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 7, 2007 - 9:52pm

We can improve our highways: here's how

Marc Lefkowitz Says:

Thanks for the list of properties that will be 'taken' because of the Innerbelt. I know your work on the Section 106 review is important - can you explain how that will alter the Innerbelt project as part of the Environmental Impact Study?

Also, I agree, there is no excuse for ODOT to not invite an artist, an architect/preservation expert, and a landscape designer to sit on its aesthetics advisory committee considering what they want to do. I have asked ODOT if they would consider adding a resident who has some professional qualification in one of these areas, but have not heard back yet. As an aside, I think Cleveland Planning Commission members Joe Cimperman and Lillian Kuri understand some of the design, historic preservation and environmental issues at stake—we all need to ask them to support these issues.

Bioswales and other innovative stormwater management practices including low-intensity native landscapes should be a matter of coarse for the aesthetics group—it can look pretty and function to slow the torrent of water that will pour from adding two bridges to the river valley and all of that new impervious surface.

While it may be nice to think this federal highway money could be used for something to reduce demand for the highway—such as a downtown housing strategy or commuter rail—ODOT will probably cite some federal regulation that prevents that from happening.

In lieu of changing the federal policy, let’s focus our efforts on reforming the policy of our state department of transportation. For example, the Ohio Constitution prevents the sharing of tax revenues from gas purchased for motor vehicles that don’t use highways (like lawnmowers) for alternative transportation. It must be used for highway building or reconstruction. Is that right?

Ohio's statute requires that "No moneys derived from fees, excises, or license taxes relating to registration, operation, or use of vehicles on public highways, or to fuels used for propelling such vehicles, [shall be used for other than traditional highway purposes]. The italicized language would allow any moneys derived from taxes on vehicles that do not operate on public highways to be used for purposes other than highway improvements.

Even though its the law in that state, Oregon’s attorney general determined that its not appropriate to use tax revenues from purchases of gas for lawnmowers, leaf blowers, and chain saws for highway construction or maintenance. In 2001, Oregon passed H.B. 3882 which amended its constitution so that off-road vehicle gas taxes are now unrestricted. After a financial review by their department of transportation, $5 million in gax tax revenue was made available to pay for the Cascades commuter rail line from Eugene to Portland.

Can we motivate the Strickland Administration and (as yet unnamed) new ODOT director with a reform agenda that includes an in-depth analysis of gas tax revenues? What are the barriers to change? Would you like to get involved with a local group working on a reform ODOT agenda?


»