April 21, 2006 — Cleveland Mayor Frank Jackson announces that The City of Cleveland and ODOT have established a working group to make recommendations on the design of the proposed Innerbelt bridge.
Upcoming meetings will also include representatives from community organizations, designers, and transportation and economic development professionals. This is meant to ensure that the technical design of the bridge will foster economic development activities in Cleveland’s “trenches.”
The members of the Central Viaduct Bridge Subcommittee:
From ODOT District 12
Craig Hebebrand
Youssef Seif
John Motl
Dave Lastovka
Lora Hummer
Jim Calanni
ODOT Central Office
Larry Hoffman
Tim Keller
City of Cleveland Planning Commission
Robert Brown
Scott Franz
Lillian Kuri
Cleveland City Council
Joe Cimperman
Phyllis Cleveland
Cuyahoga County Commissioner
Jimmy Dimora
Timothy Hagan
Peter Lawson-Jones
Randy DeVaul — City of Cleveland Engineering & Construction
Rob Mavec — City of Cleveland Traffic Engineering
Howard Maier — NOACA
Joe Calabrese — GCRTA
Colleen Gilson — Director, Tremont West Development Corp.
Thomas Starinsky — Historic Gateway and Warehouse District
Tom Newman — Flats Oxbow Association
Bill Beckenbach — Quadrangle Incorporated
Joe Marinucci — Downtown Cleveland Alliance
Jennifer Coleman — Cleveland Landmarks Commission
Mike Armstrong — FHWA, Ohio Division
Tim Tramble — Burten, Bell, Carr Development, Inc.
Robert C. Klaiber, Jr. P.E., P.S. — Cuyahoga County Engineer
Identity and Responsibility:
The Innerbelt Bridge Sub-Committee is a standing committee of the Cleveland Urban Core Projects Advisory Committee (a.k.a. Advisory Committee).
The activities and recommendations of the Innerbelt Bridge Sub-Committee will report regularly to the Advisory Committee.
Purpose and Goals of the Sub-Committee:
Members of the Sub-Committee will work with representatives of the Consultant Team, ODOT and FHWA to develop a bridge type recommendation. The Sub-Committee will consider issues such as how to integrate the structure into the immediate environment, including consideration of the structure’s color, texture, signing and lighting.
The bridge type recommendation pertains only to the main crossing over the Cuyahoga River Valley.
The basic process by which the Sub-Committee will operate will include, but will not be limited to, the following steps:
The Sub-Committee will work with the Consultant Team, ODOT and FHWA to develop the criteria by which to evaluate and compare each of the alternative bridge types.
The Sub-Committee will participate in the process by which each alternative is evaluated.
The evaluation process is anticipated to be iterative, with the total number of alternatives being reduced at each step in the process, until the recommended alternative has been identified.
The Sub-Committee will present their recommendations to the Advisory Committee at each step in the process.
The Sub-Committee will present their recommendation to the General Public and solicit public comment at each step in the process.
The Sub-Committee will meet monthly from May through November. Sub-Committee meetings are tentatively scheduled for the first Monday of the month and are tentatively to be held at the Offices of the Northeast Ohio Areawide Coordinating Agency (NOACA).
The Sub-Committee will present to the Ohio Department of Transportation, a recommended bridge type, on or before October 5, 2006.
The ultimate bridge type decision will be made by the Ohio Department of Transportation.
Questions for the bridge subcommittee:
- What is the Cleveland design vernacular that can contribute to the look of the new bridge?
- Your scope of work includes how the bridge fits in with its environment — should the committee address alignment issues? Issues of placement within the current road network?
- What is the budget for the new Central Viaduct Bridge, and can a signature bridge like the Bunker Hill Bridge in Boston be acheived within the cost structure?
Resources:
Cuyahoga County Planning Commission photo gallery of signature bridges
