OhioDOT says this concept drawing of a bike-ped path on the Innerbelt
Bridge does not convey a realistic expectation. Image: GreenCityBlueLake
We’ve got an update today on a storyline we’ve been following for
months: The Ohio Department of Transportation’s refusal to build a path
for biking and walking when they replace Cleveland’s I-90 Innerbelt
Bridge. Back in December, cyclists rallied to urge the DOT to include such a path, which would create a direction connection to downtown. In the face of ongoing pressure from local activists, as well as Congressman Dennis Kucinich and Senator Sherrod Brown, DOT Commissioner Jolene Molitoris has continued to stonewall the idea.
Marc Lefkowitz at member blog GreenCityBlueLake writes:
ODOT finally released a letterexplaining why it doesn’t see a way to design a bridge today with asimple multi-purpose path. Working against ODOT in this case are atleast 30 instances where multipurpose paths are already on highway bridges. The problem has never been one of can it be done, the issue has always been our DOT cannot imagine why it should be done.
In her letter to the Governor last week, ODOT Director Jolene Molitorisshed more light on ODOT’s thinking – the bridge is a problem to besolved, not an asset to be gained. Molitoris writes: “ODOT took adifferent approach to evaluating this issue as part of this renewedsecond look. To start, we asked the very simple question: if bicycleand pedestrian access were added to the Innerbelt Bridge, whatchallenges would need to be overcome?”
That sounds eerily similar to the old approach. Rather than figureout how to meet the community’s expectation, ODOT is looking for anexcuse to lower those expectations…
Members of Congress and local business leaders alike continue thisweek to press Governor Strickland to request that ODOT Region 12 askthe bridge designers to think of a creative solution in their bids. Inother words, this fight isn’t over; not by a long shot.
Read Lefkowitz’s full post for some sharp observations about Ohio DOT’s opaque decision-making process.
More good stuff from around the Network: Joe Urban debunks Joel Kotkin’s recent piece in the Wall Street Journal claiming the demand for city living has been exaggerated. A visit to Boston prompts a Burqueño to wonder — what if the Big Dig had been a big freeway teardown instead? And Twin Cities Streets for People posts a sickening computer simulation of how oil spewing into the Gulf may spread.
