I wouldnt call any of those designs "suit and tie." Somewhere between "Polo and Sandles" and "(working outside in 90% humity) Wife beater and shoeless"

 

Ha! I was trying to be kind, but you reveal the truth!

Or instead of Saks 5th Avenue we are getting the Dollar Store....or Goodwill for that matter.

 

....which looks in need of help from the Salvation Army!

This is such a disaster.  Can't we just rout the inner blelt to I 480 or 490 or whatever it is like KJP said? Can we please get some political leadership? Even that Guilligan would have stopped this. 

Cleveland: Winning design for Innerbelt Bridge set to be unveiled

 

ODOT developed a 105-point scoring system for the three designs and took input from residents through Aug. 15th.

 

The final scores have now been tabulated, but ODOT won't be opening those envelopes until shortly before Thursday's scheduled later afternoon media briefing, according to Jocelyn Clemings, spokeswoman.

 

http://www.wkyc.com/news/local/news_article.aspx?storyid=147641&catid=3

 

 

And the winner is.....a steaming pile of poo!!!!!!

^Close.

 

For easy reference:

 

Bridge A:

http://www.dot.state.oh.us/projects/ClevelandUrbanCoreProjects/Innerbelt/InnerbeltBridge/PublishingImages/BridgeA.pdf

 

Bridge B:

http://www.dot.state.oh.us/projects/ClevelandUrbanCoreProjects/Innerbelt/InnerbeltBridge/PublishingImages/BridgeB.pdf

 

Bridge C:

http://www.dot.state.oh.us/projects/ClevelandUrbanCoreProjects/Innerbelt/InnerbeltBridge/PublishingImages/BridgeC.pdf

 

A!!

 

http://www.newsnet5.com/dpp/news/local_news/cleveland_metro/design-picked-for-new-innerbelt-bridge

i guess thats the best one. hooray!

I saw it on one of the news channels and they said it was something like 100+ million dollars under what they thought it would be. They said it was going to cost around $250 million dollars instead of the 400+ million initially planned.

 

I was wondering if that was just for the first phase of it or for the total?

ODOT already awarded the construction and design bid.

 

ODOT awards Innerbelt Bridge Project

Walsh construction gets the job, construction starts in the spring.

By Ken Robinson, Newsradio WTAM 1100

Check out Ken's personality page

Thursday, September 9, 2010

(Garfield Heights) - The Ohio Department of Transportation (ODOT) and City of Cleveland awarded design and construction of the historic Interstate 90 Innerbelt Bridge to Walsh Construction with designer HNTB Ohio Inc.

 

 

Full story here:

 

http://www.wtam.com/cc-common/news/sections/newsarticle.html?feed=122520&article=7578882

Weird, Cleveland.com still doesn't have anything up about it.  Maybe they're still gathering info to write a more lengthy piece.

Weird, Cleveland.com still doesn't have anything up about it.  Maybe they're still gathering info to write a more lengthy piece.

 

Why on earth would they do that when they've only written a mere seven stories about Frank Russo today.  They're sure not gonna win a Pulitzer over some silly bridge!

 

A bit more seriously, though, my guess is that Litt puts out a piece sometime next week, as soon as the editorial board finishes cleaning up the drool from the newsroom.  ;)

My guess is Walsh/HNTB gets the job.  They definatelty have the best background.  I would be very, very suprised if Ruhlin gets it.  If so, I think it would soley be fore the local thing.  THey have a good transprotation dept, but I don't know if they can handle this. 

^They did.

 

I'm happy with the design selection.

Wait their under budget and couldnt afford the bike lane? Huh.

Thanks, freethink!

Wait their under budget and couldnt afford the bike lane? Huh.

 

Thats because adding a bike lane would cost an additional $300 million. :lol:

Press release from ODOT District 12:

 

Cleveland’s New I-90 Innerbelt Bridge:

Apparent Winning Team for Historic Bridge Construction Revealed

Winning proposal calls for completion of construction full year earlier than planned

 

http://www.dot.state.oh.us/districts/D12/Deputy%20Director/News/Pages/Cleveland%E2%80%99sNewI-90InnerbeltBridge4.aspx

historic

 

reallly?

 

 

historic in that it may be the worst managed billion dollars of Ohio money ever?

 

that is probably what they intended

 

EDIT: OMFG!!!!!! IT IS A HUNDRED MILLION CHEAPER THAN ODOT BUDGETED, GOING TO BE BUILT A YEAR A HEAD OF SCHEDULE!!  SERIOUSLY DOES ODOT EVEN KNOW WHAT THEY ARE DOING?

CAN'T PUT PEDESTRIAN ACCESS TO IT BECAUSE IT WOULD BE TOO EXPENSIVE,  --->ACCORDING TO ODOT<---- WHO CAN'T EVEN PRICE THE BRIDGE CORRECTLY

 

I AM AMAZED THAT THIS PROJECT CAN STILL GET ME THIS UPSET!

 

IF ANYONE WANTS A GREAT EXAMPLE OF GOV'T IMPOTENCE VS. THE PRIVATE SECTOR, I OFFER THE INNERBELT VS. THE CC/MM.

"Technical elements – such as schedule, safety, quality management, construction plans, community outreach and sustainability – were evaluated by the ODOT-Cleveland expert team. "

 

Well the good news is we only have to live with this monstrosity for the next, what, 150 years?

 

A pedestrian/bike lane would make it at least tolerable if we have to live with this sleeper freeway bridge.

We still don't know what its going to look like at the two ends

This.  Thing.  Sucks.

They cannot afford a bike lane because they need the money to weed wack and mow insignificant places along the highways....  :-P

 

Seriously, this is not so bad...It could be better... But the bridge we have standing is looking like a piece of crap rusting to bits, filthy and not well maintained... But I question how long this generic one will last.

They cannot afford a bike lane because they need the money to weed wack and mow insignificant places along the highways....  :-P

 

 

Don't forget the political patronage associated with concrete sound barrier walls in the burbs.  Euclid should get new ones at least every 7-10 years.  ;)

What is the actual cost of the highway sound walls

^Roughly $1 million per mile.

its stupid because it caters to a few select people who knew they were buying a house next to the freeway in the first place. all that money could have been spent on something more useful.  I wonder how much they spend a year on average on them, including new walls, replacing and repairing old walls. I bet its a pretty high number.

its stupid because it caters to a few select people who knew they were buying a house next to the freeway in the first place. all that money could have been spent on something more useful. I wonder how much they spend a year on average on them, including new walls, replacing and repairing old walls. I bet its a pretty high number.

 

Are sound walls not funded by local communities?  They should be.  They increase property values thereby increasing tax revenue.  It should be a simple cost-benefit analysis in which the community determines whether the cost of the wall is less than the increased property tax revenue over X number of years (7-10 maybe?).  The federal government should not be subsidizing suburban development by putting up sound barriers.  Sound barriers in communities through which the highway was originally built are another story.  Those should obviously be funded by the federal government.  But if a developer decides to build houses next to the highway he should not do so with the expectation that the feds will pick up the tab of installing sound barriers once his residents complain.

 

Does ODOT have guidelines on sound barriers and where funding should come from?

The cost is more like $1.3 million to $1.4 million per mile.

 

Also, the funding usually comes from the Feds and the remainder is usually covered by the State.  Extra details (like the community plaques in Eastlake) are funded by the local community.  For example, for the new Euclid sound barriers 90% of the funding is coming from the Feds and the other 10% is coming from the State.

 

http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2010/03/euclids_noise_walls_along_inte.html

 

Although I think the sound walls are a ridiculous waste of money, and especially replacing them so soon, I have more of a problem with ones in places where the houses were built after the freeway (the homes along I-90 in Euclid predate the freeway).

Its actually a pretty cool experience driving on the freeway when the walls are down and seeing exactly where you are and all the houses and everything. your more apart of the community and get a glimpse at things instead of a brown wall.

Bob Dyer at the Akron Beacon Journal was a guest on a show on WCPN about sound barriers.  They used measuring equipment to determine that sound was attenuated close to the wall, but that the sound still was heard neighborhood if you were further from the wall, like 1000 or 2000 feet away.  So, the walls are a waste.

OK so back to the bridge. Below is from the DOT website describing how HNTB proposes a unique design approach to a couple of areas of the bridge, which reduces some of the cost. I guess we will have to use our imagination to picture what they are talking about until we can see some renderings.

 

The team took a unique approach which ends the main span just east of Ontario Street allowing for a smaller, “Gateway” bridge over Ontario Street and a landscaped embankment between the two bridges. Reducing the length of main viaduct in this way would reduce the amount of new materials required and increase the amount of reused materials.

The team also pushed-back the pier closest to the Western Reserve Fire Museum and integrated it with the retaining wall structure along Canal Road opening views of the river valley. The design also includes additional art panels along Ontario and E. 9th Streets.

While this is from the Illinois Department of Transportation, the federal rules regarding noise walls and other abatement are pretty consistent from state to state...

 

http://www.dot.state.il.us/desenv/noise/faqAbatement.html

 

Note that IDOT quotes an average per-mile cost of $1.5 million.

 

Noise abatement is required under Federal Highway Administration design rules whenever an investment is made to a highway that changes its traffic patterns -- however small. But neighborhoods and communities along the highway can opt-out of noise walls or other abatement. I wonder how many communities know that can opt-out???

...Below is from the DOT website describing how HNTB proposes a unique design approach to a couple of areas of the bridge, which reduces some of the cost. I guess we will have to use our imagination to picture what they are talking about until we can see some renderings.

 

The team took a unique approach which ends the main span just east of Ontario Street allowing for a smaller, “Gateway” bridge over Ontario Street and a landscaped embankment between the two bridges. Reducing the length of main viaduct in this way would reduce the amount of new materials required and increase the amount of reused materials....

That "landscaped embankment" cannot be very long.  ODOT's use of the term "main span" is pretty vague.

 

http://www.dot.state.oh.us/projects/ClevelandUrbanCoreProjects/Innerbelt/InnerbeltBridge/PublishingImages/BridgeA.pdf

"Main span ends just East of Ontario street"....don't they mean just West of Ontario??  I'm having trouble picturing this.

Seriously, this ODOT bridge project makes me sick. It literally makes me sick to my stomach. How do these uptight "designers" (aka engineers) think they are going to help cleveland by putting a completely undesirable bridge on our doorstep? The word "design" needs to be substituted for "construction drawings" because I see no design there. The whole thing is a joke of a project, and they are doing the city a disservice.

I am still in shock about how ODOT just raped this city.  But, hey, it is like 45% under budget!

 

Just think if they asked for a half decent bridge, with connections for more than one transportation mode (Ohio Department of whatnow) maybe it could have come in 20% under budget and everyone would have been happy.

 

I can't believe Strickland was so powerless against ODOT

There is no reason that the westbound bridge should not have a pedestrian/cyclist lane when it gets built in 10 years.  No budget reason, at least.

I am still in shock about how ODOT just raped this city.  But, hey, it is like 45% under budget!

 

Just think if they asked for a half decent bridge, with connections for more than one transportation mode (Ohio Department of whatnow) maybe it could have come in 20% under budget and everyone would have been happy.

 

I can't believe Strickland was so powerless against ODOT

 

Maybe Strickland never intended to fight ODOT.  Also, another local politician who's name I am not permited to mention.  Where is he in all this?

I, for one, am hardly up in arms about the design.  I think it has some real potential as we can dress it up in various ways, with such things as painting the underbelly (as seen in one of the renderings), lighting, and other forms of public art.  I really did not like the other two designs, so maybe my complacency just comes from a sense of relief that neither of those were selected.

 

One question I have is how does it compare, height-wise, to the current bridge.  I like how the current bridge somewhat mirrors (slightly above, I believe) the latitude of Public Square.... so I hope the plans aren't to change that aspect.

The design isn't so awe-inspiring, but it's not so awful either. I'm fine with it. I think the bigger issue is the one raised by other posters with regard to the lack of pedestrian / cycling access. Given how it came so far under budget, I think ODOT's lack of foresight, and general unwillingness to address this matter is astonishing. I think at the very least they owe an explanation as to why they still feel these shouldn't be included in the design, and if not this one, how they plan to implement in the second bridge.

 

Believe it or not, I think Tedolph has a point in that Frank Jackson needs to be the standard bearer in this issue, as it will impact the walkability and (yes I said it) connectivity of his city. It's not unreasonable to want to be able to walk from one side of the river to the other, particularly if we're trying to promote the urbanity of the city.

Well.... I don't think that I would ever want to walk or bike across the I-90 bridge, even if lanes for doing so were provided.  It's not like there aren't other ways to get from one side of the river to the other.  Something about semi-trucks zinging by at 70 mpg on one side and a 300 foot drop (or however high it is) on the other would probably push me in the direction of finding another route.  Now... if we were talking about the west shoreway bridge, after being converted to a boulevard, I could see the reason for complaint.

This bridge should ABSOLUTELY have pedestrian and bike access.  The biggest problem with Cleveland neighborhoods is they end up as pockets of development and never really spread beyond their little "safe zones".  A safe, well-lit walk/bikeway between Tremont/Duck Island/Downtown is a great way to build this connectivity.

 

Is it too late to pressure ODOT on this?

I don't want to come off as anti-pedestrian/biking lanes... because I am not.  I encourage biking lanes for pretty much any new road that is built.... a la what they did on Euclid Avenue between UC and downtown (just rode it the other week).  However, I disagree with the notion that bike/pedestrian lanes are needed on this bridge for connectivity purposes.  Don't both Lorain-Carneghie and Detroit-Superior have walkways?  I don't see how putting the lanes on the I-90 bridge is going to build connectivity in any *significant* way.  Sure, they would be another asset for those who would prefer that route to the other two in the area.... but I think the cost, if there is indeed some more $$ to spread around, could be better used for asthetic purposes.... both at bridge level and at ground level.

... However, I disagree with the notion that bike/pedestrian lanes are needed on this bridge for connectivity purposes. Don't both Lorain-Carnegie and Detroit-Superior have walkways? I don't see how putting the lanes on the I-90 bridge is going to build connectivity in any *significant* way. Sure, they would be another asset for those who would prefer that route to the other two in the area.... but I think the cost, if there is indeed some more $$ to spread around, could be better used for asthetic purposes....

With the walkway/bikeway, Tremont could become a bedroom community for people who want to walk downtown to work.  The Lorain-Carnegie bridge is not a substitute because it takes you to Ohio City, not Tremont.

I just don't see how it would be significantly faster than using West 3rd from Tremont if that would be the reason.  The difference seems negligible to a point where I don't see those who haven't been using that route since Tremont's resurgence would suddenly start carrying their briefcase across I-90 bridge.  If connectivity between Tremont and Downtown is what you seek, I'd say there are better options.  JMHO.

I just don't see how it would be significantly faster than using West 3rd from Tremont if that would be the reason. The difference seems negligible to a point where I don't see those who haven't been using that route since Tremont's resurgence would suddenly start carrying their briefcase across I-90 bridge. If connectivity between Tremont and Downtown is what you seek, I'd say there are better options. JMHO.

 

I somewhat agree. Its not worth the money to cater to just a few residents if that was the only case...

We can always install a zipline and people can use that.

 

The die is cast on this bridge, and I don't expect that they should re-open the design just to acommodate this one aspect. However, I still think it should be in the discussion as they design the second bridge

As somebody who lives in Tremont and works Downtown, a ped/bike route on the Innerbelt would create a significantly shorter commute. Presently, my choices are either to:

1. Zig-zag from W. 14th west across a narrow Abbey Ave. to an even narrower W. 20th then east across the Lorain Carnegie to Ontario (which is another awful road for cyclists).

2. Shoot down Literary Hill to W. 3rd, possibly wait 15+ minutes for the W. 3rd Bridge (which is being maintained presently anyway), then hump it up Commercial Hill (which will be eliminated by the new Innerbelt Bridge anyway).

3. Shoot down University to Scranton, take the bumpy and extremely dusty ride to Carter Road, possibly wait 15+ minutes for the Carter Road bridge, then go to Old River and hump it up St. Clair.

 

The argument has never been an either/or as ODOT wants us to believe, but one of basic fairness and connectivity. ODOT had a responsibility to make a reasonable analysis of bike and ped connections, which it didn't do until the last minute. And when they finally looked at it, they said it would cost $40 million to add the bike and ped connection. $40 million to a bridge that is estimated to cost less than $290 million.

 

Words fail me.

 

[EDIT: By the bye, as I ride over the Lorain Carnegie, although the speed limit is 35 mph, cars regularly drive 50+ mph, and there is no protection for cyclists whatsoever. A separated lane on the Innerbelt Bridge would have been much, much safer, even at highway speeds.]

Based, unscientifically using google maps.  Walking from Sokolowski's to Jacobs Field is about 1.8 miles going via Abbey Ave and over L C bridge

 

The walk/bike ride woud rougly be 0.8 miles over the innerbelt bridge.

 

I bet you there are streets in Columbus that have a 50 mph speed limit with a sidewalk next to it.  I am pretty sure they can engineer a safe bike and pedestrian path for even a 60mph bridge.

 

I am also pretty sure that pedestrian and bike access have been included in freeway bridges across the country, including ones done by this contractor, Walsh.

 

The federal money we recieved for this project REQUIRES bike and pedestrian access.

 

I can see where some people would not care either way if there was pedestrian access.  But to be opposed to it?  Name me one good reason to be AGAINST it