PART IV: Summary of Comments - SCOR/RAC

PART IV: Summary of Comments17-May-10Reviewer Comments Distribution of Ratings■ Should be combined in C-20. They overlap each other.■ While WSDOT could directly benefit from this research, the problem statement is very weak and the objectives are notdiscernable.■ A little unclear as to the exact problem. However sufficient research, studies and related work exists for the safedevelopment of bicycle or shared use paths. This study does not represent a current problem that needs researching andhas been given a 1 priority rating.Item #127:B-13Impact of the Bridge Structures on Migratory Birds(17)(46)NR 0 1 2 3 4 5SCOR 3 6 5 1 2RAC 3 10 11 16 4 5Standing Committee on Research■ This is an important tool that that has high implementation prospects across the country. I'd like to see more details onhow the HQI is different than others that have been developed, but this is a strong research need that deserves attention.■ Could be useful information if it is unique to bridges■ The problem of bird mortality from striking bridge cables is best dealt with locally because conditions and species willdiffer.■ Not a bad idea, but not sure the study as described would advance knowledge much■ The ability to answer the many questions posed in just three years is questionable. Changes in animal behavior requirelong-term study, including a pre "impact" period of study to establish baseline or "normal" behavior. Time may be betterspent by substantially narrowing the focus of the study. Also, how would fatal impacts be quantified in the field unlesscause of death was directly observed? It cannot be assumed that the death of a bird was caused by the bridge structureitself unless the bird was actually seen hitting the bridge.■ Important, but generally localized issue.■ [Rating: 3] This proposal would rate a 5 if a decision support tool were developed to help identify potential problem areasfor bridges, rather than focusing monitoring on a single bridge site.Research Advisory Committee■ This is a low need for ODOT. Most of the state commented that they really didn't see a lot of need for this one.■ The proposal is overly ambitious for the budget, considering the huge range of variability of bridge characteristics andbird presence. WSDOT is not aware of mortality issues associated with migratory birds colliding with bridges.■ Refer topic to NCHRP 25-25■ This seems more appropriate for a pooled fund of relevant states rather than a NCHRP study.Other■ [Rating: 2] The Committee believes that this study focuses on a localized issue where cable stay bridges are prevalent.The Committee believes that there are more bird/bridge issues on a national scale to fund this project as stated. In orderto gain the support of the Committee the scope would have to be greatly expended. It also appears that there is someinformation already available from European studies.IV-93