Urban design aesthetics

Submitted by Marc Lefkowitz  |  Last edited January 10, 2008 - 3:27pm
Posted in | »

How can we improve the look and feel of this area with $20-30 million?Federal guidelines compel ODOT to set aside two percent from each phase of the Innerbelt Project to pay for urban design aesthetics, or add-ons to improve the look and feel on and around the highway. For the first phase of the project—which includes the westbound ‘signature’ bridge and the design of the Innerbelt Trench—that budget is $13 million. Examples of urban design aethetics may include:

  • ornamental fencing
  • pedestrian lighting
  • public art
  • parks
  • connections to the Towpath Trail

Guiding the decisions on how to use this pot of money is the Central Viaduct Aesthetics Subcommittee and consultants from the firm Crosby, Schlesenger & Smallridge and from City Architecture. ODOT intends to initiate the design process in spring 2007.

Key areas of focus are how to treat the landscaping on large swaths of land surrounding the Central Viaduct (the size of three Jacob’s Fields) in the Flats and the vast shadow area cast under the bridge in Tremont. It also includes the design of overhead bridges and the large retaining wall in the trench.

Multi-use path on new Cooper River Bridge attracts hordes of cyclists and runners“Our goal is to add to civic pride and civic pleasure,” said Skip Smallridge at a public meeting on Feb. 1. “We’re looking at how it relates to the neighborhood. We’re not going to design this in isolation.”

Admirable goals. They will carry the weight of their convictions if the Innerbelt Bridge can raise our collective spirit and open access for more than just cars zooming by at 50 mph. No other connection has as much value and potential to inspire than that between Tremont and downtown. Designing comfortable spaces around and multi-purpose paths on the bridge will invite motorists, cyclists and pedestrians to appreciate all this city has to offer and should guide aesthetic decisions.

Ornamental fencing on overhead bridges can establish sense of place from the highwayUnder the bridge, ODOT is purchasing the entire right of way, which includes an industrial river bed with piles of stone that resemble a lunar landscape. How should a future landscape pay tribute to heritage of the industrial Flats? Should the natural areas that are reclaiming the slopes and crooked river banks be enhanced into a park? ODOT could invite some of our very talented local landscape designers and artists such as Don Harvey, who is leading an effort to restore an ecological balance to Irish Town Bend (the west bank area under the bridge) to participate in the process. And Tremont residents such as Glenn Murray, who have ideas for lighting and programming under the bridge (update: GCBL wrote ODOT to request Murray's participation in the aesthetics subcommittee, and ODOT accepted him).

Smallridge shared ideas on how other cities have gussied up their highways with fine-grain design elements. Forms molded on retaining walls, land caps, architectural elements that reflect Art Deco or other periods, fancy lamps and locally designed fences. All of these can be ours.

Forms in concrete retaining wall pick up themes of a regionOnce we factor in the $520 million for the next phase of the Innerbelt, including the eastbound bridge, the total budget for aesthetics could reach $20-30 million. With that budget, we should reasonably expect the following:

  • Well-designed paths leading from the Towpath Trail to a bike/pedestrian path on the bridge
  • A well-lit (perhaps with a state-of-the-art LED design) and, more importantly well-programmed area under the bridge in Tremont. Programs could include art and recreation activities similar to the Burnside Bridge Skate park in Portland, Oregon.
  • A Natural Flats pilot project that highlights the ecological, industrial and cultural underpinning of the riverbank
  • A Towpath neighborhood connection/spur leading through a restored Walworth Run greenway/park

To see the Urban Design Aesthetics presentation (pdf)

Updates
2-7-07—ODOT informs GCBL that the Innerbelt Urban Design Aesthetics Committee will be the same members as the Bridge Design Subcommittee (click here to see members) plus representatives from geographic areas that were not included in the bridge-specific group. ODOT plans to hold aesthetics/urban design-specific public meetings in the future. As far as a citizen representatives on the aesthetic committee, an ODOT spokeswoman says: "we included on the Bridge Subcommittee and will include on the aesthetics subcommittee, representatives from the community development corporations as liaisons between the neighborhoods and the committee and ODOT" but they're willing to consider adding a citizen, or artist or architect/preservation expert.


February 6, 2007 - 8:17pm

aesthetics AR'nT ODOT

Susan Miller Says:

I looked at the list of bridge design committee members and saw only one person who would be considered art literate? Are they kidding!!!???

These cast concrete walls are horrid -- so if we lose the Breuer Tower but add tacky concrete barriers for the trench, we will have confirmed the brutalism of our county commissioners. Who among those listed would advance the idea of wind turbines or bioswales at the Central Interchange? Would they invite someone who might know to toss those ideas out for consideration?

I say scrap the whole thing and give the money back. Forward thinking planning would reallocate the funds to rail and public transit. But it seems ODOT is set on tearing down our history and replacing it with a conduit for poor air and water quality. Here's what we stand to lose as a result of the innerbelt project from the Phase II section 106 review of historic buildings in the area of potential effect:

 

4.3.1 King-Otis Cleveland Mounted Police Stables, 1150 E. 38th Street

4.3.2 Wasson Street Freight Station, 3615 King Avenue

4.3.3 Brooks & Company Structural Iron, 3000 Lakeside Avenue

4.3.4 Ohio Boxboard Company, 1400 E. 30th Street

4.3.5 Michael Groh House, 3043 Superior Avenue

4.3.6 Loft Building, 2800 Superior Avenue

4.3.7 Artcraft Building, 2530-2570 Superior Avenue

4.3.8 William A. Howe Printing/Graphic Arts Building, 2630 Superior Avenue

4.3.9 The Musterole Building, 1748 E. 27th Street

4.3.10 Sterling & Welch Company Warehouse, 1800-1802 E. 25th Street

4.3.11 Apartment Building, 1900 E. 30th Street

4.3.12 The League House, 2344 Prospect Avenue

4.3.13 Independent Towel Company, 1802-1822 Central Avenue

4.3.14 Cleveland Rapid Transit Storage Company, 1022 Carnegie Avenue

4.3.15 Tactical Rescue Station, 312 Carnegie Avenue

4.3.16 Marathon Gas Station, 300 Central Viaduct

4.3.17 Broadway Mills, 300 Central Viaduct

4.3.18 The Central Viaduct Pier Ruins

4.3.19 Cleveland Electric Illuminating Company Steam Plant, 2470 Canal Road

4.3.20 The Nickel Plate Railroad Viaduct (CUY-3257-02)

4.3.21 Distribution Terminal Warehouse, 2000 W. 14th Street

4.3.22 Ferry Cap & Set Screw Company, 2151 Scranton Avenue

4.3.23 The Norfolk and Western Railroad Bridge over Scranton Road

4.3.24 Scranton Road Proposed Historic District, Fairfield Avenue to I-90

4.3.25 Engine Company No. 8, 2599 Scranton Road

This is truly a case of paving paradise to put up a parking lot. People, it is time to talk to the new state government and put a stop to this ludicrous process! Imagine what $1.5 billion could produce in terms of rail and public transit… In the future, it will be too expensive for us to drive anywhere, only the elite will be able to fly. We’d better get hip to the future and stop living in the past, like the future is not already upon us. It is time for us to reconsider this one bridge at a time plan and begin Making Other Arrangements. By the time this process is finished (and it is not even all funded so it may not ever be finished), we won't be able to use it. Driving to and from the exurbs daily will not be part of our future. If we are going to discuss design, we should be talking about sustainable design for the 21 century. We are there afterall.


»