freeways, arterials, and at intersections to determine alternatives. Finally, these alternatives were evaluated and recommendations were developed. The Congestion Management System Report recommended 160 highway projects on various roadways between now and 2030. These projects included additional through lanes, reconfiguring freeway ramps and interchanges, turn lanes, and signal

32

coordination. The total cost of implementing all of the congestion management recommendations was estimated at $2.6 billion. The 2030 Highway System Preservation Needs report identifies the cost to maintain the existing roadway system. This report estimated the cost of resurfacing all federal functionally classified roadways between now and 2030 to be $476 million. The report also discusses the importance of bridge rehabilitation and replacement over the next twenty-five years. The Additional Highway Needs memorandum is the third source that identifies highway needs. Although relieving traffic congestion and preserving the highway system are important, they are not the only reason for improving the regional highway system. Consequently, the AMATS Policy Committee identified several additional highway projects as needs. The purpose of these projects is to accomplish one or more of the following objectives: 1) preserve the existing transportation system; 2) improve regional accessibility and mobility; 3) improve poor highway design characteristics; or 4) enhance economic development opportunities. This memorandum identified 12 projects. The total cost of implementing these projects is estimated at $52 million. Identification of Public Transportation Needs Public transportation needs are identified in the 2030 Public Transportation Needs report. This report identifies the capital and operating needs for preserving the existing public transportation system, and strategically expanding it between now and 2030. Several important transportation objectives were considered when developing the needs:

• Safety and Security • Cost Effectiveness • Efficiency of Travel • Modal Integration • System Preservation • Support for Community Planning Objectives • Encouragement for Desirable Settlement Patterns

In addition, the Transit Development Plans (TDPs) of METRO and PARTA were reviewed so that their recommendations could be considered. The recommendations described in the TDPs are not automatically considered to be public transportation needs. Each recommendation was evaluated for its consistency with the AMATS Regional Transportation Goals and Objectives prior to its inclusion as a need. Once the TDPs had been reviewed, regional public transportation needs were classified into two categories: system preservation and system expansion. System preservation needs require both continued operating expenditures and investments in many types of capital assets, which typically include replacement vehicles, facilities rehabilitation, and

33

preventive maintenance expenses. A total of $1.1 billion in capital and operating preservation needs were identified. System expansion needs are those that expand the public transportation system through the addition of new services, facilities, or amenities. A total of $76.3 million in capital and operating expansion needs were identified. Identification of Transportation Enhancement Needs Transportation enhancement needs are identified in the 2030 Transportation Enhancement Needs report. This report identifies and evaluates regional transportation enhancement needs between now and 2030. To identify transportation enhancement needs, local community and agency plans, including the Summit County Trail and Greenway Plan were reviewed. In order to evaluate the transportation enhancement needs, projects were first separated into two categories: 1) bikeways; and 2) all other enhancement projects (pedestrian, historic/archaeological, and scenic/environmental). Bikeways were then classified into a hierarchy of three classes based on their regional significance: regional, feeder, and local. Local bikeways were excluded as needs since they were not considered regionally significant. Non-bikeway needs were evaluated. They include pedestrian facilities, historic and archaeological enhancements, and scenic and environmental enhancements. Three types of non-bikeway projects were excluded from the needs: 1) non-bikeway projects where community support was withdrawn; 2) maintenance projects, which are considered a local responsibility and are therefore not considered a regional need; and 3) projects that replace existing sidewalks. The 2030 transportation enhancement needs consist of all regional and feeder bikeways along with several regional non-bikeway enhancements. A total cost of $77.4 million was identified in the report to fulfill all the transportation enhancement needs.

34

FINANCIAL FORECAST The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21) requires that the regional transportation plan include a forecast of financial resources in order to demonstrate that the transportation plan can be implemented in a fiscally sound manner. To this end, a forecast of transportation funds, by category, has been developed to estimate the amount of funding expected to be available to the Akron metropolitan area between now and 2030. The 2030 Financial Resources Forecast is included in Appendix E. It is estimated that approximately $2.5 billion in federal and state funding will be available for transportation improvements between now and 2030. When local matching funds are included, this estimate increases to nearly $2.7 billion. This amount of funding, while substantial, is significantly less than the nearly $4.4 billion necessary to implement the transportation improvements identified as needs. Table III-1 displays anticipated funding levels by category.

Table III-1 FORECASTED TRANSPORTATION FUNDING BY CATEGORY

Funds in $(000)

FUNDING CATEGORY

FEDERAL/ STATE FUNDS

TOTAL FUNDS *

Transportation Review Advisory Council (TRAC) $807,092 $807,092TRAC Railroad Grade Separation Program $8,507 $8,507ODOT District Four Allocation $955,554 $955,554AMATS Surface Transportation Program (STP-A) $185,225 $231,532AMATS Congestion Mitigation/Air Quality (CMAQ-A) $104,902 $131,128AMATS Transportation Enhancement Program (TEP-A) $18,523 $23,153County STP (STP-C) $35,287 $44,109City Bridge Program (City BR) $12,913 $16,142City High-Cost Bridge Program $6,500 $6,500County Bridge Program (BR-C) $52,865 $66,081Safety Program $103,308 $114,786Federal Highway Discretionary Funding $2,250 $2,250Section 5307 - Urbanized Formula Program $176,048 $220,060Section 5309 - Discretionary Capital $21,259 $26,573Section 5310 - Specialized Transportation Program $1,765 $2,206Section 3037 - Job Access Reverse Commute (JARC) $3,900 $7,800Federal Transit Discretionary Funding $364 $455TOTAL FUNDING $2,496,261 $2,663,928

* Includes local matching funds

35

RECOMMENDATIONS The following section presents the financially constrained recommendations of the 2030 Regional Transportation Plan. The total cost of the highway, public transportation, and transportation enhancement improvements recommended in the plan does not exceed the amount of transportation funding expected to be available between now and 2030. Although each transportation mode is described separately, the recommendations included in this chapter have been evaluated in a comprehensive manner. Highway Recommendations The highway needs identified in the Congestion Management System Report, the 2030 Highway System Preservation Needs report, and the Additional Highway Needs memorandum have been prioritized based on the methodology shown in Table III-2. This methodology establishes the regional importance of each highway need and places each project into one of seven priority groups, based on project readiness, the level of existing and future congestion, safety problems, and truck volumes.

Table III-2 PRIORITIZATION OF HIGHWAY NEEDS

PRIORITY GROUP CRITERIA

1 Active projects 2 LOS E/F (existing) & safety problems OR high truck volumes 3 LOS E/F (existing) 4 LOS D (existing) OR LOS E/F (future) & safety problems OR high truck volumes5 LOS D (existing) OR LOS E/F (future) 6 LOS D (future) & safety problems OR high truck volumes 7 LOS D (future) OR listed as an "Additional Highway Need"

Priority Group 1 consists of specified "Active Projects," which are those that are programmed in the Transportation Improvement Program or are currently under development. Priority Groups 2 through 7 consist of the remainder of the highway projects. Once the projects were placed into priority groups they were then matched with the amount of highway funding that was expected to be available by funding category. For example, projects that are eligible for TRAC funding were prioritized and then assigned funds based on the amount of TRAC funds that were forecasted to be available between now and 2030. Funding was allocated to each project, in priority order, until each funding source was exhausted. Map III-2 and Table III-3 show the highway recommendations. These highway recommendations strike a balance between maintaining the existing highway system and providing additional system capacity. The total cost of implementing all of the recommended highway projects is approximately $2.35 billion.

36

The highway recommendations are composed of two types of projects: specified and unspecified. Specified projects are those with a specific location, recommendation, estimated cost, and purpose and need. These projects include both operational and capacity improvements. The total cost of the specified highway recommendations is approximately $1.24 billion. The purpose and need, which is listed as a one or two letter code in Table III-3, is defined below:

• A – Improves local access – increases accessibility within an area • C – Congestion relief – identified as congested in the Congestion Management System Report • D – Improves design – identified in a previous study as a design problem • E – Enhances economic development – improves economic development opportunities in

areas where the highway system is limited • P – Improves pedestrian access – improves pedestrian access in areas with large amounts of

pedestrian traffic • S – Improves safety – identified as a high crash location in the AMATS crash reports or the I-76

Major Investment Study. • SP – System preservation – maintains the existing highway system • T – Improves traffic flow – improves traffic flow but was not identified as congested in the

Congestion Management System Report

Unspecified projects include system preservation (resurfacing, reconstruction, and bridge rehabilitation/replacement) and safety projects that will be identified between now and 2030. These projects are not specified in this document because they are identified on an ongoing basis as bridge, pavement, and road conditions warrant. When identified, these projects will be considered consistent with the regional transportation plan. Reserving additional highway funding for unspecified system preservation and safety projects is an important policy consideration emphasized in the AMATS Regional Transportation Goals and Objectives and in TEA-21. Approximately $1.11 billion in federal funding has been set aside for unspecified system preservation and safety projects. The amount of funding forecasted to be available between now and 2030 is insufficient to include all of the highway needs that have been identified. Unfunded highway needs are listed in Appendix G. The total cost of these projects is estimated to be approximately $1.2 billion.

37

38

59

43

94

21

14

44

1418

77

76

764

585

532

241

162

619

225

183 225

261

236

277

224

224

8

8

5

8

5

14

59

91

21

82

44

18

44

21

44

43

82

93

91

94

43

44 88

14

59

82

43

91

21

57

82

8844

305

77

77

80

80

76

77

76

80

76 76

176

261

303

241

306

604

619

261

183

303

282

303303

700

271

480

271

480

224224

422

224224

Map III-22030 HIGHWAY RECOMMENDATIONS

New FacilityAdditional Through LanesReconfigure AccessOperational Improvements

Intersection ImprovementsPlanning StudyFreeway Management System

May 2005

0 1 2 3 4Miles

40

Back of Map III-2

Remove this page before copying

Table III-3 HIGHWAY RECOMMENDATIONS

Highway Estimated Purpose Recommendation Cost ($000) and Need SR 8

• at Howe Ave – reconfigure interchange $18,500 C, S • at Seasons Rd – construct new interchange $8,400 E • SR 303 to I-271 – major upgrade to freeway standards $99,077 C • at Highland Rd – turn lanes (where warranted) $1,800 C, S

SR 8 Service Rd

• Hines Hill Rd to Highland Rd – construct new roadway $10,000 A SR 14

• I-80 to SR 44 – corridor study $600 C • SR 88 to SR 5 – widen to 4 lanes and turn lanes (where warranted) $10,400 C, S • at SR 59 – intersection improvements $6,544 C, S • SR 5 to Tallmadge Rd – turn lanes (where warranted) $1,800 C

SR 18

• Revere Rd to Pershing Ave – turn lanes (where warranted) and $4,789 C reconstruct to standard lanes • Pershing Ave to Hawkins Ave – turn lanes (where warranted), $4,300 C

reconstruct to standard lanes, and signal coordination* • Hawkins Ave to Twin Oaks Rd – turn lanes (where warranted), $4,337 C

reconstruct to standard lanes, and signal coordination* • Twin Oaks Rd to Rose Blvd – turn lanes (where warranted), $2,193 C

reconstruct to standard lanes, and signal coordination* • Summit St to SR 8 – signal coordination* $820 T • Martha Ave to Hilbish Ave – reconstruct to standard lanes and $7,323 SP, T signal coordination*

SR 43

• SR 261 to Summit St – turn lanes (where warranted), reconstruct $6,523 C to standard lanes, and signal coordination

• at Fairchild Ave – replace Crain Ave bridge, turn lanes (where $14,400 C warranted), and signal coordination

• Kent north corporation limit to SR 303 – corridor study $400 C • Market Square Dr to SR 306 – widen to 4 lanes and turn lanes $26,028 C (where warranted) • SR 82 to Squires Dr – widen to 4 lanes and turn lanes (where $6,726 C warranted)

SR 44

• Tallmadge Rd to I-76 – widen to 4 lanes, turn lanes (where $4,385 C, S warranted), and signal coordination

SR 59T (Perkins St)

• Main St to SR 8 – signal coordination* $487 S, T A – improves local access E – improves economic development S – improves safety C – congestion relief P – improves pedestrian access SP – system preservation D – improves design T – improves traffic flow

41

Table III-3 (continued) HIGHWAY RECOMMENDATIONS

Highway Estimated Purpose Recommendation Cost ($000) and Need SR 59

• Deidrick Rd to Longmere Dr – turn lanes (where warranted), $3,805 C, S reconstruct to standard lanes, and signal coordination

• Longmere Dr to SR 261 – signal coordination $880 C, S • CSX RR Bridge to Menough Rd – median turn lane $6,281 C

I-76

• at SR 21 – reconfigure interchange $30,000 S, D • SR 21 to State St – widen to 6 lanes and reconfigure access $55,600 C, S, D • State St to I-277 (Kenmore leg south interchange) – widen to $69,300 C, S, D

6 lanes and reconfigure access • I-277 (Kenmore leg south interchange) to I-77 (Kenmore leg $63,800 C, S, D north interchange) – widen to 6 lanes, reconfigure access, and reconstruct Kenmore leg south interchange (I-76/I-277) • I-77 (Kenmore leg north interchange) to SR 59 – widen to 8 $104,400 C, S, D lanes, reconfigure access, and reconstruct Kenmore leg north interchange (I-76/I-77) • SR 59 to SR 8 – widen to 8 lanes and reconfigure access $86,600 C, S, D • at Central interchange – reconfigure interchange $188,000 C, S, D • at Tallmadge Rd – reconfigure interchange $3,700 D

I-77

• at Akron-Canton Airport interchange – reconstruct Lauby Rd/ $1,000 T Airport intersection and reconfigure southbound off-ramp

• Copley Rd (SR 162) to SR 21 – widen to 6 lanes $42,400 C, S • SR 21 to SR 18 (Copley Township) – reconstruct and reconfigure $28,598 C, S

interchanges at SR 21 and SR 18 I-80

• SR 8 to I-480 – widen to 6 lanes and reconstruct toll plaza $20,000 T SR 82

• Boyden Rd to SR 8 – widen to 4 lanes, turn lanes (where $11,068 C warranted), and signal coordination

• at Olde Eight Rd/Brandywine Rd – intersection improvements $1,300 C • S. Bedford Rd to Crow Dr – widen to 4 lanes, turn lanes (where $8,214 C

warranted), and replace railroad bridge • Crow Dr to Chamberlin Rd – widen to 4 lanes and turn lanes $8,912 C (where warranted)

SR 91

• at US 224 – intersection improvements $802 C, S • US 224 to E. Market St (SR 18) – turn lanes (where warranted) $8,130 C, S and reconstruct to standard lanes • Triplett Blvd to Mogadore Rd – signal coordination* $915 C, S

A – improves local access E – improves economic development S – improves safety C – congestion relief P – improves pedestrian access SP – system preservation D – improves design T – improves traffic flow

42

Table III-3 (continued) HIGHWAY RECOMMENDATIONS

Highway Estimated Purpose Recommendation Cost ($000) and Need SR 91 (continued)

• Gilchrist Rd to north of Eastwood Ave – signal coordination* $385 C, S • Howe Rd to SR 59 (Kent Rd) – widen to 4 lanes and turn lanes $20,517 C (where warranted) • Old Mill Rd to I-480 – signal coordination $385 C, S • I-480 to Ravenna Rd – turn lanes (where warranted) and signal $2,500 C, S

coordination • Post Rd to Cuyahoga county line – widen to 4 lanes, turn lanes $6,410 C (where warranted), and signal coordination

SR 93

• Robinson Ave to Cormany Rd – widen to 4 lanes and turn lanes $4,811 C (where warranted)

SR 241

• at Greensburg Rd – intersection improvements $1,428 C • Greensburg Rd to Steese Rd – turn lanes (where warranted) $1,500 C • Steese Rd to Graybill Rd – widen to 4 lanes and turn lanes (where $2,278 C warranted) • Steese Rd to SR 619 (Turkeyfoot Lake Rd) – signal coordination $800 C • Mayfair Rd to Krumroy Rd – turn lanes (where warranted) $1,800 C • Krumroy Rd to US 224 – widen to 4 lanes and turn lanes (where $5,410 C warranted)

SR 261 (Tallmadge Ave)

• Howard St to SR 8 – signal coordination* $618 C • SR 8 to Home Ave – reconstruct to standard lanes and signal $5,064 C, S coordination*

SR 261 (Northeast Ave)

• Tallmadge Circle to Bentley Place Blvd – turn lanes (where $2,109 C, D warranted) and site distance improvement

Arlington Rd/St • Greensburg Rd to SR 619 – widen to 4 lanes and turn lanes $9,500 C (where warranted) • at SR 619 – intersection improvements $3,919 C, S • SR 619 to Green north corporation limit – reconstruction to $2,723 C, S

standard lanes, turn lanes (where warranted), and signal coordination

• at Jarvis Rd – relocate intersection $1,500 S • Krumroy Rd to Swartz Rd – turn lanes (where warranted) and $1,420 C signal coordination • 7th Ave to E. Market St (SR 18) – turn lanes (where warranted) $3,547 C and reconstruct to standard lanes

A – improves local access E – improves economic development S – improves safety C – congestion relief P – improves pedestrian access SP – system preservation D – improves design T – improves traffic flow

43

Table III-3 (continued) HIGHWAY RECOMMENDATIONS

Highway Estimated Purpose Recommendation Cost ($000) and Need Brittain Rd

• E. Market St (SR 18) to Eastwood Ave – signal coordination* $380 C Canton Rd

• Killian Rd to US 224 – turn lanes (where warranted) $3,500 C, S Cleveland-Massillon Rd

• Shannon Ave to Gardner Blvd – widen to 4 lanes and turn lanes $4,628 C, S (where warranted) • Greenwich Rd to I-76 – widen to 4 lanes and turn lanes (where $6,416 C warranted) • Copley Rd (SR 162) to Ridgewood Rd – turn lanes (where $2,600 C warranted) • at Ridgewood Rd – realign Ridgewood Rd intersection $2,750 T • I-77 to SR 18 – widen to 4 lanes and signal coordination $4,440 C

Exchange St

• Hawkins Ave to Delia Ave – signal coordination* $225 C • Delia Ave to Rhodes Ave – turn lanes (where warranted), $3,730 C parking management, reconstruct to standard lanes, and signal coordination* • Broadway St to Fountain St – turn lanes (where warranted), $5,299 C, P parking management, pedestrian channelization, reconstruct to standard lanes, and signal coordination*

Graham Rd

• Bath Rd to SR 8 – turn lanes (where warranted) and signal $2,830 C coordination • SR 91 to Charring Cross Dr – widen to 4 lanes and turn lanes $3,400 C (where warranted)

Highland Rd

• at Norfolk Southern RR tracks – railroad grade separation $8,507 C, S • Chamberlin Rd to SR 91 – turn lanes (where warranted) $3,775 C

Howe Ave

• at Main St – intersection improvements $225 C, S • Main St to Buchholzer Blvd – widen to 6 lanes, turn lanes (where $6,534 C

warranted), and signal coordination • at Brittain Rd/Bailey Rd/Tallmadge Rd/Northwest Ave – eliminate $11,000 C, S

Northwest Ave and Tallmadge Rd intersection with Howe Ave and replace with new connector roadways

A – improves local access E – improves economic development S – improves safety C – congestion relief P – improves pedestrian access SP – system preservation D – improves design T – improves traffic flow

44

Table III-3 (continued) HIGHWAY RECOMMENDATIONS

Highway Estimated Purpose Recommendation Cost ($000) and Need Hudson Dr

• Steels Corners Rd to Norton Rd – widen to 4 lanes and turn $10,280 C lanes (where warranted)

S. Main St

• Whitefriars Dr to Radnor Ave – widen to 4 lanes, add signal, and $3,250 C signal upgrade • Radnor Ave to N. Turkeyfoot Rd – turn lanes (where warranted), $8,720 C reconstruct to standard lanes, signal coordination, and correct horizontal and vertical geometry • Althea Ave to Hanna Pkwy – turn lanes (where warranted), $2,125 C reconstruct to standard lanes, and add signal • Hanna Pkwy to Firestone Blvd – turn lanes (where warranted), $8,480 C reconstruct to standard lanes, and signal coordination*

Miller Rd

• Ridgewood Rd to W. Market St (SR 18) – turn lanes (where $4,813 C warranted) and reconstruct to standard lanes

Portage Trail

• Portage Path to State Rd – widen to 4 lanes and turn lanes $13,304 C (where warranted)

Prospect St

• SR 44 to Lake Ave – turn lanes (where warranted) $1,500 C • at Summit Rd/Hayes Rd – intersection improvements $725 C, D

State Rd

• Bath Rd to Steels Corners Rd – turn lanes (where warranted) $3,600 C with possible bike lanes

Steels Corners Rd

• State Rd to SR 8 – widen to 4 lanes, turn lanes (where warranted), $11,529 C and signal coordination • SR 8 SB ramps to Hudson Dr – turn lanes (where warranted) $3,250 C, S and signal coordination

Summit St

• Lincoln St to Loop Rd – turn lanes (where warranted), signal $4,700 C, P coordination, access management, traffic calming, realign Summit St/Lincoln St intersection, and realign E. Campus Center Dr to Loop Rd

A – improves local access E – improves economic development S – improves safety C – congestion relief P – improves pedestrian access SP – system preservation D – improves design T – improves traffic flow

45

Table III-3 (continued) HIGHWAY RECOMMENDATIONS

Highway Estimated Purpose Recommendation Cost ($000) and Need Triplett Blvd

• Hilbish Ave to SR 91 (Canton Rd) – widen to 4 lanes and turn $4,800 C lanes (where warranted)

White Pond Dr

• North of Mull Ave to W&LE RR tracks – median turn lane and $5,725 C reconstruct to standard lanes • White Pond Dr to W. Market St (SR 18) – construct new roadway $6,380 C, T and intersection improvements

Akron-Canton Freeway Management System

• Various locations along SR 8, I-76, I-77, and I-277 – traffic flow $8,500 C, S detection, cameras, and dynamic message signs

Cleveland Freeway Management System

• Various locations along I-77, I-271, and I-480 – traffic flow $1,000 C, S detection, cameras, and dynamic message signs

Specified Operational and Capacity Improvements $1,235,081 Unspecified System Preservation and Safety Improvements $1,113,052 AMATS Regional Transportation Planning Supplemental Funding $2,250 HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENTS TOTAL $2,350,383 * These projects include the necessary fiber optic cable connection to the Akron Traffic Management Center in accordance with the

Akron Signal Action Plan. A – improves local access E – improves economic development S – improves safety C – congestion relief P – improves pedestrian access SP – system preservation D – improves design T – improves traffic flow

46

Public Transportation Recommendations The public transportation recommendations were drawn entirely from the Public Transportation Needs report. Both federal planning regulations and the AMATS Regional Transportation Goals and Objectives specify that preserving and maintaining the existing transportation system should be a priority of the transportation planning process. In prioritizing the 2030 public transportation needs and selecting the plan recommendations, the needs were first categorized as follows:

METRO and PARTA capital and operating needs • • • •

METRO and PARTA transit enhancement needs Specialized Transportation Program AMATS RIDESHARE! Program

METRO and PARTA capital and operating needs were then prioritized in the following order:

1. Projects currently programmed in FY 2005 of the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP)

2. Remaining bus replacement needs 3. Security needs 4. Remaining preventive maintenance needs 5. Other preservation and operational needs 6. Expansion needs

Once the projects were placed into priority groups they were then matched with the amount of public transportation funding that was expected to be available. Funding was allocated for each project, in priority order, until each funding source was exhausted. For the Section 5307 program, an equitable distribution of funding between METRO and PARTA was also assumed. Only a portion of METRO and PARTA preservation related capital and operating needs could be funded after the needs had been prioritized. With the overall goal of system preservation in mind, the primary recommendations include continued operating expenditures and investments in many types of capital assets. Table III-4 summarizes the primary recommendations. The total cost of the primary recommendations is $294.3 million. In general, transit operators such as METRO and PARTA have more opportunities to seek and receive discretionary federal transportation funding for projects than local communities do. With this in mind, several secondary recommendations were included in the 2030 Regional Transportation Plan, contingent upon additional discretionary funding being made available by Congress. Secondary recommendations include the balance of preventive maintenance needs for both METRO and PARTA and some additional maintenance projects. The purpose of the secondary recommendations is to: 1) demonstrate support for the projects; and 2) avoid having to amend the Plan if the

47

funding is allocated to METRO or PARTA. Table III-5 summarizes the secondary recommendations. The total cost of these projects is approximately $46.6 million.

PROJECT TYPE1

PROJECT COST

METRO 274 Large Transit Buses (35'-40') - Replacement P $83,570,000METRO 194 Small Paratransit Buses (LTVs) - Replacement P $20,370,000PARTA 50 Large Transit Buses (35'-40') - Replacement P $15,250,000PARTA 206 Small Buses (LTVs) - Replacement P $12,360,000METRO Preventive Maintenance Expenses P $113,875,000PARTA Preventive Maintenance Expenses P $8,308,500PARTA Communication/Automatic Vehicle Locator (AVL) System O $700,000METRO Security Cameras on Buses S $2,192,000PARTA Security Cameras on Buses S $2,248,000METRO Security Improvements at Admin./Maint. Facility S $50,000METRO Downtown Akron Intermodal Facility E $21,500,000KSU Downtown Kent Transit Center - Preliminary Planning E $455,096METRO Job Access Reverse Commute Service (Operating Assistance) P $7,800,000

TOTAL $288,678,596

METRO Bus Stop Shelters P/E $1,040,000METRO Bus Stop Signs P/E $25,000PARTA Bus Stop Shelters/Benches P/E $100,000PARTA Bus Stop Signs P/E $15,000METRO Bus Bicycle Racks E $300,000PARTA Bus Bicycle Racks E $81,000

TOTAL $1,561,000

P $2,210,000P $1,820,000

TOTAL $4,030,000GRAND TOTAL $294,269,596

Table III-4PRIMARY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION RECOMMENDATIONS

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

AMATS RIDESHARE! Program

Capital and Operating

Transit Enhancement

Other Public Transportation Specialized Transportation Program (FTA Section 5310)

Notes: 1. P=Preservation; O=Operational Improvement; S=Security Improvement; E=Expansion

48

PROJECT TYPE1

PROJECT COST

METRO Balance of Preventive Maintenance Needs P $29,125,000PARTA Balance of Preventive Maintenance Needs P $9,891,500METRO Automatic Vehicle Locator System (AVL) Phase 2 (FY 2006 TIP) O $1,500,000PARTA Replace Bus Garage Roof P $225,000PARTA Improvements to Summit Road Admin./Maint. Facility O $2,550,000METRO Rehabilitation of Bus Garage P $2,000,000METRO Additional Bus Garage (FY 2006 TIP) O $1,250,000METRO Feasibility Study of Rail Service in Canton-Akron-Kent Corridor E $100,000

TOTAL $46,641,500

Table III-5SECONDARY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION RECOMMENDATIONS

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

Notes: 1. P =Preservation; O=Operational Improvement; E=Expansion The amount of funding forecasted to be available between now and 2030 is insufficient to include all of the public transportation needs that were identified in the 2030 Public Transportation Needs report. Unfunded public transportation needs are listed in Appendix G. The total cost of these projects is estimated to be $57.7 million. The Primary and Secondary recommendations are described in greater detail in the following section. Primary Public Transportation Recommendations Replacement Buses The replacement of revenue vehicles is an important major capital expense for transit operators. In order to provide reliable service to the public in a cost effective manner, it is necessary to replace buses when they have reached the end of their service lives. It is recommended that METRO purchase 274 large (35’-40’) transit buses and 194 small buses, as replacements, between 2005 and 2030 at an estimated total cost of $103.9 million. It is recommended that PARTA purchase 50 large transit bus replacements and 206 small bus replacements over the same period at an estimated cost of $27.6 million. Preventive Maintenance Expenses Preventive maintenance expenses are operating costs related to the maintenance of buses, non-revenue vehicles, buildings, and other equipment. The amount of Section 5307 funding expected to be available will support only a portion of the preventive maintenance expenses forecasted for METRO and PARTA. The portion that can be funded is recommended for inclusion in the Regional Transportation Plan. This amounts to $113.9 million for METRO and $8.3 million for PARTA. The remaining balance of preventive maintenance expenses is recommended if additional funding becomes available over and above the current financial forecast. Security Cameras on Buses Equipping buses with security cameras is becoming a common feature in the transit industry. It provides a deterrent to crime and can help reduce false personal injury claims, which helps save local funding for

49

operating transit service. METRO currently equips all of its new large buses with cameras. It is recommended that METRO continue this practice, and that PARTA begin to equip their replacement buses with cameras. For PARTA, it will be necessary to equip their small buses in addition to the large buses. The cost to equip one bus is approximately $8,000. The total cost to equip all replacement buses included in the plan is $4.2 million. Security Improvements at METRO Administration/Maintenance Facility METRO needs to install additional cameras and fencing at their administration and maintenance facility on Kenmore Boulevard in order to improve the security. This project is estimated to cost $50,000. PARTA Communications/Automatic Vehicle Locator System This project is currently programmed in FY 2005 of the AMATS Fiscal Year 2004-2007 Transportation Improvement Program. This project will replace PARTA’s existing radio system with a public wireless (cellular) based communication system. The Automatic Vehicle Locator System component of the project will allow PARTA dispatchers to monitor the location of all PARTA buses in real-time. The total cost of this project is estimated to be $700,000. Downtown Akron Intermodal Facility METRO is currently in the process of developing an off-street intermodal facility in downtown Akron. This facility will supplant the Main Street Transitway as the primary transfer location for METRO in the downtown area. Property for the new facility has been acquired and design work is currently underway. When completed, the facility should provide a secure, comfortable waiting area for METRO passengers and offer connections to taxis, Greyhound bus service, and possibly Amtrak rail service. It is anticipated that $10 million in funding will come from the Ohio TRAC, and that the remainder will come from other sources including local funds and direct funding earmark(s) from Congress in the Section 5309 Program. The cost of this project is currently estimated to be $21.5 million. Downtown Kent Transit Center- Preliminary Planning Kent State University (KSU) has proposed a transit center in the downtown Kent for several years. This facility would serve as a hub for multi-modal transportation operating in the central Kent area, and would give passengers a common area to transfer between modes. This transit center is currently being proposed by Kent State University and the City of Kent. Preliminary planning of the Downtown Kent Transit Center is recommended. The costs of preliminary planning are estimated at $ 455,096. METRO Job Access/Reverse Commute Program The purpose of the JARC program is to develop transportation services designed to transport welfare recipients and low-income individuals to and from jobs, and to develop transportation services for residents of urban centers and rural and suburban areas to suburban employment opportunities. Emphasis is placed on projects that use mass transportation services. Funds allocated from the program can be used to cover up to 50 percent of the operating costs incurred to provide JARC services. Funds for this program are allocated on a discretionary basis. The total cost to continue METRO’s Job Access/Reverse Commute program between now and 2030 is estimated at $7.8 million. Transit Enhancements TEA-21 established a requirement that a minimum of one percent of an urbanized area’s annual Section 5307 Program allocation be spent of transit enhancement projects. Examples of eligible transit enhancements include passenger shelters, bicycle racks on transit vehicles, transit connections to parks, and projects that preserve historic transit facilities.

50

In the 2030 Public Transportation Needs report, the following transit enhancement needs, totaling $1.6 million, were identified. A sufficient amount of Transit Enhancement funding is forecasted to be available to meet these needs, and they are recommended for inclusion in the Regional Transportation Plan:

• Bus Stop Shelters/Benches - Shelters help to mitigate one of the disadvantages of using transit service: waiting outside in inclement weather. Where shelters are impractical, benches can provide a place for passengers to sit while waiting for their bus to arrive. The total cost of METRO’s and PARTA’s shelter and bench needs between now and 2030 is estimated to be $1 million and $100,000 respectively.

• Bus Stop Signage – Bus Stop Signage is essential for designating the locations of bus stops for

fixed route transit service. $25,000 is recommended for METRO for bus stop signage and $15,000 for PARTA.

• Bus Bicycle Racks - Both METRO and PARTA have proposed equipping their buses with racks to

carry passengers’ bicycles. The rationale being that it will improve access to both operators’ existing bus service, and thereby increase the usage of the transit systems. The cost to equip all of METRO’s large buses is estimated to be $300,000. Currently, all of the former Campus Bus Service buses in PARTA’s fleet are equipped with bicycle racks. The cost to equip all of the remaining buses in PARTA’s fleet is estimated to be $81,000.

Specialized Transportation Program (FTA Section 5310) The Specialized Transportation Program is an important program that meets the special transportation needs of the disabled and elderly. These funds are to be used for the purchase of equipment to support transportation services for the elderly and disabled where existing transportation is unavailable, inappropriate, or insufficient. The total cost to continue the Specialized Transportation Program between now and 2030 will be $2.2 million. RIDESHARE! Program The RIDESHARE! Program helps commuters find potential carpool or vanpool partners and encourages people to use public transportation. This program is recommended for continuation at the current level through 2030. The estimated cost to do so is estimated to be $1.8 million. It is assumed that funding for the RIDESHARE! Program will continue to come from the CMAQ program. Secondary Public Transportation Recommendations Balance of Preventive Maintenance Needs As noted in the primary recommendations, the amount of funding that has been forecasted is insufficient to support all of the preventive maintenance needs. Discretionary federal funds are not eligible to be used towards preventive maintenance expenses. However, if additional discretionary funding becomes available for the purchase of buses, then an equivalent amount of Section 5307 Formula funds could be shifted towards this balance of preventive maintenance expenses. The unfunded balance of METRO and PARTA preventive maintenance expenses is $29.1 million and $9.9 million, respectively. METRO Automatic Vehicle Locator System Phase 2 Currently, all of METRO’s SCAT buses are equipped with automatic vehicle locator (AVL) equipment. Phase 2 of this project is to purchase and install AVL equipment on all buses assigned to fixed-route service. Phase 2 is estimated to cost $1.5 million.

51

Rehabilitation of METRO and PARTA Bus Garages PARTA needs to replace the roof on their existing bus garage at an estimated cost of $225,000. One of METRO’s bus storage garages is in need of a major rehabilitation (or possibly a complete replacement) due to its age. The total cost is estimated to be $2 million. Improvements to PARTA Summit Road Administration and Maintenance Facility A number of improvements to PARTA’s Administration and Maintenance Facility on Summit Road have been identified as needs. These improvements are recommended for implementation if additional funding becomes available:

• Vehicle service lanes for more efficient fueling, cleaning, washing, and servicing of PARTA buses • Additional vehicle garage doors in order to finish the transformation of the former warehouse

building into a bus storage building • Additional vehicle lifts, mechanic tool sets, diagnostic equipment, and other equipment to

maintain the recently expanded fleet • Expanded fueling capacity • Paving of the parking lot and implementation of storm water improvements

The total cost of the projects listed above is estimated to be $2.6 million. Additional METRO Bus Garage Currently, a portion of METRO’s bus fleet must be stored outside when not in service. METRO has proposed constructing an additional bus storage structure. It is likely that this will be a canopy style structure. This project is estimated to cost $1.3 million. Feasibility Study of Rail Service in the Canton-Akron-Kent Corridor During the past decade, local passenger rail service has been proposed for several rail corridors in the Akron metropolitan area. The most recent proposal was contained in METRO’s Transit Development Plan (TDP), which was completed in 2003. The TDP recommends that METRO implement passenger rail service along the rail lines that it owns. METRO has since expressed a desire to follow up this TDP recommendation with a feasibility study of passenger rail service in the corridor extending between Canton to Akron and Kent. METRO has stated that the purpose of this Canton-Akron-Kent rail service would be to provide an alternative mode of transportation for travelers in their service area and provide additional linkages to the transit systems in Stark and Portage Counties. METRO has indicated that there are differences between the type of service now envisioned for the Canton-Akron-Kent corridor and to the type of rail service that has been considered in previous studies and proposals. The differences include: 1) the use of self propelled rail cars rather than locomotive hauled passenger coaches in order to reduce capital and operating costs; 2) a system design that is focused on Akron rather than Cleveland; 3) the use of METRO-owned rail lines exclusively, in order to eliminate the usage fees and operating limitations that can be imposed by freight railroads for the use of their lines; and 4) more frequent stops to attract more potential ridership. The cost of this feasibility study is estimated to be $100,000.

52

Transportation Enhancement Recommendations The transportation enhancement recommendations were drawn entirely from the 2030 Transportation Enhancement Needs report. The transportation enhancement recommendations are shown in Map III-3 and summarized in Table III-6. In prioritizing the 2030 transportation enhancement needs and selecting the plan recommendations, priority was first given to projects already programmed in the AMATS 2004-2007 Transportation Improvement Program. The remaining bikeway projects were prioritized by regional importance until the funding was exhausted. The total cost of the 35 bikeway projects recommended is $37.1 million. Non-bikeway enhancement needs were prioritized using the project evaluation criteria described in the AMATS Funding Policy Guidelines of September 2003. The criteria used to prioritize non-bikeway projects were based on:

• Direct Relationship to Transportation • Service to Special Populations • Project Type

The non-bikeway enhancement projects which include pedestrian, historic/archaeological, and scenic/environmental enhancements were then placed into priority groups. Funding was allocated for each project, in priority order, until the funding was exhausted. The total cost of the 11 non-bikeway projects recommended is $6.2 million. Approximately $18.5 million in federal funding will be available for transportation enhancements between now and 2030. Local matching funds totaling $4.6 million would include funds from park boards and other sponsors. In addition, $2 million in federal STP funds will be available between now and 2030. The total cost of the transportation enhancement recommendations is $43.3 million. The amount of funding forecasted to be available between now and 2030 is insufficient to include all of the transportation enhancement needs that were identified in the 2030 Transportation Enhancement Needs report. Unfunded transportation enhancement needs are listed in Appendix G. The total cost of these projects is estimated to be $31.8 million. The transportation enhancement recommendations are described in greater detail in the following section.

53

54

8

8

5

8

5

14

59

91

21

82

44

59

18

43

44

21

94

21

14

44

43

82

93

91

94

44

14

43

44 88

14

59

82

43

91

21

57

82

18

8844

305

77

77

80

80

76

77

77

76

80

76

76

76

176

764

585

532

241

162

261

619

303

241

306

225

604

619

183

261

183

303

225

261

282

303

236

303

700

277

271

480

271

480

224 224

422

224224

224224

Map III-32030 TRANSPORTATION ENHANCEMENT

RECOMMENDATIONSRegional Bikeway RecommendationFeeder Bikeway RecommendationExisting or Committed BikewaysNon-bikeway Recommendation May 2005

±0 1 2 3 4

Miles

56

Back of Map III-3

Remove this page before copying

PROJECT FROM TO Project TypeTotal Cost of

ProjectCOMMITTED ENHANCEMENTSAkron curb ramps Phase 2 various locations Pedestrian SOLDOhio & Erie Canal Towpath Trail Manchester Rd US 224/I-277 Bike Path $266,432 *Ohio & Erie Canal Towpath Trail - underpass of Waterloo Rd Waterloo Rd Bike Path $625,000Ohio & Erie Canal Towpath Trail Waterloo Rd Wilbeth Rd Bike Path $907,458Ohio & Erie Canal Towpath Trail Wilbeth Rd Kenmore Blvd Bike Path $1,005,430Ohio & Erie Canal Towpath Trail Kenmore Blvd Summit Lake Park Bike Path $1,341,876Ohio & Erie Canal Towpath Trail - Akron Bikeway Phase 2-B Lock 2 Park Ash & Quaker Sts Bike Path $1,047,000Ohio & Erie Canal Towpath Trail - Akron Bikeway Phase 2-A Ash & Quaker Sts north of Innerbelt (SR 59) Bike Path $1,974,000Ohio & Erie Canal Towpath Trail - Cascade Locks Phase I north of Innerbelt (SR 59) North St Bike Path $625,000 *The Portage Horning Segment - SR 261 Loop Rd Horning Rd at SR 261 bridge Bike Path $267,231The Portage Bikeway over SR 261 Horning Rd Dix Stadium Bike Path $479,000Stow Bike and Hike Trail Southeast Metro Parks Bike & Hike Trail Graham Rd Bike Path SOLDBIKEWAYS - REGIONALTHE TOWPATH TRAIL: Ohio & Erie Canal Towpath Trail Center Rd Snyder Ave Bike Path $1,000,000 *Ohio & Erie Canal Towpath Trail US 224/I-277 Waterloo Rd Bike Path $76,000 *Ohio & Erie Canal Towpath Trailhead SE corner of Wilbeth Rd Bike Path $722,180 *Ohio & Erie Canal Towpath Trail Bartges St N of Bartges St Bike Path $114,000THE PORTAGE HIKE AND BIKE TRAIL: The Portage Hike and Bike Trail Summit/Portage Co line Breakneck Creek Bike Path $1,482,000The Portage Hike and Bike Trail Breakneck Creek The Hike & Bike Trail extension Bike Path $456,000Summit St Conrail Freedom Secondary Lincoln St Bike Lanes $1,102,950The Portage Hike and Bike Trail (The Esplanade) - parallel to Summit St Lincoln St Loop Rd Bike Path $380,000

The Portage Hike and Bike Trail - parallel to Summit St Dix Stadium North-South Trail Bike Path $228,000The Portage Hike and Bike Trail (North-South Trail) Summit Rd Towner's Woods Park Bike Path $912,000The Portage Hike and Bike Trail Chestnut St Trumbull Co line Bike Path $5,244,000THE TALLMADGE TRAIL:

Cuyahoga Valley Scenic Railroad Corridor Towpath TrailConrail Freedom Secondary/ CVS RR junction Bike Path $1,038,450

Conrail Freedom Secondary Corridor (Tallmadge Trail)Conrail Freedom Secondary/ CVS RR junction Southwest Ave Bike Path $1,038,450

Conrail Freedom Secondary Corridor (Tallmadge Trail) N Munroe Rd Summit/Portage Co line Bike Path $494,000

TRANSPORTATION ENHANCEMENT RECOMMENDATIONSTable III-6

57

PROJECT FROM TO Project TypeTotal Cost of

Project

TRANSPORTATION ENHANCEMENT RECOMMENDATIONSTable III-6

THE WESTERN RESERVE HERITAGE TRAIL (HEADWATERS BIKEWAY):Headwaters Bikeway Aurora NCL Treat Rd Bike Path $1,400,000Headwaters Bikeway Treat Rd Mennonite Rd Bike Path $1,098,650Headwaters Trail Trailhead Facilities - Mantua Twp At Mennonite Rd Bike Path $150,000Headwaters Bikeway Asbury Rd SR 700 Bike Path $342,000Headwaters Bikeway SR 82 Horn Rd Bike Path $632,100METRO PARKS BIKE & HIKE TRAIL:Metro Parks Bike & Hike Trail Realignment Brandywine Rd on south Brandywine Rd on north Bike Path $1,000,000BIKEWAYS - FEEDERSmith Rd Power Line Trail Hametown/Medina Rds Towpath Trail Bike Path/Route $2,280,000Mud Brook Trail Towpath Trail - Akron Peninsula Rd Hampshire Rd Bike Path/Route $2,280,000Wolf Creek/Pigeon Creek Trail and Greenway Hopocan Ave W (Lake Dorothy Trail) Fairlawn Bike Path $3,192,000Rubber City Heritage Trail (ABC RR Corridor) Towpath Trail E. Market St (SR 18) Bike Path $1,900,000NON-BIKEWAY PROJECTSArea-wide curb ramps various locations Pedestrian $2,000,000 **Brittain Rd Sidewalks Eastwood Ave Tallmadge Ave Pedestrian $340,000Riverfront Pedestrian Walkway, along Cuyahoga River, Kent Crain Ave River Bend Blvd Pedestrian $376,000E Main St Pedestrian Safety Improvements Frances Dr Sixth Ave Pedestrian $250,000Munroe Falls Ave Sidewalk Improvement Cuyahoga Falls CL SR 91 Pedestrian $146,000N River Rd Sidewalk Improvement SR 91 Stow CL Pedestrian $157,119SR 91 Sidewalk Improvement Munroe Falls Ave N River Rd Pedestrian $220,000SR 91 Sidewalk Improvement N River Rd Stow CL Pedestrian $85,507

Peninsula Historic District Sidewalk Restoration - SR 303 Emerson St Dell RdHistoric/ Archaeological $388,625

Vegetative Expressway Landscaping I-77 both sides, Akron Diagonal Rd Copley Rd

Scenic/ Environmental $2,200,640

$37,101,207$6,163,891

* Funding By Others** Funding with STP Funds Total Cost $43,265,098

Total Cost of Recommended BikewaysTotal Cost of Recommended Non-Bikeways

58

Regional Bikeway Recommendations Committed Bikeways The first group of regional bikeway recommendations includes all committed bikeways for which money has been spent or is programmed to be spent. These bikeways are included in the AMATS 2004-2007 Transportation Improvement Program. The projects include portions of the Ohio & Erie Canal Towpath Trail in Akron and two segments of The Portage Hike and Bike Trail in Franklin Township. The estimated cost of completing the committed bikeways is $8.5 million. The Towpath Trail The Towpath Trail recommendation includes remaining portions of the Ohio & Erie Canal Towpath Trail in Summit County not yet committed or constructed. When completed, the Towpath Trail will run for 110 miles from Cleveland to New Philadelphia. Additional support for the Towpath Trail from other agencies has resulted in alternate sources of funding to be secured. The remaining uncommitted portion of the Towpath Trail in Akron from Bartges Street to approximately 0.3 miles north of Bartges Street is estimated to cost $114,000. The Portage Hike and Bike Trail The Portage Hike and Bike Trail runs through central Portage County. When completed, it will serve as an east-west link to trails in Summit and Trumbull Counties. Several segments of this trail already exist. Two segments are included in the AMATS 2004-2007 Transportation Improvement Program. This trail system is estimated to cost $9.8 million. The Tallmadge Trail This bikeway extends from the Towpath Trail in the City of Akron to The Portage Hike and Bike Trail in Portage County. This trail is generally completed within the City of Tallmadge. The estimated cost of this recommended trail system is $2.6 million. The Western Reserve Heritage Trail The Western Reserve Heritage Trail follows an east-west railroad right of way in the northern portion of Portage County. Several miles have been completed. Completing the Western Reserve Heritage Trail is estimated to cost $3.6 million. Metro Parks Bike & Hike Trail Realignment This bikeway recommendation is a realignment of the trail from its current alignment on Brandywine Road, which is narrow and curving, to a new off-road alignment. The new alignment would provide a separate crossing of I-271. The bikeway is located in Northfield Center Township and Sagamore Hills Township and is part of the Summit County Trail and Greenway Plan. The estimated cost of this recommended trail is $1 million. Feeder Bikeway Recommendations This group of recommended bikeways consists of four feeder bikeways that connect into the regional trails and are part of the Summit County Trail and Greenway Plan. The bikeways include the Smith Road Power Line Trail, Mud Brook Trail, Wolf Creek/Pigeon Creek Trail and Greenway, and the Rubber City Heritage Trail (ABC Railway Corridor). The estimated cost of these recommended bikeways is $9.7 million.

59

Non-Bikeway Recommendations Area-wide Curb Ramps Area-wide curb ramps are a pedestrian facility. The need for curb ramps was established by the Federal Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The ADA requires that public entities, when newly constructing or altering streets, roads and highways, must provide curb ramps at intersections with curbs or other barriers to entry from street level pedestrian walkways. A court decision has established that resurfacing a street or highway is to be construed as altering the facility; therefore, curb ramps must be provided as part of the resurfacing if none are present. ODOT Urban Paving Policy allows ODOT to resurface state routes within a municipality even though ODOT is not required to do so under the Ohio Revised Code. However, ODOT only provides the resurfacing thereby establishing a need for the community to install the ramps. The estimated cost of area-wide curb ramps is $2 million. Because TEP funds are limited for transportation enhancement projects, alternate funding from STP funds is apportioned for the area-wide curb ramps. Akron – Brittain Road Sidewalks This pedestrian facility consists of construction of sidewalks, curb ramps, and related items in areas where no sidewalks exist along a 1.2-mile stretch of Brittain Road from Eastwood Avenue to Tallmadge Avenue. Sidewalks do not exist along most of this stretch. Both commercial and residential structures abut this portion of Brittain Road. The estimated cost of this project is $340,000. Akron – Vegetative Expressway Landscaping, I-77 both sides This project is under the scenic/environmental enhancement category. It consists of the vegetative landscaping along both sides of I-77 from Diagonal Road to Copley Road (SR 162) in the City of Akron. The estimated cost of this recommended project is $2.2 million. Kent – Riverfront Pedestrian Walkway, along Cuyahoga River This project is a pedestrian walkway that parallels the Cuyahoga River from Crain Avenue north to River Bend Boulevard in the City of Kent. The estimated cost of this project is $376,000. Kent and Franklin Twp. – E. Main Street Pedestrian Safety Improvements This pedestrian facility on E. Main Street (SR 59) runs from Francis Drive in Kent to Sixth Avenue in Franklin Township. The project includes the installation of a pedestrian island crossing point near Horning Road and landscaping to direct pedestrians to the island. The construction of new sidewalks on the north side from 1627 E. Main Street to Sixth Avenue is also included in the project. The estimated cost of this project is $250,000. Munroe Falls – Munroe Falls Avenue Sidewalk Improvement Four pedestrian enhancements are recommended for the City of Munroe Falls to connect schools, the CBD, the Bike and Hike Trail, and residential neighborhoods. The first, the Munroe Falls Avenue Sidewalk Improvement, includes the construction of new sidewalks, where none currently exist, on Munroe Falls Avenue from the Cuyahoga Falls Corporation Limits to SR 91. This recommended project is estimated to cost $146,000.

60

Munroe Falls – North River Road Sidewalk Improvement The second pedestrian project in the City of Munroe Falls calls for constructing new sidewalks, where none currently exist, on North River Road from SR 91 to the Stow Corporation Limits. The estimated cost of this project is $157,000. Munroe Falls – SR 91 Sidewalk Improvement, Munroe Falls Avenue The third pedestrian project in the City of Munroe Falls calls for the construction of new sidewalks, where none currently exist, on Main Street (SR 91) from Munroe Falls Avenue to North River Road. This project is estimated to cost $220,000. Munroe Falls – SR 91 Sidewalk Improvement, North River Road This project in the City of Munroe Falls includes the construction of new sidewalks, where none currently exist, on Main Street (SR 91) from North River Road to the Stow Corporation Limits. The estimated cost of this project is $86,000. Peninsula – Peninsula Historic District Sidewalk Restoration, SR 303 This project is under the historic/archaeological enhancement category. It consists of repair and/or replacement of the existing sandstone sidewalks and curbs along SR 303 from Emerson Street to Dell Road. The project area is within the Village of Peninsula’s National Historic District. The sidewalks link the Ohio & Erie Canal Towpath Trail to the Village of Peninsula with its shops, restaurants, churches, historic sites, and library. In addition to the sidewalk rehabilitation, the project would include all incidental work such as driveway pavement repair, grade changes, retaining walls, and restoration. The estimated cost of this project is $389,000.

61

SUMMARY AMATS is responsible for preparing and maintaining a regional transportation plan that meets the travel needs of residents in Summit and Portage counties and Chippewa Township in Wayne County. The 2030 Regional Transportation Plan ensures that transportation improvements proposed in local communities are planned and coordinated on a regional basis. The Plan also serves as a guide to local officials in implementing transportation projects with federal funds. Projects must be consistent with the Plan in order to be eligible to receive funding assistance from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and the Federal Transit Administration (FTA). The Plan has been developed based on goals and objectives established by the AMATS Policy Committee as described in Appendix A. The recommendations were reviewed for conformance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the environmental justice requirements of Executive Order #12898 of 1994. An environmental justice analysis of the recommended highway, public transportation, and transportation enhancement projects is shown in Appendix B. This analysis demonstrates that the recommendations provide equitable benefits to low-income and minority groups in terms of accessibility and the overall level of investment in transportation facilities. The Plan also takes into account the social, economic, and environmental (SEE) characteristics of the area. A SEE factor inventory is shown in Appendix C. The inventory identifies SEE factors that could be potentially impacted by a transportation project. These factors should be considered by implementing agencies in later stages of project development as detailed environmental analyses are completed. The Plan must show conformity with the region’s air quality implementation plan in accordance with the Clean Air Act (CAA) as amended in 1990. The transportation projects that are expected to be completed between now and 2030 are able to demonstrate air quality conformity. The air quality conformity analysis is described in Appendix D. The Plan has been developed to meet regional travel needs in a fiscally sound manner. A financial forecast was completed to estimate the amount of funding expected to be available to the Akron metropolitan area between now and 2030. The financial resources forecast is shown in Appendix E. The Plan was developed in cooperation with elected officials and members of the public. Two rounds of public involvement meetings were held in order to provide the public with an opportunity to review and comment on the regional transportation policies and projects that are described in the Plan. The first set of meetings focused on identifying regional transportation needs. The second set of meetings focused on the draft 2030 Regional Transportation Plan. Appendix F documents these meetings.

62

Approximately $2.7 billion is recommended for transportation improvements between now and 2030. This equates to 61 percent of the nearly $4.4 billion in transportation improvement needs that have been identified in this document. The unfunded transportation needs are shown in Appendix G. Additional transportation funding will need to be made available before these projects can be implemented. Table III-7 compares total expenditures by travel mode. This information is also illustrated in Figure III-1.

Table III-7 TOTAL EXPENDITURES BY TRAVEL MODE

Travel Mode Total Expenditures

Highways $2,350,383,000 Public Transportation $294,270,000 Transportation Enhancements $43,266,000

PLAN TOTAL $2,687,919,000 Public Transportation - Secondary* $46,600,000

* Contingent upon the availability of funds. The cost of the secondary public transportation recommendations is not included in the Plan total.

Figure III-1: Expenditures by Travel Mode

Highways 87%

Public Transportation

11%Transportation Enhancements

2%

The 2030 Regional Transportation Plan makes a substantial commitment to maintain the existing transportation system. Of the $2.7 billion in project recommendations, $1.7 billion, or 63 percent, is reserved for projects that preserve and maintain the operation of the existing transportation system, as illustrated in Figure III-2.

63

Figure III-2: Expenditures by Project Type

System Preservation

63% System Expansion

37%

In keeping with the continuing nature of metropolitan transportation planning, preliminary work on developing the next regional transportation plan is already underway. As always, this process will include many opportunities for elected officials, and the public that they serve, to work together in developing a regional transportation plan that meets the needs of area residents.

64

APPENDICES

A - 1

APPENDIX A

REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

AMATS Mission Statement

The Policy Committee of the Akron Metropolitan Area Transportation Study is a regional organization of local officials responsible for carrying out multimodal transportation and air quality planning under local direction and in accordance with federal and state regulations. The AMATS area encompasses the Akron metropolitan region that includes Summit and Portage Counties and Chippewa Township in Wayne County. In pursuing these responsibilities AMATS aims to:

• Improve the quality of life of the region's citizens by identifying ways to maintain, improve, and enhance the region’s transportation system and improve air quality.

• Assist member local governments and agencies in addressing local and regional

issues in a cooperative manner.

• Assure the equitable flow and prudent expenditure of public funds. AMATS supports these aims by:

• Serving as a forum of local public officials for regional debate and intergovernmental cooperation.

• Encouraging local decision-making in harmony with the region's transportation

and air quality plans. • Maintaining federal designations and planning processes, and meeting federal

and state requirements for regional programs. • Seeking the equitable return of state and federal transportation funds to the

region for use in meeting locally determined needs. • Providing information and technical planning support for the benefit of member

communities and agencies to enable the best use of public resources. • Advocating the interests of the region with state and federal officials.

A - 2

AMATS Regional Transportation Goals and Objectives To develop a transportation system which will serve the existing and future needs of the residents and businesses in the AMATS area and enhance their quality of life. The transportation system should meet the following goals and objectives:

GOAL 1 THE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM SHOULD REFLECT

AND SUPPORT THE VALUES AND PLANNING OBJECTIVES OF AREA COMMUNITIES AND NEIGHBORHOODS

A. Coordinate regional transportation planning with local plans.

• Provide the opportunity for local officials to review and comment on regional transportation plans, programs, and land use and development forecasts.

• Collect and review the comprehensive plans of local communities and agencies.

• Use data and solicit comments from regional planning agencies (such as NEFCO and the Portage County Regional Planning Commission) for use in land use and development forecasts.

B. Encourage and make use of public involvement and input in the planning

process.

• Hold special public meetings to solicit input during the development of the Regional Transportation Plan and Transportation Improvement Program

• Hold regular AMATS Citizens Involvement Committee meetings prior to AMATS Policy Committee meetings.

C. Conduct the planning process in conformance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act

of 1964 and Executive Order 12898 – Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low Income Populations.

• Identify and address disproportionately high and adverse human health

and environmental effects, including the interrelated social and economic effects, of transportation plans and programs on minority and low-income populations.

A - 3

GOAL 2 THE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM SHOULD ENCOURAGE

DESIRABLE DEVELOPMENT PATTERNS A. Coordinate the development of transportation facilities and land use.

• Coordinate transportation improvements with regional and local infrastruc-

ture plans. • Preserve and maintain the vitality of the AMATS area Central Business

Districts, as well as developed communities and neighborhoods. B. Minimize the adverse effects of transportation facilities on land use, in order to

protect and preserve neighborhoods and communities.

• Discourage through and industrial traffic on residential streets. • Identify and preserve historical sites, parks and public areas. • Identify future transportation corridors and recommend that member

communities use land use control policies and procedures to preserve those corridors.

• Consider urban sprawl and farmland preservation issues in the development of regional transportation plans and programs.

• Ensure careful examination that unused or potentially abandoned rail, canal or other rights of way are not reconfigured or placed in service in such a way as to disadvantage or compromise the integrity of an existing neighborhood or community.

C. Minimize the adverse effects of land use changes on the transportation system.

• Review and comment on the potential effects of specific land use decisions on the transportation system.

• Encourage local communities and developers to follow the recommendations of the AMATS guide for “Transportation Access to Development”

A - 4

GOAL 3 THE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM SHOULD BE SAFE AND SECURE

A. Minimize highway accidents and provide safe travel routes.

• Identify and monitor locations with a high number of accidents. • Encourage the implementation of Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS)

improvements that can aid in quickly identifying and clearing crashes and other incidents on area roadways.

B. Minimize pedestrian, bicycle, train, and vehicle conflicts.

• Where appropriate, encourage the construction of pedestrian walkways

and sidewalks to separate pedestrian and vehicle traffic. • Where appropriate, encourage the construction of bikeways and bicycle

lanes to separate bicycle and motorized vehicle traffic. • Encourage highway designs that improve pedestrian and cyclist safety. • Where appropriate, encourage safety improvements at highway/railroad

crossings. C. Improve the safety of transit facilities and operations.

• Encourage the purchase of transit vehicles designed to maximize passenger and operator safety.

• Encourage transit facility designs that maximize passenger and operator safety.

D. Improve the security of the transportation system.

• Consider the security of transportation facilities and transportation system users in the development of regional transportation plans and programs.

A - 5

GOAL 4 THE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM SHOULD MINIMIZE

ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS A. Minimize the adverse air, energy, and noise impacts related to transportation

facilities.

• Encourage the use of public transportation, carpooling and vanpooling, in order to minimize single-occupant vehicle use and growth in vehicle miles traveled.

• Encourage transportation improvements which decrease single-occupant vehicle use and vehicle miles traveled.

• Evaluate the air quality impacts of transportation plans and programs.

B. Minimize the adverse impacts of transportation facilities on historic, archaeologi-cal, and other environmentally sensitive areas.

• Identify the general impacts of alternate transportation improvements on

historic and archaeological sites, lakes, streams, reservoirs and flood plains, wetlands, natural areas, neighborhoods, parks, cemeteries and public facilities.

A - 6

GOAL 5 THE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM SHOULD PROVIDE

MOBILITY FOR ALL PERSONS A. Encourage a public transit system that provides basic mobility for transit

dependent persons and provides an alternative to automobile usage.

• Encourage transit service to be provided where development densities and ridership warrants.

• Encourage the transit operators to provide specialized transit service to those persons unable to use regular fixed route service because of disability.

• Encourage transit vehicle and facility access to be consistent with the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act.

• Identify residential areas with significant concentrations of transit dependent persons and evaluate whether they are adequately served by transit.

• Encourage service coordination among METRO, PARTA, and the neighboring transit operators

B. Encourage the development of a regional network of bicycle routes. C. Encourage the placement of sidewalks and other pedestrian facilities where they

are appropriate.

A - 7

GOAL 6 THE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM SHOULD BE

ECONOMICALLY SOUND

A. Develop regional transportation plans and programs that are financially

constrained.

• Forecast federal transportation funding to determine the amount of funding available to support project recommendations.

B. Evaluate the cost effectiveness of transportation facilities and services.

• Utilize costs and benefits to compare transportation alternatives. • Consider traffic engineering and other effective, low-cost improvements to

existing highways to increase or preserve the capacities of these facilities. • Consider the life-cycle costs of proposed transportation improvements.

C. Consider improvements to existing highways, transit or rail facilities before planning for new facilities.

D. Encourage shifts to transportation modes where excess capacity exists, such as

public transportation, carpooling and vanpooling, before implementing new improvements.

• Encourage the development of park-and-ride lots to increase access to

public transit services, carpooling and vanpooling.

A - 8

GOAL 7 THE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM SHOULD PROVIDE

FOR EFFICIENT TRAVEL A. Minimize traffic congestion.

• For planning purposes, all urban freeways should operate at Level of Service (LOS) “D” or better, and all other roadways should operate at LOS “C” or better.

B. Minimize overcrowding on scheduled transit services.

• Provide sufficient capacity for transit passengers (125% of seated capacity

in peak hours, 100% in off-peak hours). C. Allow trips to be completed in as direct a manner, and in as short a time as

possible.

• Develop the transportation system such that all major travel movements can be accomplished with a minimum of turning, interchanging or trans-ferring.

• Encourage total transit travel time to be as competitive as possible with automobile travel time by minimizing walk, wait, transfer, and ride time.

D. Maximize the operational efficiency of the transportation system.

• Encourage highway operational efficiencies through traffic engineering improvements and ITS technologies such as advanced traffic signal control systems.

• Encourage transit operational efficiencies through the use of ITS technologies.

• Periodically analyze the operational performance of the region’s fixed route transit service.

• Encourage system operating efficiencies through the development of projects that provide direct connections between modes.

A - 9

GOAL 8 THE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM SHOULD FUNCTION

IN A FULLY INTEGRATED MANNER A. Encourage the development of a balanced, integrated, multimodal transportation

system that includes highways, transit, bikeways, pedestrian, rail, and air facilities.

B. Encourage the development of intermodal transportation facilities.

C. Identify and consider transportation facilities that serve national and regional

functions.

• Consider regionally significant railroad lines, airports, and intermodal facilities to be important transportation links.

• Consider the connectivity of roadways included in the National Highway System a planning priority.

D. Ensure that projects are not evaluated in isolation.

• Coordinate transportation planning among modes. • Consider corridor connectivity in highway planning on the basis of Federal

Functional Classification.

A - 10

GOAL 9 THE EXISTING TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM SHOULD

BE PRESERVED, MAINTAINED AND ENHANCED A. Give priority to resurfacing, restoration, and rehabilitation, improvements in the

development of regional transportation plans and programs.

• Consider Federal Functional Classification in identifying major roadways for preservation.

• Incorporate ODOT’s pavement and bridge condition reporting systems into the regional planning process.

B. Give priority to transit vehicle replacements, preventive maintenance, and facility

rehabilitations in the development of regional transportation plans and programs.

• Consider the average age of the bus fleet and the condition of transit facilities in the planning process.

C. Identify regionally significant rail or other transportation rights of way, that are

unused or potentially abandoned, and encourage their preservation for alternative uses in keeping with regional, local community, and neighborhood objectives.

A - 11

GOAL 10 THE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM SHOULD SUPPORT THE ECONOMIC VITALITY

OF THE METROPOLITAN AREA A. Develop a transportation system that will provide superior mobility for the

movement of goods and freight. B. Coordinate with local communities and regional agencies (such as NEFCO,

NEOTEC, and GAC) as part of the transportation planning process. C. Encourage the implementation of transportation improvements that will promote

sound economic growth.

B - 1

APPENDIX B

ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ANALYSIS INTRODUCTION According to the AMATS Regional Transportation Goals and Objectives, the transportation system should reflect and support the values and planning objectives of area communities and neighborhoods by ensuring that the planning process is conducted in conformance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the environmental justice requirements of Presidential Executive Order #12898 of 1994. The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Office of Environmental Justice defines environmental justice as: The fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color, national origin, or income with respect to the development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations and policies. Fair treatment means that no group of people, including racial, ethnic, or socio-economic group, should bear a disproportionate share of the negative environmental consequences resulting from industrial, municipal, and commercial operations or the execution of federal, state, local and tribal programs and policies. This means that programs or activities which use federal funds must make a meaningful effort to involve low-income and minority groups in the process to make decisions regarding the use of federal funds. It also means that agencies using federal funds must attempt to identify and address any disproportionately high and adverse human health and environmental effects on minority and low-income groups, which may result from the implementation of their plans and programs. According to Presidential Executive Order #12898, disproportionately high and adverse effects are those that will be predominately borne by minority or low-income groups; or those which will be suffered by minority and low-income groups in a manner that is appreciably more severe or greater in magnitude than those which will be suffered by non-minority and non-low-income groups. In keeping with the environmental justice requirements that the recipients of federal funds make greater efforts to involve low-income and minority populations in the decision-making process, the public involvement activities conducted by AMATS ensure that low-income, minority individuals, and community groups have the opportunity to participate in the transportation planning process. Community groups representing minority and low-income populations are included on the AMATS mailing list. These groups are made aware of opportunities to participate in the planning process by advertising public meetings in three newspapers: 1) The Akron Beacon Journal; 2) The Kent-Ravenna Record Courier; and 3) The Reporter (a publication that serves the African-American community).

B - 2

METHODOLOGY In addition to involving low-income and minority populations in the planning process, environmental justice also means assessing the impact of transportation plans, programs, and policies on low-income and minority populations. In order to accomplish this, the following questions must be considered:

• What are low-income and minority populations? • How should these populations be identified? • Which environmental impacts should be considered? • What are the potential impacts of recommended projects on low-income and

minority populations? • What is the overall level of accessibility in low-income and minority

neighborhoods? • What is the overall level of investment in transportation infrastructure in areas

with regionally significant concentrations of minority and low-income populations? Definitions According to the final United States Department of Transportation (USDOT) Order 5610.2 on Environmental Justice, contained in the Federal Register (April 15, 1997): Low Income is defined as a person whose median household income is at or below the Department of Health and Human Services poverty guidelines. Minority is defined as a person who is: 1) Black (a person having origins in any of the black racial groups of Africa); 2) Hispanic (a person of Mexican, Puerto Rican, Cuban, Central or South American, or other Spanish culture or origin, regardless of race); 3) Asian (a person having origins in any of the original peoples of the Far East, Southeast Asia, the Indian subcontinent, or the Pacific Islands); or 4) American Indian and Alaskan Native (a person having origins in any of the original people of North America and who maintain cultural identification through tribal affiliation or community recognition). Identifying Concentrations of Low-Income and Minority Population Although low-income and minority persons live throughout the AMATS area, many are concentrated in specific locations and neighborhoods. The following methodology was used to identify regionally significant concentrations of low-income and minority groups:

• Concentrations of low-income households were identified by comparing the percentage of households below the poverty level in each traffic analysis zone to the percentage of such households in the entire AMATS area. The data used in this analysis were obtained from the 2000 Census. Traffic analysis zones with a percentage of households below the poverty level that was twice the regional average of 10.5%, were considered to be regionally significant concentrations of low-income households. These traffic analysis zones are shown on Map B-1.

B - 3

• Concentrations of minority population were identified by comparing the percentage of minorities living in each traffic analysis zone to the percentage of such persons living in the entire AMATS area. The data used in this analysis were obtained from the 2000 Census. Traffic analysis zones with a percentage of minorities that was twice the regional average of 13.9%, were considered to be regionally significant concentrations of minority population. These traffic analysis zones are shown on Map B-2.

Environmental Impacts According to the U.S. Department of Transportation, adverse impacts are defined as significant individual or cumulative negative human health or environmental effects, resulting from the implementation of federal, state, or local transportation policies, plans, or projects. By reviewing environmental justice guidance developed by ODOT, the following ten variables have been identified as a means of qualitatively evaluating the environmental impacts of projects recommended in the 2030 Regional Transportation Plan that are located in low-income or minority areas:

1) Safety - How will the project affect the relative safety of those using the facility and living in the target area?

2) Pollution - How will the project affect the overall air quality, water quality, noise level, or soil quality of the target area?

3) Natural Resources - How will the project affect vegetation, streams, parks, or other aspects of the natural environment in the target area?

4) Aesthetics - How will the project affect the appearance and physical attractiveness of the target area?

5) Community Cohesion - How will the project affect the identity and cohesiveness of the target area?

6) Economic Vitality - How will the project affect the economic health of the target area?

7) Accessibility - How will the project affect the level of access to, or from, the target area?

8) Displacement of Businesses or Residents - How will the project affect businesses, residents, and institutions in the target area? Will it displace any of them?

9) Traffic Congestion - How will the project affect existing levels of traffic congestion?

10) Equal Access to Improvement - Will the overall benefits of the project be as available to residents of the target area as they will be to the region as a whole?

B - 4

AKRON

GREEN

HUDSON

AURORA

STOW

NORTON

NEW FRANKLIN

STREETSBORO

KENT

CUYAHOGA FALLS

TALLMADGE

TWINSBURGMACEDONIA

RICHFIELD

BARBERTON

RAVENNA

FAIRLAWN

CLINTON

PENINSULA

MANTUA

BOSTON HEIGHTSWINDHAM

MUNROE FALLS

LAKEMORE

GARRETTSVILLE

HIRAM

SILVER LAKE

REMINDERVILLE

MOGADORE

DOYLESTOWN

NORTHFIELD

BRADY LAKE

SUGAR BUSH KNOLLS

21

44

93

91

94

57

77

76

8

8

5

8

5

14

59

91

82

59

18

43

44

21

94

21

14

44

43

82

44

14

43

44 88

14

59

82

43

91

21

82

18

8844

305

77

80

80

76

77

77

80

76

76

76

176

764

585

532

241

162

261

619

303

241

306

225

604

619

183

261

183

303

225

261

282

303

236

303

700

277

271

480

271

480

224 224

422

224224

224224

0.00% - 10.49%10.50% - 15.74%

15.75% - 20.99%21.00% - 100%

±0 1 2 3 4

Miles

May 2005

Map B-12030 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN

ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE SCANPERCENT LOW INCOME HOUSEHOLDS

BY TRAFFIC ANALYSIS ZONE

B - 6

Remove before copying

AKRON

GREEN

HUDSON

AURORA

STOW

NORTON

NEW FRANKLIN

STREETSBORO

KENT

CUYAHOGA FALLS

TALLMADGE

TWINSBURGMACEDONIA

RICHFIELD

BARBERTON

RAVENNA

CLINTON

PENINSULA

MANTUA

FAIRLAWN

BOSTON HEIGHTSWINDHAM

MUNROE FALLS

LAKEMORE

GARRETTSVILLE

HIRAM

SILVER LAKE

REMINDERVILLE

MOGADORE

DOYLESTOWN

NORTHFIELD

BRADY LAKE

SUGAR BUSH KNOLLS

8

8

5

8

5

14

59

91

21

82

44

59

18

43

44

21

94

21

14

44

43

82

93

91

94

44

14

43

44 88

14

59

82

43

91

21

57

82

18

8844

305

77

77

80

80

76

77

77

76

80

76

76

76

176

764

585

532

241

162

261

619

303

241

306

225

604

619

183

261

183

303

225

261

282

303

236

303

700

277

271

480

271

480

224 224

422

224224

224224

±0 1 2 3 4

Miles

May 2005

0.00% - 13.90%14.00% - 20.90%

21.00% - 27.80%27.90% - 100%

Map B-22030 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN

ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE SCANPERCENT MINORITIES BY TRAFFIC ANALYSIS ZONE

B - 8

Remove before copying

B - 9

ANALYSES Three analyses were developed to evaluate the potential adverse human health or environmental impacts of the recommended transportation improvements upon minority population and low-income households. These analyses examine: 1) the potential environmental impacts of projects; 2) transportation accessibility in low-income and minority neighborhoods; and 3) transportation investment in low-income and minority areas. Potential Environmental Impacts of Projects Highway, public transportation, and transportation enhancement improvements recommended in the 2030 Regional Transportation Plan were analyzed in order to determine potential impacts on low-income households and minority population. This analysis was completed according to the following procedure: Step 1 - Projects were examined to determine whether they were located in, or bordering on, an area that was identified as a regionally significant concentration of low-income households or minority population. Projects that were not located in or bordering on these areas were exempted from further analysis. Step 2 – The remaining projects were divided into eight categories: 1) major capacity improvements; 2) realignment or reconfiguration; 3) highway operational improvements; 4) public transportation system preservation; 5) public transportation system expansion; 6) bikeway facilities; 7) pedestrian facilities; and 8) scenic/environmental enhancements. The following project categories were exempted from further analysis because they are not expected to have any disproportionately high and adverse human health and environmental effects on minority and low-income groups:

• Highway operational improvements • Public transportation system preservation • Pedestrian facilities • Scenic/environmental enhancements

Step 3 - The remaining categories were qualitatively evaluated as to their environmental impacts because they have the potential of disproportionately high and adverse human health and environmental effects on minority and low-income groups:

• Major capacity improvements • Realignment or reconfiguration • Public transportation system expansion • Bikeway facilities

B - 10

The potential environmental impacts of highway, public transportation, and transportation enhancement projects are displayed in Table B-1. Projects that are expected to impact a variable in a positive manner are indicated by a "+." Projects that are expected to impact a variable in a neutral manner are indicated by an "n." Projects that could impact a variable in a negative manner are indicated by a "-." All of the projects shown in Table B-1 should be analyzed more closely as they move into later stages of development. Projects which were shown to have potential negative impacts should be closely scrutinized as more detailed environmental analyses are completed, in order to determine whether these negative impacts will be disproportionately borne by low-income or minority individuals or communities. Transportation Accessibility in Low-Income and Minority Neighborhoods One of the goals of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21) is to increase the accessibility and mobility options available to people and freight. This is especially crucial in low-income and minority communities, which often lack adequate access to recreational, shopping, and employment opportunities. Two analyses have been completed in order to determine the overall level of accessibility in low-income and minority neighborhoods. The first analysis focuses on the highway projects recommended in the 2030 Regional Transportation Plan. The second analysis focuses on the existing public transportation system. Transportation enhancement recommendations were exempted from the transportation accessibility analysis because these projects are used mostly for recreational purposes and are difficult to analyze quantitatively. Highway Accessibility Analysis The first step in the highway accessibility analysis was to identify a sample of six traffic analysis zones that represent low-income and minority neighborhoods: 1) West Akron; 2) East Akron; 3) North Akron; 4) Barberton; 5) Kent; and 6) Ravenna. The second step in the analysis was to identify traffic analysis zones that contain major activity centers. Altogether, 15 traffic analysis zones containing major commercial, industrial, medical, educational, transportation, and recreational facilities were identified:

1) Downtown Akron 2) Akron City Hospital 3) Akron General Hospital 4) Goodyear 5) Lockheed-Martin 6) Chrysler 7) Akron-Canton Airport 8) Geauga Lake Park

Table B-1POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF PROJECTS

Project From To Category Location Safe

ty

Pollu

tion

Nat

ural

re

sour

ces

Aes

thet

ics

Com

mun

ity

cohe

sion

Econ

omic

vi

talit

y

Acc

essi

bilit

y

Dis

plac

emen

t of

resi

dent

s/

busi

ness

es

Traf

fic

cong

estio

n

Equa

l acc

ess

to

impr

ovem

ent

HIGHWAY PROJECTSSR 14 SR 88 SR 5 Major capacity improvement Low Income + n n n n n n - + nSR 43 at Fairchild Ave Realignment Low Income n n - + n n + - + +

I-76 I-77 SR 59 Major capacity improvementLow Income/ Minority + n n n n n n - + n

I-76 SR 59 SR 8 Major capacity improvementLow Income/ Minority + n n n n n n - + n

I-76 at Central Interchange ReconfigurationLow Income/ Minority + n n n n n n - + n

I-77 Copley Rd SR 21 Major capacity improvementLow Income/ Minority + n n n n n n n + n

I-77 SR 21 SR 18 (Copley Twp) Reconfiguration Low Income + n n n n n n n + nSR 93 Robinson Ave Cormany Rd Major capacity improvement Low Income + n n n n n + - + nCleveland-Massillon Rd I-77 SR 18 Major capacity improvement Low Income n n n n n n + - + nPortage Trail Portage Path State Rd Major capacity improvement Minority n n n n n n + n + nSummit St Lincoln St Loop Rd Reconfiguration Low Income + n n n n n + n + +White Pond Dr White Pond Dr SR 18 Realignment Minority n n n n + n n n + +PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS

Downtown Akron Intermodal FacilityPublic transportation system expansion

Low Income/ Minority + n n + n n + n n +

TRANSPORTATION ENHANCEMENT PROJECTS

Ohio & Erie Canal Towpath Trail Wilbeth Rd Kenmore Blvd Bikeway facilityLow Income/ Minority + n n + + + + + n +

Ohio & Erie Canal Towpath Trail Kenmore Blvd Summit Lake Park Bikeway facilityLow Income/ Minority + n n + + + + + n +

Ohio & Erie Canal Towpath Trail - Akron Bikeway Phase 2-B Lock 2 Park Ash & Quaker Sts Bikeway facility

Low Income/ Minority + n n + + + + + n +

Ohio & Erie Canal Towpath Trail - Akron Bikeway Phase 2-A Ash & Quaker Sts north of Innerbelt (SR 59) Bikeway facility

Low Income/ Minority + n n + + + + + n +

Ohio & Erie Canal Towpath Trail - Cascade Locks Phase I north of Innerbelt (SR 59) North St Bikeway facility

Low Income/ Minority + n n + + + + + n +

Ohio & Erie Canal Towpath Trail Center Rd Snyder Ave Bikeway facilityLow Income/ Minority + n n + + + + + n +

Ohio & Erie Canal Towpath Trail Bartges St N of Bartges St Bikeway facility Low Income + n n + + + + + n +The Portage Hike and Bike Trail Summit/Portage Co line Breakneck Creek Bikeway facility Low Income + n n + + + + + n +Summit St Conrail Freedom Secondary Lincoln St Bikeway facility Low Income + n n + + + + + n +The Portage Hike and Bike Trail (The Esplanade) - parallel to Summit St Lincoln St Loop Rd Bikeway facility Low Income + n n + + + + + n +The Portage Hike and Bike Trail - (North-South Trail) Summit Rd Towner's Woods Park Bikeway facility Low Income + n n + + + + + n +The Portage Hike and Bike Trail Chestnut St Trumbull Co line Bikeway facility Low Income + n n + + + + + n +

Cuyahoga Valley Scenic Railroad Corridor Towpath TrailConrail Freedom Secondary/CVS RR junction Bikeway facility

Low Income/ Minority + n n + + + + + n +

POTENTIAL IMPACTS*

B - 11

Table B - 1POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF PROJECTS

Project From To Category Location Safe

ty

Pollu

tion

Nat

ural

re

sour

ces

Aes

thet

ics

Com

mun

ity

cohe

sion

Econ

omic

vi

talit

y

Acc

essi

bilit

y

Dis

plac

emen

t of

resi

dent

s/

busi

ness

es

Traf

fic

cong

estio

n

Equa

l acc

ess

to

impr

ovem

ent

TRANSPORTATION ENHANCEMENT PROJECTSConrail Freedom Secondary Corridor (Tallmadge Trail)

Conrail Freedom Secondary/CVS RR junction Southwest Ave Bikeway facility Minority + n n + + + + + n +

Mud Brook TrailTowpath Trail - Akron Peninsula Rd Hampshire Rd Bikeway facility Minority + n n + + + + + n +

Wolf Creek/Pigeon Creek Trail and GreenwayHopocan Ave W (Lake Dorothy Trail) Fairlawn Bikeway facility Minority + n n + + + + + n +

Rubber City Heritage Trail (ABC RR Corridor) Towpath Trail E Market St (SR 18) Bikeway facility Minority + n n + + + + + n +

* KEY:+ denotes Positive Impactn denotes Neutral Impact- denotes Negative Impact

POTENTIAL IMPACTS*

B - 12

B - 13

9) Chapel Hill Mall 10) Summit Mall 11) Rolling Acres Mall 12) Montrose 13) Macedonia Commons 14) University of Akron 15) Kent State University

In the third step, the AMATS travel-demand model network, representing the highway system as it is planned to operate in 2030, was used to estimate the average travel time from each low-income and minority neighborhood to each of the 15 major activity centers. In order to provide a valid comparison, a similar analysis was conducted to estimate the average travel time to each major activity center from a sample of six traffic analysis zones, representing neighborhoods without regionally significant concentrations of low-income households and minority population: 1) Cuyahoga Falls; 2) Hudson; 3) Stow; 4) Green; 5) Macedonia; and 6) Aurora. The results of the highway accessibility analysis are shown in Table B-2. According to this analysis, the highway projects recommended in the 2030 Regional Transportation Plan provide low-income and minority neighborhoods with slightly better accessibility to major activity centers located throughout the AMATS area, than non-low-income and non-minority neighborhoods. The average travel time to major activity centers is 22 minutes for low-income and minority neighborhoods, versus 25 minutes for non-low-income and non-minority neighborhoods. Public Transportation Accessibility Analysis The first step in the public transportation accessibility analysis determined the percentage of the total population and total households in Summit and Portage counties living within a 0.25 mile walking distance of existing fixed route transit service. The second step of the analysis determined the percentage of minority population and low-income households living within a 0.25 mile walking distance of existing fixed route transit service. The third step compared the percentage of minority population and low-income households to the percentage of the total population and total households having access to fixed route transit service. The results of the transit accessibility analysis are shown in Table B-3. According to this analysis, a greater percentage of minority and low-income groups in both Summit County and Portage County have access to fixed route transit service than the general population. In Summit County, 75.4% of the minority population has access to fixed route transit service, as compared to 49.8% of the total population. The total number of low-income households in Summit County that has access to fixed route transit service is 71.9%, as compared to 53.4% of total households.

Table B-2HIGHWAY ACCESSIBILITY ANALYSIS

AVERAGE TRAVEL TIME TO MAJOR ACTIVITY CENTERS

Akron-Canton Airport

Akron CBD

Akron City

Hospital

Akron General Hospital Goodyear

Lockheed-Martin Chrysler

Geauga Lake Park

Chapel Hill

Rolling Acres

Summit Mall Montrose

Macedonia Commons

University of Akron

Kent State

Zone Number 452 21 8 43 90 112 342 609 55 143 522 516 566 39 720

Low Income or Minority Zones 27 16 16 17 16 19 33 40 17 20 24 24 30 16 21 22East Akron (zone 93) 18 10 7 10 4 6 36 45 12 16 19 19 31 8 22 17West Akron (zone 181) 24 8 10 6 12 16 35 48 16 8 11 11 30 8 30 18North Akron (zone 222) 23 5 6 7 9 16 30 40 8 15 14 16 25 7 23 16Barberton (zone 259) 21 19 21 17 20 17 46 58 26 11 22 22 41 19 38 27Ravenna (zone 688) 45 34 32 36 30 34 22 23 25 41 43 44 26 34 12 32Kent (zone 711) 34 22 20 25 19 23 26 27 14 30 33 33 28 22 5 24

Non-Low Income and Non-Minority Zones 33 24 22 26 24 29 20 27 20 32 26 26 19 23 24 25Cuyahoga Falls (zone 302) 26 12 11 14 13 20 26 36 8 22 15 17 21 12 21 18Hudson (zone 368) 39 25 23 27 26 32 12 18 19 35 28 28 13 25 20 25Stow (zone 375) 32 18 16 20 19 24 22 28 11 28 23 25 20 18 13 21Green (zone 447) 6 19 18 21 17 14 45 55 23 21 28 28 39 18 34 26Macedonia (zone 568) 44 30 28 33 31 37 4 19 26 37 24 24 3 30 29 27Aurora (zone 611) 52 38 36 40 39 45 12 6 32 48 37 36 16 38 28 33

OVERALL AVERAGE

B - 14

B - 15

Table B-3 TRANSIT ACCESSIBILITY ANALYSIS

FIXED ROUTE TRANSIT COVERAGE IN THE AMATS AREA

Summit County Portage County

Population Group Total

Total Covered

by Transit

% Covered

by Transit Total

Total Covered

by Transit

% Covered

by TransitTotal Population 542,899 270,624 49.8% 152,061 39,383 25.9%

Minority Population 89,624 67,589 75.4% 8,516 4,252 49.9%Total Households 235,238 125,508 53.4% 59,934 16,626 27.7% Low Income Households 15,886 11,426 71.9% 3,644 1,760 48.3% Source: 2000 US Census Notes: Percentage covered by transit includes all people and households within a 0.25 mile walking distance of existing fixed route transit service. Fixed Route Transit Service in Summit County is provided by METRO RTA Fixed Route Transit Service in Portage County is provided by PARTA

B - 16

In Portage County, 49.9% of the minority population has access to fixed route transit service, as compared to 25.9% of the total population. The total number of low-income households in Portage County that has access to fixed route transit service is 48.3%, as compared to 27.7% of total households. Transportation Investment in Low-Income and Minority Areas The overall level of investment in transportation facilities, by geographic area, was examined in order to determine whether areas with regionally significant concentrations of low-income and minority groups would receive an equitable share of the benefits from planned transportation improvements. The transportation facilities that have been examined in this analysis include all of the highway, public transportation, and transportation enhancement projects recommended in the 2030 Regional Transportation Plan. The results of the analysis of transportation investment in low-income and minority areas are shown in Table B-4 and described in the following section.

Table B-4

TRANSPORTATION INVESTMENT IN LOW-INCOME AND MINORITY AREAS

Low-Income and

Minority Areas

Non-Low-Income and Non-Minority

Areas Total Pct.Specified Highway Expenditures $563,893,000 $673,438,000 $1,237,331,000 46%Unspecified Highway Expenditures $133,566,240 $979,485,760 $1,113,052,000 15%Highway Expenditures $697,459,240 $1,652,923,760 $2,350,383,000 30% Specified Public Transportation Expenditures $21,500,000 $0 $21,500,000 100%Unspecified Public Transportation Expenditures $19,093,830 $253,675,170 $272,769,000 7%Public Transportation Expenditures $40,593,830 $253,675,170 $294,269,000 15% Transportation Enhancement Expenditures $28,843,796 $14,421,302 $43,265,098 67% Total Expenditures $766,896,866 $1,921,020,232 $2,687,917,098 29% Population 108,818 596,030 704,848 15%Land Area (sq. miles) 27.6 931.6 959.2 3%

Highway Investment Analysis Highway projects recommended in the 2030 Regional Transportation Plan were split into two categories: specified and unspecified. Specified highway projects consist of those with a fixed location. Unspecified highway projects are not project-specific and are not yet identified; however, additional highway funding has been reserved for these projects.

B - 17

Specified projects were examined to determine whether they were located in, or bordering on, an area that was identified as a regionally significant concentration of low- income households or minority population. The total cost of the specified highway project expenditures recommended in low-income and minority areas is $563.9 million, or 46% of the total. The percentage of unspecified highway expenditures attributed to low-income and minority areas is based on the percentage of the total federal functionally classified roadway mileage located in these areas. The total cost of the unspecified highway project expenditures recommended in low-income and minority areas is $133.6 million, or 15% of the total. In all, $697.5 million, or 30%, of the total highway expenditures recommended in the 2030 Regional Transportation Plan will benefit areas with regionally significant concentrations of low-income and minority groups. Public Transportation Investment Analysis Public transportation projects were split into two categories: specified and unspecified. Specified public transportation projects include those with a specific location. Unspecified public transportation projects are not project specific, but are estimated in the aggregate, based on what it will cost to preserve and maintain the existing public transportation system. Specified public transportation expenditures were examined to determine whether they were located in, or bordering on, an area that was identified as a regionally significant concentration of low-income households or minority population. The total cost of the specified public transportation project expenditures recommended in low-income and minority areas is $21.5 million, or 100% of the total. The percentage of unspecified public transportation expenditures attributed to low-income and minority areas is based on the percentage of total fixed route mileage in low-income and minority areas. The total cost of the unspecified public transportation expenditures recommended in low-income and minority areas is $19.1 million, or 7% of the total. It is likely that a much greater percentage of public transportation expenditures actually benefit low-income and minority persons than this analysis indicates, because the amount of route miles does not accurately reflect the actual amount of service being provided. In all, $40.6 million, or 15%, of the total public transportation expenditures recommended in the 2030 Regional Transportation Plan will benefit areas with regionally significant concentrations of low-income and minority groups.

B - 18

Transportation Enhancement Investment Analysis Transportation enhancement expenditures were examined to determine whether they were located in, or bordering on, an area that was identified as a regionally significant concentration of low-income households or minority population. The total cost of the transportation enhancement expenditures recommended in low-income and minority areas is $28.8 million, or 67% of the total. Summary The analysis indicates that $766.9 million, or 29% of the total project expenditures recommended in the Plan are located in areas with regionally significant concentrations of low-income and minority groups. This analysis also demonstrates that low-income and minority areas, which comprise 15% of the total population, and 3% of the total land area in the AMATS area, will receive an equitable share of the benefits from planned transportation improvements. CONCLUSION In keeping with the environmental justice requirements of Presidential Executive Order #12898, the 2030 Regional Transportation Plan has been thoroughly analyzed to ensure that its recommendations will not have disproportionately high and adverse effects on low-income and minority groups. The three analyses completed for this Environmental Justice Analysis are summarized below: Potential Environmental Impacts of Projects

• None of the projects recommended in the 2030 Regional Transportation Plan appear to have any fatal flaws from an environmental justice standpoint.

• It is recommended that all of the projects shown in Table B-1, be analyzed more closely as they move into future stages of development.

• Projects which were shown to have potential negative impacts should be closely scrutinized as more detailed environmental analyses are completed, in order to determine whether these negative impacts will be disproportionately borne by low-income or minority individuals or communities.

Transportation Accessibility in Low-Income and Minority Neighborhoods

• Highway projects recommended in the 2030 Regional Transportation Plan provide low-income and minority neighborhoods with adequate and equitable accessibility to major activity centers located throughout the AMATS area.

B - 19

• Low-income and minority groups in both Summit and Portage counties are well served by public transportation, having greater access to fixed route transit service than the general population.

Transportation Investment in Low-Income and Minority Areas

• Low-income and minority areas will receive an equitable share of the benefits from planned transportation improvements recommended in the 2030 Regional Transportation Plan.

• It is likely that a much greater percentage of public transportation expenditures actually benefit low-income and minority persons than the analysis indicates, because the amount of route miles does not accurately reflect the actual amount of service being provided.

C - 1

APPENDIX C

SOCIAL, ECONOMIC, AND ENVIRONMENTAL FACTOR SCAN

Planning for transportation improvements should take into account the impact that a project may have on the social, economic, and environmental (SEE) characteristics of the area. According to the AMATS Regional Transportation Goals and Objectives, the transportation system should minimize the adverse impacts of transportation facilities on historic, archaeological, and other environmentally sensitive areas. A SEE factor inventory is maintained by the AMATS staff, which identifies characteristics such as airports, cemeteries, National Register historic sites, industrial parks, shopping centers, public facilities, railroads, streams and rivers, lakes and reservoirs, and parks. SEE factor information has been obtained by reviewing data from the following sources:

• Ohio Department of Natural Resources (ODNR) • Metro Parks serving Summit County • Local departments of parks and recreation • U.S. Department of the Interior’s National Register of Historic Places • Ohio Education Directory • Ohio Department of Health’s Directory of Licensed Nursing Homes • Ohio Department of Transportation, Division of Aviation’s Ohio Airport

Directory • NEFCO Industrial Park Inventory • Harris Industrial Guide • U.S. Geological Survey • U.S. Bureau of the Census • Most recent AMATS Land Use Inventory

Map C-1 shows a SEE factor inventory for the Akron metropolitan area. The inventory identifies social, economic, and environmental factors that could be potentially impacted by a transportation project. These factors should be considered by project sponsors as projects are developed and environmental analyses are completed. This information can be made available to project sponsors electronically in ArcGIS shape file format.

AKRON

GREEN

HUDSON

AURORA

STOW

NORTON

NEW FRANKLIN

STREETSBORO

KENT

CUYAHOGA FALLS

TALLMADGE

TWINSBURGMACEDONIA

RICHFIELD

BARBERTON

RAVENNA

FAIRLAWN

CLINTON

PENINSULA

MANTUA

BOSTON HEIGHTSWINDHAM

MUNROE FALLS

LAKEMORE

GARRETTSVILLE

HIRAM

SILVER LAKE

REMINDERVILLE

MOGADORE

DOYLESTOWN

NORTHFIELD

BRADY LAKE

SUGAR BUSH KNOLLS

8

8

5

8

5

14

59

21

82

44

59

18

43

21

94

21

14

44

93

91

94

44

14

43

88

14

59

82

91

57

18

44

77

80

77

77

76

80

76

91

4443

82444321

82

88

305

77

80

7676 76

176

764

585

532

241

162

261

619

303

241

306

225

604

619

183

261

183

303

225

261

282

303

236

303

700

277

271

480

271

480

224 224

422

224224

224224

Map C-1SOCIAL, ECONOMIC AND ENVIRONMENTALCHARACTERISTICS OF THE AMATS AREA

Passenger AirportGeneral Aviation AirportAirfield/HelipadCemeteriesNat'l Register Hist SitesHospitals

Industrial ParksNursing HomesPublic HousingSchoolsShopping CentersTruck Terminals

RailroadsStreams/RiversLakes/ReservoirsParksRavenna Arsenal May 2005

0 1 2 3 4Miles

C - 3

D - 1

APPENDIX D

AIR QUALITY CONFORMITY ANALYSIS Summit and Portage counties are part of the U.S. Census-designated eight-county Cleveland-Akron-Elyria Combined Statistical Area (CSA). Based on air quality readings, the United States Environmental Protection Agency designated this area as a moderate non-attainment area for ozone in April 2004. Ozone is produced by the interaction of hydrocarbons (HC) and oxides of nitrogen (NOx) in the presence of sunlight. HC and NOx are emitted from a variety of sources, including motor vehicles. As a result of the area's designation as an ozone moderate non-attainment area, transportation plans and programs supported with federal funds must show conformity to the region's air quality implementation plan as established under the Clean Air Act (CAA) as amended in 1990. In September 1993, an agreement was executed between AMATS, the Northeast Ohio Areawide Coordinating Agency (NOACA), Ashtabula County, the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (OEPA), and the Ohio Department of Transportation (ODOT), which established an interagency consultation process in order to meet air quality conformity requirements. This agreement states that ODOT will conduct the conformity analysis for the Ashtabula County portion of the eight-county maintenance area, while AMATS and NOACA conduct analyses for their respective planning areas. The three agencies then combine the results of their individual analyses in order to generate one conformity analysis for the entire area. In order for the eight-county Cleveland-Akron area to show air quality conformity, the overall level of air pollution resulting from the implementation of projects recommended in the regional transportation plans of AMATS, and its Cleveland counterpart, NOACA, must be analyzed. This air quality conformity analysis has to demonstrate that hydrocarbon (HC) and oxides of nitrogen (NOx) emissions from mobile sources will not exceed those established in the budget contained in the State Implementation Plan (SIP) for ozone, which sets the allowable limits for each pollutant in the Cleveland-Akron area. The analysis must then be approved by the United States Department of Transportation (USDOT), via a formal transportation conformity determination, before any federal transportation funds can be spent on the projects included in the regional transportation plan. All projects recommended in the 2030 Regional Transportation Plan are classified as either exempt or non-exempt (analyzed). Exempt projects are those specified under 40 CFR 51.460 and 40 CFR 51.462 as exempt from regional emissions analysis. Examples of these types of projects include safety upgrades; transit system preservation projects; bicycle and pedestrian facilities; routine highway maintenance

D - 2

projects; roadway resurfacing, rehabilitation, or reconstruction projects; traffic signal coordination; and intersection improvements. Non-exempt projects, which include the construction of additional through lanes, new interchanges, new highways, and new fixed-guideway transit routes, are evaluated using standard transportation planning and emissions models in cooperation with the ODOT Office of Technical Services. Projects are grouped into air quality analysis networks based upon their stage of development and their expected completion date. In the case of the 2030 Regional Transportation Plan, networks for 2006, 2010, 2020 and 2030 have been evaluated. See the attached Tables D-2 through D-5. The air quality analysis for the eight-county Cleveland-Akron area has been completed. The results of this analysis are shown in Table D-1 below. Based on these results, it appears that the region will be able to demonstrate air quality conformity.

Table D-1: 2030 Regional Transportation Plan

Cleveland-Akron Air Quality Analysis*

Hydrocarbons (HC) (tons/day) NOACA

Ashtabula County

AMATS Total

2006 Budget 92.702006 Emissions 45.20 3.88 22.22 71.302010 Emissions 31.15 2.88 16.11 50.142020 Emissions 15.11 1.62 8.24 24.972030 Emissions 13.48 1.59 7.74 22.81 Oxides of Nitrogen (NOx) (tons/day) NOACA Ashtabula County

AMATS Total

2006 Budget 104.402006 Emissions 59.37 5.09 33.61 98.072010 Emissions 38.04 3.70 23.76 65.502020 Emissions 11.97 1.55 9.33 22.852030 Emissions 8.06 1.20 6.84 16.10

*HC and NOx emissions (tons per day) are normalized based on 1990 HPMS data. Mobile 6.2 takes Tier II credits into account as part of the travel demand modeling process. The complete air quality analysis for the eight-county Cleveland-Akron area is documented in an April 2005 report assembled by NOACA with the assistance of AMATS and ODOT.

Table D-2

PROJECT LOCATION & TERMINI TYPE OF WORK

I-77 FAIRLAWN - SR 162 to SR 21 Widen to 6 lanes

AMATS 2006 NETWORK

The 2006 Network includes the existing and under constructiontransportation system plus the following project:

D - 3

Table D-3

PROJECT LOCATION & TERMINI TYPE OF WORK

SR 8 STOW/HUDSON - Seasons Road interchange Construct new interchange

SR 8 BOSTON HEIGHTS/NORTHFIELD CENTER - SR 303 to Twinsburg Rd

Major upgrade to freeway standards

SR 8 BOSTON HEIGHTS/NORTHFIELD CENTER - Twinsburg Rd to I-271

Major upgrade to freeway standards

SR 43 AURORA - SR 82 to Squires Road Widen to 4 lanes and turn lanes

I-80 (Ohio Turnpike) HUDSON/STREETSBORO - SR 8 to I-480 Widen to 6 lanes

SR 82 MACEDONIA - South Bedford Road to Crow Drive

Widen to 4 lanes, turn lanes, replace railroad underpass

SR 93 (Manchester Road)

COVENTRY - Robinson Avenue to Cormany Road

Widen to 4 lanes and turn lanes

Fairchild Avenue/Crain Avenue

KENT - SR 43 Intersection Replace Crain Ave bridge, turn lanes, and signal coordination

S. Main Street COVENTRY - Whitefriars Dr to Radnor Ave Widen to 4 lanes, add signal, and signal upgrade

AMATS 2010 NETWORK

The 2010 Network includes those projects in the 2006 network plus the following projects:

D - 4

Table D-4

PROJECT LOCATION & TERMINI TYPE OF WORK

SR 8 CUYAHOGA FALLS - Howe Rd interchange Reconfigure interchange (including railroad bridges)

SR 8 Service Rd BOSTON MILLS/NORTHFIELD CENTER TWP/MACEDONIA - Hines Hill Rd to Highland Rd

Construct new roadway

SR 43 STREETSBORO/AURORA - Market Square Blvd to SR 306

Widen to 4 lanes and turn lanes

I-76 NORTON - SR 21 interchange Reconfigure interchange

I-76 NORTON - SR 21 to Barber Rd Widen to 6 lanes and reconfigure access

I-76 NORTON/BARBERTON - Barber Rd to State St Widen to 6 lanes and reconfigure access

I-76 BARBERTON/AKRON - State St to I-277 Widen to 6 lanes and reconfigure access

I-76 AKRON - at I-277 (Kenmore south leg) Reconfigure interchange

I-76 AKRON - I-277 to I-76/77 (Kenmore north leg) Widen to 6 lanes and reconfigure access

I-76 AKRON - at I-76/77 (Kenmore north leg) Reconfigure interchange

I-76/77 AKRON - I-76/77(Kenmore north leg) to SR 59 Widen to 8 lanes and reconfigure access

I-76/77 AKRON - SR 59 to SR 8 (Central Interchange) Widen to 8 lanes and reconfigure access

I-76/77 AKRON - SR 8 (Central Interchange) Reconfigure interchange

I-76 TALLMADGE - Tallmadge Rd intersection Reconfigure intersection

AMATS 2020 NETWORK

The 2020 Network includes those projects in the 2010 network plus the following projects:

D - 5

Table D-4 (continued)

I-77 COPLEY TWP - SR 21 to SR 18 Reconfigure interchanges

SR 241 (Massillon Road)

GREEN - Steese Road to Graybill Road Widen to 4 lanes and turn lanes

Cleveland-Massillon Road

NORTON - Greenwich Road to I-76 Widen to 4 lanes and turn lanes

Cleveland-Massillon Road

COPLEY TWP - Ridgewood Rd intersection Realign intersection

Frank Boulevard AKRON - W&LE RR tracks to West Market Street

Reconfigure White Pond intersection, reconstruct on new alignment

Howe Ave CUYAHOGA FALLS - Main St to Buchholzer Blvd Widen to 6 lanes, turn lanes, and signal coordination

Hudson Dr STOW - Steels Corners Rd to Norton Rd Widen to 4 lanes and turn lanes

Portage Trail CUYAHOGA FALLS - Portage Path to State Road

Widen to 4 lanes and turn lanes

Steels Corners Rd CUYAHOGA FALLS/STOW - State Rd to SR 8 Widen to 4 lanes, turn lanes, and signal coordination

Summit St KENT - Lincoln St to W. Campus Center Dr Turn lanes, signal coordination, access management, and realign

Summit St KENT - W. Campus Center Dr to Loop Rd Turn lanes, signal coordination, and realignment

Triplett Blvd AKRON - Hilbish Av to Canton Rd (SR 91) Widen to 4 lanes and turn lanes

AMATS 2020 NETWORK

The 2020 Network includes those projects in the 2010 network plus the following projects:

D - 6

Table D-5

PROJECT LOCATION & TERMINI TYPE OF WORK

SR 14 RAVENNA - SR 88 to SR 5/44 Widen to 4 lanes and turn lanes

SR 44 ROOTSTOWN TWP - Tallmadge Rd to I-76 Widen to 4 lanes, turn lanes, and signal coordination

SR 82 SAGAMORE HILLS TWP - Boyden Rd to SR 8 Widen to 4 lanes, turn lanes, and signal coordination

SR 82 MACEDONIA - East of Crow Dr to Chamberlin Rd

Widen to 4 lanes and turn lanes

SR 91 MUNROE FALLS/TALLMADGE/STOW - Howe Road to SR 59

Widen to 4 lanes and turn lanes

SR 91 TWINSBURG - Post Rd to Cuyahoga county line Widen to 4 lanes, turn lanes, and signal coordination

SR 241 (Massillon Road)

AKRON - Krumroy Road to US 224 Widen to 4 lanes and turn lanes

Arlington Road GREEN - Greensburg Rd to SR 619 Widen to 4 lanes and turn lanes

Cleveland-Massillon Road

BARBERTON - Shannon Ave to Greenwich Rd Widen to 4 lanes and turn lanes

Cleveland-Massillon Road

FAIRLAWN - I-77 to SR 18 Widen to 4 lanes and signal coordination

Graham Road STOW - SR 91 to Charring Cross Dr Widen to 4 lanes and turn lanes

Howe Avenue/Brittain Road

CUYAHOGA FALLS - Barney's Busy Corner Intersection

Eliminate part of intersection and replace with new connectors

AMATS 2030 NETWORK

The 2030 Network includes those projects in the 2020 network plus the following projects:

D - 7

E -

1

APPENDIX E

2030 FINANCIAL RESOURCES FORECAST

Section I Introduction

The purpose of this appendix is to document the development of a forecast of funds expected to be available to support transportation improvements in the AMATS area from now until 2030. The projections in this appendix are used as input for the development of the financially constrained portion of the AMATS 2030 Regional Transportation Plan. Assumptions were developed for each category of federal funding and a forecast was completed for the years 2005 through 2030. Projected fiscal year 2005 allocations are the basis of forecasting funding. All funding references are denoted in constant, uninflated dollars. Projects recommended in the 2030 Plan are also listed in current, un-inflated dollars. In addition, a forecast of funding from local transportation sources was completed. This appendix contains four sections. Section II focuses on the legislation that governs the funding and planning processes. It includes a description of the categories of federal funding provided for in TEA-21. Section III, provides assumptions and forecasts for the years 2005 through 2030. Section IV provides a forecast of other funding sources for the years 2005 through 2030. Finally, Section V summarizes the forecast and discusses its purpose.

E -

2

Section II Federal Legislation

The passage of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA) significantly changed federal transportation philosophy. Emphasis shifted from the building of new roads to improving the performance of existing roadways, mitigating congestion, mandating more planning at the state and metropolitan level, and encouraging alternative forms of transportation including public transit, pedestrian and bicycle facilities. One of the most important features of ISTEA was the flexibility it gave state and local officials in choosing among highway, transit, and other transportation alternatives. The Act also greatly expanded the type of projects and activities that are were eligible under the basic programs. ISTEA also created new highway funding classifications and new funding participation rates. The current federal legislation governing transportation funding and policy is the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, known as TEA-21. Enacted in 1998 and originally lasting until 2003, TEA-21 has recently had several extensions, the latest which is through May of 2005. TEA-21 continues most of the same programs and funding structures as ISTEA. This Act also requires that the planning process include a financial plan that demonstrates how transportation improvements will be implemented and indicates resources from public and private sources that are reasonably expected to be available to carry out the planned improvements. As a result, AMATS must complete a forecast of funds expected to be available for the AMATS area through the year 2030. This section provides a brief explanation of the federal funding categories. National Highway System (NHS) The NHS is comprised of the most important roads in the nation. This includes the existing interstate system, the Strategic Highway Corridor network and its major connectors, high priority corridors identified in TEA-21 and selected regional arterial highways. The standard funding participation rate for NHS is 80% federal and 20% state and/or local. Interstate Maintenance (IM) The Interstate System retains a separate identity within the NHS. It consists only of routes with the “Interstate” designation. To ensure continued maintenance and improvement of this system, Congress established the IM program under ISTEA and continued it in TEA-21. The US Department of Transportation allocated funds to the states based on lane-miles open to traffic, vehicle-miles traveled, and contributions to the Highway Account of the Highway Trust Fund attributed to commercial vehicles. The funding participation rate for IM is 90% federal and 10% state.

E -

3

Surface Transportation Program (STP) The Surface Transportation Program (STP) is the most versatile funding program. Highways eligible for STP funds include those highways which have a federal functional classification of urban collector or higher in urbanized areas, and rural major collector or higher in rural areas. As stated in TEA-21, STP funds may be used for other modal projects including capital transit projects, commuter rail, and bus terminals and facilities. Carpool projects, traffic monitoring, regional planning, and bicycle and pedestrian walkways are eligible for these funds as well. Once the US Department of Transportation distributes funds to the states, ten percent is set-aside for the Hazard Elimination and Safety Program (HSP) that supports safety construction activities and railway crossing improvements. In addition, ten percent is set aside for transportation enhancements (TEP) that encompass a broad range of projects that have an intermodal function. ODOT suballocates a portion of this enhancement funding to Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) such as AMATS. The remaining Surface Transportation Program funding is comprised of three components under different controlling authorities. ODOT retains control of all STP funding that is not formally suballocated to the MPOs and to the County Engineers (through the County Engineers Association of Ohio). The standard funding participation rate for projects using STP funding is 80% federal and 20% state and/or local. Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation (BR) Bridges on any public road that are over twenty feet in length are eligible to receive funding for replacement or rehabilitation. This also includes painting, de-icing compositions, or seismic retrofitting. The US Department of Transportation distributes funds to the state with a mandate that 65% of the funds are to be spend on on-system routes, 15% of the funds are to be spend on off-system routes and 20% of the funds are to be spend on either off or on-system routes. System routes include the federal aid routes. Off-system routes include local roadways in urban areas and minor collectors and below in rural areas. Bridge funds are distributed among different bridge programs following these percentages. In Ohio, the bridge programs include City Bridge, Local Major Bridge, County Bridge, State Bridge and Major High-cost Bridge. The funding participation rate for projects using BR funding is 80% federal and 20% state and/or local. Congestion Mitigation/Air Quality (CM/AQ) CM/AQ funding was a new funding category established by ISTEA. It continues under TEA-21. The US EPA has currently designated AMATS as a moderate non-attainment

E -

4

area for ozone with regard to National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS), and is therefore eligible to receive CM/AQ funding. Transportation projects and programs are eligible for CM/AQ program funds only if they meet specific criteria spelled out in TEA-21. In determining project eligibility under these criteria, only projects that have documented mobile source emission reductions associated with them will be considered for funding. Highway and transit projects may both qualify for CM/AQ funding. The funding participation rates for CM/AQ funding are 80% federal and 20% local. However, certain projects (i.e. signal systems) can qualify to receive 100% CM/AQ funding. Federal Discretionary Funding This program entails Congressional set-aside projects enacted outside the authority of other funding categories. Funding may be set aside out of FHWA or FTA programs for highway and transit projects. FTA Section 5307 Urbanized Area Formula Program The Section 5307 Program was also established by ISTEA and continued in TEA-21. Section 5307 funding is apportioned to each Urbanized Area as a transportation block grant. These funds are flexible and may be used for a variety of transportation projects, however they tend to be exclusively used to fund transit projects such as bus replacements and other transit capital projects. For urbanized areas with over 200,000 in population, such as Akron, Section 5307 funds may not be used for operating expenses. The exceptions to this restriction include expenses for preventive maintenance, the capital cost of leasing, planning, and complementary ADA paratransit service. The funding participation rate for Section 5307 is generally 80% federal and 20% local. TEA-21 also established a requirement that a minimum of one percent of an urbanized area’s annual Section 5307 Program allocation be spent on Transit Enhancement Projects. Examples of eligible transit enhancements include bus passenger shelters, bicycle racks on transit vehicles, transit connections to parks, and preservation of historic transit facilities. Currently, the only designated recipients of Federal Transit Administration funds in the AMATS area are METRO RTA in Summit County and PARTA in Portage County. Both METRO and PARTA receive the bulk of their Section 5307 funds from the Akron Urbanized Area’s apportionment, however they also receive smaller allocations from the apportionment to the Cleveland Urbanized Area.

E -

5

FTA Section 5309 Transit Capital Investment Program The transit capital investment program provides capital assistance for three primary activities:

• new and replacement buses and facilities

• modernization of existing rail systems

• new fixed guideway systems Funds from this program are allocated on a discretionary basis. However, the State of Ohio typically receives an annual allocation from this program for the bus and bus-related category. METRO and PARTA, in turn, usually receive some portion of the State's allocation. Funding participation rates can be 80 percent federal and 20 percent local. However, a local share greater than 20 percent is common. FTA Section 5310 Specialized Transportation Program The purpose of this program is to assist public agencies and private non-profit corporations in transporting the elderly and disabled. The Specialized Transportation Program focuses on assisting those unable to use regular transit service. Coordination of existing transit services is emphasized. AMATS administers this program locally on behalf of ODOT. The funding participation rates for this program are 80% federal and 20% local. FTA Section 3037 Job Access and Reverse Commute Program (JARC) The purpose of this grant program is to develop transportation services designed to transport welfare recipients and low income individuals to and from jobs, and to develop transportation services for residents of urban centers and rural and suburban areas to suburban employment opportunities. Emphasis is placed on projects that use mass transportation services. Grants from this program may finance capital projects and or operating costs. Funds are allocated on a discretionary basis, and the federal/local share is 50/50.

E -

6

Section III 2005 through 2030 Forecast Methodology

This section discusses the methodology used to forecast federal funds for the years 2005 through 2030. Projected FY 2005 allocations form the basis used to forecast future year funding estimates. This forecast assumes future years will receive at least the same level of funding as the projected FY 2005 funding levels. Table E-1 lists the forecast funding by funding category. Transportation Review Advisory Council (TRAC) In Ohio, the Transportation Review Advisory Council or TRAC was created to prioritize major transportation projects costing $5 million or more. Funding for TRAC projects can come from a variety of different funding sources. These funding sources include BR, CMAQ, IM, NHS, State gas tax revenues, and STP. The amount of TRAC funding available per year for the AMATS area was calculated by multiplying the projected average annual allocation to TRAC by the percentage of Ohio’s population in the AMATS area. Actual funding for the AMATS area fluctuates annually but over the 26 years of the Plan, this amount is assumed to be AMATS’ fair share.

AMATS PopulationOhio Population =TRAC's average annual

allocationX

X$500,000,000 per year

AMATS Annual Fair Share of TRAC funding

704,848 =11,353,140 $31,041,985

2005-2030 AMATS Fair-share $31,042,000 x 26 = $807,092,000

Source: TRAC Major New Program report and Census 2000 Population TRAC Railroad Grade Separation Program Also under the TRAC, is a program called the Railroad Grade Separation Program. This is a 10-year $200 million program that began in 2000. After two rounds of applications, all funds in the Railroad Grade Separation Program have been programmed for projects throughout the state. The AMATS area received funding for one project in the City of Macedonia on Highland Road for $8,507,100. Because the funds for this program have all been assigned to projects, no further attempt to forecast these funds was made. Ohio Department of Transportation District Four (ODOT D4) The Ohio Department of Transportation District Four, which includes the AMATS area, mainly funds preservation type projects on state routes. Funding for ODOT D4 projects

E -

7

can also come from a variety of different funding sources. These funding sources include BR, IM, NHS, State gas tax revenues, and STP. The amount of ODOT D4 funding available per year for the AMATS area was calculated by multiplying the projected average annual allocation to ODOT D4 by the percentage of Ohio’s population in the AMATS area.

=

= $36,752,072

AMATS Annual Fair Share of ODOT District 4 FundsDistrict 4 Avg.

Annual Allocation

AMATS PopulationODOT Dist 4 total Pop

1,658,457per year$86,475,000

X

X 704,848

2005-2030 AMATS Fair-share $36,752,000 x 26 = $955,554,000

Source: ODOT Business Plan and Census 2000 Population AMATS Funding Programs (STP-A, CM/AQ-A and TEP-A) Following the publishing of the federal fiscal year allocations, ODOT issues the AMATS area’s annual STP, CM/AQ, and TEP allocations. The AMATS Policy Committee has direct authority in programming projects using these funds, subject to state and federal law. In the absence of new Federal Authorization, the projected FY 2005 level was used as the forecast for each year between FY 2005 and 2030.

STP-A $7,124,051/year 2005-2030 AMATS Fair-share $7,124,000 x 26 = $185,225

CM/AQ-A $4,034,707/year 2005-2030 AMATS Fair-share $4,035,000 x 26 = $104,902

TEP-A $712,405/year 2005-2030 AMATS Fair-share $712,000 x 26 = $18,523 County STP (STP-C) The funding is suballocated by the State of Ohio to the County Engineers Association of Ohio (CEAO). Projects compete and are ranked statewide on an annual bases by the CEAO. The actual amounts awarded each year to the AMATS area may fluctuate. Future year awards are forecasted based on AMATS share of population in the state. This formula results in an allocation near the average of the last four years awarded.

E -

8

2005-2030 AMATS Fair-share $1,357,000 x 26 = $35,287,000

Source: ODOT Business Plan and Census 2000 Population Major High-Cost Bridge Program This program provides funding for bridge replacement and rehabilitation for 146 major bridges within the state of Ohio that carry a State, U.S. or Interstate route. Seven bridges in the AMATS area are eligible for funding under the major high-cost bridge program. It is not expected that any of these seven bridges will require replacement or rehabilitation during the life of the Plan, therefore no attempt to forecast future year awards was made. City Bridge Program (City BR) This program provides funding for bridge replacement and rehabilitation for bridges within municipalities. The amount of City BR funding available per year for the AMATS area was calculated by multiplying the projected average annual allocation to the City BR program by the percentage of Ohio’s population in the AMATS area.

AMATS Annual Fair Share of City BR Funds

Cities Annual BR Allocation X AMATS Population

11,353,140$8,000,000 X 704,848

=Ohio Population

= $496,672 per year

2005-2030 AMATS Fair-share $497,000 x 26 = $12,922,000

Source: ODOT Business Plan and Census 2000 Population City High-Cost Bridge Program This program provides funding for bridge replacement and rehabilitation for 51 major

Ohio's FY 2005 STP-C Allocation

X

$21,860,732 X

AMATS Annual Fair Share of County STP Funds

$1,357,201

AMATS PopulationOhio Population =

704,848 =11,353,140per year

E -

9

bridges within municipalities in the state of Ohio. The AMATS area received funding under this program for one project in the City of Barberton on Tuscarawas Avenue for $6,500,000. It is not expected that any additional high-cost city bridges will require replacement during the life of the Plan, therefore no attempt to forecast future year awards was made. County Bridge Program (C-BR) This program provides funding for bridge replacement and rehabilitation for bridges on county routes. The amount of County BR funding available per year for the AMATS area was calculated by multiplying the projected average annual allocation to the County BR program by the percentage of Ohio’s population in the AMATS area.

AMATS Annual Fair Share of C-BR Funds

AMATS PopulationOhio Population

CEAO's Annual BR Allocation

$32,750,000

X

X

=

= $2,033,250 per year704,84811,353,140

2005-2030 AMATS Fair-share $2,033,000 x 26 = $52,865,000

Source: ODOT Business Plan and Census 2000 Population Safety Program Of the STP funds distributed to Ohio, 10% must be set aside for safety construction activities under the Highway Safety Program (HSP). The amount of funding available for safety improvements per year was forecasted by adding the required HSP funding amount and the additional funds ODOT allocates to safety projects, which gives a total of $64 million. The projected FY 2005 statewide allocation was multiplied by the percent of statewide population located in the AMATS area.

Ohio Population

=

ODOT's FY 2005 HSP & add'l State Allocation

AMATS Annual Fair Share of Federal/State Safety Funds

X

11,353,140

AMATS Population

$64,000,000 X 704,848 $3,973,374 per year

2005-2030 AMATS Fair-share $3,973,000 x 26 = $103,308,000

Source: ODOT Business Plan and Census 2000 Population

E -

10

Federal Highway Discretionary Funding Current federally earmarked funds scheduled for highway projects in the AMATS area are issued for the I-77/Lauby Road interchange project, White Pond Drive project and the Akron Innerbelt Study. Since Congress retains direct authority in granting these federal earmarks, no further attempt to forecast future year awards was made. FTA Section 5307 Urbanized Area Formula Program Projected FY 2005 appropriation figures for Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Section 5307 Urbanized Area Formula Program are assumed to be the same as the actual appropriations in FY 2004 for the Akron and Cleveland urbanized areas. It is also assumed that the annual appropriations will remain constant through the forecast period, and that METRO and PARTA will continue to receive their same shares of the Cleveland Urbanized Area’s funding. The sum of METRO’s and PARTA’s shares of the annual forecasted funding is:

Akron Urbanized Area $6,259,587 per year Cleveland Urbanized Area $ 511,484 per year AMATS Area Total $6,771,071 per year

2005-2030 AMATS Fair-share $6,771,000 x 26 = $176,048,000

FTA Section 5309 Transit Capital Investment Program Although the FTA Section 5309 Program is a discretionary program, METRO and PARTA each typically receive a share of the State of Ohio’s annual allocation from this program. In FY 2004, the sum of METRO’s and PARTA’s shares from Ohio’s allocation was $817,639. It is assumed that their combined shares will remain the same in FY 2005 and through the forecast period.

Section 5309 $817,639 per year

2005-2030 AMATS Fair-share $818,000 x 26 = $21,259,000 FTA Section 5310 Specialized Transportation Program As noted earlier, AMATS administers this program locally on behalf of ODOT. In FY 2004, AMATS’ allocation for the Section 5310 program was $67,876. It is assumed that this annual funding level will remain constant in FY 2005 and through the forecast period.

Section 5310 $67,876 per year

E -

11

2005-2030 AMATS Fair-share $68,000 x 26 = $1,765,000 FTA Section 3037 Job Access and Reverse Commute Program (JARC) The JARC program is a discretionary program. However, over the past several years, METRO has received approximately $150,000 annually from the program. It is assumed that this funding level will remain constant through the forecast period.

Section 5310 $150,000 per year

2005-2030 AMATS Fair-share $150,000 x 26 = $3,900,000

Federal Transit Discretionary Funding Congress may also award additional discretionary FTA Section 5309 funds to specific projects. Currently, there are $364,077 in Section 5309 funds earmarked for a Kent State University Intermodal Facility.

Funding ProgramFY 2005

Allocation

Total Years from FY 2005 to

2030 TOTAL

Transportation Review Advisory Council (TRAC) $31,042 26 $807,092

TRAC Railroad Grade Separation Program $8,507 n/a $8,507

ODOT District Four Allocation $36,752 26 $955,554

AMATS Surface Transportation Program (STP-A) $7,124 26 $185,225

AMATS Congestion Mitigation/Air Quality (CMAQ-A) $4,035 26 $104,902

AMATS Transportation Enhancement Program (TEP-A) $712 26 $18,523

County STP (STP-C) $1,357 26 $35,287

City Bridge Program (City BR) $497 26 $12,913

City High-Cost Bridge Program $6,500 n/a $6,500

County Bridge Program (BR-C) $2,033 26 $52,865

Safety Program $3,973 26 $103,308

Federal Highway Discretionary Funding $2,250 n/a $2,250

Section 5307 - Urbanized Formula Program $6,771 26 $176,048

Section 5309 - Discretionary Capital $818 26 $21,259

Section 5310 - Specialized Transportation Program $68 26 $1,765

Section 3037 - Job Access Reverse Commute (JARC) $150 26 $3,900

Federal Transit Discretionary Funding $364 n/a $364

TOTALS $112,589 $2,496,261

FORECASTED FUNDING BY FUNDING CATEGORY

Table E - 1

FY 2005-2030

Funds in $(000)

E - 12

FY 2005-2030

FEDERAL TOTALFUNDS FUNDS

Transportation Review Advisory Council (TRAC) $807,092 $807,092

TRAC Railroad Grade Separation Program $8,507 $8,507

ODOT District Four Allocation $955,554 $955,554

AMATS Surface Transportation Program (STP-A) * $185,225 $231,532

AMATS Congestion Mitigation/Air Quality (CMAQ-A) * $104,902 $131,128

AMATS Transportation Enhancement Program (TEP-A) $18,523 $23,153

County STP (STP-C) $35,287 $44,109

City Bridge Program (City BR) $12,913 $16,142

City High-Cost Bridge Program $6,500 $6,500

County Bridge Program (BR-C) $52,865 $66,081

Safety Program $103,308 $114,786

Federal Highway Discretionary Funding $2,250 $2,250

TOTAL HIGHWAY FUNDING $2,292,926 $2,406,834

Section 5307 - Urbanized Formula Program * $176,048 $220,060

Section 5309 - Discretionary Capital $21,259 $26,573

Section 5310 - Specialized Transportation Program $1,765 $2,206

Section 3037 - Job Access Reverse Commute (JARC) $3,900 $7,800

Federal Transit Discretionary Funding $364 $455

TOTAL TRANSIT FUNDING $203,335 $257,094

TOTAL FUNDING $2,496,261 $2,663,928

* funding can be used for either highway or transit type projects

FORECASTED TOTAL FUNDING BY FUNDING CATEGORY

Table E - 2

Funds in $(000)

E - 13

E -

14

Section IV Other Funding Sources

2005 through 2030

Federal funds are not the only source of revenue for implementing transportation projects in the AMATS area. As mentioned earlier, in order to receive federal funding, a matching of state or local dollars must be included. State or local entities sponsoring a project will provide the funding needed to match federal dollars. The major source of this funding comes from license plate registration fees, local permissive taxes and motor fuel taxes. For the calendar year 2003, the AMATS area generated approximately $17.5 million in license plate registration fees. Of this $17.5 million, $10.0 million was generated through the imposition of local permissive taxes dedicated to transportation funding. In addition, motor fuel tax revenue distributed to the AMATS area in 2002 amounted to $14.3 million. A portion of this money is employed in matching federal revenues and a portion is used for 100% state-funded projects. Assuming the allocation remains at this level throughout the forecast period, then adequate funding should be available to provide the necessary match for federal funds. METRO's operations are supported with a permanent 0.25 percent countywide sales tax. PARTA also has a 0.25 percent sales tax, but this is not a permanent levy and currently must be renewed every five years. Both operators use the sales tax revenue primarily to fund that portion of their general operating expenses not covered by passenger fares. Sales tax revenue is also used to provide the local share on capital projects that use federal funds.

E -

15

Section V Conclusion

TEA-21 provided authorizations for highway, highway safety, enhancement and mass transportation improvements through 2003 and with recent extensions, TEA-21 may be in effect through May of 2005. Beyond this point, funding availability is unknown. Keeping the revenues at the annual levels calculated in the previous sections for the years 2005 through 2030 will provide a conservative estimate of future revenues in each category. Table E-1 shows the resulting forecasted federal funding by funding category. It is understood that on a year-by-year basis, the forecasted revenues will vary from the actual revenues. However, over the forecast period these revenues are expected to be available. This financial forecast represents those funds expected to be available for the AMATS area between 2005 and 2030. If additional revenue sources not identified in this forecast become available, they will be added to the forecast. AMATS estimates that $2.5 billion in federal funding will be available for area projects between 2005 and 2030 (see Table E-2). Incorporating the state and local match, total funding available for the forecast period is estimated to be $2.7 billion. This financial analysis and forecast will guide the selection of projects to be included in the recommended Year 2030 Regional Transportation Plan from among numerous alternatives that have been proposed. This will insure the effective and efficient use of available financial resources. These analyses and forecasts help both public officials and private citizens to identify financial issues concerning transportation and to develop courses of action.

F - 1

APPENDIX F

PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT Public involvement is an integral component in transportation planning. The exchange of ideas between the public and transportation planners is vital if the needs of an area’s transportation system are to be met. To foster dialogue and participation, AMATS maintains a public involvement policy. The policy encourages public comment throughout the planning and project selection process. The policy provides opportunities for members of the public to review and comment on the regional transportation policies, plans and projects that are under consideration. The policy addresses the issue of Environmental Justice by encouraging the public participation of low-income and minority groups. The public participation process to update the 2030 Regional Transportation Plan has been conducted in accordance with Chapter IV of the AMATS Public Involvement Policy. AMATS initiated this process in late September 2004 with its Looking Ahead to 2030 public awareness campaign, which included a series of public involvement meetings. A second series of meetings was held in April 2005. The following is a summary of these meetings. September/October 2004 Public Involvement Meetings The first series of meetings provided concerned citizens, businesses and civic organizations the opportunity to focus on identifying regional transportation needs. The agency scheduled five meetings at various locations throughout the AMATS area. These meetings were promoted through a combination of informational brochures, newspaper advertisements and the AMATS web site. During the meetings, the AMATS Staff made presentations regarding potential highway, public transportation, bicycle, and pedestrian needs. Open Houses followed the presentations and included informative displays and materials. Comments received at these meetings were considered as the 2030 Regional Transportation Plan was developed. A total of 40 individuals attended the five public involvement meetings. There were several recurring topics among the comments presented to staff members by meeting attendees. These topics were:

1. The need to pursue commuter rail in some form. 2. The need for more bikeways to serve neighborhoods. 3. The need for more sidewalks.

F - 2

During the meetings, AMATS received 20 written comments, which were subsequently addressed by the staff and presented to the Policy Committee in October 2004. (These comments and a list of meeting attendees are available from AMATS upon request.) April 2005 Public Involvement Meetings AMATS scheduled a second series of public involvement meetings from April 5, 2005 through April 7, 2005 and a 30-day comment period that began March 30, 2005 and ended April 29, 2005. The purpose of the meetings and comment period was to allow the public to comment on the draft 2030 Regional Transportation Plan. The draft plan was available for public review at the AMATS and Ohio Department of Transportation (ODOT) District 4 offices and on the agency web site. As with the initial series of public involvement meetings, these meetings were scheduled at various locations throughout the AMATS area. These meetings were held on the following dates and locations.

• April 5, 2005, Senator Oliver R. Ocasek Government Office Building Auditorium, Akron

• April 5, 2005, Walker Building, Aurora

• April 6, 2005, ODOT District 4 Office, Coventry Township

• April 7, 2005, Kent City Council Chambers, Kent

• April 7, 2005, Stow Safety Building, Stow.

AMATS promoted this second series through a combination of a press release, informational brochures, newspaper advertisements and its web site. A press release announcing the April meetings and the 30-day comment period was mailed to all media identified in the public involvement policy on March 23, 2005. AMATS posted this item on its web site. The agency prepared 2,500 multi-color informational brochures with detailed information regarding the dates, times and locations of these meetings and the 30-day comment period. Over 1,300 of these brochures were mailed to the groups identified in the public involvement policy. (A copy of this brochure is included in this appendix.) Three 50-column inch newspaper advertisements announcing meeting dates, times and locations and the 30-day comment period appeared in the Akron-Beacon Journal, the Kent-Ravenna Record-Courier and The Reporter prior to the first scheduled meeting. These advertisements appeared in the Akron-Beacon Journal and the Record-Courier on March 30, 2005 and in The Reporter the week of March 28, 2005. (A copy of the ad that appeared in these newspapers is included in this appendix.)

F - 3

During the meetings, staff members made presentations regarding the planning process leading up to the 2030 Regional Transportation Plan and described recommended highway, public transportation, bicycle, and pedestrian improvements. Open Houses followed the presentations and included informative displays and materials. Members of the public were encouraged to offer their comments on the draft plan and on other transportation issues confronting the area, such as congestion, safety, accessibility, and mobility. Comments received at these meetings and during the public comment period were considered by the Policy Committee prior to its approval of the draft 2030 Regional Transportation Plan. A total of 38 individuals attended the five public involvement meetings. There were two recurring topics among the oral comments made by meeting attendees. These topics were:

1. The need to pursue passenger rail in some form as an alternative to driving. 2. Questions pertaining to the planned downtown Kent transit center.

AMATS received five written comments during the 30-day comment period, to which the staff subsequently responded. (These comments are included in this appendix.) Attendees at these meetings, along with meeting dates and locations, are listed below. Senator Oliver R. Ocasek Government Office Building Auditorium - April 5 Attendee Affiliation Ralph Coletta City of Akron Frank Hairston PARTA Alan Ricks MS Consultants Neil Shaffer Media Walker Building - April 5 Attendee Affiliation Lloyd Atkinson Self John Drew PARTA John Knepp Self Lynn McGill Mayor, City of Aurora John Trew Service Director, City of Aurora ODOT District 4 Office - April 6 Attendee Affiliation Tony Deivasi City of Cuyahoga Falls Joel Helms Self John Marulli McCoy Associates Bud Schafer ODOT District 4 Kent City Council Chambers - April 7 Attendee Affiliation Nancy Adams Kent Environmental Council Walt Adams Kent Environmental Council W.J. Anderson Self

F - 4

Oleta Anderson Self Lloyd Atkinson Self Edward Bargerstock Councilman, City of Kent Harriet Begala Kent Environmental Council Joseph Betkoski Self Edith Chase Kent Environmental Council Tom Clapper Kent State University Brad Dickerson Self John Drew PARTA Frank Hairston PARTA Sally Kelly Portage County Senior Service Elaine Landry Self Bill Lillich Kent, Interim City Manager Kerry MaComber Portage County Commissioners Doug McGee McGee & Associates Scott McKinney American Red Cross Diane Smith Kent Environmental Council Gordon Vars Self George Waliga Self Harold Walker Kent Environmental Council Stow Safety Building - April 7 Attendee Affiliation Bill Miloscia Self Michael Ondecker Self Roak Zellar Self

Contact: Jason A. Segedy

Transportation Planning Administrator 330-375-2436

NEWS RELEASE

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: March 23, 2005

AMATS INVITES YOU TO COMMENT ON UPCOMING TRANSPORTATION

IMPROVEMENTS

The Akron Metropolitan Area Transportation Study (AMATS) is seeking

public comments regarding its two most important planning documents: the draft

2030 Regional Transportation Plan and the draft Transportation

Improvement Program 2006-2009 (TIP). The documents will be available for

public review during a 30-day comment period beginning March 30 and ending

April 29. AMATS will also host five public involvement meetings April 5 through

April 7.

The 2030 Regional Transportation Plan is a long-term guide to local

government officials implementing transportation improvements with federal

funds in Summit and Portage counties and Chippewa Township in Wayne

County. Transportation improvements must be included in the plan to qualify for

federal funding.

The TIP is the area’s short-term program of highway, public transit, bicycle and

pedestrian projects scheduled to receive federal transportation funds over the

next four years.

The public is encouraged to comment on these documents and other

transportation issues confronting the area. Copies of the Draft Regional

Transportation Plan and the Draft TIP will be available for review and comment at

two locations: the AMATS office located at 806 CitiCenter, 146 S. High Street in

Akron and the Ohio Department of Transportation District 4 Office located at

2088 S. Arlington Road in Coventry Township. Comment forms will be

available at both locations. The Regional Transportation Plan and the TIP will

also be available for review on the What’s New page of the AMATS web site

(www.ci.akron.oh.us/AMATS).

The meetings will include a presentation regarding highway, public transit,

bicycle and pedestrian improvement recommendations. An Open House will

follow the presentation, complete with informative displays and materials.

Meeting dates, times and locations are presented below, along with available

transit service routes.

• 12 p.m., Tuesday, April 5 at the Senator Oliver R. Ocasek Government

Office Building located at 161 S. High Street in Akron.

• 7 p.m., Tuesday, April 5 at the Walker Building located at 129 W.

Pioneer Trail in Aurora.

• 7 p.m., Wednesday, April 6 at the Ohio Department of Transportation

District 4 Office - Cardinal Conference Room located at 2088 S.

Arlington Road in Coventry Township.

• 12 p.m., Thursday, April 7 at the Kent City Council Chambers located at

325 S. Depeyster Street in Kent.

• 7 p.m., Thursday, April 7 at the Stow Safety Building located at 3800

Darrow Road in Stow.

For additional information, please call 330-375-2436 or e-mail

amats@ci.akron.oh.us.

# # #

If yo

u ar

e un

able

to a

ttend

any

of t

he fi

ve p

ublic

mee

tings

and

hav

e a

spec

ific

conc

ern

that

you

wou

ld li

ke to

brin

g to

our

atte

ntio

n, p

leas

e co

mpl

ete

the

info

rmat

ion

belo

w, f

old

alon

g th

e do

tted

line

and

forw

ard

your

com

men

ts to

AM

AT

S b

y m

ail.

(Ple

ase

prin

t cle

arly

.)

Nam

e:__

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

Add

ress

:___

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

_S

tree

tA

pt.

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

City

Sta

teZ

ip

Plea

se d

escr

ibe

brie

fly:_

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

___

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

Akr

on M

etro

polit

an A

rea

Tran

spor

tatio

n St

udy

806

Citi

Cen

ter

146

S. H

igh

St.

Akr

on, O

hio

4430

8-14

23

AMATS invites you to comment onupcoming transportation improvements

The Akron Metropolitan Area TransportationStudy (AMATS) is seeking public commentsregarding its two most important planning docu-ments: the 2030 Regional Transportation Planand the Transportation Improvement ProgramFY 2006-2009 (TIP). The Draft RegionalTransportation Plan and the Draft TIP will beavailable for public review during a 30-day com-ment period beginning March 30 through April29. AMATS will also host five public involvementmeetings beginning April 5 through April 7.

Both documents are used by AMATS to plan forhighway, public transit, bicycle and pedestrianprojects in the Akron metropolitan area. The2030 Regional Transportation Plan is a long-term guide used by local government officials topursue transportation improvements with federalfunds. The TIP is the area’s short-term programof projects scheduled to receive federal trans-portation funds over the next four years.

The meetings will include a presentation regard-ing recommendations for transportation improve-ments. An Open House will follow the presenta-tion complete with informative displays and mate-rials. The public is encouraged to comment ontransportation recommendations included in theDraft Regional Transportation Plan and the DraftTIP as well as transportation issues confrontingthe area.

Copies of the Draft Regional Transportation Planand the Draft TIP will be available for review andcomment at two locations: the AMATS officelocated at 806 CitiCenter, 146 S. High Street inAkron and the Ohio Department ofTransportation District 4 Office located at 2088S. Arlington Road in Akron.

The Draft Regional Transportation Plan and theDraft TIP will also be available for review on theWhat’s New page of the AMATS web site atwww.ci.akron.oh.us/AMATS.

For additional information, please contactAMATS by phone at 330-375-2436 or by e-mail atamats@ci.akron.oh.us.

Tuesday, April 5, 12 p.m.Senator Oliver R. Ocasek

Government Office Building - Auditorium161 S. High Street, Akron

METRO RTA routes are available to downtown Akron

Thursday, April 7, 7 p.m.Stow Safety Building

3800 Darrow Road, Stow

Transit Service Available:METRO RTA Route #103 - Stow/Hudson

Tuesday, April 5, 7 p.m.Walker Building

129 W. Pioneer Trail, Aurora

(Transit service is not availableto this meeting.)

Thursday, April 7, 12 p.m.Kent City Council Chambers

325 S. Depeyster Street, Kent

Transit Service Available:PARTA Routes - Interurban, Campus Loop,

S. Water Street, Kent Circulator

Wednesday, April 6, 7 p.m.Ohio Department of Transportation

District 4 Office - Cardinal Conference Room2088 S. Arlington Road, Coventry Township

Transit Service Available:METRO RTA Route #2 - Arlington

* Persons with disabilities needing assistance are asked to contact Richard Johnson, Office of the ADA Coordinator, 166 S. High St., Akron, OH 44308,330-375-2189 (voice), 330-375-2345 (TDD), at least seven (7) days in advance.

Akron M

etropolitan Area Transportation Study

806 CitiC

enter146 S. H

igh St.A

kron, Ohio 44308-1423

Place Stam

p H

ere

The Akron Metropolitan Area Transportation Study (AMATS) is seeking public commentsregarding its two most important planning documents: the 2030 Regional Transportation Planand the 2006-2009 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). The Draft RegionalTransportation Plan and the Draft TIP will be available for public review during a 30-day commentperiod beginning March 30 through April 29. AMATS will also host five public involvementmeetings beginning April 5 through April 7.

The 2030 Regional Transportation Plan is a long-term guide to local government officialsimplementing transportation improvements with federal funds in Summit and Portage countiesand Chippewa Township in Wayne County. Transportation improvements must be included inthe plan to qualify for federal funding.

The TIP is the area’s short-term program of highway, public transit, bicycle and pedestrianprojects scheduled to receive federal transportation funds over the next four years.

The public is also encouraged to comment on transportation recommendations included in theRegional Transportation Plan and the TIP. Members of the public are encouraged to offer theircomments on the recommendations or transportation issues confronting the area.

Copies of the Draft Regional Transportation Plan and the Draft TIP will be available for reviewand comment at two locations: the AMATS office located at 806 CitiCenter, 146 S. High Streetin Akron and the Ohio Department of Transportation District 4 Office located at 2088 S.Arlington Road in Akron. Comment forms will be available at both locations. The RegionalTransportation Plan and the TIP will also be available for review on the What’s New page of theAMATS web site.

The meetings will include a presentation regarding highway, public transit, bicycle andpedestrian improvement recommendations. An Open House will follow the presentation,complete with informative displays and materials.

For additional information, please call AMATS at 330-375-2436 or e-mail AMATS atamats@ci.akron.oh.us. Please visit the What's New page of the AMATS web site athttp://www.ci.akron.oh.us/AMATS/whatsnew/index.htm for detailed information regardingupcoming meetings.

Tuesday, April 5, 7 p.m.Walker Building

129 W. Pioneer Trail, Aurora

(Transit service is not available to this meeting.)

Wednesday, April 6, 7 p.m.Ohio Department of Transportation

District 4 Office - Cardinal Conference Room2088 S. Arlington Road, Akron

Transit Service Available:METRO RTA Route #2 - Arlington

Thursday, April 7, 12 p.m.Kent City Council Chambers

325 S. Depeyster Street, Kent

Transit Service Available:PARTA Routes - Interurban, Campus Loop,

S. Water Street, Kent Circulator

Thursday, April 7, 7 p.m.Stow Safety Building

3800 Darrow Road, Stow

Transit Service Available:METRO RTA Route #103 - Stow/Hudson

* Persons with disabilities needing assistance are asked to contact Richard Johnson, Office of the ADA Coordinator, 166 S. High St.,Akron, OH 44308, 330-375-2189 (voice), 330-375-2345 (TDD), at least seven (7) days in advance.

Tuesday, April 5, 12 p.m.Senator Oliver R. Ocasek

Government Office Building - Auditorium161 S. High Street, Akron

METRO RTA routes are available to downtown Akron

AMATS invites you to comment on upcoming transportation improvements

50 column inches

To appear in the Akron Beacon Journal and the Record-Courier on Wednesday, March 30, 2005

To appear in The Reporter during the week of March 28, 2005

G - 1

APPENDIX G

UNFUNDED TRANSPORTATION NEEDS The 2030 Regional Transportation Plan recommendations for highway, public transportation, and transportation enhancement improvements are financially constrained. This means that the recommendations have been selected so that their total cost does not exceed the amount of transportation funding expected to be available between now and 2030. The amount of funding forecasted to be available through 2030 is insufficient to include all of the highway, public transportation, and transportation enhancement needs that have been identified in the Congestion Management System Report, the 2030 Highway System Preservation Needs report, the Additional Highway Needs memorandum, the 2030 Public Transportation Needs report, and the 2030 Transportation Enhancement Needs report. The unfunded transportation needs are listed in Tables G-1 through G-3. The total cost of the needs is estimated to be $1.25 billion. These needs will be reevaluated for inclusion in the Plan if additional transportation funding becomes available to the AMATS area between now and 2030.

ESTIMATEDPROJECT FROM TO PROJECT DESCRIPTION COSTSR 8 I-76/I-77 (Central Interchange) Perkins St Widen to 8 lanes $53,000,000SR 8 Perkins St Cuyahoga Falls Ave Widen to 8 lanes and reconfigure access $196,500,000SR 8 Cuyahoga Falls Ave Graham Rd Widen to 8 lanes and reconfigure access $65,500,000SR 14 SR 303 (E. Leg) SR 44 Widen to 4 lanes and turn lanes (where warranted) $35,100,000SR 18 Smith Rd Intersection upgrade $500,000SR 18 Smith Rd Ghent Rd Reconstruct to standard lanes and access management $2,600,000SR 18 Portage Path S. Highland Ave Remove angled parking and replace with parallel parking $250,000SR 43 Old Forge Rd Tallmadge Rd Turn lanes (where warranted) and reconstruct to standard lanes $4,922,000SR 43 Kent North Corp. Ravenna Rd (W. Leg) Widen to 4 lanes and turn lanes (where warranted) $6,152,000SR 43 Ravenna Rd (W. Leg) SR 14/303 Widen to 4 lanes, turn lanes (where warranted), and access

management$23,034,000

SR 43 Mennonite Rd Realign W. Mennonite Rd to Mennonite Rd $800,000SR 43 Treat Rd Geauga County Line Turn lanes (where warranted) $1,000,000SR 59 Oak Park Blvd Englewood Dr Turn lanes (where warranted) $2,500,000SR 59 Baird Rd Deidrick Rd Turn lanes (where warranted) and signal coordination $1,300,000SR 59 SR 261 Menough Rd Widen to 4 lanes and turn lanes (where warranted) $16,200,000I-76 Gilchrist Rd Southeast Av (SR 532) Widen to 6 lanes $22,300,000I-76 SR 43/Edson Rd Intersection upgrade $3,500,000I-76 SR 44 Reconfigure intersection $3,900,000I-77 Arlington Rd I-277 Widen to 8 lanes $70,000,000I-77 at I-277 Reconfigure interchange $102,000,000I-77 I-277 Lovers Lane Widen to 8 lanes and reconfigure access $105,000,000I-77 Ghent Rd I-80 (Ohio Turnpike) Widen to 6 lanes and reconfigure access $121,600,000SR 82 Cuyahoga County Line Boyden Rd Widen to 4 lanes, turn lanes (where warranted), and signal

coordination$9,055,000

SR 82 SR 43 SR 306 Turn lanes (where warranted) $500,000SR 91 Tallmadge Cir Howe Rd Turn lanes (where warranted) $2,500,000SR 91 Graham Rd Intersection upgrade $1,300,000SR 91 SR 303 Intersection upgrade $2,360,000SR 91 SR 303 Intersection bypass (extend from SR 91 to Oviatt St) $4,650,000SR 91 Valleyview Rd Twinsburg Rd Widen to 4 lanes and turn lanes (where warranted) $11,464,000SR 93 Center Rd SR 619 Turn lanes (where warranted) and reconstruct to standard lanes $7,550,000SR 93 SR 619 State St Turn lanes (where warranted) $3,140,000SR 93 Carnegie Ave Waterloo Rd Turn lanes (where warranted), access management, and signal

coordination$2,200,000

SR 162 Cleveland-Massillon Rd I-77 Turn lanes (where warranted), reconstruct to standard lanes, and improve horizontal geometry

$15,700,000

SR 241 Raber Rd SR 619 Widen to 4 lanes and turn lanes (where warranted) $4,209,000SR 261 (Tallmadge Ave) N. Main St SR 8 Turn lanes (where warranted) and reconstruct to standard lanes $5,536,000SR 261 (Northeast Ave) Bentley Place Blvd Cherry St Turn lanes (where warranted) and access management $2,310,000SR 261 Cherry St SR 43 Turn lanes (where warranted) and signal coordination $1,600,000I-271 SR 8 I-480 Widen to 6 lanes $45,600,000I-271 NB ramp at SR 82 Ramp relocation $1,500,000SR 303 Terex Rd Boston Mills Rd Widen to 4 lanes and turn lanes (where warranted) $15,957,000SR 303 Boston Mills Rd Atterbury Blvd Turn lanes (where warranted) and signal coordination $600,000SR 306 SR 43 SR 82 Turn lanes (where warranted) $500,000SR 306 SR 82 Geauga County Line Widen to 4 lanes and turn lanes (where warranted) $7,000,000SR 619 State St SR 241 Widen to 4 lanes and turn lanes (where warranted) $31,400,000SR 619 Myersville Rd Intersection upgrade $620,0005th St NE Paige Ave State St Turn lanes (where warranted) $3,000,00031st St Wooster Rd W Shannon Ave Widen to 4 lanes and turn lanes (where warranted) $6,624,000Akron-Peninsula Rd Portage Trail Intersection upgrade $500,000Arlington St Killian Rd Krumroy Rd Turn lanes (where warranted) and reconstruct to standard lanes $5,154,000Arlington St Swartz Rd Waterloo Rd Turn lanes (where warranted), reconstruct to standard lanes, and

signal coordination$4,100,000

Cleveland-Massillon Rd SR 18 Springside Dr Widen to 4 lanes and signal coordination $2,500,000Cuyahoga Falls Ave N. Main St Front St Widen to 4 lanes, turn lanes (where warranted), and signal

coordination$5,000,000

Fairchild Ave Hudson Rd SR 43 Turn lanes (where warranted) and reconstruct to standard lanes $790,000Fishcreek Rd Call Rd Laurel Woods Blvd Widen to 4 lanes and turn lanes (where warranted) $9,600,000Graham Rd Charring Cross Dr Newcomer Rd Widen to 4 lanes and turn lanes (where warranted) $10,200,000Highland Rd SR 8 Chamberlin Rd Widen to 4 lanes and turn lanes (where warranted) $7,750,000S. Main St Caston Rd (N. Leg) SR 619 Turn lanes (where warranted) $2,500,000Merriman/Riverview Rd Smith Rd Weathervane Lane Turn lanes (where warranted) and access management $1,500,000Merriman Rd Portage Path Intersection upgrade $500,000Phillip Pkwy - Ethan Dr Phillip Pkwy Ethan Dr New road $5,500,000Portage Trail Lillis Dr SR 8 Turn lanes (where warranted) and reconstruct to standard lanes $8,140,000Prospect St Lake Av Main St (SR 59) Turn lanes (where warranted) and signal coordination $2,720,000Ravenna Rd Glenwood Dr Cuyahoga County Line Widen to 4 lanes, turn lanes (where warranted), signal coordination,

and realign Shepard Rd/Richmond Rd$8,450,000

Smith Rd Lake of the Woods Blvd Sourek Trail Turn lanes (where warranted) and reconstruct to standard lanes $7,500,000Smith Rd Sourek Trail Riverview Rd reconstruct to standard lanes and vertical improvement $1,900,000Stow Rd Barlow Rd SR 303 Widen to 4 lanes and turn lanes (where warranted) $14,600,000Tallmadge Rd Clyde Ave Newberry St Turn lanes (where warranted) and reconstruct to standard lanes $5,820,000Terex Rd Extension SR 303 Boston Mills Rd New road $8,400,000Valleyview Rd Olde Eight Rd Cuyahoga County Line Turn lanes (where warranted) and reconstruct to standard lanes $12,933,000Waterloo Rd I-77 SB Ramps S. Arlington St Widen to 4 lanes and turn lanes (where warranted) $5,265,000Wooster Rd N State St I-76 Turn lanes (where warranted), reconstruct to standard lanes and

signal coordination$3,400,000

Wooster Rd W Johnson Rd 31st St Widen to 4 lanes and turn lanes (where warranted) $4,920,000

Total Estimated Cost $1,164,175,000

LIMITS

Table G - 1 UNFUNDED HIGHWAY NEEDS

G - 2

TRANSIT PROVIDER PROJECT DESCRIPTION

PROJECT TYPE1

ESTIMATED COST

METRO Boston Hts./Hudson Park and Ride Lot E $1,000,000METRO Bus Route Terminal Facilities E $2,000,000METRO Chapel Hill Transit Center E $2,000,000METRO Computer Hardware P $250,000METRO Crosstown Bus Service (Additional Buses) E $5,947,000METRO Cuyahoga Falls Park and Ride Lot E $1,500,000METRO Ellet Area Transit Center E $2,000,000METRO Farebox Replacement P $2,500,000METRO Feasibility Study of Rail Service in Barberton-Akron Corridor E N/AMETRO Improved Frequency on Local Bus Routes (Additional Buses) E $9,703,000METRO Leasing Expenses P $3,900,000METRO More Frequent Express Bus Service (Additional Buses) E $2,800,000METRO Neighborhood Circulator Routes (Additional Buses) E $4,370,000METRO Non-Revenue Vehicles - Replacement P $885,000METRO Planning Expenses P $5,200,000METRO Radio System Replacement P $2,000,000METRO Rehab Sandyville Rail Line P $5,300,000METRO Rehabilitation of Administration Building P $500,000METRO SCAT Restructuring (Additional Buses) E $425,000METRO Shop Equipment P $250,000METRO Wadsworth Service (Additional Buses) E $626,000PARTA Bus Destination Signs O $314,900PARTA Computer Hardware P $250,000PARTA Dispatching Software Upgrade P $150,000PARTA Non-Revenue Vehicles - Replacement P $873,000PARTA Photo Copiers P $120,000PARTA Planning Expenses P $2,288,000PARTA Shop Equipment P $500,000PARTA Study of New Service to Adjacent Counties E N/A

$57,651,900

Notes:

Table G - 2UNFUNDED PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION NEEDS

1 P=Preservation; O=Operational Improvement; E=Expansion

Total Estimated Cost

G - 3

PROJECT ESTIMATEDPROJECT FROM TO DESCRIPTION COST

Bike & Hike Trail - Portage Connector

Bike & Hike Trail The Portage at Middlebury Rd Bike path $228,000

Brandywine Creek Greenway Metro Parks Bike & Hike Trail/I-271 Hines Hill Rd Bike path $1,824,000Conrail Akron Secondary Hudson SCL S Main St/SR 303 Bike path $436,450Conrail Akron Secondary Conrail Freedom Secondary Hudson SCL Bike path $1,339,450Cormany Rd Trail Portage Lakes Dr Towpath Trail Bike lanes $432,000Gateway Trail (NPS) Towpath Trail Metro Parks Bike & Hike Trail Bike path $1,266,350Graham Rd Stow Bike & Hike Trail Southeast Summit/Portage Co line Bike lanes $19,350Graham Rd (Stow Bike & Hike Trail) Stow Bike & Hike Trail North Stow Bike & Hike Trail

SoutheastBike lanes $58,050

Green Center City Trail Christman Rd Stark/Summit Co line Bike path/ route/lanes

$2,312,600

Horn Rd Bikeway Freedom Secondary Headwaters Bike Trail Bike lane $1,020Kelsey Bikeway Extension Howe Ave Northmoreland Blvd Bike path/

route/lanes$449,350

Lake Dorothy Trail Medina Line Rd Towpath Trail Bike path/route $1,065,150Little Cuyahoga Greenway E. Market St (SR 18) Portage Co line Bike path $2,508,000Nimisila Creek Greenway Towpath Trail - Clinton Christman Rd Bike path/

route/lanes$218,650

Ohio to Erie Trail - along railroad Summit Co line N Lawrence Rd Bike path $98,000Ohio to Erie Trail - along railroad (Wayne Co)

Cardinal Trail Summit Co line Bike path $1,824,000

Old Carriage Trail Extension Holzhauer Rd Metro Parks Bike & Hike Trail Bike path $219,475Sagamore Creek Metro Parks Bike Trail

Summit Co line & Towpath Trail Metro Parks Bike & Hike Trail Bike path $663,775

Stow Rd Trail SR 91/Graham Rd Metro Parks Bike & Hike Trail Bike lanes $396,000The Hike and Bike Trail Extension Hudson Rd The Portage (Conrail Freedom

Secondary)Bike path $316,050

Tuscarawas River Greenway Towpath Trail CVS RR Bike path $3,500,000Tuscarawas River Trail Ohio to Erie Trail Rogues Hollow Tramline Trail Bike path $342,000Vanderhoof/Caston Rds Trail Towpath Trail & Vanderhoof Rd Main St Bike path/

route/lanes$560,600

Young Rd Trail Stow Bikeway Metro Parks Bike & Hike Trail Bike path $228,000

Akron Sidewalks and curb cuts (additional phases)

various locations Pedestrian $6,750,000

Aurora Historic Streetscape (SR 43/SR 82/SR 306)

Scenic/ Environmental

$3,200,000

Brady Switch Tower Historic Transportation Building Renovation

Ravenna Rd (southwest of Towner's Woods Park)

Historic/ Archaeological

$200,000

E. Market Street sidewalks, curbs, and trees

Broadway St SR 8 Scenic/ Environmental

$780,000

Mill Street Skywalk Extension Radisson Inn First Merit Bldg Pedestrian $416,000SR 82 Sidewalks Hadden Rd Church Dr Pedestrian $170,333

$20,306,320$11,516,333

$31,822,653Total Estimated Cost

UNFUNDED TRANSPORTATION ENHANCEMENT NEEDS Table G - 3

UNFUNDED NON-BIKEWAY NEEDS

UNFUNDED BIKEWAY NEEDS

LIMITS

Total Estimated Cost of Non-Bikeway UnfundedTotal Estimated Cost of Bikeway Unfunded

G - 4

Metropolitan Transportation Policy Committee Technical Advisory Committee

Chairman - Mr. David Celik Chairman - Mr. John TrewVice Chairman - Mayor Lynn McGill Vice Chairman - Mr. Jim Oberdorfer

AKRON - Mayor Donald L. Plusquellic AKRON - Mr. Mike MadonioAURORA - Mayor Lynn McGill AKRON - Mr. Ralph ColettaBARBERTON - Mayor Randy Hart AKRON - Mr. Dave GasperBOSTON HEIGHTS - Mayor Raymond McFall AURORA - Mr. John E. TrewBRADY LAKE - Mayor Hal Lehman BARBERTON - Mr. James L. BeckettCLINTON - Mayor Thomas Mayberry BARBERTON - Mr. William CoursonCUYAHOGA FALLS - Mayor Don Robart CUYAHOGA FALLS - Mr. Tony V. Demasi DOYLESTOWN - Mayor Terry L. Lindeman CUYAHOGA FALLS - Mr. Fred GuerraFAIRLAWN - Mayor William J. Roth DOYLESTOWN - Engineering AssociatesGARRETTSVILLE - Mayor Craig Moser FAIRLAWN - Mr. Nicholas SpagnuoloGREEN - Mayor Dan Croghan GREEN - Mr. Wayne WietheHIRAM - Mayor Robert Summers GREEN - Mr. Paul PickettHUDSON - Mayor William A. Currin HUDSON - Mr. David McCallopsKENT - Mr. Bill Lillich HUDSON - Mr. Mark RichardsonMACEDONIA - Mayor Don Kuchta KENT - Mr. Eugene Roberts MANTUA - Mayor Claude Hopkins KENT - Mr. Max JohnsMOGADORE - Mayor Steve Marks MACEDONIA - Mr. John ChasteenMUNROE FALLS - Mayor Frank Larson MOGADORE - Vacant NEW FRANKLIN - Mayor Al Bollas MUNROE FALLS - Mr. Barry WalkenshawNORTHFIELD - Mayor Victor F. Milani NEW FRANKLIN - Mr. Robert LeeNORTON - Mayor Joe Kernan NORTHFIELD - Mr. Richard WasoskyPENINSULA - Mayor Michael J. Kaplan NORTON - Mr. Jeff PritchardRAVENNA - Mayor Paul Jones RAVENNA - Mr. Mark BowenREMINDERVILLE - Mayor Sam Alonso RICHFIELD - Ms. Melanie TibbsRICHFIELD - Mayor Michael K. Lyons SILVER LAKE - Mr. Richard FenwickSILVER LAKE - Mayor Warner D. Mendenhall STOW - Mr. James McClearySTOW - Mayor Karen Fritschel STOW - Mr. Ken TrennerSTREETSBORO - Mayor Mark J. Pavlick STREETSBORO - Mr. Bill RudloskySUGAR BUSH KNOLLS - Mayor Nancy S. Carstensen TALLMADGE - Mr. Pat SaunerTALLMADGE - Mayor Christopher B. Grimm TWINSBURG - Mr. Dan MoczadloTWINSBURG - Mayor Katherine A. Procop SUMMIT COUNTY ENGINEER - Mr. Greg BachmanSUMMIT COUNTY ENGINEER - Mr. Greg Bachman PORTAGE COUNTY ENGINEER - Mr. Michael MarozziSUMMIT COUNTY EXECUTIVE - Mr. James McCarthy PORTAGE COUNTY TOWNSHIP ASSOCIATION - Ms. Connie LeedomSUMMIT COUNTY - Mr. Joseph Migliorini METRO RTA - Mr. Robert PfaffSUMMIT COUNTY - Mr. Jim Oberdorfer NEFCO - Mr. Joseph HadleyPORTAGE COUNTY ENGINEER - Mr. Michael Marozzi ODOT - Mr. Mohamed DarwishPORTAGE COUNTY COMMISSIONER - Mr. Charles Keiper II PARTA - Mr. John DrewPORTAGE COUNTY COMMISSIONER - Ms. Maureen Frederick PORTAGE COUNTY REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION - Ms. Lynn EricksonPORTAGE COUNTY COMMISSIONER - Mr. Christopher Smeiles PORTAGE COUNTY SMALL VILLAGES - Vacant WAYNE COUNTY - Mr. Mark Spademan SUMMIT COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT - Mr. Jim OberdorferODOT - Mr. Mohamed Darwish SUMMIT COUNTY TOWNSHIP ASSOCIATION - Ms. Betty KlingenbergMETRO RTA - Mr. Bernard Bear SUMMIT COUNTY SMALL VILLAGES - Ms. Marilyn MosesPARTA - Mr. Pat McCon

Non-Voting MembersNon-Voting Member

Akron Canton Airport - Mr. Frederick KrumAMATS - Kenneth A. Hanson Akron Regional Air Quality Management District - Mr. Lynn Malcolm

Akron Metropolitan Area Transportation Study - Mr. Kenneth HansonCitizen Involvement Committee Cuyahoga Valley National Park - Mr. John Debo, Jr.

Environmental Community - Mr. Jim WoodingChairman - Mr. Michael Ondecker KSU Campus Bus Service - Mr. Thomas J.ClapperVice Chairman - Mr. David H. Mangold Private Transportation Provider - Mr. Mark Posten

Railroad Industry - Mr. William A. CallisonMr. Charles Allen Mr. Timothy W. Lewis Summit County Port Authority - Mr. Chris BurnhamMr. Jerome Apple Ms. Courtney Luff Trucking Industry - VacantMr. Doug Anderson Mr. Charles McGallMr. Joseph Baiera Mr. Leonard McKayMr. Marvin Buchanan Ms. Kerry Macomber Akron Metropolitan Area Transportation Study StaffMr. Dan Campbell Mr. William MakiMr. Thomas J. Clapper Mr. David H. Mangold Study Director - Mr. Kenneth A. HansonMr. Angelo Coletta Mr. John MoranMr. Kirt Conrad Mr. Dave Nist Mr. Matthew Amer Mr. Thomas KochMr. Larry Crookston Mr. Michael A. Ondecker Ms. Heather Bates Mr. Eugene PaczeltMr. Donald B. Dieterich Mr. Philip Sage Mr. Victor Botosan Ms. Amy PraterMr. Bill Goncy Mr. Fred Schuld Mr. Gabriel Elissa Mr. Kerry PraterMr. Joel A. Helms Ms. Julia Sigel Mr. Thomas Fritsch Mr. David PulayMs. Audrey Cielinski-Kessler Mayor Robert Summers Mr. Jeff Gardner Mr. Jason SegedyMr. David Koontz Mr. Richard Wasosky Ms. Phyllis Jividen Ms. Linda Werntz

Ms. Marie Whaley

May 16, 2005

AKRON METROPOLITAN AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY