CUY-90-Innerbelt ODOT PID No 77510

Chapter 5: Public Involvement and Agency Coordination On June 7, 2006 at The Annunciation Greek Orthodox Church, a meeting was held regarding the Central Viaduct Bridge, attended by 139 people. The open house style meeting was held from 4:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. with a presentation given on possible types of bridges for the Central Viaduct. Consultant and ODOT staff were on hand to answer questions. Comments 5.1 Introduction were solicited from the public to gather their opinion on which types of bridges were more appealing. Based on the comments received three bridge concepts were carried forward for further consideration; the Single Tower Cable-Stayed, Two Tower The public involvement process as outlined in ODOT’s PDP and its Public Involvement Guide has been an integral part of the Cable-Stayed, and Tied Arch bridges. Project from its inception, and will continue to guide public involvement activities as the process moves through the remaining PDP Steps. A second open house meeting was held on September 13, 2006, from 4:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. at The Annunciation Greek Orthodox Church regarding the Central Viaduct Bridge. The consultant presented three concepts which had been the most Public involvement efforts conducted through the development of Conceptual Alternatives are summarized in the Conceptual popular options from the previous meeting. Ninety-five people attended the meeting and were asked to once again give their Alternatives Study (CAS) included in Appendix C. These efforts included: coordination with the City of and the opinions on the three bridge types to further narrow down the field of options. Cleveland Urban Core Projects Advisory Committee, consisting of 70 stakeholder organizations; stakeholder meetings; public meetings; newsletters; and a project website. These efforts are more fully described in the CAS document, beginning on page Following consideration of public comments, the committee recommended the single tower cable stay as the bridge type. A 3-3. rendering of the bridge type recommended by the committee is included in Appendix G. Comments and concerns, advertisements, presentations etc. from these meetings are found in Appendix F. This chapter will summarize public involvement and agency coordination efforts subsequent to the Conceptual Alternatives Study. ODOT originally accepted the committee’s recommendation on January 2, 2007. However, due to fiscal limitations and recent lane closures due to build-up of ice on cables (such as on the Maumee River Crossing in Toledo), the preferred alternative 5.2 Central Viaduct Bridge Subcommittee and Bridge-Type Public Meetings does not include the signature bridge type recommended by the committee. The Central Viaduct Bridge is anticipated to be one of the first components of the Cleveland Innerbelt Project to be designed ODOT remains committed to working with an aesthetics committee to focus on the appearance of the corridor, such as and constructed. Consequently a separate Committee was established early to provide advice on the bridge type. lighting, fencing and various treatments. ODOT will consider input from the Innerbelt Bridge and Urban Design Aesthetics subcommittees prior to selecting aesthetic treatments and urban design details, including wayfinding, gateway, overpass and • Burton Bell Carr Development Corporation underpass treatments. • City of Cleveland Chief of Staff (Mayor’s office) • City of Cleveland Design Review 5.3 Design and Aesthetics Subcommittee • City of Cleveland Engineering A Design and Aesthetics Subcommittee was assembled for the project, consisting of the following organizations: • City of Cleveland Planning Commission • • • City of Cleveland Planning Department American Institute of Architects Cleveland City of Cleveland - Planning Commission • • • City of Cleveland Public Service Burgess & Niple City of Cleve land - Traffic Engineering • • • City of Cleveland Traffic CDC -Burton Bell Carr , Ward 13 • • • Cleveland City Council Ward 13 CDC -Cleveland Development Neighborhood Coalition Cleveland City Council, Ward 5 • CDC - Alliance • Cleveland State University • Cleveland Landmarks Commission • CDC -Flats Oxbow Association • Cuyahoga Community College • Cuyahoga Community College • CDC -Historic Gateway and Warehouse District • Cuyahoga County Commissioners • Cuyahoga County Commissioners • CDC -Maingate • Cuyahoga County Engineer • Cuyahoga County Engineer • CDC -MidTown Cleveland, Inc. • Federal Highway Administration - Division • Downtown Cleveland Alliance • • • CDC -Quad rangle Incorporated GCRTA - Regional Transit Agency Flats Oxbow • CDC -St. Clair Superior • KSU Cleveland Urban Design Collaborative • Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority • CDC -Tremont West Development Corp. • NOACA - Areawide Coordinating Agency • Historic Warehouse/Historic Gateway Development Corporation • City of Cleveland - Department of Economic Development • Ohio Department of Development • Northeast Ohio Areawide Coordinating Agency • City of Cleveland - Design Review, Cleveland Landmarks • Ohio Department of Transportation - Central Office • The Quadrangle Inc. • City of Cleveland - Engineering & Construction • Ohio Department of Transportation - District 12 • Tremont West Development Corporation • City of Cleveland - Office of Buildings and Housing

Draft Environmental Impact Statement 5-1

An invitation to interested parties to become a member of the Cleveland Innerbelt Plan Aesthetics and Urban Design A second meeting was held on September 6, 2006 at the NOACA Boardroom. The results of the Phase I Cultural Resources Subcommittee was sent out on March 16, 2007. A kickoff organizational meeting for the subcommittee was held on March 29, Survey were discussed including OHPO recommendations for the Phase II. More sites for the Phase II Survey were 2007 at 8:30 a.m. at NOACA’s office. The goal of the first meeting was to give an overview of the study process, the highway recommended for further study. A site tour of the corridor was given, resulting in several other sites identified for possible aesthetics/urban design opportunities, and to obtain input to guide the design concepts for the next meeting. investigation in the Phase II Survey. A stakeholder workshop was held on May 29, 2007. The goal of the workshop was to share ideas and input generated from The third Section 106 Consulting Party Meeting was held on February 22, 2007 from 9:30 a.m-12:00 p.m. The group went the stakeholder workshop meetings, identify key movements and places to focus investments, and to obtain consensus from through and discussed each individual property. Eligibility for each property was discussed and sent to SHPO for a 30-day the group on the aesthetic and urban design direction and priorities. response period. A second meeting was held on June 7, 2007, at 8:30 a.m. in the NOACA boardroom. A synopsis of the discussion from the Details regarding all review submissions made to the Consulting Parties are included in the Effects Report included in stakeholder workshop sessions were also sent to the subcommittee members. Appendix D. Sign-in sheets and minutes for these meetings are found in Appendix F. Materials regarding the Design and Aesthetics Subcommittee are found in Appendix F. Materials include invitations, agendas, Table 5-1: Consulting Parties and workshop synopsis, as well as the schedule for future meetings and workshops. Robert Brown, City Planning Commission Dean Tracy Lind, Trinity Cathedral Nancy Campbell, OHPO The committee recommended designing the retaining walls between East 22 nd Street and Carnegie Avenue to support a Debbie Berry, City Planning Commission Tim Tramble, Burten Bell Carr Mark Epstein, OHPO freeway cap or deck. ODOT has committed to considering this issue during detailed design. ODOT has not committed to funding the design or construction of the freeway cap or deck. Robert Keiser, Cleveland Landmarks Scott Carpenter, Western Reserve Fire Kermit Pike, Western Reserve Historical Commission Museum & Education Center Society ODOT remains committed to working with an aesthetics committee to focus on the appearance of the corridor, such as lighting, fencing and various treatments. ODOT will consider input from the Innerbelt Bridge and Urban Design Aesthetics Ed Hauser, citizen John J. Boyle, Cleveland State University Michael Armstrong, FHWA subcommittees prior to selecting aesthetic treatments and urban design details, including wayfinding, gateway, overpass and Martha Eakin, citizen James Haviland, MidTown Cleveland Inc. Carol Poh Miller, Historical Consultant underpass treatments. Susan Miller, citizen Tom Newman, Flats Oxbow Robert P. Range, Grace Hospital 5.4 General Public Meeting William Beckenbach, Quadrangle Phyllis Cleveland, Councilperson Ward 5 Gina Latimer, Carnegie Prospect Holdings On February 1, 2007, an open house style meeting for the entire corridor was held at the Annunciation Greek Orthodox Anita Perez, Central YMCA Cleveland Joseph Cimperman, Councilman Ward 13 Church from 4:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m., which 129 people attended. The study team presented the Recommended Preferred Alternative to the general public. A presentation was given at 6:00 p.m. Comments were solicited about the alternative and Sarah Beimers, Cleveland Restoration Patrick Reymann, Western Reserve Historical Chris Garland, Tremont West Development the study team, along with ODOT staff, was in attendance to answer questions. Society Society Corporation The public meeting was advertised in the newspapers (metropolitan, community, and ethnic papers) and CDC newsletters. Jamie Blackson-Baker, St. Clair Superior Michael Chesler, Prospect Development, Inc. Marty Gelfand, U.S. Rep. Kucinich Office Notices were sent to the Project’s mailing list of more than 8,000 recipients. The meeting was preceded by both print and Thomas Strarinsky, Historic Gateway George Graham, Pilgrim Congregational Pastor Michael Hageman, Zion Lutheran broadcast media coverage. Comments and concerns, advertisements, presentations, etc., from these meetings are found in Neighborhood Corporation Church Church & School Appendix F. Copies of materials used for the public meetings (e.g., handouts, display boards) are on file at ODOT District 12. Reverend Laurinda Hafner, Pilgrim Scott Pollack, Cuyahoga Metropolitan Housing Peter Lawson Jones, Cuyahoga County 5.5 Section 106 Consulting Parties Process Congregational Church Authority Commissioner Jimmy Dimora (alternate Paul Alsenus), Timothy Hagan (alternate Marvin Hayes), Three meetings were held with the Section 106 Consulting Parties to discuss concerns about historic properties within the project’s study area. There were 43 people that attended at least one of the Section 106 meetings. A list of the members is Cuyahoga County Commissioner Cuyahoga County Commissioner found in Table 5-1. The first meeting was held at the NOACA Boardroom on May 24, 2006, at 9:00 a.m. An information packet was handed out to 5.6 Project Website each of the attendees. A presentation by FHWA was made explaining the Section 106 process, as well as the responsibilities of FHWA, State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO), ODOT, and Consulting Parties. The Area of Potential Effects (APE) The Project web site, www.Innerbelt.org , was an important tool of the public involvement effort. The site provides historical Map was presented by URS Consultants for comment from the consulting parties. The Consulting Parties requested a larger information and graphic descriptions of alternatives, reports, presentations, meeting minutes, press releases, and media map to better see everything, an overlay of the alternatives looked at to see where they lay within the APE, show entire coverage. The site also allows individuals to provide comments and concerns for agency review and response. The website boundaries of historic districts, as well as identify any building 40 years or older, since some may become eligible by the time was up and running around January, 2001, and was updated through publication of the Conceptual Alternatives Study in late the project is constructed. A revised APE map based on these comments would be made and sent to the consulting parties 2006. The site gives the user access to the project schedule, Subcommittee Meeting Records (presentations and meeting for a 30-day review. minutes), Public Meeting Records (presentations and display boards), the Conceptual Alternatives Study Report, other key

5-2 CUY-90-Innerbelt ODOT PID No 77510

Stakeholder documents, news articles and press releases through 2006, contact information, comment forms, and links to Frequency Comment Summary Response Reference related projects websites. 2 Concerned about impacts to ODOT coordinated with the Western Reserve Fire DEIS Section 4.2.10 the active fire station and the Museum and the Cleveland Fire Department to Cultural Resources 5.7 Notice of Intent Western Reserve Fire minimize impacts to their two facilities. The Museum. Western Reserve Fire Museum has found the In accordance with 40 CFR Section 1501.7, On September 18, 2001 the FHWA issued a Notice of Intent, (66 FR 49448, Sep. refinements to the Carnegie Avenue/Ontario 27, 2001), for the Cleveland Innerbelt action, which was in the planning phase of project development, indicating that an Avenue/Commercial Road/IR-90 on-ramp Environmental Assessment or EIS would be prepared. Since 2001 project development and public involvement activities have intersection acceptable for the future access and been ongoing. To effectively and efficiently manage the Cleveland Innerbelt Project the FHWA, in cooperation with the ODOT, use of the their facilities. decided to prepare an EIS for the proposed Project. An updated Notice of Intent to prepare an EIS was published in the Federal Register on September 7, 2006. The text of the Notice of Intent is included in Appendix E. 19 Concerned with the closing The Feasible Alternatives includes the construction DEIS Section 4.2.3 of any of the existing ramps of a pair of one-way frontage roads between Neighborhoods/ 5.8 Summary of Public Comments on the Innerbelt. Chester Avenue and Carnegie Avenue to mitigate Community Access the closing of the Prospect Avenue ramps. The Issues raised subsequent to the Conceptual Alternatives Study were focused on the overall process, property takes, historic Carnegie Avenue and E 22 nd St ramps are structures and the bridge type. A summary of the issues raised by letters and e-mails during this Stage are shown in Table 5- consolidated into a single ramp. Access to 2 below along with the frequency with which they were voiced. Lakeside Avenue and St. Clair Avenue will be The following represent the central comments and questions received about the Cleveland Innerbelt project during the provided through an improve Superior Avenue Feasible Alternatives phase. The actual comments or concerns made are found in the public involvement record in Appendix interchange. F which displays the actual comment as a comment at a public meeting, a letter, comment card or e-mail to the project web . site. 3 Expresses concern over the ODOT is coordinating with the City, County and DEIS Section 4.2.5 proposed improvements and State Development Office to promote retention of Property Impacts and Within the table, a reference is provided to other reports of sections of this DEIS where the issue is discussed in more detail. the impact on his business existing businesses. Relocation assistance for Relocations and property. residential and business structure takes have been Table 5-2 Summary of Comments in accordance with Uniform Relocations Act. Frequency Comment Summary Response Reference 7 ODOT needs to be more ODOT has welcomed and accepted any comments. www.innerbelt.org 3 Concerned about the impact Noise and vibration studies were conducted for the DEIS Section 4.1.13 diligent in its public outreach The ODOT schedule has been flexible in order to DEIS Section 5.0 of noise and vibration. Feasible and Preferred alternatives. Noise walls will Noise Analysis efforts. The public needs adequately address comments Public Involvement be constructed where warranted if the community DEIS Section 4.1.14 more time to comment. wants them built. The vibration study concluded Vibration Analysis 2 Public comment period Comments relating to the Draft Environmental ODOT public that minimal impacts are expected from the should be over. Impact Statement (DEIS) will be received until the involvement policy roadway construction adjacent to sensitive end of the comment period for the DEIS which is and FHWA NEPA buildings. tentatively scheduled for spring of 2009. regulations on public 38 Requests access of current All information requests were addressed by ODOT. www.innerbelt.org comment periods information, progress of All written requests, including e-mails are directly DEIS Section 5.0 9 The new Innerbelt should go Alternatives extending the freeway system as an in- Cleveland Innerbelt Innerbelt plans, and/or a responded to. Information, progress of the Innerbelt Public Involvement down either E. 55 th or E. 79 th city beltway were examined in the Innerbelt Study Study/Strategic Plan timeline of the project. project, and timeline of the project were updated Street from the Shoreway (I- (PDP Steps 1 – 4). The in-city beltway was regularly through 2007 on the website for the 90) to connect to I-77. St. eliminated. The Opportunity Corridor was also project. www.innerbelt.org Clair, Chester, and recommended from the Innerbelt Study. The 3 ODOT and FHWA should Consultants were hired to conduct these and other DEIS Chapter 3 Woodland Avenues could be Opportunity Corridor would improve access from the hire a consultant to do an specialty studies. Alternatives. main arteries. Chester interstate system from IR-490/East 55 th Street to Engineering Study and DEIS Section 4.2.7 should be a grand /East 105 th Street. The Opportunity Economic Impact Analysis. Economic Impacts boulevard. Corridor is planned to be a non-limited access roadway for local access.

Draft Environmental Impact Statement 5-3

Frequency Comment Summary Response Reference Frequency Comment Summary Response Reference 4 Has covering the trench A cap has been considered but is not part of the DEIS Section 6.2 3 Consider making a true Extensive use of retaining walls to minimize Exhibits A and B. been considered? proposed project. The retaining walls between E Commitments trench system through property impacts are included as part of the feasible 22 nd St and Carnegie Ave may be designed to Cleveland, using retaining alternatives. accommodate a future cap. walls to save space and the surrounding structures. 1 Opposed to closing Commercial Hill Road is being relocated and will DEIS Section 3.4.3 Commercial Hill Road. continue to serve the industrial valley and the 2 Consider realignment the Modern design requirements for safety on ramps ODOT Location & Central interchange. The project will improve the newly proposed exit ramp of will require the taking of parking in this location as Design Manual safety and traffic flow at the Carnegie I-77 to reduce impact it will well as other locations. Avenue/Ontario Avenue/Commercial Road/IR-90 have on parking. on-ramp intersection. Trucks will be able to avoid 1 Encouraging ODOT to The plans for the Cleveland Innerbelt will comply Stormwater Best this intersection altogether. assess the potential impact with all applicable Ohio EPA regulations and will Management Practices (BMP) 1 Innerbelt Curve should be A single environmental document is being prepared 2007 Physical the runoff storm water will include the use of best management practices for the treatment of stormwater. Report, 8-24-2007; straightened out before covering the entire corridor, thus requiring that Conditions Report; have on the water resources DEIS Section 4.1.3 decisions to build a bridge determinations be made on all elements prior to Purpose and Need and urges ODOT to consider are made. initiating further development of any individual alternative options for element. Due to the condition of the Innerbelt treating the runoff in the draft bridge, it was necessary to make the structure the EIS. first priority. 2 Resurface the road and The No-build alternative is considered in the DEIS. DEIS Chapter 2 3 Concerned with various The project includes an extensive system of Exhibits A-24 to A-27 leave it as it is. Just pave or This alternative includes only the reconstruction of Purpose and Need; property takings on the east retaining wall to avoid and minimize property rebuild the existing roads the existing bridge. This alternative does not Chapter 3 side of the Trench. impacts. Impacts were reduced on east side of and leave us alone address the many safety deficiencies of the corridor, Alternatives trench during design refinements. nor does it improve capacity of the corridor. th 3 Build the Opportunity A separate and independent Opportunity Corridor DEIS Section 4.3.4 2 Encourages the elimination The alternatives include a slip ramp to East 30 as DEIS Section 4.2.3 th Corridor first. Study has been initiated. Due to the condition of and Cleveland of the proposed E. 30 part of the Superior northbound exit ramp. In earlier Neighborhoods/ the Innerbelt bridge, it was necessary to make the Innerbelt Strategic Street exit. versions of the alternatives, this slip ramp impacted Community Access reconstruction of this structure the first priority. Plan. Asia Plaza. The proposed design has been modified to reduce the impact to Asia Plaza and has 2 Concerned about the Ramp has been modified to avoid this impact. Exhibit A-27 been kept as part of the project. demolition of the Asia Plaza 1 West entry lane expansion At this time, it is not anticipated that widening will be and the impact that will have th on the Chinese community. to I-90 at E. 9 Street should required in this area. Minor changes to the roadway be improved on the west may be needed, but no impacts to buildings are 11 Need to rethink the entire Comment noted. ODOT is working closely with DEIS Sections 4.2.7, side of the street. anticipated. Innerbelt Plan because the FHWA to ensure that environmental and economic 4.2.8, and 5.3 current one is a disaster impacts are evaluated and addressed. ODOT has 1 Concerned about street The Cedar Avenue intersection with Carnegie DEIS Section 3.4.2 nd economically, undertaken an aesthetics initiative which will closures – Cedar Avenue Avenue is relocated to from the west of E 22 St to nd environmentally, and continue into the design phase. the east of E 22 St in the Preferred Alternative. aesthetically. Access to the Cedar Estates and the Juvenile Justice Center will be preserved. 2 Worried about damaged A separate and independent Lakefront West Project CUY-Lakefront West traffic flow along the Lake has been initiated. (PID 77330) 4 Concerned taking of All historic properties have been avoided where DEIS Section 4.2.11 Shore because of park historical properties will be possible and takings occur only where there are no enlargement. impacted by the Northern feasible and prudent alternatives. Extensive Bridge coordination with OHPO and FHWA to identify historic properties has been completed.

5-4 CUY-90-Innerbelt ODOT PID No 77510

Frequency Comment Summary Response Reference Frequency Comment Summary Response Reference 1 Support Ontario fly-over to Ontario Street and Carnegie Avenue intersect in an DEIS Section 3.4.3. 57 Signature Bridge ODOT conducted a bridge aesthetic study which DEIS Section 5.2 miss the fire museum. at-grade intersection in the Preferred Alternative recommended cable-stayed structure for the portion that avoids the Western Reserve Fire Museum. of the Central Viaduct that spans the Cuyahoga 4 Keep politics out of the plan. Comment noted. River. However, due to fiscal limitations and 2 Expresses concern for the The Samuel Mather Mansion will not be directly DEIS Section 4.2.11 concerns over ice build-up on cables that requires Samuel Mather Mansion of impacted by the project and I-90 travel lanes will be lane closures (such as occurs on the Maumee River Cleveland State University. farther away from the facility under the Preferred Crossing in Toledo), a conventional structure is Alternative. The Midtown Connector roadway will being considered. be on the same elevation as the Mansion. The 2 Has a two-level bridge The proximity of the numerous entrance and exit current IR-90 is in a cut section 20-25 feet below the structure been considered, ramps at each end of the bridge precludes the use Mansion. The Midtown Connector will include eliminating the need to of a double deck structure. sidewalks that will be in close proximity of the annex property? Mansion. Mather Mansion was identified early in 3 Need to consider the most ODOT convened a bridge committee that DEIS Section 5.2 the Study as a significant resource to be avoided. economical design. recommended a cable-stayed structure for the Design continues to minimize impact to the Mather portion of the Central Viaduct that spans the Mansion property as much as possible while still . Due to fiscal limitations and meeting the roadway capacity needs and safety concerns over ice build-up on cables that requires requirements. lane closures (such as occurs on the Maumee River 3 There needs to be an Ontario Street and Carnegie Avenue intersect in an DEIS Section 3.4.3. Crossing in Toledo), a conventional structure is alternative to the Ontario fly- at-grade intersection in the Preferred Alternative. being considered. over alternative. The previously proposed fly-over alternative has 16 Either include a bike lane on Bicycle Lanes were considered, however, they were DEIS Section 4.2.10 been removed from further consideration. the new Innerbelt Bridge or not included in the Preferred Alternative due to cost, 2 Is there a plan to minimize Maintenance of traffic plans will be part of the DEIS Section 4.3.1 add it to the existing one. use, maintenance and safety concerns. traffic during the project design. 1 Wants to know why a bike Bicycle Lanes were considered, however, they were DEIS Section 4.2.10 construction, such as path is being discussed on not included in the Preferred Alternative due to cost, employers changing hours, an interstate that should use, maintenance and safety concerns. etc? prohibit pedestrians, farm 7 Concerned with ODOT ODOT periodically removes debris from within the CUY-Innerbelt machinery, bicycles, or properties in Tremont and State Right-of-Way and promptly responds to CCG1B2A (PID motorcycles. Feels it is a the accumulation of waste maintenance requests. ODOT currently is removing 83167) waste of time to discuss a and unauthorized tenants. structures that were acquired as hardship cases. bike path. This will address some issues with vacant ODOT– 11 The southern bridge The southern alignment is considered along with the DEIS Chapter 4 owned properties. alternative should be northern alignment within the DEIS. 1 Concerned about the In general, land determined to be excess is sold to reconsidered. transfer of ODOT’s excess the highest bidder through public auction. All 1 Has using E. 30 th St. as a North of Superior Avenue, East 26 th Street and East DEIS Section 3.4.1 land. Planning and Zoning decisions would be the boulevard and a marginal 30 th Street will function as two-way marginal or and 3.4.2 responsibility of the City of Cleveland. road been considered frontage roads. South of Chester Avenue, a pair of one-way marginal or frontage roads will be constructed.

Draft Environmental Impact Statement 5-5

5.9 Agency Coordination • Input on Range of Alternatives: Opportunity for involvement of participating agencies and the public for range of alternatives occurred during coordination of the Conceptual Alternatives Study. This information was included in the Agency Coordination during the Feasible Alternatives phase was conducted for a variety of purposes, including responses Agency Coordination letter of July 25, 2007. No comments were received from the agencies on this issue. regarding: • Input on Methodology: Appropriate methodology to be used and level of detail required in analysis has been • Review of Level 1 Ecological Survey Report by Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, Ohio Department of Natural determined in collaboration with participating agencies based upon coordination for ODOT’s Project Development Resources, U.S. Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service, and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Process and comments received during Agency Coordination. This information was included in the Agency • Review of Conceptual Alternatives Study by Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Environmental Protection Coordination letter of July 25, 2007. No comments were received from the agencies on this issue. Agency, and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers • Stormwater coordination with Northeast Ohio Regional Sewer District • Coordination under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act with Ohio Historic Preservation Office, Table 5-3: Agency Responses to SAFETEA-LU Coordination Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, and Native American Tribes Agency Date Status Comments

Each of these coordination efforts is summarized in Table 5-4, beginning on the following page. Copies of the coordination letters are included in Appendix E. U.S. Department of Emphasized importance of Lake Erie shoreline Interior, Fish and Wildlife August 21, 2007 Participating Agency and provided technical assistance regarding key Additional coordination, beyond those efforts listed above, was necessitated by the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Service issues related to water quality and habitat. Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU), signed in August of 2005. Section 6002 of SAFETEA-LU prescribes changes to existing FHWA and FTA procedures for implementing the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 Agreed with proposed methodologies. (NEPA), as amended, and for implementing the regulations of the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ). These changes U.S. Environmental August 28, 2007 & Requested project-specific discussion on air Participating Agency are the result of efforts to make the environmental review process more efficient and timely, and to protect environmental and Protection Agency September 10, 2007 toxics. Agreed to participate to the extent that community resources. Section 6002 of SAFETEA-LU describes the roles of the project sponsor and the lead, participating, resources permit. and cooperating agencies; sets new requirements for coordinating and scheduling agency reviews; broadens the authority for States to use Federal funds to ensure timely environmental reviews; and specifies a process for resolving interagency U.S. Department of Participating Agency, No concerns. Agrees to participate if Section disagreements. Interior, National Park September 7, 2007 required due to 4(f) involvement occurs. The following are the actions taken to meet the essential aspects of the SAFETEA-LU environmental review process: Service Section 4(f) • Project Initiation Letter: ODOT letter to FHWA dated March 6, 2007, is included in Appendix E. Cooperating Agency, Agrees with FHWA as lead agency. Provides • Identification of Participating and Cooperating Agencies: Participating agencies and cooperating agencies have been U.S. Coast Guard August 14, 2007 required due to technical guidance regarding navigable river. identified. Notification letters on Participating and Cooperating agency status were sent to identified agencies on July Section 10 permit 25, 2007 and placed in official project file. Copies of letters and responses are included in Appendix E. Results are summarized in Table 5-3. September 6, 2007 U.S. Army Corps of Agrees with FHWA as lead agency. Provide & September 12, Cooperating Agency • Identification of Lead/Joint Lead Agency: Lead/Joint lead agency status has been determined and documented. Engineers technical guidance regarding Section 404(b)(1). 2007 FHWA is the lead agency. ODOT is a joint lead. • Preparation of Coordination Plan: The coordination plan, including a draft schedule, has been developed and was U.S. Department of included in the July 25, 2007 letter to agencies, included in Appendix E. No comments were received from the Transportation, Federal No response None None agencies on this issue. Transit Administration • Input on Purpose and Need: Opportunity for involvement of participating agencies and the public on purpose and need has occurred. As discussed earlier in this chapter, Purpose and Need was included in reports coordinated with U.S. Department of Intends to limit review to hazardous wildlife the public and identified agencies prior to the adoption of SAFETEA-LU. This information was included in the Agency Transportation, Federal August 14, 2007 Participating Agency attractants on or near airports and objects Coordination letter of July 25, 2007. No comments were received from the agencies on this issue. Aviation Administration affecting navigable air space.

5-6 CUY-90-Innerbelt ODOT PID No 77510

Table 5-4: Agency Coordination Summary

Agency Date and Subject Comment Response and/or Reference September 21, 2006: Review of The Ohio EPA had no objections with the CAS. Comment noted. Conceptual Alternatives Study

No concerns with alternatives. Stream impacts do not exceed thresholds for Section 401 water quality certification. A Coast Guard Section 9 permit will be required for the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency May 16, 2007: Pre-application Question whether bridge work is subject to Section 9 or 10 of the Clean Harbors and Rivers Act, which requires project. During the waterway permit application process, it will coordination, review of Level 1 Section 401 certification, or whether individual Section 404 is required from U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. be determined whether an individual Section 404 permit Ecological Survey Report Recommends using best management practices to minimize impacts to Cuyahoga River during construction. and/or a Section 401 Water Quality Certification are required.

Rare and Endangered Species : The ODNR, Division of Natural Areas and Preserves, Natural heritage Database, All identified habitat areas for the noted state-threatened plant contains records for two additional species not included in the project documentation: the threatened Schweintz species would be located along the Lake Erie shore or within Umbrella-sedge (Cyperus schweinitzii) and the threatened Canada Hawkweed (Hieracium canadense). In addition, wetlands along the Cuyahoga River. None of these areas are if any of these trees are encountered during the implementation of this project, they should be left undisturbed if at all impacted by the project. possible. Fish and Wildlife : The ODNR Division of Wildlife (DOW) recommends no in-water work on the Cuyahoga River from At this time in project development, there is no indication that April 19, 2007: Review of Level March 15 to June 30 to reduce impacts to aquatic species and their habitat. Records exist for the muskellunge (Esox in stream work is required to construct the project. A Ohio Department of Natural Resources 1 Ecological Survey Report masquinongy), a state species of concern, and the upland sandpiper (Bartramia longicauda), a state threatened commitment regarding in-stream work time restrictions is species, within one mile of the project area. If either of these species is encountered during construction of the included in DEIS Section 6.2. If either of the noted species is project, work should be immediately stopped, and the DOW should be contacted. Further coordination regarding the encountered during construction, work will be stopped and the peregrine Falcon is needed. DOW contacted. Parks and Recreation : The ODNR, Division of Parks and Recreation (DPR) requests public access be maintained to Access to recreational areas will be maintained. Stormwater the state park and recreational areas. “Best Management Practices” should be utilized during and after construction issues are discussed in DEIS Section 4.1.3. to control stormwater runoff and erosion. The proposed project lies within range of the Federally listed endangered Indiana bat (Myotis sodalist), Piping plover (Charadrius melodus), and the Federally-listed threatened Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus). Due to the project type, size, and location, a “no effect” determination was made for these species in the report. Therefore consultation is not required. U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish April 25, 2007: Review of Level The USFWS recognizes that ODNR, in conjunction with ODOT, has been actively working on providing suitable Comment noted. and Wildlife Service 1 Ecological Survey Report habitat for the peregrine falcons on the bridge understructure, and that it will be necessary in the future to perform major rehabilitation on the bridge, including possible demolition and replacement. The Service acknowledges ODOT’s willingness to comply with all applicable regulations pertaining to the peregrine falcon including the Migratory Bird treaty Act. Review of the document did not yield any detailed information on the extent of water resource or other ecological September 13, 2006: Review of resource impacts within the project area for any of the alternatives. Limits of impact to the Cuyahoga River or other Additional information provided in subsequent coordination of U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Conceptual Alternatives Study potential impacts to waters of the U.S. were not identified. Therefore, there are no specific comments at this time. Ecological Survey Report.

Draft Environmental Impact Statement 5-7

Agency Date and Subject Comment Response and/or Reference The Cuyahoga River within the study area is a perennial stream subject to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. It is May 11, 2007: Review of Level also a navigable river subject to Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act. As such, the Corps has jurisdiction over A Section 10 permit will be obtained from the Corps. 1 Ecological Survey Report this water of the U.S. for regulatory purposes. This jurisdictional determination remains valid for five years from the date of the letter, unless new information warrants revision of the provided survey. USEPA agrees with the purposes for the project. It seems possible that the sum of alternatives as proposed may intensify the CBD local street grid congestion and thereby intensify local air pollution. Cuyahoga County is designated as “non-attainment” for 8-hour ozone levels, as The local street grid is projected to operate equal to or better well as 2.5 micron particulate matter (PM 2.5), and “maintenance” for carbon monoxide. Did FHWA and ODOT December 11, 2006: Response than No Build conditions, so no alternatives were considered consider alternatives or design elements to: direct some traffic away from the Central Interchange and Trench to August 11, 2006 request for for the purposes of redirecting local traffic. Air quality U.S. Environmental Protection Agency section, distribute traffic more widely around Cleveland’s CBD perimeter when entering and leaving the CBD, thus comments on Conceptual analyses are discussed in DEIS Section 4.1.12. allowing the local street grid to better handle traffic flows? Alternatives Study It is recommended that stormwater impacts and techniques for its collection and pretreatment be addresses in the Stormwater issues are discussed in DEIS Section 4.1.3. Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for the Central Viaduct Bridge and for other sections of the CIP. Also, since extensive river front and lakeshore construction activities may be involved in this project, the DEIS should address measures to be taken to avoid or minimize construction impacts to these water bodies. August 16, 2006: ODOT letter - ODOT requested information on charges related to the storm water utility. clarification of design issues

October 16, 2006: NEORSD NEORSD responded that the identification of a fee for storm water was uncertain. NEORSD indicated willingness to response to August 16, 2006 work with ODOT on ongoing strategic implementation. letter Discussion of stormwater issues is provided in DEIS Section November 20, 2006: ODOT Northeast Ohio Regional Sewer District ODOT stated intent to begin investigation of a storm water separation strategy to provide separate storm sewer 4.1.3. letter regarding storm water systems for roadway drainage, where hydraulically appropriate. strategy ODOT stated to NEORSD that the Department will pursue a stormwater separation strategy, as hydraulically May 29, 2007: ODOT Letter to appropriate. The strategy will include installation of stormwater quality best management practices (BMPs) along the NEORSD regarding stormwater corridor to: address water quality requirements. Proposed BMPs will address: water quality requirements on existing coordination stormwater-only sewer systems with the corridor and storm water only systems which may be designed as a result of separating highway run-off from the existing combined sewer system. March 16, 2007: ODOT letter ODOT summarizes previous coordination and lists properties with the project’s Area of Potential Effect that are listed regarding identification of on, nominated to, or eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. historic properties Cultural resources issues are summarized in DEIS Section Ohio Historic Preservation Office 4.2.11. April 2, 2007: Response to identification of historic Concurrence with findings and eligibility requirements. properties

5-8 CUY-90-Innerbelt ODOT PID No 77510

Agency Date and Subject Comment Response and/or Reference September 24, 2008: ODOT ODOT transmits report Assessment of Effects for the Feasible Alternatives, September 2008 . This report submission of assessment of summarized the consultation process and provided information on the effects to each historic property resulting from effects on historic properties the Feasible Alternatives under consideration. November 25, 2008: Response to September 24, 2008 OHPO responded with a Determination of Effects for each property as a result of each Feasible Alternative. (See submission of Section 106 summary of conclusions in Section 4.2.11.) Assessment of Effects December 9, 2008: Finding of OHPO concluded that a finding of “Adverse Effect” would be applicable to the project. “Adverse Effect”

January 9, 2009: Response to Advisory Council on Historic ODOT notification of “adverse ACHP determined that their participation in resolving “adverse effects” is not warranted. Comment noted. Preservation effect” finding

January 8, 2009: ODOT Native American Tribes ODOT notified the Tribes, on behalf of FHWA, regarding the project. No response received to date. notification letter

October 3, 2006: Response to Notification to FHWA that U.S. Coast Guard permit will be required for construction of bridge over the navigable U.S. Coast Guard Comment noted. Coast Guard permit will be obtained. updated Notice of Intent Cuyahoga River. January 29, 2008: Letter from Airport noted that new draft Airport Layout Plan (ALP) does not accommodate the proposed Cleveland Innerbelt airport with questions regarding design in the area. Airport responded to January 14, 2008, draft Innerbelt Curve alignment with questions on impacts and timing on airport implementation strategy. properties. Cleveland Airport System February 8, 2008: ODOT letter Discussion included in DEIS Section 4.2.10. ODOT provided information on project schedule and summary of impacts. to airport regarding impacts. May 27, 2008: ODOT letter to ODOT committed to revising the design to reduce the footprint into airport property. ODOT noted that this change airport responding to March 10, would eliminate impacts to any areas utilized for airport operations. 2008 meeting.

Draft Environmental Impact Statement 5-9

5.10 Summary of Key Issues Issue Summary Reference Although hundreds of comments were received and numerous meetings held, the majority of the concerns revolved around a • CAS Alternatives, DEIS small number of key issues. These major issues are listed in the Table 5-5 with references to locations where more detail is Section 3.3.4 Much discussion in public comments and in the media concerned the Northern available. • Alternatives, DEIS Bridge Alignment versus the Southern Alignment for the new bridge. These issues are explored Table 5-5: Summary of Key Issues Section 3.4.3 Alignment in detail throughout the document. References are provided to sections with key • decision-making factors. Comparison of Issue Summary Reference Alternatives, DEIS • Access, Section 4.2.3 Section 4.6 Many comments and concerns focused on the impact of changes in access to and Access Changes • Economic Effects, Sections A bridge subcommittee recommended a cable-stay bridge type for the main span of the from the freeway, particularly in the Trench Area. 4.2.7 and 4.2.8 Central Viaduct. ODOT originally accepted the committee’s recommendation on Two options were considered in the CAS for the Chester Interchange. One option January 2, 2007. However, due to fiscal limitations and recent lane closures due to • CAS recommendations, • Bridge subcommittee, provided the interchange at Chester. A second option split the interchange at Bridge Type build-up of ice on cables (such as on the Maumee River Crossing in Toledo), the DEIS Section 3.3.2 DEIS Section 5.2 Chester Chester and at Payne Avenue. Public concerns were received regarding the preferred alternative does not include the signature bridge type recommended by the • Feasible Alternatives, DEIS change in character to Payne Avenue if an interchange were connected to that committee. ODOT remains committed to working with an aesthetics committee to focus Interchange Section 3.4.2 street. A hybrid option, the Chester Avenue Interchange with cut-off ramps was on the appearance of the structure, such as lighting, fencing and various treatments. • Exhibits A-25 and A-26 chosen. • Cultural Resources, Both Feasible Alternatives result in impacts to properties that are eligible for or listed on Concerns included: loss of companies in the MidTown Corridor area; a negative DEIS Section 4.2.11 Impacts to the National Register of Historic Places. ODOT has consulted with the Ohio Historic impact on the economic development efforts of the neighborhood; reduced access • Section 4(f) Evaluation, Historic Preservation Office and consulting parties, as required by Section 106 and Section 4(f). to the and University Circle; shifting traffic to Chester Avenue DEIS Section 4.5 The Northern Alignment Alternative results in the least overall harm to such properties. from Carnegie Avenue; the negative impact of a traffic incident at the Chester Properties • Appropriate migitation will be provided. Consulting Parties, DEIS Avenue interchange; and increased congestion on local streets. A number of • Access, DEIS Section 4.2.3 Section 5.5 alternatives were evaluated to try and keep existing access points. Testing of the • Alternatives, DEIS Section FHWA Policy on Design Standards Interstate System requires that all movements be Carnegie Access Prospect and Carnegie ramp alternatives showed that none achieved the 3.4.2 provided at interstate-to-interstate connections. However, the movement from I-77 minimum level of service and safety as documented in the Conceptual Alternatives • northbound to I-90 westbound is redundant, as this connection is provided via I-490 Report. Access to Carnegie Avenue is to be provided via East 22 nd St., two blocks Exhibits A-23 and A-24 Interstate-to- immediately to the south. Providing this movement would have required sacrificing west of the current termini. Additional surface street improvements are proposed connectivity to the local street system, which is contrary to the Innerbelt's primary • Conceptual Alternatives Interstate to mitigate the impacts of the loss of the ramp. This includes the construction of a function of collecting and distributing traffic from the radial freeway system to the local Study, Chapter 6 pair of one-way local streets, northbound on the east side and southbound on the Movements street system and vice versa. Based upon comparison of the seven performance criteria west side, of the Trench. in the CAS (the practical aspects of the project), FHWA determined that it was Concerns were expressed about the closure of the westbound I-90 ramp to • Access, DEIS Section 4.2.3 appropriate to consider an exception to the Policy on Design Standards Interstate Broadway Avenue, changing traffic patterns, access to the US post office regional Broadway Off- • Alternatives, DEIS Section System. distribution center and traffic on East 30th Street. The Northern Alignment 3.4.3 The total cost estimate for the project, including engineering, right-of-way and ramp Alternative is able to provide this connection. The Southern Alignment • Exhibits A-17 and B-17 construction, is approximately $1.5 - $2.0 billion and will require a long-term investment Alternatives does not. strategy. An Annual Financial Plan and Project Management Plan will be required. Carnegie/Ontario The design for the Ontario/Carnegie Intersection as shown in the CAS was found The size and complexity of the Cleveland Innerbelt Project, its extensive cost, and the to not function based upon updated traffic volumes. Three options were • Alternatives, DEIS Section Intersection and need to maintain traffic require that the improvements be systematically phased. Early in considered for this location: a fly-over ramp, a split at-grade intersection, and a 3.4.3 Implementation project development, it was anticipated that the Innerbelt Curve would be constructed • Implementation, DEIS Ontario on-ramp single at-grade intersection. Issues: Cost, first. Based upon bridge conditions for the Central Viaduct, the construction of a new Chapter 6 Questions were asked about providing a pedestrian/bicycle lane across the new Schedule, and Bicycle Facilities bridge over the Cuyahoga River is now a higher priority. The phases for improvements, • Maintenance of Traffic, Central Viaduct Bridge. ODOT evaluated this request and concluded that no bike • Other Transportation on the Central Maintenance of their preliminary cost estimates, funding sources, and proposed construction contract DEIS Section 4.3.1 facilities would be provided on the bridge due to safety and the availability of other Modes, DEIS Section 4.2.10 Viaduct Traffic groups are currently being evaluated. This phasing plan will be part of the financial plan routes. described above. Business and residential relocations will result from either Feasible Alternative. • Property Impacts and The public has also expressed concerns about maintenance of traffic (MOT) during Property Impacts Property acquisition will be conducted in accordance with the Federal Uniform Relocations, DEIS Section construction. This issue has come to the forefront as bridge conditions have and Relocations Relocation and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, The Surface 4.2.5 necessitated some lane closures. Transportation and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act and 49 CFR Part 24

5-10