The Innerbelt Project, where $1 billion will be spent to improve the bridge and highway cutting through the heart of the city, was bound to create some struggle. This week’s announcement that the project will be put on hold for up to two years is a result of one — but likely more — such struggles between the city and state transportation officials.

The Plain Dealer reported that the design of the Ontario ramp for westbound traffic was the culprit. City officials we spoke to confirm that a proposed bridge from Ontario Street to the highway ramp was a sticking point. Months ago, ODOT withdrew its proposal to build an elevated bridge from Ontario to the on-ramp because the city objected that it will create a wall that blocks views of Jacob’s Field. When ODOT insisted on the bridge, it triggered significant push back from the city, and that led to the delay.

But beyond the Ontario ramp issue, the Inner Belt project is plagued by design flaws. Most notably, as CSU Urban Planning professor Tom Bier pointed out in great detail in his August 13 column in the PD, the closing of downtown ramps and the design of the new access road would be "the mother of all rush-hour snarls [and] is simply too risky." Business association Midtown Cleveland has hired its own traffic engineers to confirm Bier’s assessment.

Meanwhile, ODOT has launched a return salvo. It wants to remove a proposed bike/pedestrian path from the redesign of the old Innerbelt Bridge — despite plenty of assurance from departments of transportation and dozens of case studies from U.S. cities where new or existing bridges were outfitted with very cool (and safe) paths for cyclists and pedestrians to use.

Seattle, San Francisco, Pittsburgh and Charleston, South Carolina are just a few shining examples of city/state cooperation leading to innovative ways of using bridges to enhance the experience of crossing rivers and bays. In Cleveland, where 25 percent of households don’t own a vehicle (40 percent in some areas), offering a signature bridge without a better option for cyclists and pedestrians would completely miss the point.

“This was a once in a generation opportunity to get across the river,” Tom Dodds of the South Carolina Department of Transportation (SCDOT) says about their signature bridge designed with a popular bike/ped path. “It’s an attraction. Biking or walking it is a good Saturday morning thing to do.”

The Charleston bridge path is so popular that young families push baby strollers and couples exchange marital vows on it, Dodds adds. Charleston proves that, when designed properly, a path for cyclists and pedestrians securely separated by barriers is not only feasible, it is prudent as well. A bike/ped path on the Innerbelt Bridge will be a major draw, serving millions of tourists biking and walking up the Towpath Trail with a direct link to downtown Cleveland.

ODOT balks at creating a signature bike/pedestrian path on the Innerbelt Bridge. It estimates the cost at $30 million, which is around 10 percent of the overall project budget of $275-300 million. Federal guidelines pertaining to highway bridge deck replacement require state DOTs to accommodate bicycle and pedestrian travel as part of such replacement or rehabilitation at reasonable cost. Usually unreasonable cost is considered to be more than 20 percent of project cost.

ODOT says the bridge is too high, too long, too windy. Our answer is: Look at San Francisco’s Golden Gate Bridge. It’s one mile longer, 100 feet higher and has some fairly significant winds, and that hasn’t slowed the popularity of its bike/ped path.

Let’s dare to think big here. A bike/ped facility on the bridge, separated by a concrete barrier but also keeping in mind good design, is a great way to leverage this once-in-a-generation opportunity to cross the river for the benefit all modes of transportation and as a major regional draw.

To impress upon ODOT the importance of accommodating cyclists and pedestrians in the design of the bridge, send an email to ODOT and specifically request that they be included in the Environmental Document. The deadline is in December. Email your comments to Lora.Hummer@dot.state.oh.us  and/or craig.hebebrand@dot.state.oh.us  

To learn more about the proposed bike/pedestrian path on the Innerbelt Bridge, go here.